#IF IT DIDN'T WORK THEN REPUBLICANS WOULDN'T TRY TO MAKE IT HARDER TO VOTE

[innerlmnt]

The US Presidential debate was horrible. It only underscores how bad both actually are, and it doesn't matter to vote either.

i watched clips of the debate. the united states should be ashamed.

your senile american dust pouches suck for sure, but that's exactly why you need to vote. the people who want the orange man with the principles of bigotry and an actual American doomsday event in office will show up to vote. they showed up in 2016 and they will show up again.

from a guy living in a parliamentary republic, i wish y'all had shit like coalitions and multiple parties in government, but because the right to vote has been manipulated against you, it's beyond critical to participate and take back that right. no one in their right mind wants to vote for Biden or Trump but y'all are between a rock and a hard place right now. it's because of your primitive voting system that the free world will be led by one of these doofuses and it's best that you pick the one that will do the lesser damage, even by a little.

think of it this way. Biden isn't gonna live forever. He's older than Trump. Joe Biden has a higher chance of dying while in office, which will bring in the Vice President i.e. a younger person - to take the lead for the Oval Office - at which point it will become the United States' job to protest and turn around the Vice President rather than Trump who is more set in his ways.

y'all have been left very little choice but to try and game the system that's been playing your asses in plain sight. sadly this comes at a time when that strategy doesn't help groups worthy of immediate attention (Palestinians, BIPOC, queer people etc.). the fight in front of you all is long and hard and tough, but it's a fight worth fighting nonetheless.

[itsallpoliticsstupid]

The US Presidential Election 2024 - A mini Deep Dive into what went wrong for the Democrats

I would say this will be my last post on the US Presidential Election of 2024, but we all know it won't be.

I wanted to bring all my thoughts together as to what I perceive the biggest issues for the Democrats were, and how this needs to be rectified in 2028. Well, they won't listen to some random person on a Politics blog with *checks* 44 followers (oh hi, thanks for following), but this is my opinion.

And interestingly, it all starts with the sale of a certain social media platform.

October 2022 - Elon Musk buys Twitter

In my personal opinion the acquisition of Twitter was a major contributing factor to how the election was won. Elon Musk has never been quiet about his Political leanings being closer to the Conservative ideology and how he believed that it was wrong to silence those on the right for their views. So Trump et al. Going as far as to reinstate their accounts.

We all know that Twitter has now become a very toxic place. With extreme ideological views. I feel it was easy to use this platform to peddle a more Trump ideal for the election. It's still one of the biggest platforms out there, why wouldn't it be used to try and win an election. And without it, it would have made things significantly harder for the Republicans to reach a larger audience.

Anyway, this isn't just me twitter bashing. This is me actually analyzing what the situation is.

So back to what the Democrats did wrong.

Joe Biden confirms he will run for President

I believe the election was lost from the moment that Joe Biden made the decision to stand as President for a second term.

This is where everything fell apart, and set a tone for the remainder of the election. Joe Biden was not medically fit to run for the Presidency, and it had been so clear towards the end of his first term as President. You could see he was struggling in front of camera. Getting words wrong. Forgetting the most basic of things. It was a bad look for the Democrat's, and something that the Republican's could easily jump on.

It meant they could capitalize on it and make the Democrat's look like a party of weak leadership.

By the time he dropped out, Kamala Harris had approximately 100 days of campaigning. It wasn't enough. It didn't allow her to really put herself forward as an ideal candidate.

Which leads me to...

Kamala Harris - what did she stand for?

Outside of the right to healthcare/abortions I can't name what Kamala Harris stood for in this election. To me she was a status quo candidate at a time where American's needed assurances due to the increase in cost of living; terrible wars in the Middle East and Ukraine; and high levels of immigration.

Regardless of how bad Trump's policies were (and as we are seeing they are BAD) they were offering an alternative. One that people have been crying out for because they're struggling with the most basic things in their life.

Unfortunately the alternative is likely to make things significantly worse for the American people. But when somebody is saying they will lower costs for you, it's something you take at face value. Especially if you don't necessary understand the impact of raising tariffs or the removal of the affordable care act.

