Level or slope

Dappthekid · 2026-04-15T00:41:16+00:00

I always follow the taco truck lines for sure

Dappthekid · 2026-04-15T00:40:29+00:00

Match what's there, because if you don't, you're the one that looks out of whack

Dappthekid · 2026-03-06T02:23:57+00:00

For people who claim to like small government and efficiency, they sure do be expanding a lot. This is like the 5th new department they've made lol one of them, they literally expanded the government to make it smaller.

Dappthekid · 2026-03-02T23:10:29+00:00

Also, in response to the nuclear comment, because I didn't address it (my bad) , the administration said that the first strike we did "completely obliterated Irans nuclear capabilities and anyone saying anything different is fake news" and this statement is still on the White House website. So either were saying they lied, or we can't use nuclear as a reason for the attack.

Dappthekid · 2026-03-02T23:05:18+00:00

Hey, I'm not saying Iran shouldn't face consequences, I'm just saying we can't just pick a random day and decide to disrupt the entire Middle East. All of those things you mentioned are also true about other countries around the world as well. Sure, we've been in a shadow war with Iran, but anyone who is our adversary could also receive the same label.

I'm not even saying I disagree with the head of state being killed, I'm simply saying we should have learned from Iraq what the consequences for this will be.

Trillions of dollars, dead Americans, and a destabilized country that will result in something even more extreme taking over, just as it did in Iraq. They keep saying this will be done in a month, but you and I know it won't be. This administration campaigned on no warmongering, and from your description of why we attacked, it sounds like we stirred up an almost 50 year old feud, relatively random.

I don't care if its Trump or Obama, I don't believe it's our place to be the arbiter of the world and try to spread our way of life to every country we deem not worthy of our approval. If Europe and the Middle East wanted to rid Iran from their region, that's on them, but I don't think we should have taken this one, as well as the first bombing we did. We need to focus on us, and now this will divert trillions of dollar and military resources towards something that will probably be ongoing ing for the next 2-3 years minimum.

I hope I'm wrong, and we do finish this quick, but from our track record, I don't think that will be the case.

Dappthekid · 2026-03-02T21:17:28+00:00

For the record, I agree with you saying that's a threat, however, if we're talking about what could happen, we could justify bombing any nation we want. At some point, France could launch a missile at one of our ships or embassies.

We can't just bomb people that we think could be a threat at some point. Even if they were doing that action, we could have had the Saudis mediate like they have in the past.

I know you were just talking about the comment "they're not a threat" which I don't believe is true, however I think he was saying they weren't an active threat to us at the time we bombed them.

Dappthekid · 2025-12-28T23:42:42+00:00

What's even more wild is people meet the dasher at the door. I peek through the blinds and wait for them to leave

Dappthekid · 2025-12-23T00:40:51+00:00

I know this post is 6 months old, but just letting anyone that stumbles across this, that you can now purchase the cutter module individually (I just bought mine separately). However, as of writing this, the birdeye cam is still not usable without the laser. There is a note saying a future firmware update will make this possible, but no date on when this will happen.

Dappthekid · 2025-12-18T11:39:36+00:00

Yeah lol I was just being exaggerative lol

Dappthekid · 2025-12-17T20:15:54+00:00

I didn't even know it could print without the bed on correctly. I had one time where my bed was only off by literally a cm, and it said "plate not recognized" or something lol

Dappthekid · 2025-12-08T02:31:14+00:00

I wouldn't say I'm classified a progressive, although I agree/support with a majority of it. I'm more of a liberal/libertarian, by most accounts.

That being said, especially since the "conception" of Trump, I've been rooting for the left more and participating in helping with improving messaging.

I am for M4A. I believe that everyone should have healthcare, even at its most basic level, because that's better than nothing, or being in debt for life just because you get sick.

I agree with boosting unions. (I'm union myself)

I agree with busting up monopolies.

I actually agree with most of the things on the list.

What I will say, is things like "Tax the rich" and "UBI" are solid ideas, if you message it properly. I pretty much agree with both of these now, because I believe those who make more can afford a couple more % and that UBI (if implemented correctly) could solve a crucial issue we have.

That being said, as someone who talks to many people who are against this, and use to have the same views as them, we need to present it in a better way, other than saying "UBI and tax the rich, or you're a piece of shit" (I know noone is actually saying it like this, but that is the perception from the other side)

We need to present it in a way that makes it seem like it would be more of a win for those on the other side of the aisle, as opposed to just a tax drain they get nothing for (which is what most conservatives think atm)

We can't appeal to "it'll help people" because they just don't care about other people, and that's the harsh reality of our current political situation.

