I’m gonna go against the grain and say no, it would in fact be bad for everyone involved if someone killed Trump. Trump is evil, sure, but he’s also stupid and there are plenty of non-stupid evil people who would want to take his place. Or, now that I think about it, it’d might good for Iran, but it’d definitely be terrible for everyone else.

Um… it might surprise you but there are, in fact, things that are more important than the Epstein files. Nothing is going to come out of the Epstein files; everyone who cares about the truth already knows Trump is a pedophile.

No, it gets money; it evidently does not get votes.

the political machine we’re building to combat the Trump administration will flatten the DNC old guard pretty handily.

Except no such thing exists. MAGA hasn’t created any meaningful surge in independent progressive (let alone genuine leftwing) politics; it’s only compelled the center left to close ranks with the center against the rising tide of the far right. There’s zero momentum for “flattening the old guard;” if you want to do that you’ll have to actually try.

And anyone who didn’t vote for Harris over Palestine has now not only doomed the Palestinians,

I keep seeing liberals saying this, but it’s just not true. There’s no metric by which Trump is worse on Palestine than Biden (and by extension Harris, who has was virtually indistinguishable from him on the issue). As for everyone else, what, did you think Harris was going to do anything for poor Americans and minorities? Jk she wouldn’t have done (or been able to do) shit because centrists kill down ballot elections. More fundamentally, though, fascism was inevitable under the political status quo; the choice was between fascism now and fascism later. If meaningful change doesn’t come from the left, people will look for it on the right; thinking 2025 was fluke is nothing short of delusional.

I mean, it has. The history of liberalism is the history of the 1% violencing the bottom 50% into submission.

You don’t need more than that.

Counterpoint: Homes in many places cost more than that. Retirement too. There’s a good cutoff for a wealth maximum, but 1 million ain’t it.

Aren’t women’s pants (other than leggings) with pockets very rare? How do you even have enough of a sample size to draw conclusions about this? Besides, women who decide (or never got to decide) against getting pants aith pockets wouldn’t complain about the pockets, would they?

That’s a fair point, I could’ve said that in a less condescending way, but “customers don’t know what they want” is an important piece of the puzzle here.

I mean, customers not knowing what they want is a thing. When someone says “I’d like it if this thing had that functionality,” they’re not necessarily considering all the externalities that might make their preference less desirable. What women have now sucks, but according to a large majority the alternative sucks even more, so the status quo persists.

I mean sure, that’s why I said “most women” and not “all women.” There is real demand for women’s pants with pockets, but (especially after the more committed folks buy unisex or men’s pants) the scale isn’t enough to sustain a large business. That aside, do cargo pants not work if you want pockets?

My source here is basically Reddit so I’m not sure how true this is, but I’ve heard multiple times that businessmen occasionally try to invest in women’s pants with pockets but they don’t get enough demand to make a profit. There are still some who have managed to make money this way so there are places that sell pants with pockets, but it’s a small market. And no, I have no idea what those places are.

At least for the pockets thing it’s a difference between what women think they want and what they actually want. When most women say they want pants with pockets, what they mean is pants that look the same as the ones they already have, but also with pockets. That’s impossible to make, so women are forced to choose between tight pants that highlight their figure and pockets and they choose the former. As for bras, after a quick google my less than educated guess is that because bigger bras have rapidly increased in demand in the past two decades (and even then many wear bras that are too small), at the turn of the century business execs were right to consider bigger bras to be a marginal market with no point in worrying too much about it. Now, however, they’re just out of touch. If I’m right hopefully this will correct itself once someone wakes up to the business opportunity.

Now this is a distraction from the Epstein files, but fuck it do it anyway.

Way overdue, frankly.

Somaliland only has like 6 million people. It’d almost definitely intensify the civil war, especially because Palestinians would 100% partner with the Houthis.

If this happens I hope this is the straw that broke the camel’s back

Absolutely not, this camel can take a lot more of these.

Counterpoint: All of 20th and 21st American history outside of WWI and WWII. The US never declared war on Iraq or Afghanistan.

Hell, they gave it to Henry fucking Kissinger.

I mean in principle sure, but this has been happening for almost a year now and barely any escalation has happened. At this point protests are acting as release valves more than anything else.