What are our standards? Letting an unlimited number of people into the country per day without any sort of legal process or system? I genuinely don't understand what people here are arguing for...

The ACLU has no legal leg to stand on here and are just doing performative politics to raise donations. Despite what libertarian "sovereign citizens" would tell you, last time I checked civil liberties don't include being allowed to travel and live wherever you want without any sort of legal process. Putting a rather generous upper limit of 2,500/day for asylum claims (from non-port border crosses only) isn't a violation of anybody's rights.

I would ask ozma the same thing I asked about marijuana policy

Your mistake is thinking that return2ozma is a regular person looking for a nuanced policy debate within the parameters of reality, and not just (at best) some guy who spends every waking hour posting bullshit on lemmy or (at worst) a sock puppet knowingly posting bad-faith arguments as a form of political propaganda.

I don't know for sure, but I do know that someone who has posted 2550 threads in 11 months (~8 threads/day on average) lives online and should be generally disregarded by any normal, rational person. Ask yourself what kind of person has that much free time to post on reddit/lemmy/social media...

Today's executive order doesn't conflict with any of those things.

In fact, all it does it put a temporary limit on extralegal border-crossing asylum claims to 2,500 people per day. So it does not, in fact, "shut down" asylum claims, nor does it increase deportations of people who have been living here.

President Joe Biden on Tuesday signed an executive order that will temporarily shut down asylum requests once the average number of daily encounters tops 2,500 between official ports of entry

Is the United States supposed to take in an unlimited number of unauthorized border-crossers every day?

Is that the way it's going to go down? The right falsely accuses the left of being for "open borders", and the left's response is to actually just take the bait and make that their stance?

Because if that's the new progressive litmus test (it's hard to keep up since there seems to be a new one every day) then we have well and truly jumped the shark. Even progressive hero FDR turned away tens of thousands of Jewish Holocaust refugees:

In 1933, and again in 1937, the Roosevelt administration modified the “likely to become a public charge” restriction, but kept it in place. German Jews attempting to immigrate to the United States in the 1930s were still often rejected for economic reasons.

As a result of these legal and administrative obstacles to immigration, less than 20% of the German quota was filled during FDR’s first term. The Roosevelt administration focused on domestic problems, chiefly combatting the Great Depression. Though Americans certainly had information about the threat Nazism posed to German Jews, few could have imagined the persecution would escalate to mass murder. FDR did not take significant action to aid German Jews, either by ordering a diplomatic protest or by publicly supporting increased immigration.

Some people on this website who claim to be "on the left" are now just inventing shit to be mad at Biden for, I guess either because they are really sockpuppet Trump supporters trying to incite division amongst Democrats, or maybe because they simply don't give a fuck if fascism takes over the US.

Who cares? Anybody who still supports Trump even knowing he's a wannabe dictator, convicted felon, serial rapist, and buddy of Epstein, need their fucking head checked. At this point I really hope these bozos give Trump all of their money. Knock yourselves out, dumb fucks.

"sold"

To think that this pathetic sack of shit is the best the Republicans could come up with, for 3 consecutive elections, blows my mind.

Oh, don't worry, I'm with you. I'm from Oregon, and I can tell you that the people who represent my interests in the House and Senate are specifically not the problem here. (We do have some bad ones in the east, but not in my district.)

a president elected on hope and change

Here's a little middle school social studies lesson for you: there is a lot more to the government than the President.

Bernie Sanders could be sitting in the Oval Office right now and he'd still be struggling with the political realities that Biden is dealing with today. There would still be multiple wars raging, there would still be Republican obstructionism, there would still be a Republican controlled House and a tied Senate, etc. And I'm willing to bet you would be sitting here commenting on how "disappointing" he ended up being as a progressive....

If you want big, sweeping FDR-style changes, then elect a big sweeping congressional supermajority like FDR had. It's not rocket science, people like you would rather just shy away from the political reality of getting bills passed in favor of complaining online, and it's getting boring.

Ok, so... What big, sweeping things are YOU doing to make society better? Where's your list of accomplishments?

The Democrats don't have a perfect track record, not even close. But being part of the online peanut gallery of whiners doesn't get us anywhere. I'm so tired of people who are all commentary and no action, people who aren't going to be part of progress (big or small) are part of the problem no matter how smug you act about it.

Man I hope you're the dumbest motherfucker on this website. I don't think I can take anything worse.

There is a "public comment period" that can last up to 60 days.