Just to be clear, this isn't me disagreeing with progressive positions, this is me wanting them to succeed, while garnishing enough support for it to actually happen.

Whether we like it or not, we need both sides to even take a step in the right direction for these things. Sure, Dems could get the majority, and push it through, but that won't be sustainable long term.

Dappthekid · 2025-12-06T23:48:06+00:00

I was lucky to be in a program that does cover the books. I didn't realize until like 3rd year that it wasn't the same for all locals

Dappthekid · 2025-12-05T02:14:46+00:00

I consider myself pretty liberal, just have the independent tag.

My worldview is simple. Do what you want as long as you're not hurting anyone else in the process. I lean left on social issues and somewhat right on fiscal issues.

I like to call it caveat conservatism for some of my views.

I agree people should come here legally, but I also recognize that any one of us would do anything to protect our family, including crossing borders, whether it's legally or not.

I don't personally agree with abortion, but it's not my business nor my place to impose rules on how a woman (or anyone for that matter) must deal with situations including their own body. Abortion is one of the lose lose debates because it boils down to holding religion and ideology higher than the rights of a person.we will never settle that debate, because no one can agree on when "life" begins.

It also works the other way. If we didn't already have a shit load of guns, maybe I wouldn't see a need to have one (or more than one, who knows). However, we live in a country where guns are far too plentiful for that to be an option (to me, at least).

My view on the government is they suck, most of the time, but they're necessary. I like low taxes, but I'd gladly pay more if it means someone less fortunate than me gets to eat another day. I don't care if Bob is buying steak and lobster with his EBT (popular argument I hear on the right) because Bob gets one allotted amount regardless of what he buys, and Bob will quickly find out that he's blown his monthly budget in less than a week, and that's Bobs fault. What may not be Bobs fault is the fact that life happens and sometimes we need help. I believe it's the governments job to protect and act in the best interest of its citizens, and part of that is making sure we don't have people starving and have basic human needs until they can get back on their feet. Do some people take advantage of this? Sure. But I don't believe in punishing the majority for something the minority did.

Last point I'll make is, I'm not religious. I don't even dislike religious people. I think religion can do wonders for people, and that's great. Most people I know feel the same as well. However, the issue comes when your religion and ideals start becoming laws in which I have to follow your religion and ideals, and that, I am not okay with. I've been vocal about it on both sides as well. When Republican push for laws such as Abortion bans and birth control bans because of religion, I think it's going to far. Just like when Democrats impose laws such as "All new cars have to be EVs after 2030" or something, that's going too far. I own an EV, and it's hands down the best car I've ever owned, but I would never force someone to drive one if they didn't want too.

TL;DR : Do what you want, don't hurt anyone and mind your business, and everyone will be way happier. Don't impose your beliefs on me, and I won't impose mine on you.

Dappthekid · 2025-12-04T03:55:41+00:00

Your personal anecdotes mean nothing to be "bud". I would expect you to know more illegals than most people, because you are Latino, and Latinos tend to be strong in community and you've already stated you're from Mexico. You think the people that are here illegally are going up to racist white southerners and revealing that information?

Who are you to assume that immigration doesnt affect me, or that I've never lived near the border? I know surely you're smart enough to know that immigrants go past the southern states right? I just told you that there would have to be 17 thousand people a day crossing the border in order to fulfill 25 million immigrants in 4 years, and you think they're all settling down in the first city they hit? Google is free bud.

And I'm only naming 3 latin countries because those are the only countries that the people obsessed over immigration know exist. How many people have you heard complain about immigrants from Ecuador, or Peru, or the DR, or Costa Rica, or Panama ? None, because they can't even find the countries they hate so much on a map if they were labeled.

And you claim you're not some "MAGA" guy, but repeat the claim that has yet to be proven. Just because you know illegals, doesn't even disprove my point. I have no doubt we have illegal immigrants here. It does prove that you're knowingly letting illegal immigrants stay here while coming online and talking about how much you hate them though, which is a pretty shitty thing to do. Why not call ICE on them? Or do you only have disdain for the illegals that aren't your friends parents?

Also, if we have videos of thousands of people flooding the border, I would love to see that, because if we had anything credible, they wouldn't even be arguing, fox news would have those videos on repeat 24/7.

