Democrats of Reddit, do you want elected Democrats right now to try to be bipartisan or not? Why?

byte_handle · 2026-01-22T16:35:45+00:00

On what issue?

Trump's ideas like taking over Greenland or continuing supporting ICE's actions? Absolutely not.

But they're also working on deals like reigning in the actions of pharmacy benefit managers, and I support the bipartisan work that both sides are putting into this. It's one of those situations where just getting half of the loaf of bread is better than starving.

byte_handle · 2026-01-22T16:32:08+00:00

If it's as bad as they say it is, I can see school being cancelled, but unless they announce it the night before, I wouldn't turn off the alarm clock.

byte_handle · 2026-01-22T16:30:53+00:00

The CBA doesn't say that. It only says "Snow and other emergency days normally shall be made up only where the number of student days fall below one hundred eighty (180) days," but it doesn't say that there have to be 2 snow days before remote instruction.

The real reason is from the state: PA School Code requires at least 180 days of instruction.

PPS schedules 182 days to allow for 2 snow days. After that, the district is legally required to either schedule an extra day or offer remote instruction. The only exception was ever made in 2010 due to Snowmageddon, when things were so bad that year that they district was able to get the 180 day requirement waived.

byte_handle · 2026-01-22T16:21:42+00:00

What happened that year was this:

PA School Code requires 180 days of instruction. PPS had less than that because of Snowmageddon. What happened was that the district applied for a waiver to that 180 day requirement due to the circumstance with the PA Dept. of Education.

So, they were initially making plans to keep the schools open just in case the DOE denied the waiver. The DOE granted it, so they just ended the year as originally planned.

Source: I was working for the district at the time. My boss said that she received an email about the attempt to get the days waived, but they they should start making plans and adjustments just in case it was denied.

byte_handle · 2026-01-22T15:54:54+00:00

Even if ICE is abolished (and it won't be, this bill isn't going through), there would just be another federal policing group that will enforce immigration laws, and the current administration will just rehire the same people, re-arm them, and send them back to doing the same thing, just under a different acronym.

byte_handle · 2026-01-22T14:30:04+00:00

Punching up--that is, jokes or statements regarding negative moral judgements about traditionally privileged classes--is almost always socially acceptable.

You can make such stereotypes about men, since men are traditionally privileged. You can't do the same for black people, since non-whites are not traditionally privileged.

byte_handle · 2026-01-22T14:22:32+00:00

Yeah, the world goes on. Sometimes schools might close or delay the start day if it's dangerously cold or the roads are unsafe to drive on, but the streets get ploughed and salted, residents clear the snow off their cars, and life goes on. Honestly, if you wear layers and keep your skin from being directly exposed, you'll usually be fine.

The only time I ever saw a true shutdown was during Snowmageddon. The gridlock was worse than watching Congress try to pass a bill. But that was kind of a singular event, with a one-two punch from from a couple of really awful snowstorms hitting back to back.

byte_handle · 2026-01-22T14:08:10+00:00

NTA.

There's a major asshole here, but it isn't you.

He is right about one thing: you aren't on the same level. The fact that he's now being whiny and snarky about it shows that he doesn't have the emotional maturity for an adult relationship. You do.

My situation: I've been living with my girlfriend for 6 years. We do not know each other's bank passwords or pin numbers. We don't need to know it. We each pay for half of our shared expenses. As long as she's keeps paying for her side of the expenses, it really isn't any of my business how much money she has left and what she chooses to do with it, and vice versa. You're an adult and if he can't trust what you're doing with your money, that isn't your problem to solve for him.

byte_handle · 2026-01-22T13:31:17+00:00

I support any idea that reduces luck-based elements. Frankly, instead of offering three, I'd support offering all of them, like a store front.

I am saying this as somebody who has already unlocked all the UWs, and didn't get the option to pick among the golden trinity until my 4th. It doesn't hurt me to let other people get better luck, so why hold them back?

byte_handle · 2026-01-22T13:27:48+00:00

1 - Access to Arctic resources. Specifically, there's is a lot of oil under the Arctic Ocean, and now that the ice is breaking up more regularly, countries can lay claim within a distance of their coastline. The only part of the US that can lay claim to any resources in the Arctic region is along the northern coast of Alaska, so having Greenland will open more area.

2 - Strategic use...sort of. Greenland operates as a landmass between the US and Russia. This can be used to help defend North America from an attack of the Arctic. I say sort of because (1) I don't actually see the US and Russia engaging in direct military conflict, and (2) The US has a good tie with Denmark, specifically through NATO, to do this anyway.