It's just sad that the Democrat campaign was so bad and didn't offer an alternative, it allowed this to happen.

Celebrity Endorsements

I was in two minds about what to put next. This or negative campaigning. But I think this one works.

Whilst Trump was backed by people like Elon Musk, I don't believe he had anywhere near the level of celebrity endorsements that Kamala had, and it very often doesn't work in a persons favor for a couple of reasons.

The first is I think there was a heavy reliance on people listening to their favorite celebrities when considering who to vote for. But in many cases, people will see an endorsement from Taylor Swift, or Misha Collins, or Bruce Springsteen and think 'well, what the hell do they know about what I am currently facing.' A lot of people will view celebrities as out of touch with the reality of today's world.

I'm not saying this is always the case. But that's what the average voter who has zero understanding of Politics will think. That somebody who has millions in the bank will never understand the struggles of having to hold down three jobs to feed your children, or pay your mortgage. And yes, there is a level of cognitive dissonance there because they don't think the same for Trump or Musk, but they seem them as a ruling elite who have the knowledge to make things better for the country. Not just a 'bleeding heart liberal' who just hates the right and has no business being in Politics.

I see the second that it took away from Kamala Harris as a candidate, and shielded a lot of the issues that she had. I think the endorsements worked for Obama because he had charisma. He offered something different. But for Harris, it was just a shield to show she had nothing.

And really, for the reasons above, it was a shield that didn't work as many people were turned off and inevitably chose not to vote.

Negative Campaigning

It never works. It's as simple as that. It never works.

And ultimately I feel that's what the Democrat campaign boiled down to. Being as negative as possible about the Republican's. About their views on abortion. About how many of them are Russian sympathisers. About Trump's health. And that always leaves people thinking 'they can't be that bad though.' And I think a lot of people got turned off by voting Democrat for that reason.

There is more. If I was to do more research I could continue for hours with this. Maybe I will come back with a part 2 when I have had more time to digest everything. But right now, these to me have been the biggest drivers behind the Democrat's losing the election.

And not the fact Kamala Harris was a woman like some people who like to believe.

It's time for the Democrats to stop burying their head in the sand and listen in time for the 2028 election.

[comparativelysuperlative]

What was the book? With the Definitely Real Banishment

Spoilers (obviously) but it's the Lightbringer series. That villain was pretty good! The word-by-word writing is fine! The plot is, for several books' worth, aimed at being Very Generic Fantasy (for reasons that will make sense later). Incoming long post about its philosophy, with even more spoilers.

It's not often that I read a book and immediately go "I can tell you what kind of middle school this author went to." In this case, it was drawing on the author's experience of exactly the theology I grew up with, which was almost eerie.

(I read book one years and years ago, and didn't retain much other than "cool magic system." Probably everything in this post is true about book one as well, but I wouldn't know.)

Google will tell you that the series gets gradually very Christian, to the point where the climax of the last book contains a sermon. But it's more specific than that. These books scream "Protestant, American, classically educated, does not travel internationally very often, male, straight, probably white, the kind of person who would vote straight-ticket Republican until that meant Trump at which point all bets are off." I did not bother confirming most of those. They're just obvious.

The loudest part--to me at least--was the "classically educated." (If you're not familiar, it's this thing.) The series would mention quotes from fantasy medieval Catholics or fantasy ancient Greeks or whatever, and I'd recognize the quotes or the names because they'd be real people I ran across in school. Sure enough, author went to Hillsdale.

Lightbringer is interesting for having an actual vision of a conservative society, not just about hating the right/wrong people. Not being on that team anymore I don't actually like this vision very much, but compared to current conservatives, credit for having one at all.

Differences between people obviously don't affect your value as a person, they just might make it easier or harder or mean you have to specialize differently to accomplish as much For The Group.

(That opinion makes perfect sense for characters in an elite military unit/training for that unit. But that context is mostly specific to book two, and the philosophy really isn't.)