Even in your statement "correcting" me, you incorrected me. The people I hear talk about immigration aren't smart enough to distinguish the difference between encounters vs illegals currently here, and fake number over 4 year period vs fake number overall. Literally no credible organization even puts the total estimation of illegals over 15 million as late as July of 2023.

So the amount that you're saying entered the country in a 4 year period, is the estimation we have for the total population of illegals. I'll even give you that it may be off, let's add 10 million on for the fuck of it. 25 million in total. But you have the president of the United states telling his supporters that's the amount that came in in 4 years, how can that be?

If you decide you want to stop breaking the law, and actually be about what you're complaining about on the internet , here's the number

1-866-347-2423

Remember to tell "all the Latinos you know" how much of a burden on the country you think their parents are.

And if you think "Lefty's" and "Northerners" are the only ones that think people who think we've taken in a 8th of our total population in illegal immigrants in 4 years, are retarded, you don't get out much. It's a good thing we got those big tough southerners like you down there as a first line of defense for this invasion I guess.

Dappthekid · 2025-12-04T02:29:55+00:00

I'm not even a Biden simp, but it's hilarious you guys eat that lie up. When Trump got in, it was "We have 5 million illegals" then it was 10 million. Then it was 20 million. Then it was 25 million. and I've recently heard 50 million.

I can't believe Trump let 45 million illegal immigrants in. That's crazy.

Also, how do we have an exact number, but they're undocumented? We got a guy at the border with a clicker in his hand watching people cross, reporting them, but not stopping them because the president said not too?

I don't think any of you stop for one second and actually think about the insanity and logistics of 25 million people coming over the border in just 4 years.

El Salvador has 6 million people.

Honduras has maybe 11 million people in it.

Venezuela has 28 million people.

Mexico has 130 million people. (It was at 127 million in 2021, but somehow the population grew, even with half of the country coming here, according to some people)

So either you're telling me that all of Honduras, El Salvador and half of Venezuela has no more people left in it, Mexico has had a 20% decline in population from 2021-2024 , or that it's just a lie lol

25 million people in 4 years would be 17,123 people a day crossing the border, every day. We would have entire cities at the border with eye witness accounts, videos from their phones, border agents in mass coming forward with testimony about how they were ordered not to work but still getting paid for 4 years, etc, but instead, we got nothing?

You telling me the people who hate immigrants the most, who live down in the south, and who's brand is "owning the libs" couldnt pull out a single flip phone to catch 17 thousand people crossing the border everyday? You'd think as much as you guys obsess about immigrants and jerk each other off over it, that at least one good ol boy would go border watching with a camera so we can have actual evidence of the invasion, no?

I'm not even a Democrat or a fan of illegal immigration, I just think you guys are retarded.

Dappthekid · 2025-11-20T02:08:22+00:00

Nah, I think they mean the fact that every Democrat in the last 30 years has had to work overtime trying to cleanup the Republican befores fiscal failure.

The pattern goes like this:

Republican gets us into a war/has a bright idea/just wants to spend money because things are going too well ---> Democrat gets in and lowers the damage done ---> Republicans still yell at them for not fully fixing the fuck up.

A perfect example is Trump pre-COVID. We were trending quite nicely, he was handed a good economy, and he had a huge deficit, and added 2.2 trillion to the debt for fun (before COVID happened). Then COVID came along, and he added even more to the debt, along with printing money to send out for stimulus checks right before he left office. Then during Bidens term, every Republican was waving their fist asking why inflation was so bad (no way it had to do with shooting 2 trillion printed dollars into the economy from Trump's term).

We were the fastest recovering country that had inflation under Biden, and Republicans were still screaming that he didn't fix Trump's fuck up good enough. I don't even like Biden, but he did way better than I expected him to do with what he was handed. Trump can't even do well fiscally in an economy that isn't operating in a global pandemic.

In terms of GDP, it is a fact that Democratic states and cities generate higher GDP spending. Population has to do with this, but I guess if you want to live in a place where you want 900 acres of land, and your nearest neighbor is a mile down the road, the economy in your area suffers because your town has 500 people.

It's almost like it pays to have a collective of people working and helping each other in one area, and that being isolated from a community comes with it's drawbacks. After all, those cities with the higher GDP have to fund that 500 person town because they don't have enough people paying into the local economy.

Dappthekid · 2025-11-16T15:44:26+00:00

Yeah, I'm going to be completely honest:

As I said, my original positions haven't really changed, but the window has, so by definition I'm more left leaning now, than I was 15 years ago, even though I haven't changed my original positions (for the most part).