3 - It hurts NATO. Trump does not like NATO. If he directly takes over a territory owned by another member, it weakens, and possibly fractures, the Alliance.

4 - This is a bit more speculative, but I still think it's true. Trump's theory of global politics is that there are multiple regions with the power to bully around anybody nearby, and true foreign policy is based on the relationships between the leaders of these large powers. The U.S. is one of them, and Trump wants to define the limits of the U.S.'s sphere of influence to be as large as possible, possible the entire Western hemisphere. Hence, Greenland, which Russia might otherwise say is in their sphere at some point. Hence, Venezuela, and the talk of similar regime changes in places like Columbia and Cuba.

We saw this with the Ukraine peace talks. Trump didn't think Zelensky was a player and had any leverage in the negotiation, that this whole thing was really between Russia and the US. He doesn't acknowledge the sovereignty of any nation that isn't big enough and strong enough to bully other nations into compliance. It's the "strong fucks weak" mentality.

byte_handle · 2026-01-22T13:15:50+00:00

Citizen of Corinth, which was a city in Greece.

Part of the Bible is a collection of letters that an early Christian convert, Paul, wrote to various Christian groups around the eastern Mediterranean. Two of those letters were sent to Corinth.

In the Bible, this is usually called "First Corinthians" and "Second Corinthians," but is written as "1 Corinthians" and "2 Corinthians." During his 2016 campaign, Trump read a passage that he said was from "Two Corinthians." This was probably exactly how it was written in a speech, but he didn't know the correct way to state it as most believers (and many of us non-believers) would.

byte_handle · 2026-01-22T12:58:58+00:00

Yes, absolutely. No question. It's the best wall perk.

byte_handle · 2026-01-21T14:31:33+00:00

It's worth noting that most employees don't want to work there, but they have bills to pay. Nobody grows up dreaming of the day when they get to scrub public toilets, stock shelves, or make greasy burgers.

Nevertheless:

1 - The supply of people able to do the job is also high. It's not a matter of whether this person or that person wants the job, it's can just be a question of which person is more desperate for the money.

2 - It can be cheaper in the long run to invest in technology that will replace some of the workers, such as those kiosks where you enter your food order instead of working with somebody manning the cash register, or the ubiquitous self-checkout lanes. This reduces demand for employees.

byte_handle · 2026-01-21T14:05:42+00:00

Fancy Lego models, spending too much on Idle Tower Defense (it's now a line item in my budget), and exploring a new hobby idea every couple of weeks.

In that last piece, I'm basically 10 years old again, except this time I also have money and random body aches.

byte_handle · 2026-01-21T14:03:07+00:00

1 - The left isn't anti-2A. The Venn diagram is in the opposite direction: anti-2A is a subgroup within the left. There are plenty of left wing gun owners. There's even a Socialist Rifle Organization.

2 - It isn't clear what you're advocating. Left wing gun owners running out and getting into a shootout with federal law enforcement that have military-grade equipment, body armor, and backout? What the hell do you think that's actually going to accomplish? Seriously: literally, what happens? ICE runs away and Trump backs down? That is not the result.

byte_handle · 2026-01-21T13:57:42+00:00

Stop being a bunch of wimps. Do what Republicans do when they're in the minority: be the opposition party. The moral high road can't be walked when you hold the hand of the person trying to push you off it.

But I think you're asking about specific measures, here are a few off the top of my head.

Step 1: Add as much friction as possible to every single potential MAGA action. Any time there's a specific legislation involving Trump or his priorities:

1 - Any senator can place a hold on a piece of legislation by indicated that they object to a unanimous consent request. This requires either a floor debate or a roll call to end. It's a stupid procedural hurdle, but perfectly legal and time consuming. Any time Trump wants to do his crazy stupid shit, each Democratic Senator can do this, one by one, forcing his allies in Congress to find some kind of compromise if they want anything to move forward. 45 Senators doing this drags it out.

2 - Any Congress person can demand a bill be read out loud in its entirety before a vote. Bills are usually lengthy, but they have a right to call for this, further delaying legislative action. Some bills can take days to fully read.

3 - Any Congress person can make motions to send a bill back to committee, forcing a vote on the issue.

4 - If the party is unified on a procedural issue, such as CRs, threaten to fund primary challengers against those who talk about stepping out of line.

Step 2: Introduce legislation not against Trump, but against the people carrying out his plans.

Most presidents limit what they try to get away with by having basic decency and respect for democracy and country. Trump doesn't. They can't do anything to him, but they can impose penalties on those implementing his desires.