So at the latest by the end of the summer. Biden obviously wants to get this done before the election, as he should, because it'll help him.

It's crazy that you actually think that's what this is about.

Brb, going to the dispensary.

We need a better congress, that's for damn sure.

You engaged with a grand total of 0 of the points that I made. So A+ dodging I guess. Congratulations on being a classic bad faith actor.

Hamas are a terrorist organization that openly advocates for genocide and commits war crimes, murdering civilians in cold blood, taking hostages, operating out of hospitals and aide organizations, and using innocent people as human shields. They have a PR department, and they don't need any new hires right now, sorry.

The only peaceful, non-genocidal solution to the Israeli-Palestinian war is a two-state solution. Fuck Hamas, fuck Netenyahu, and also to a much lesser extent, fuck you. I didn't "make a case for genocide", you did. If you think Hamas are going to go down in history as heroes or freedom fighters, you're as dumb as you are ignorant of history.

Let's be real though, the nonpartisan committee has been doing a real shitty job running the debates in recent years. No order, bad questions, shitty crowds full of wooping plants, allowing candidates to shout over eachother and make faces or side comments, etc.

America doesn't need a repeat of the last 2 election cycles.

I don't blame him. Low quality, poor safety standards, made in sweatshops by who-the-fuck-knows, not good for American jobs. China can keep their junky clunkers.

I love Evangelion. I don't love this stupid bullshit.

Was it Trump?

They should recall it for a faulty design.

1. My cat
2. Tough one, but probably my cat.
3. Not only do I love my cats, taking care of your pets if your responsibility as a pet owner. I have no love or relationship to a stranger, they don't care about me and I don't care about them, and It's also not my responsibility to protect other people. An animal that I raised from near-birth, and who has always shown me basically unconditional love and affection seriously means as much to me as a child. My pets are there for me when I have a bad day, and they're with me when I'm having a great day too. They bring so much joy and comfort into my life and they are so innocent and kind. Even after a lifetime of interactions I never have a single bad or negative moment with my pets. I don't hate people and I wouldn't like to have to decide in a fucked up scenario like you're describing here. But to be honest, I'm probably saving my pet. Sorry.

Cool thanks!

Lemmy is leaking. lmao

ps: Hamas should free the hostages, stop hiding behind innocent people and accept the ceasefire deal.

Isn't this you, just yesterday, complaining that Biden was enabling the Israeli/Netanyahu government to stop aid from coming into Gaza "at all":

Just so everyone is clear, the Israeli governments reaction to this massacre is that they now need tostop aid from coming into Gaza at all because this incident proves starving people receiving aide is a danger to the Israeli military.

These are the people Biden is sending millions of dollars in weapons to. These are the people Biden directs the US ambassador to veto a widely supported cease fire resolution to give international cover to. Fuck, these are the people Biden chooses to lock arms with even as he loses 100k votes in Michigan in protest.

Today Biden has directed the US military to personally deliver aid to Gaza, in the most effective way that they can. (The US certainly isn't going to put boots on the ground to deliver aid in extremely hostile and dangerous territory where hostages are being kept potentially anywhere.) They are getting aid to the people of Gaza, while the UN is failing to.

It's possible that the UN could deliver aid more effectively by driving it into Gaza, but (a) it's very likely that they can't, because we've seen aid trucks hijacked by Hamas and aid stolen from innocent civilians and (b) the connections between UNRWA and Hamas have almost completely ruined the trust relationship with Israel. The UN has become severely compromised by their lack of ability to vet the people that work for them, because as the old saying goes "a bad apple can spoil the bunch", and innocent people are suffering because of it. That one isn't on Biden.

To say that Biden could "end this all with a phone call" is pure fiction, whether it's in an op-ed or not--the only two parties who can agree to a ceasefire are Netanyahu's government and Hamas. No US president, real or imaginary, is going to disarm Israel when they are our biggest ally in the region and under constant threat from Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, Iran and others. No US president, real or imaginary, will call for Israel to unilaterally ceasefire against Hamas as Hamas continues to hold their people hostage and wage their own counterattacks. If a ceasefire should happen, and it should, it'll only happen because both sides of this conflict agree to the terms.

Anyway, I really hope you don't realize that you're moving the goal posts here, because I want to give you the benefit of the doubt... Anything else makes the complaints seem political and not genuinely pragmatic or even idealistic. Set the goalposts somewhere reasonable, and just keep them there.