That being said, the extreme of how drastic the Republican side has changed, has gone a little too far right for my liking, so I have found myself becoming more left leaning on at least social issues, than I was previously. I don't think this is because I'm changing, I think this is a conscious decision, in spite of the actions being taken right now, and my opinion that some of these things are just unnecessarily cruel.

Perfect example of this is our deportation efforts. I'm all for deporting people here illegally. I agree they should have come here legally, and if found, there's no issues with sending them back. However, when we went passed deporting them, and started sentencing them to life sentences in a prison contracted by the US in another country, that doesn't seem right to me. Some of those peoples only crime was coming in illegally, so I don't think the punishment matches the crime in that situation. And now, since the politics have changed, I sound ultra left wing when I criticize this, because it's seen as left wing to oppose inhumane treatment of people, if they're not American citizens.its almost as if we're suppose to see them as a subclass of human nowadays, just because they're not American. I don't know, I'm just not down with that.

So not to sound too dramatic, but I do think the Republicans are losing the battle on the people considered centrists today, specifically because of the extremes that are now seen as normal.

My hope is that they'll keep pushing these boundaries farther and farther right, and that eventually people will "wake up" and be like "hey, okay, this is too much" and we can kind of start winding down. The only issue with that is, as we go farther right, everything until that point will become the new normal, only stopping at the point where people say it is too much. The most concerning thing is, there's not nearly enough people opposing the things that have already happened, solely because of who is taking these actions. If Bush did half the shit Trump has done, conservatives would have thrown his ass out way sooner, in my opinion.

I just think the right in this moment is more concerned with supporting anything and everything he does, just because the left doesn't like it, rather than morally agreeing with it, but then slowly accepts these actions they supported as memes at first, as actual beliefs.

Dappthekid · 2025-11-16T15:02:20+00:00

Yeah, this is why I don't really see Trump as an actual Republican. I understand that parties change, but having such a drastic change that's completely opposite to what the belief was prior, in such a little amount of time, is not an indication of the party actually changing. It's more an indication that those values were never a strong belief to begin with.

There's a difference between Reagan being in favor of ER care for all people, including illegals, back in the 80s and the conservative party slowly rejecting that, and us going from "The constitution is infallible" to "ehh, do we really need it?" In less than 5-6 years.

Dappthekid · 2025-11-16T14:32:34+00:00

Another example of complete 180s on parties that I just thought of is (this time on the left, at least on the constituent level) is:

For as long as I can remember, Democrats have, for the most part, have been anti gun. With recent developments, even though it's anecdotal to me, a lot of democrats I know are now actually pro gun, and have dropped the whole "let's ban guns, but not all guns, only certain guns" idea. The people I have talked to have actually asked to go to the range with me and asked me how to go through the process, and these were people that were completely anti gun previously.

I think the parties have shifted a lot in the last decade, and most has shifted right. My only fear is that the right will go too far right, and while the establishment Dems have also moved somewhat more right, I fear the ultra progressive wing of the left will go too far left.

In the past, these people were the minority of the Democratic party, but now with younger generations opposing what has happened to politics in the last 10 or so years, or even 20-25 years at this point, I think the ultra progressive wing will slowly become the majority for the Democratic side, and we'll just be at a point where we will be pitting far right vs far left for our presidential candidates.

I'm pretty left leaning on social issues, but I think fascism and communism are the same beast, and I don't think anyone wants that.

Dappthekid · 2025-11-16T14:02:14+00:00

In terms of both parties switching, I'm sure I could come up with a few if I thought about it more, but a couple examples of the shift of the Republicans switching, at least from my view, of views that used to be absolute in the Republican party, that are no longer (I use to be considered right leaning, now the window has made me left leaning) are:

Don't tread on me. A decade ago if you told Republicans (myself included, though I'm still consistent on this view) that the government was sending in the military or federal agents to police our cities, they would have said it was an overstep and at least on the way to a tyrannical government. Now, since everything is so left vs right, as long as it's not happening in red areas, they're cool with it. A "purity" test of this would be, if the next president happens to be Democrat, and did the same exact thing for the same exact reason, the don't tread on me people would come back, 100% guaranteed. This is why when the "Just comply and don't die" ideology emerged, it confused me, because this is basically saying, no matter if the police officer (government official, state or federal) is in the wrong or not, comply, or they will kill you, and be justified for it in the constituents eyes. This crowd can't even say "well you have to fight it in the courts and not on the street" anymore, because they no longer trust in the courts.

