Yeah, that's what leadership is, chief.
It's also not even like it's only Americans whose lives will be directly affected by the next election but millions of migrants, Palestinians, Ukrainians and God knows how many more. So talk about the privilege of this comment, not to mention the dismissal of the half the country who doesn't want a return to 2020, to just throw the rest of the world under the bus because some may deserve it.
I understand the line, it does not reflect reality.
Well, you clearly don't, because OP's whole contention was if the candidate was anyone else but Trump, and yet here you are continuing to argue something the OP isn't disputing.
And Biden and Trump should both in theory put out a “I’m fine but if I develop dementia during the next turn this is the plan” plan. For Biden, that will help a lot of people who are on the fence between him and nobody see him as a better candidate and turn out in higher percentages.
I believe that's called a running mate, and not too many people seem keen on a President Harris.
Unfortunately, it probably isn't possible to. Unless, of course, everyone (and I do mean everyone) here is perfectly content with the Fediverse never gaining mainstream popularity, the simple and unpleasant fact is that it's all just a matter of time until Lemmy and Kbin are infected with the same kind of shit. This phenomenon predates Reddit, it predates 4chan, it predates Digg. Ask early Usenet members 30 years ago just how far back this issue goes.
But what if, instead of trying to prevent stagnation/degradation entirely, we were to change tack slightly and try to slow it down as much as possible? Now, you're working with reality, not against it.
One idea I've always been in favor of has been the concept of installing limits: limited posts, limited replies, limited votes, etc. I don't know if this is a thing that could be rolled out on an instance-per-instance basis or that, even if it could be, if it would be as effective as a platform-wide initiative, but the appeal of setting limits is to introduce scarcity and thus more weight to a user's actions.
If you only have X number of possible actions per day, such as X number of posts, how might that affect your behavior? Would you still shitpost as often in every pun thread, upvote every repost, argue with every single troll? Probably not.
There are obviously some downsides to this as it might have a not insignificant effect on promoting genuinely good content and or punishing (downvoting to oblivion) objectively bad or offensive content -- and again, at best, you'd really just be delaying the inevitable as long as possible -- but I think it's worth investigating nevertheless.
I came to the same conclusion in a post on a sub that was debating whether they should re-open permanently or not. I'll leave it to you to imagine how well it went over, but it should be added that this behavior doesn't only affect mods or power users; it's true of the userbase in general. People will latch onto anything they can in order to defend crossing their own picket line.
Well, that was certainly spicy! Surely, Cocca must be gone after this match, right? El Tri was thoroughly dominated after the first 20 minutes or so, and their two ejections were a long time coming (on another note though, what were McKennie and Dest thinking retaliating like they did?).