Nobody is saying that Biden deserves a fuckin' peace prize for this, but he's doing a good thing here (something that just yesterday you seemingly wanted to see too) and he should be given at least due credit for that.

I can agree with that. I think that's a valid and convincing point. There should be conditions on the military equipment that we send to Israel just like their is with the stuff that we send to Ukraine. I'm not sure exactly what those conditions should be (beyond the obvious stuff like "follow international laws surrounding war crimes"), but I certainly think it's only reasonable that we should have a say in how our weapons are used if we are sending them over.

Would that be enough to satisfy critics at home and abroad? Would that appease the people who are saying that Biden is somehow complicit in "genocide"? I'm not so sure about that, but I think it would at least send the appropriate message that there are red lines that must not be crossed, even if that is mostly a symbolic gesture. At best people are very vague about what they want Biden to do, and at worst they're calling for a one-state solution (either that Israel should annex Gaza and the West Bank from the extreme right, or that Palestine should control the territory "from the river to the sea" from the extreme left--both of these being more representative of genocide than even what we're seeing today).

The only reasonable, non-genocidal (as in not involving mass murder or displacement of either people) solution is for Israelis and Palestinians to coexist, hopefully peacefully, and maybe even one day (dare to dream) cooperatively.

One thing is for sure, Israel (and the US, by extension) are not going to be satisfied with any conclusion to this chapter in the [decades long] conflict that doesn't return the hostages, strip Hamas of power and remove any chance of a future attack coming out of Gaza.

As long as Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, etc., continue to suggest that Israel should be wiped off the map (not to mention act accordingly) then America will continue supplying Israel with the necessary tools to defend themselves against militant threats. Hamas and Hezbollah have fired missiles nonstop at heavily populated Isreali cities, and the only thing stopping massive destruction and loss of life to our Isreali allies are iron dome missile defense systems that the US has spent >$3,000,000,000 funding. If not for the US, we would be counting bodies in the hundreds of thousands across both Israel and Palestine.

On top of that, all of this ignores the fact that there was YET ANOTHER viable ceasefire agreement that was rejected by Hamas today. At what point do we stop blaming the US for all of the world's problems? The only people with the agency to stop the current fighting in Gaza are Hamas and Netenyahu's government, and you all damn well know that.

Considering it was Hamas who just today rejected a ceasefire agreement that could have gone into effect by the end of the week, maybe people should start voting "uncommitted" against them instead of Biden.

This entire fucking fiasco is between Palestine and Israel, who have been fighting constantly since Biden was born and will probably continue to fight long after Biden is dead and gone. Neither side is going magically "go away" and nor should they. Both groups of people have a legitimate historical and cultural claim to live in this land and the choice was made to split this land long before most any of them were even born. The Israeli Jew and the Palestinian Arab Muslims simply have to learn to coexist peacefully and reject extremism or there will only ever be more war and violence.

There is a "simple" solution: free the hostages immediately, turn over people who committed war crimes (on either side) for prosecution, return borders to 1949, create an internationally enforced DMZ, stop illegal settlements, and stop the damn fighting. NONE of that is on Biden, nor is it the singular responsibility of the United States to manage.

Even if you cynically believe that all of this is just some kind of America-backed proxy war (which, if you look at the history of the region spanning thousands of years, it clear is not), then you should at least apply that same logic to the European countries that back Israel as well as Iran, Russia, and the other countries that have backed Hamas and called for violence in the region.

Funny how all of these social media platforms that were so happy to describe themselves as "the public town square of the internet" or whatever are now claiming that they own everything that everyone ever posted. So, which is it? Because it obviously cannot be both.

Ranked choice voting is just a primary with fewer steps

This is wrong. It is a multi-stage runoff election with fewer steps (hence why it's called "instant runoff"), and that's a good thing because it means that people are much less likely to invalidate their ballot by voting for a first-preference candidate with no chance of winning.

Ranked choice gives you the most moderate candidate and weeds out the others

Ranked Choice Voting gives you (more often than not*)the most broadly popular candidate. Which is what you should want if you believe in democracy or the concept of a republic.

I feel like this should go without saying, but the goal of democratic reform is not to put the person you like in power, it's to put the people back in power.

If the most popular candidate happens to be too "moderate" for your tastes, then it's up to you to advocate for your positions in a way that will change hearts and minds in order to get more people on your side. If you can't do that, then you really have no business winning a truly democratic election, right?