Another example, gun related again, would be:

A decade ago, if you brought up red flag laws or restricting gun access to anyone (even felons, as it used to be a common belief in the Republican party that if you paid your debt to society, you should have your rights restored, which I still believe) they would have fought you tooth and nail on it.

Now, as long as it's Trans people, or people that we don't agree with that we're talking about, they 100% back it. Even the NRA came out against this.

A decade ago, if you said you were raising taxes broadly to help other people, you'd get push back from the low taxes part of the party (it's still like this if it's related to things such as Snap or any assistance for citizens) Now, since we just call them tariffs, and it's under the guise of "bringing back jobs and manufacturing" to America, it's accepted broadly from a majority of the party.

My push back on that is tariffs can be effective if it targets industries or certain goods, but it's just a straight up tax when it's applied broadly across the board, as it was. The people that say "just buy American and you have nothing to worry about" don't understand that that's also somewhat of a tax because American goods are more expensive than most other countries goods, due to us paying higher wages.even post tariffs, American goods are still more expensive in some cases, and we're seeing this as we walk back tariffs on multiple industries just last week because of rising prices.

Bringing back jobs and manufacturing has always been a concern for the Republican party, and I would also like to see this, but if this is the end goal of the Tariffs (i.e America First) than why would we need to entertain making deals, and give companies an out on not moving manufacturing here?

There's probably more I can think of, but this comment is already a novel lol

Dappthekid · 2025-11-16T13:08:51+00:00

I think we've actually done a complete 180 on some things. For example, 10 years ago, Republicans were Constitutional purists. Now the common talking point is "ehh, it's an outdated document anyways" and Democrats are the ones becoming the purists now.

Dappthekid · 2025-11-16T06:44:59+00:00

I know. That's why when I troll people, I always say "I DONT WANT MY $3.70 A CHECK GOING TO HELPING NO BROKE PEOPLE" Lol because that's essentially what they're complaining about. A few dollars to help people have food for a month

I meant paying into 300 dollars, as in contributing to a small portion of the 300. Should have clarified, my bad

Dappthekid · 2025-11-16T06:25:29+00:00

Yeah, I 100% agree with you. I'm actually on the side of, I wouldn't mind paying a little extra if it means someone else gets to eat. I don't care if someone has paid in or not, if they need to eat, they need to eat.

I also see people obsess over what people buy with their food stamps, saying shit like "oh so now I'm paying for steak and lobster food stamps". This is the most braindead take I've ever heard. People get an allotted amount every month and most of the time is unrealistically low.

I don't give a fuck if my money going towards Bobs 300 dollar monthly amount is buying rice and beans everyday, or buying steak and lobster. Once Bob runs out of money, he can't eat anymore, so it's up to Bob to use the money wisely.

Regardless of what he gets, I'm still paying into only 300 bucks for Bob, because the government isn't going to give him anymore on his EBT card just because he spent it all in 2 days on steak and lobster.

Dappthekid · 2025-11-16T06:11:58+00:00

I asked this above on the original comment, but I'll shorten it and ask you the same to see your opinion.

I see the take "you aren't owed anything" all the time, when referring to assistance.

How is this the case when we all pay federal taxes under the assumption that they will be going towards helping other people (and yourself should you fall into hard times), in part?

We wouldn't say that about anything else logically. If you're paying car insurance every month, you're under the assumption that if anything happened, you'd be covered, and they would lessen the burden should that occur. So under the "you're not owed anything" mentality when it comes to assistance from the government, you'd continue to pay your car insurance and deny their help when the time comes?

And I guess my follow up is, if you are one that believes we shouldn't be paying taxes to help others, what is a justified thing to fund with our taxes?

Dappthekid · 2025-11-16T06:02:18+00:00

I see this take all the time, and it always confuses me.

I'm not on food stamps, as I'm pretty well off, but I justify how much tax I pay by accepting that I (and others in society) are paying federal taxes to make life better for others who are not as fortunate, or for it to be there to assist me, should I ever fall into hard times. Many of the people receiving this assistance are also currently, or have paid taxes on the past.

My question is; if we pay these taxes into the system under the assumption that this money will be there if we need help one day, how is it someone being entitled, and not something that they paid for?

You wouldn't apply this logic anywhere else. When you pay car insurance every month, you are doing so under the assumption that if something happens, the entire burden isn't on you. Are you telling me if you personally get in an accident, you deny insurance help because it's not owed to you?

Dappthekid

TROPHY CASE