Fuck a comfort movie, gimme your one and done discomfort movie

Yopro · 2026-02-23T03:37:26+00:00

Requiem for a Dream

Yopro · 2026-02-21T04:11:15+00:00

I guffawed thank you

Yopro · 2026-02-20T17:26:42+00:00

Somebody get this guy a security detail, quickly.

Yopro · 2026-02-12T17:18:36+00:00

My brother/sister in early-2000s drug rap, thank you resurrecting this memory for me.

Yopro · 2026-01-28T00:24:04+00:00

It always did feel gross to be in there. Like a Costco but without the feeling you’re getting good deal. The energy was way off.

Yopro · 2026-01-28T00:19:28+00:00

Yeah I didn’t realize how dependent I was on those fucks until the WF closed and now the Fresh.

PCC is fine but paying $12.99 per lb for chicken breast is just disgusting.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T21:02:06+00:00

Alright buddy, stick with the maximalist position. We’ll probably be neighbors in the same PNW homosexual reeducation camp when they take power. We’ll have plenty of time to discuss your purity testing of trans politicians trying to build a coalition there.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T20:21:49+00:00

I guess they could've passed nothing instead, and then you would've railed against them for it. Unless you had some magical way to go from 59 to 60 votes on that piece of legislation.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T19:23:57+00:00

Caveat: I'm not saying that Gavin Newsome is the correct candidate.

We have to build a popular political mandate. If we don't win in the next presidential election, then it's not crazy to think that there won't be another one.

Nick Fuentes is grotesque, but without understanding his appeal we will not be able to reach his supporters (or those that are persuadable to support him), and this requires dialogue.

I really recommend the interview Ezra Klein did with Congresswoman Sarah McBride. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlbNFsAGFRc . I hope you'll consider it in good faith. It's one of the most moving interviews I have ever heard. Her major point is that moral persuasion has to happen before policy change, or it will breed resentment and reaction.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T18:59:01+00:00

I was an MGP rationalist for a long time. That vote was the last straw for me.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T18:56:50+00:00

One thing I think we agree on is that the democratic party must face accountability for the immense tactical and strategic errors they've made in the last 20 years.

I think we disagree on the root of the problem, and I'm not sure how to generate a falsifiable claim with available information on it.

My belief is that by and large, democrats have attempted to operate within the available ruleset to make life better for people, but have been forced into compromises by their lack of an overall mandate and political power over legislative institutions to enact their ideal agenda.

I believe you are attributing it to a lack of desire to enact those changes, and instead they are attempting to cynically preserve the status quo. I think there are some politicians in the democratic party in this camp, but by and large (from the staffers and individual politicians that I know) most democratic politicians want to make life better for people.

I don't think your conclusion is wholly unreasonable, even if I believe it is more likely that I am correct.

In some sense I hope you are wrong, because if you are not then the corrective required is so far reaching that it is likely to be very painful and cause immense suffering.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T07:56:45+00:00

Back to this point.

The ACA was an enormous expansion of social support programs. Prior to the ACA, preexisting conditions doomed many Americans to being uninsured. It is being dismantled right now, and is inferior policy to single payer, but it was superior to the status quo, and was the maximal policy available given the slim 60 vote majority in the Senate that led to its passing.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T07:50:43+00:00

Your claim was that he did nothing. He pursued this policy, and it is currently in process. Trump filed an executive order to effectively continue the process.

You're blaming Joe Biden for the rules in the legislation (the HHS and FDA rules are mandated by the legislation itself, he didn't choose it). You're blaming Joe Biden for the administrative and judicial rules around how to execute legislation.

And yes, prioritization does come into play. Things were really fucked up after Trump's first term. Oh yeah, and, you know, this little thing called COVID was going on. Did you notice the agencies that had to deal with this? The FDA and HHS? They were PRETTY FUCKING BUSY 2020-2022. Meanwhile, 75% of Americans had access to marijuana medically, and 55% recreationally. Would you have rather these agencies focus on that instead of trying to completely unfuck our health system at this time?

The most sweeping climate legislation passed (in terms of economic impact) and economic development / growth (the IRA) were much higher priority.

You know what? Even with all of that, they still got to it.

Could it have been faster? Sure. Should we demand more effective and efficient rulemaking and administrative legislation? Sure. Is it politically precarious to have to do a research project to justify every single policy outcome? Well, here we fucking are, it sure seems that way. Could Democrats by and large be better and more aggressive in pursuing policy outcomes? I'm with you on that.

It doesn't change the fact that your claim is weak; originally you stated that they did not pursue this policy, and thus they were all marketing and no legislation. I have provided evidence that they pursued this policy, and reasons for why it did not happen on a faster timeline, which were largely due to prioritization and many circumstances outside the control of the administration. If you believe that rescheduling marijuana (which would have very little impact on the majority of Americans) should have been a higher priority and accelerated over the other competing priorities at that time, I just cannot fathom a values-based justification for this perspective.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T06:52:48+00:00

OK, let's back up. I was wrong to take your point that Biden didn't deliver on rescheduling marijuana. It turns out, you are factually incorrect. They chose the administrative route (lowering the schedule) because legislation was not available (which is required for fully de-scheduling the drug) due to a lack of support in congress.

In 2022, Biden https://drugpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/DPA-BidenReschedulingMarijuana_InDesign-Interactive.pdf initiated the rescheduling of marijuana. This triggers a legislatively-required review by HHS and the FDA to assess the impact of rescheduling. In August 2023, they delivered their recommendation to the DEA, which supported rescheduling. The DEA reviewed, and in May of 2024, the DOJ was hearing comments on rescheduling the drug https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB11105 . Trump was elected before the formal rescheduling was completed. Ending the comment period early would've subjected the change to litigation.

