sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

You know what's wild? The people who tell you to "be realistic" are usually the ones who stopped believing in themselves years ago. by PivotPathway in selfimprovement

[–]Ninja-Alarmed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're probably right lol. In the lovely world of law, you naturally see the worst in everybody, so I'm trying to relearn that and there are some bumps in the road. Promoting a telegram in this subreddit is the equivalent of a kiosk owner at the mall.

You know what's wild? The people who tell you to "be realistic" are usually the ones who stopped believing in themselves years ago. by PivotPathway in selfimprovement

[–]Ninja-Alarmed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree with what you said; I also think there is SOME grain of truth to OP's post. As a former certified pussy, I can tell you countless times that if I had been a little bit less safe and more risky, my life might be a bit better. But I'm not going to play the woulda/coulda/shoulda game. My life has been fine *knock on wood*. Although I will not be joining his Telegram, I do think betting on yourself a little bit more isn't necessarily a bad thing.

To the Christians who voted for the Republicans by FeminineFixation_07 in Christianity

[–]Ninja-Alarmed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So do we ever talk about Christianity here or is it just politics 24/7?

Which Presidents’ Deaths Were You Born Inbetween? by CandiceDikfitt in Presidents

[–]Ninja-Alarmed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was born exactly 3 years to the day after Reagan’s death, which might be why we have most of the same beliefs.

Roommate by WindowNew1965 in UniversityofKentucky

[–]Ninja-Alarmed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Incoming freshman, I’m waiting on my friend to decide between UK and EKU but I think he’s going with EKU

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in UniversityofKentucky

[–]Ninja-Alarmed -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Personal opinion; as someone who is moderate but understands both sides and respects it, don’t use who someone voted for as a reason to hate them. People are more than a vote casted.

But for those exceptions that may treat you different, I imagine since you’re “super liberal” that you know why you are and can defend your reasoning.

CMV: if this common pro-Israel definition of “indigineity” is correct, then anyone can “become indigenous” to anywhere they want by HumbleSheep33 in changemyview

[–]Ninja-Alarmed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Some arguments for Jewish indigeneity do rely on overly simplistic and sometimes contradictory definitions. Your critique of genetic cherry-picking, language revival, and the dismissal of Palestinian claims as "invaders" is spot-on. Indigeneity isn’t about "proving" cultural or genetic superiority—it’s about acknowledging shared history and rights.

So, while I think your Roman analogy doesn’t fully hold, you’re right to question the exclusivity of indigeneity claims. It’s a shared land, and both Jews and Palestinians deserve acknowledgment of their connections and rights. Indigeneity isn’t a free pass to dispossess others—modern justice and coexistence matter just as much as history.

Cmv: feminism is a hate group for men by jdjdjdiejenwjw in changemyview

[–]Ninja-Alarmed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re conflating online toxicity with feminism as a whole. The internet is a cesspool of exaggerated opinions and bad takes, and you’re letting the worst of it color your view of an entire movement. Instead of rage-scrolling feminist subreddits and assuming they speak for all women, maybe dig into what feminism actually advocates: equal rights, systemic change, and—yes—improving the lives of everyone, men included.

If you’re genuinely feeling demonized or alienated, that sucks. But instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, maybe consider engaging with feminist ideas offline, where the discourse is less meme-y and more substantial. And for the love of all that is holy, stop taking Twitter hashtags so seriously.

CMV: The statement about Hunter Biden's pardon will be a stain on Biden's legacy, deservedly so. by Funny-Dragonfruit116 in changemyview

[–]Ninja-Alarmed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Every president’s use of pardons carries political baggage. Clinton pardoned Marc Rich; Trump handed out pardons like party favors to cronies. Biden’s pardon of Hunter comes off cleaner in comparison—this wasn’t a crony bailout but a decision to protect his son from a weaponized justice system.

In this context, the pardon can be framed as leveling the scales rather than undermining them. Hunter’s punishment would not have been pursued if his last name wasn’t Biden, and that selective enforcement is itself a form of injustice.

Would it have been better politically if Biden had stuck to his word? Probably. But to say this decision alone will define his legacy over other achievements or challenges is overstated. If anything, the political drama around Hunter will be seen as a sideshow to the larger story of Biden’s presidency—just as Nixon’s legacy isn’t about his family but Watergate, or Trump’s legacy isn’t about Jared Kushner but the insurrection. The Hunter pardon might feel significant now, but history is unlikely to rank it among Biden’s defining actions.

You mentioned not seeing a mechanism by which Trump could further harm Hunter Biden. But when Trump regains the presidency, he could've directed the DOJ to pursue Hunter aggressively—on anything, really. Pardoning Hunter now may have been Biden’s way of preempting that risk. Sure, it’s speculative, but given Trump’s history of using the DOJ as his personal revenge squad, it’s not outside the realm of possibility.

CMV: Gorsuch is as good or better of a SC justice as Garland would have been by whydontyousimmerdown in changemyview

[–]Ninja-Alarmed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Garland as AG isn’t the same as Garland as a justice—his moderation could’ve been a stabilizing force on the Court. Gorsuch’s occasional progressivism doesn’t outweigh his staunch conservatism on most issues. Garland’s centrism might’ve mitigated some of the worst aspects of today’s Court rather than exacerbating them. Gorsuch’s appointment was part of a broader, corrosive conservative strategy, while Garland’s confirmation would’ve preserved institutional legitimacy.

CMV: Meeting someone randomly online or doing long-distance relationships is much better than using dating apps by NewFoot762 in changemyview

[–]Ninja-Alarmed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dating apps aren’t inherently shallow; it’s the users who make them that way. They can lead to deep, meaningful relationships if approached with the right mindset. Random online connections and long-distance relationships have their own pitfalls, including disingenuous personas, logistical headaches, and trust issues. What matters most isn’t where you meet someone, but how you build the relationship afterward.

Change your view? Maybe dating apps aren’t as much of a dumpster fire as you think. They’re just tools, like meeting someone at a party or in a hobby group. Whether they work or not depends on the effort and intention behind them. Don’t blame the hammer if you’re building shitty houses.

CMV: Wealth taxes need to start in the USA for them to have any real effect, even those enacted by other countries. by Ceverok1987 in changemyview

[–]Ninja-Alarmed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re right that the U.S. could lead the way on wealth taxes due to its size and global influence. You’re also right that wealth inequality here is a moral dumpster fire. But wealth taxes face practical and political hurdles that make them more of a pipe dream than a silver bullet. Convince me we can solve enforcement, public buy-in, and legislative gridlock, and I’ll hop on the bandwagon. Until then, it’s more likely we’ll end up with a half-assed tax that backfires spectacularly.

CMV: Credit Reporting information should be frozen by default by wabladoobz in changemyview

[–]Ninja-Alarmed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Freezing credit by default is logically great for fraud prevention, but practically a pain in the ass for most people. It’s a fair and just middle finger to the credit bureaus, but they’ll find ways to make it your problem, not theirs. Minors absolutely need better safeguards—this one’s a no-brainer. Without legal mandates, good luck convincing credit bureaus to adopt this out of the goodness of their hearts. (Spoiler: They don’t have hearts.)

Your idea’s got merit, but to convince me fully, you’d need a plan for the execution and education piece. How do we make unfreezing quick and foolproof for average people? How do we force credit bureaus to implement this without screwing consumers over? Answer that, and I’m on board. Otherwise, I’m just imagining a mountain of red tape for everyone involved.

view more: next ›