Douglas spent the majority of Lincoln’s presidency mercilessly and publicly attacking him - claiming he was ‘working for him’ is not only fairly disingenuous but an extremely odd way to characterize their relationship

Idk what your point is with LfB but that letter absolutely slaps.

I don’t use it regularly enough to weigh in comprehensively- I use it mostly for processing svg drawings created in other programs for cnc plotting, or for compiling svg drawings onto standardized layouts for sending to a printer

My only complaint with inkscape is that it’s a bit slow with rendering complex shapes/canvases with many points, but otherwise it does everything I need from a vector program.

It’s a tool that helps ‘trace’ a raster image into vector shapes and paths

it’s useful for creating vector artwork from raster images - sometimes a logo or icon is only available in a poor resolution raster image, and so having an easy way to convert it into vector saves a ton of time.

I used it yesterday to create an SVG file for CNC plotting of a company logo. It would have taken me a few hours to hand-trace it myself

Just a small thing, but as of the latest release Inkscape has a functioning live-trace tool

It was one of the biggest things keeping me using illustrator but I used inkscape’s trace yesterday and it worked great

Well if it comforts you, the same analogy could be interpreted as them being ‘opposites’

Still ‘of the same coin’, though

I’m not great at reading but I don’t think thats what they said

“Biden is doing his best to pressure them to stop!”

We got to where we are because we’ve been choosing the lesser evil, for far longer than 20 years

If liberals hadn’t been so content with choosing evil, we’d have avoided the last 50 years of backsliding.

I know surefire improvements we can make to the way things are now better

Yea, me too.

I don’t trust anyone with the authority

Yea, me too.

Weren’t you being facetious?

If the world was ending, it wouldn’t be because we lacked morals but because we lacked action. I think we agree on what’s moral, we just disagree about how much of what action is needed.

Working to make the world you live in better even though you don’t know what the final outcome of that work may actually be?

You’re just more confident than I am that liberalism doesn’t end poorly

Openly support communism without thought about what the final outcome of that may actually be

Just keep working to make the world I live in better

They’re the same picture.

proactive

Doesn’t seem like they’re supportive of Israel, no

You’re looking at illegitimate power gained through wealth but not any other means, which is shortsighted.

Nope, I’m saying the wealth is legitimately accumulated, but it’s still a problem. Edit: and wealth is power under capitalism

It’s widely accepted that wealth can and will be abused, and thats the problem.

The message works more broadly than you claim.

Doubtful, and even if it did: Republicans could just as easily run the exact same campaign against the democrats’ ‘elities’, and we’re right back where we started.

Class consciousness is the thing democrats haven’t tried because they refuse to, and it’ll be the thing that prevents them from winning.

You don’t understand, their support of lesser fascism is necessary to avoid the greater fascism, so by opposing them you’re actually supporting the greater fascism

“It’s not my opinion”
spends the next ten paragraphs expressing that opinion

Insisting that the problem isn’t wealth accumulation, but instead “corrupt” wealth that just happens to be accumulated under capitalism is just delusion and denial.

Bernie and AOC are two of the most nationally-favorable politicians in the US, and the core message from both is “wealth inequality is the problem”.

I’ll just say it again: if democrats run their platform on “cronyism” and not wealth disparity and accumulation, they will continue losing. But don’t take my word for it - that’s what they’ve been running on.

Edit:

They need to beat Republicans at social media, have their own answer to right-wing influencers & podcasters like Joe Roga

Lmao, Ken Martin, that you? This is such a boomer take. This is like trying to claim Clinton lost in 2016 because she didn’t tweet enough or use the right young-person slang, skibidi

They shouldn’t control that much wealth anyway, even if it’s not ‘real’ money

It’s not about me. It’s about how others think, and they don’t necessarily think wealth is a problem.

But it is a problem, so nerfing your messaging and platform in such a way as to avoid addressing it ends up making things worse (not to mention that you end up losing the people who know it’s a problem and are frustrated at the constant running away)

I think you overestimate Americans & don’t know how many think unlike you.

Rubber, glue

At some point, democrats need to start making the case for their platform instead of tailoring it to what they think voters believe. If we believe wealth inequality is the source of the issue and needs to be addressed, then we need to go to bat for that platform instead of shying away from it because some people have been propagandized into believing it’s communist to talk about. Constantly running away from that platform makes it look more like democrats actually endorse the inequality

Merely complaining that someone is rich is oblique

“Nobody should have so much money they can buy their way into a presidential cabinet position”. That’s not oblique, that’s straight to the point

Complaining that they exercise undue power over you & cheat you out of a fair shot makes the point directly.

“This person is abusing power” vs “This person used their wealth to fuck you over”. Both are simple messages, but one is addressing the actual issue while the other is complaining about who is exercising power and not how or why they have that power to begin with

Democrats will not win on the messaging being proposed, because their own base is getting frustrated with the double-speak and impatient with the lack of progress. You can blame those people if you want but it won’t make them any more likely to win.

The… cognitive meaning? Wtf is a ‘cognitive’ meaning?

There is some reason to think criticizing power (elites stacking the deck in their favor like unelected rulers) is more likely to broadly appeal to those folk

And how do you think those elites are stacking the deck?? I think you’re intentionally dismissing something that most americans understand extremely well - that the ‘elite’ are able to stack the deck in their favor because they have obscene wealth. Elon bought his way into trump’s circle and fucked with Wisconsin’s election using his immense fortune and influence. That isn’t a mystery, not even to diehard conservatives.

The other issue with ‘kings’ is that in a MONarchy, there is only one monarch, one King. Even the people you’re claiming to speak for know that the problem extends well beyond Trump, and thinking of Elon and Bezos and Zuck and Gates all as Kings of their own kingdom unnecessarily complicates what is otherwise a clear quid-pro-quo relationship between them and a government they are supposed to be subservient to. Oligarchs may be ‘officially’ less than the governing structure they’re a part of, but they are the defining feature of a government by the name of oligarchy.

I also see an argument for a different tact & same results in rustier, less urban states.

I have family in those states, and even though we have differing voting habits, they have always shared my resentment against those with ill-begotten obscene wealth and influence. It is often one of the few things we have in common politically, and I think democrats just don’t want it to be true.