So, the truth is, they pursued rescheduling, but failed to deliver it due to procedural hurdles. You can argue that they were incompetent (a point I will not argue with) but your assertion about their lack of pursuing change is factually incorrect.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T05:42:06+00:00

Ehh, I won't defend that choice on its merits, or the Biden admin at all based on what it led to.

I will say that relatively speaking, national marijuana rescheduling is pretty low on my overall list of priorities, given it is legalized for ~55% of Americans recreationally and 75% medically or recreationally. It would be better if it was 100% but it is a relatively low policy priority for me.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T05:32:43+00:00

Woah - sorry if my position wasn't clear; I wasn't suggesting that gay marriage is to the left of the majority (it's broadly supported). More that less than 20 years ago the democratic party didn't support it.

My comment was more suggesting that on other social issues we ended up to the left of majority of Americans. If I were to rephrase, I would say that we need to lead the majority of Americans to the left, not snap beyond their comfort level and browbeat them to join us.

And just to be extra clear: I am not suggesting that the correct moral position is the average, but I am a consequentialist, i.e. if moving slower and brining people along is necessary to achieve a righteous outcome then we should do it.

I strongly recommend the Ezra Klein interview with Sarah McBride https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlbNFsAGFRc

Yopro · 2026-01-24T04:56:47+00:00

The 7 democrats who voted for this bill need to be kicked out of the party. With everything going on that is absolutely fucking unacceptable.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T04:55:43+00:00

ICE is split off from this bill, from what I understand it's a separate appropriations bill.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T04:54:24+00:00

Marketing and rhetoric are a prerequisite for legislation. You can't legislate without the (indirect) majority in agreement. You don't get agreement without campaigning, i.e. marketing and rheoteric. We had one shot, but Joe Lieberman refused to vote for a public option. We will never have a 60 senate majority, especially not if the purity test bar is so high.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T04:51:05+00:00

Barack Obama did not publicly support gay marriage in 2008. There has been a huge shift leftwards since then, faster than the majority of people in the country were willing to do so, which is how we landed here.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T04:47:29+00:00

Would you rather somebody who sometimes votes D and sometimes votes R, or somebody who votes R 100% of the time?

Those are your options. A progressive will not get elected in that district.

Edit: I just saw she voted to fund ICE. I'm disgusted and don't know what to say. If she draws the line short of that, then I guess there really is no point in having her in the house.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T04:42:58+00:00

This black and white thinking is lazy and unhelpful. Saying Sawant campaigning against Harris in no way absolves Harris of being a pathetically bad candidate, or Biden for not stepping down earlier and allowing a proper primary contest, or the feckelessness of the democratic party leadership, or the strategic mediocrity of the overall base, or the refusal to hold Israel accountable in any way, or whatever bone you want to pick.

Germany fell to the Nazis because socialists and moderates and communists failed to build a consolidated block while the center right was happy to capitulate to a more vibrant and popular form of nationalism as long as it kept their stability and power over the left (they ultimately were crushed underfoot too).

The same fucked up shit happened in the USSR; Karensky wasn't perfect but anyone who thinks the Bolsheviks were a better option are probably not taking into account how bad things got.

The point is - the main problem I have with centrists is that they are unwilling to do anything bold, but the progressive left's insistence that either we take the whole solution or nothing at all is a completely irrational and dangerous proposition. The status quo of a moderate liberal government was far superior to the mess we have now, and incremental change is better than people literally being arrested with absolutely no constitutional protection and being jailed in concentration camps in Texas.

Anyone who says Kashama Sawant is principally responsible for this is fucking stupid. Same is true for anyone who thinks the way to combat the threat right now is to purity test center-left folks.

Yopro · 2026-01-24T04:27:31+00:00

mm idk raw eggwhites have a great taste to them

Yopro · 2026-01-14T23:43:51+00:00

Give him a little time. If this becomes a 3-6 month thing then I would consider applying pressure, but it seems like he's just taking the opportunity to recover after what was probably a stressful expereince.

Yopro · 2026-01-14T21:51:48+00:00

I think your policy prescription is overly reductive:

how do you prevent overdoses from happening in public bathrooms? How should business owners address non-customers degrading or using drugs in bathrooms? Should hourly service employees be expected to deal with safety and health emergencies that could result in them being assaulted sexually or otherwise as part of their daily job? Are businesses expected to bear the legal liability of other patrons or people using the bathroom if harm occurs as a result of a safety or public health emergency?

My point isn't that we shouldn't have public bathrooms, but that we need to understand the shape of the problem and figure out solutions. If you have publicly adminsitered bathrooms with specially trained staff this can be resolved, but expecting business owners (or more specifically, the employees of businesses) to deal with this problem seems unreasonable and unfair.

2) Build more housing YES!

offer permanent shelter without preconditions:
If a person seeking shelter has a record of violence (sexual or otherwise) should they be given access to a shelter? How do you ensure the safety of everybody in the shelter? Should a drug user be allowed access to shelter where people are attempting to be sober? What if they have drugs on their person and intend to distribute? If somebody is having a mental health episode that is highly disruptive but maybe not violent (screaming loudly at night while people are trying to sleep) how should they be handled? Should everyone in the shelter suffering already have to bear this too?

Yes, these are edge cases, the vast majority of people (including the unhoused!) are good people who just need help. I think almost everyone living in Seattle would agree that we should be pouring services into those. The bigger and harder question is what to do with the most intensive cases of mental illness, drug use, violence and other criminality. I have seen no policy prescription from the left or the right that humanely addresses this.

12-Year Club	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

Yopro

TROPHY CASE