This applies to everything. Physical condition, including strength/weight/gender. Color-blindness. Superpowers. Being straight. (I'm genuinely not sure if that part was intentional. Characters kept getting distracted at terrible times, and the narration outside their head sounded exactly the same as when someone can't run a mile without Trying Very Hard.)

It does not matter whether your mental illness turns out to be literally demons in your head. Either way you've still got to either work through it or specialize around it.

Tradition matters, even when we don't understand the reason behind it.

If you happen to be in a fantasy book and have access to magic, consorting with demons is evil but fancy physics is fine. You can just BET this author got into fights with other Christians about whether Harry Potter was anti-Jesus.

"Irredeemably bad" isn't really a thing. "Not in fact going to be redeemed" is, but it's worth trying to show mercy if you have the chance. If you don't have the chance, kill 'em. Don't enjoy it, though.

Forgiving people for actually-bad things is hard, can't just go "idk, they're good guys now," but it's also important. (I do think this is underrepresented in secular fiction, where it's either depicted as "how could you work with THEM" or "come on, get over it already and team up against the whatever.")

One of the big reveals at the end is "the Christian God is real." The answer to the problem of evil is indeed the popular answer in the denominations I grew up with. Human choices something something mumble free will.

Very incrementalist. You do as much good as you can as fast as you can, but obviously without overthrowing the entire order or anything. Only evil opportunists would want to do that. Yes, even if the existing order is corrupt all the way through.

Speaking of which, you know that organization/political entity claiming to represent God? Corrupt all the way through. God is more personal than that. Protestantism!

Personal morality matters. Your leaders absolutely must be good people, or at least trying to be, or you're screwed.

Personal morality matters. It is safe to assume you'll end up as exactly what your peers expect of you, so pick good peers.

A man should be faithful to one (1) wife. Viewpoint characters speedrun figuring out the philosophy behind this.

(IMO monogamy was a legitimate human rights win by early Christianity, relative to what came before, and I think something similar applies in this setting. But since the real-life alternatives today are so much better than women being property, giving this a lot of screen time sounded like the book is fishing very hard for things historical Christianity did right.)

Also, once you are married you Are Married. It's not that changing that would be unthinkable, just that if you do treat it as an option you're obviously doing it wrong.

Gay people don't exist. Any variety of non-straight, really. Nobody says that it should be that way. It just doesn't come up. Characters are written in enough detail that I can tell you how they'd react if you asked them, and it's mostly the "not my business" + "prefer not to think about it" kind of low-grade homophobia. A few would be explicitly okay with it. But it does not come up. If there were a gay relationship depicted, I'd expect it to be "coincidentally" problematic in some other way.

(I guess there's that one slaver-antagonist whose sexuality is just "sadist." Yeah, one might call that problematic.)

Practically dripping with Great Man Theory of History. There's a scene where the protagonist has a self-affirming/emotional moment about not relying on his family name and meritoriously earning his first kingdom. This is played completely straight.

Don't worry, he uses it for good. At least as much good as he can without overthrowing the existing order etc.

If there are end times prophecies, they might well be true but you can't trust any specific interpretation so it's wiser to just do your best without reference to the prophecy. (This is an interesting take! And not heresy but also not common! I bet the author's reacting against some interesting strains of fundamentalism there.)

A cool idea where angels and demons can be anywhere in any world at any time in history, but are very reluctant to actually do that because they can't pick the same time twice. You can just tell it's the author's Christianity headcanon.

You win by doing your best and having faith in God. The villains are very much a sideshow.

(I think if everyone followed this book's philosophy more it would be a mostly bad thing. Let's not do that.)

(But wow, I wish modern conservatives were only this bad.)

It probably sounds like I didn't like this series. But I did read five doorstoppers' worth. This post is just about the opinions, and the opinions sucked.

Anyway. This has to be on purpose, right, and 10 or 15 years ago I was pretty much the target audience for this. Guess I'm old.

