15 hours of player to get 5 chances at one free item.

If you are going to play the game anyway, it might get you to a store, but you're not gonna feed your family meat/potato/milk farming the Wendy's game.

Before "The Big Lie" was specifically Trump won the 2020 election, it was a strategy pursued by authoritarians, including Putin, the Kim family, Mussolini, and Hitler: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie

The truth is whatever we say the truth is: do not trust your lying eyes. To speak otherwise is to betray Friend Computer.

I never was really interested, though plenty of people in my family hunt. In Arkansas while I was in secondary school, we did all have to take a mandatory Hunter's Safety course. And, in the area were I live right now, I'm sure there are families that benefit from the additional caloric supply, maxing out their tags during rifle season.

I have mixed feelings around the other points you raise, that I find it hard to articulate. But, I don't have any better solution to overpopulation.

I've been present at killing, cleaning, and (later) butchering of rabbit, deer and cow. But, I do try to get as few calories from animal products as I can. I was vegan at home for many months, tho not currently.

I'm not giving up a single copyright (or other IP) protection until AFTER they are stripped from Disney, Amazon, and Google.

If we want to end the IP regime, I can probably cope, even though I depend on it a bit for CC-SA and AGPLv3 distribution. But, first "artificial persons" have to give it up before I or any "natural person" does.

Honestly, any mandatory use of some something that can generate dangerous, factually incorrect text and images should be absolutely forbidden. Government / public services shouldn't use them at all without automated checking that can operate at the same speeds and doesn't make those mistakes. Private organizations should be forced to provide all consumers as easy opt-out from using them.

Opt-in entertainment purpose should ALSO be regulated for safety. And, with "hallucinations" being mathematically impossible to eliminate, I'm not sure liability risk will leave an product people will want to afford.

I don't disagree about that. Schumer and Jeffries have had their chance(s). If they really want to help the party, they can assist the new leadership behind the scenes -- strategizing and whipping. Or do you think it might have been about being on camera for them?

I believe they can (and should) pass legislation that will: if passed, benefit the people and attract voters to Ds; and if vetoed, provide campaign fodder to detract voters from Rs. In particular, I'd like to see something that benefits the working class broadly, but benefits the MAGA base rapidly and significantly, maybe some Medicare/Medicaid/ACA changes that save people $$$? Maybe a one-time corporate tax and distribution to consumers as a "tarrif rebate"? Maybe some sort of temporary jobs program to repair/replace infrastructure, with an allocation that mirrors existing federal->state/district grants (to benefit rural areas a bit more)?

They should also deny executive appointments to prevent further corruption, but that's not going to be seen as action. I think some time can be spend on congressional investigations, maybe even turning evidence and conclusions over to state AGs, but going for impeachment or involving the Trump DOJ is an absolute waste of time.

If they go for a government shutdown, they better have a strategy for really winning something significant for the people. If there is a shutdown and there's no or little concession from the executive, it's not going to be seen as positive action, but mere obstructionism.

I agree it might actually be impossible to satisfy the expectations I've been seeing on social media today. I think many people are overestimating the power of Congress v. "Mr. Veto", the DOJ, and SCOTUS.

They’re just not invited to my property.

I can weirdly live and let live with that.

For me, that's too close to the way Christian Nationalists in my state of Arkansas want to exclude non-Whites, and I think would bring back suntown towns where the (often democratic) government of an locality (violently) excluded a marginalized minority from "their property".

I have to live with that attitude around here, but I'm not directly threatened by it as a cis, white male. My county voted 90% R yesterday. I know politics is the wrong place to change hearts, but I hate that my state government has regulations in place that make things less safe for trans persons and cis women.

Unions also generally have access to more individual donors that are willing to have their donations at least partially directed by the organization.

The "dark money" PACs are usually formed because some rich person(s) want(s) to wield more power than they can by directly convincing other individuals to direct their donations, even when they (illegally) offer to and do reimburse other individuals for their donations.

When you are having to funnel donations via individuals (legally or not), the number of individuals often matters more than the amount of available funding. (And, that's a good thing, even for unions.)

Moore noted that the initiative passed by Montana is similar to a law passed in Hawaii earlier this year that classified corporations as “artificial persons” who do not have a constitutional right to make political donations.

(from the article)

There's a legislative strategy that could work, but we'll see if leaders of the new congress can execute.

Impeachment proceedings are not a large part of that. Denying executive appointments or being part of a government shutdown over budget issues is also not going to be seen as action.

I agree. Among the things the Rs have been good at are closing ranks and obstructing process. There's no way 11-13 of them decide to remove someone the R President still supports. While I do think there should be some level of congressional investigation, I hope the new Congress focuses on passing legislation that will benefit the people if passed, and hurt the popularity of Rs (and especially MAGA) if vetoed.

The evidence collected (and conclusions reached) as part of congressional investigation could be handed over to the DOJ (if it is ever independent from the executive person, again) or State AGs or both. But, even a 56/44 Senate is not going to pass a vote to remove.