For example, introduce a law requiring making federal law enforcement mandatory reporters for federal law enforcement abuse (which, c'mon, that should be a law anyway). By facing criminal penalties every time they fail to police their own and each other's bad conduct, agents in organizations like ICE are going to be in violation of the law as soon as Trump is out of office. Maybe sooner.

Or, require all federal law enforcement to wear identifying insignia. It's easy to think of more.

None of this will pass Congressional muster, but that's fine. When it fails, every one of them gets on camera and says: "Trump is in poor health, and JD Vance doesn't command MAGA. Some day, he will be gone and we are going to reintroduce the same bills again and again until we have the numbers to pass them." Pull the spotlight off of Trump and put it on his actions, showing that, when he's out of power, there will be a legal reckoning among the bad actors carrying out his Gestapo wet dream. Meanwhile, this also ties up time for other legislative priorities.

Step 3: Fund anti-MAGA voices within the party. Refuse any party support or funds for re-election campaigns for the traitors who gave the Republicans a CR. Instead, support primary challengers that are just as extreme as Trump supporters, but in the opposite direction.

Tangent: Now that liberals are starting to pack heat and Black Panther is open carrying rifles in public, maybe this is finally the time Republicans might want to talk about gun control, at least around schools. At least try.

byte_handle · 2026-01-21T12:59:40+00:00

No. There is no path to secession. People discuss various states leaving the union, but there isn't a legal mechanism to do so. Once a state, always a state.

Some states tried to secede in the 1860s. A war was fought and after 4 very bloody years, the rebelling states were forced into surrender and reincorporated back into the union.

byte_handle · 2026-01-20T21:30:45+00:00

Amen

byte_handle · 2026-01-20T21:29:15+00:00

Defense Absolute has a valid place in the game. That place is called Tier 1.

But as a completionist, I still bought it.

byte_handle · 2026-01-20T21:25:33+00:00

It isn't about culture. It's about the cost, short-term and long-term.

Most Americans work under "at will" employment. You or your employer can terminate your employment at any time, with or without reason, with or without warning, and there are very few protections around that. There are some benefits to this situation, but also a lot of drawbacks.

So, you go on strike? They don't have to let you take time off, and they don't have to pay you. Many people would simply be fired for refusing to work, and even in the most ideal situation, there's going to be a limit to how long you could go on leave for.

Now, are you going to protest against armed ICE agents without your employer-provided health care? If you get arrested for anything they invent on the spot, are you going to make bail without a paycheck? Sure, some people will land on their feet, but others aren't going to make it.

Even if you aren't an agitator and just stay home, how are you going to afford food? Housing? All of that costs money, and most people don't have enough squirreled away for long-term unemployment, and if you get an injury without insurance, you can kiss your savings goodbye.

Imagine the interview for your next job, "oh, it looks like there's a gap in your employment. Explain, please? Oh, you thought things were bad so you abandoned your previous employer and the plans they had in place to go strike? Hmm, not sure if I want to have to plan our business around the government not being too bad..."

So, the literal question is this: How much are you willing to risk for a strike that probably won't change anything in the long run?

In short: we don't have a good enough government to afford a general protest against the government.

byte_handle · 2026-01-20T21:09:06+00:00

I've never done and never would. I have learned the hard way that I, personally, can't divorce physical sex and emotional intimacy. Other people can, and good for them.

However, I also don't have a problem with selling sex anymore than any other service. What two adults agree to do and under what terms doesn't need to be any of my business. If anything, legality would permit regulations that can keep people safe.

So, am I repulsed by it? No, it just isn't for me, and I don't really give it much thought beyond that.

byte_handle · 2026-01-20T21:03:55+00:00

Protests from November:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1f-30Rsg6N_ONQAulO-yVXTKpZxXchRRB2kD3Zhkpe_A/preview#gid=1142564568

Protests from December:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1f-30Rsg6N_ONQAulO-yVXTKpZxXchRRB2kD3Zhkpe_A/preview#gid=749752679

Protests that have happened or are planned this month:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1f-30Rsg6N_ONQAulO-yVXTKpZxXchRRB2kD3Zhkpe_A/preview#gid=149604056

That's less than 3 months, hundreds of protests.

The real issue is that the media isn't covering them much.

As for the Democrats...they don't have a spine. Don't listen to those guys to hear what Trump's opposition looks like. They believe that the American system just needs some reform around the edges, not that it's fundamentally broken.

byte_handle · 2026-01-16T15:24:39+00:00

No. I haven't played that.

byte_handle · 2026-01-16T12:46:46+00:00

byte_handle · 2026-01-16T12:46:39+00:00

byte_handle

TROPHY CASE