I used to explicitly think "I'm Christian, but atheist fiction is more interesting," and this book is the kind of thing that...tries...to counter that. Fails, because resolving major conflicts with divine intervention is tricky to make interesting. But you'll see why it's going for Every Other Book, But Christian. (Also, the amount of sex in these books is much higher than you might think, given everything. I wish I knew less about what body types the author is attracted to.)

Anyway, I can't really say I would recommend it. But if you're interested in what would happen if Card or Sanderson tried to be Evangelical Lewis for adults, Lightbringer isn't bad.

[optimiticsolarpunk]

How We Saved Ourselves

This is a short story I wrote in June 2024 about what I see as a potential future for how humans solve the climate crisis:

In 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act barely passed in Congress in the United States. The IRA was the name given to the biggest climate bill the United States had ever dreamed of passing. It was a miracle bill in some ways, one that a year or two earlier, climate activists wouldn't have dreamed would actually pass.

No Republicans supported it, so the Democrats needed every single member to vote for it in the Senate, or it was dead. Joe Manchin, the Democrat from West Virginia almost didn't vote for it, which would have killed the bill. "It's a miracle I'm even here," he would say, for being a Democrat from a deeply Republican state. In a way it sort of was a miracle, but he was there and they needed his vote. After lots of haggling, and periods when he said he wouldn't vote for it, then he would, now he won't again, Manchin came around, and the deal was done. It was all very dramatic (don't say it's dramatic...show how it's dramatic.  If you show it, overtly stating it is unnecessary).

The bill was massive, and was designed to attract billions, even trillions of dollars of private capital, or money from companies, to solve the climate crisis and save the world. They knew that the bill by itself wouldn't actually save the world, but the idea was to start the momentum, and prove to businesses that investing in climate solutions was where the markets were headed, so it would be a smart investment for them. There was a lot of money to be made saving the world, and no one wanted to miss out on it. And why not, you get to be a hero and make money, what's not to love?

By 2024, it was working, and billions of dollars started flowing into climate solutions. Massive solar projects went up. Giant offshore wind farms were under construction, pumping power to millions of homes on the densely populated East Coast.

In 2026, troves of money flowed into startup companies with big ideas for how to capture carbon, build an electrical vehicle transportation system, convert our heating and cooling to electricity and generate all this electricity without releasing carbon.

There were haters. Change is hard. "What if we don't like looking at the solar panels or wind turbines?" they would ask themselves. But as the first projects finished, they would look around and say "Well, this isn't so bad. And it's pumped a lot of money into our town and made lots of jobs." Early technology can take time to mature, so the electric alternatives were not always up to par with their fossil fuel cousins. But humans are incredible engineers, and technology improved so fast that the fossil fuel legacy tech was quickly left in the dust.

Some oil and gas companies even got in on the fun. They would think, "Well we are just energy companies. If the future energy of society is solar and wind, we'll do that too." They built massive renewable energy projects all over the world. They also got lots of tax breaks for these projects, so it was easier to get the shareholders' support. But of course, not all of them were so excited about it.

Some oil and gas companies didn't want to loose the record profits they were making from selling oil and gas. They wanted to stop renewable energy as quickly as possible, and keep fossil fuels as the dominant currency of the world economy. So they started a hidden campaign to fund what were made to look like grass roots campaigns of voters rallying against renewable energy projects. These campaigns could be very successful - at one point they had even convinced a growing audience that wind farms were killing whales. It was hard to disprove, but eventually the scientists showed enough data that the people came around. Solar was a little harder to attack, but you could always try to convince people they were ugly.

A leading presidential candidate even promised oil executives that if they donated $1 billion to his campaign, he would undo all the climate laws, ensuring the dominance of oil and gas for the foreseeable future.

The stages were set for a fierce battle. Oil and gas companies convinced a huge swath of the population that the looming climate crisis was confusing enough that we shouldn't make any drastic changes. On the other side, the data continued to pile up painting a clearer and clearer picture of the existential threat to humanity. Scientists pushed the population to make the big changes that were necessary to survive. A formidable percentage of humans looked at the data and joined the scientists' group to push through solutions to the climate crisis. The war for the future of humanity was raging. On one side: the oil and gas companies and their supporters. On the other side: the scientists and their supporters.