• There are some statistically possible scenarios in which the most broadly popular does not win a RCV election, but they are far less likely than any version of our current first-past-the-post plurality voting system.

Trump doesn't seem to really care whether he wins or not, just in case you haven't noticed...

Just like last time, he'll claim that he's won if he's ever even slightly ahead, and he and his cult will harass people to "stop the count".

Just like last time, he and his cult will resort to violence and insurrection to overthrow democracy even if he loses.

That’s not even touching on the fact that most democrats don’t want Biden for a second term, but the DNC is going to force it on us anyway.

Well, you might say that, but when Biden is winning with >90% as a write-in candidate in primaries where he isn't even on the ballot, it's a little bit hard to take it seriously.

There is no serious or viable candidate challenging Biden from the left in 2024, which is why Bernie is out here endorsing him. To pragmatic socialists like Bernie, electing Biden isn't the destination, but the next necessary step to keeping the country on the right path and defending against an existential threat to our democracy. Don't take it from me though, read what he's been saying.

... which, if you really feel that way, is exactly why we need to implement more democratic and efficient voting systems, like ranked choice (instant runoff),, STAR, approval, etc.

As American political systems are today, the only viable candidates to win the presidency in 2024 are Joe Biden (a well-meaning, old white man) and Donald Trump (old white narcissistic Putin-loving vindictive criminal rapist who doesn't care for democracy and can't remember his wife's name).

I'll be voting for Biden because even if you really believe he's "evil", he's certainly the far lesser evil than Trump (for the reasons listed above and then some).

It's like a human centipede of sexual predators.

Among the great tragedies of our time is the fact that this slimy rapist dirtbag conman isn't already yesterday's news. Fade the fuck away, Donald.

The American right are beyond pathetic that this whining fat orange removed is the best they've been able to come up with for 3 consecutive election cycles. At best he's a distraction from the shit our country needs to do and at worst he's a danger to the entire world, us included. Demented dotard belongs in jail and nowhere near the levers of power.

Hmhmmm... Did he also rape a woman named Mercedes? 🤔

vroom vroom

I think you're conflating two very different things here.

1. Reddit _hosting/dissemination user-submitted copyrighted data.
2. Reddit licensing/selling copyrighted data to other parties.

The DMCA covers hosting and dissemination. If a user submits copyrighted data to Reddit that they do not own and Reddit unknowingly (because, to be fair, they can't know what is or isn't owned or by who), then Reddit is not liable for copyright infringement as long as they comply with DMCA takedown requests from people who claim to own the original IP.

But again, none of that implies that Reddit themselves (or Twitter, Facebook, TikTok, etc.) can realistically claim ownership over all of the data that is on their website. The reason they are subject to DMCA at all is because there is a globally shared assumption that data that users submit may or may not be owned by some other party, and while the DMCA protects them from being held liable for simply hosting and disseminating that data, it does not magically make them the owner of all data that hasn't had a DMCA claim made against it.

In other words, if I post a picture of Homer Simpson on Reddit (and there are many), it is ridiculous for anyone to suggest that they have any intellectual property rights over that picture, that character, any trademarks, etc., whether someone has made a formal DMCA take down request or not. And if they don't own the picture, the character, the trademark, etc., when what exactly are they selling (licensing) and where did they get the right to sell it?

They might not be liable for just hosting/distributing it, but just like you can't sell someone else's car, you can't license out someone else's IP.

And yet that exact kind of data is all over reddit in ways that are impractical to enforce by case by case DMCA. How many memes are there using footage from popular shows? How much fanart?

More importantly, is that stuff not included as part of the data that reddit "owns" when they sell their data to tech companies? Because whether a DMCA takedown has been requested on that kind of data or not, doesn't change the fact that they don't hold the copyright in the first place. How can they sell things that they don't even own?

Something smells. The logic of this entire industry doesn't add up.

Their TOS says they own your content in any current or future formats or derivative works.

Their ToS could say they own you and your children and grandchildren, but that doesn't make it enforceable.

If I post a frame from the movie Akira on Reddit would any reasonable person suggest that they own not only that frame, but also the entire movie that it came from as a derivative work? There is a glut of second-hand data just like that all over Reddit, Twitter, and every other social media network, and I'm willing to bet that's also part of what's being sold.

But hey... I'm not saying you're wrong, just that the idea that they automatically "own" the things that people post on their website is ridiculous. It's a bit like UPS or FedEx saying they own the contents of your package while delivering it.

"its data".

Ah yes... of course.