For years, the oil companies and their supporters were winning easily. There was just too much money coming in, and they bought victory anywhere they could. Politicians were a major lifeline - without laws like the IRA, private companies would not be willing to take on all the risks of the energy transition by themselves. In some cases, with enough money, you could even get politicians to make laws that helped prevent the energy transition, such as blocking renewable energy projects.

To counter this, scientists continued publishing the data they were gathering that showed the horrible destruction that would come if humans didn't change course. Some of the people on the side of the oil companies decided it wouldn't be so bad if some legislation was passed that helped clean up the air and water. "Why not?" they would ask themselves.

Scientists used their data to determine that humanity had until 2050 to stop adding ANY more greenhouse gases. The world had to be carbon neutral.

Storms, wildfires and droughts raged with increasing destruction across the globe. Millions of people died. Scientists tried hard to keep their predictions realistic and moderate, so they would be less susceptible to attacks on their data and predictions from the opposing side. This meant, however, that in many cases the destruction was actually worse than they predicted.

The world had three options: One was to continue burning fossil fuels for energy and end in a world of suffering and destruction. The second was to convince everyone to give up electricity, cars, and modern life. The third option was to build an enormous number of renewable energy projects around the world. Option one, continuing with fossil fuels, didn't actually solve the problem. And not many people wanted to give up modern life. So renewable energy it was.

In 2015, at a huge gathering in Paris, the world had set goals for how to solve the climate crisis, based on the scientists' data. The Paris Accord, as it would be called, set goals to build an increasing number of renewable energy projects, to replace the fossil fuel power plants that were spewing carbon into the atmosphere, causing the climate crisis. Scientist said that if humans around the world could follow these goals, by 2050 we could avoid the most catastrophic destruction.

In 2027, the world was far behind the goals. That's not to say there wasn't progress. Bills similar to the IRA began passing in countries around the world. Renewable energy technology got better, more efficient and cheaper. Electric cars became cheaper than gas cars; better and faster too.

One reason for the slow progress was that many of the people on the side of scientists began to feel like it was hopeless. There wasn't enough progress, and why were the oil companies still winning? Without the fire of optimism and inspiration, it was hard to get motivated to help.

And the oil companies were as powerful as ever. They could control the price of oil and gas by constraining their production, so they could drive the price up anytime they wanted. This led to record profits.

By 2029, the destruction had gotten worse, but it was mostly in the global south and Americans didn't really care that much about it. The destruction increased in the US too, but the oil company team explained it away as just another bad storm; nothing new. Some items had gotten really expensive, like coffee and chocolate, because of droughts in other parts of the world. But usually the current president was blamed.

There was hope. The number of renewable energy projects began to grow exponentially every year.

Engineers invented floating wind turbines, which meant we didn't run out of space for these projects, you could just float them further out to sea. Huge subsea cables brought this power back to land to distribute it deeper and deeper in land.

By 2030, a huge number of offshore wind farms far out in the Atlantic and Pacific provided enough power for every coastal state and more. During the most windy parts of the day, these wind farms produced more power than could actually be used. Advances in battery and storage meant this extra power charged giant energy storage facilities, giant batteries from which energy would be released when the wind died down.

Nuclear energy also made a comeback. People liked nuclear energy because it didn't release carbon and was not intermittent. The power was always there whether or not the sun was shining or the wind was blowing. The plateau in nuclear power plants that happened toward the end of the 20th century gave way to a big increase in small modular reactors, a fourth generation nuclear technology that allowed for smaller and much safer reactors. These were cheap and easy to build, eliminating many of the negative aspects of the first generations of nuclear power plants. The early nuclear plants from the 20th century didn't have safe technology and there were enough catastrophes that held the power source at bay until these safer technologies emerged.

Inland, massive solar farms were built in the deserts and onshore wind farms on the plains. Renewable energy projects generated enormous amounts of electricity. Giant energy highways carried electricity from renewable energy projects along cables to load centers all over the country. Fossil fuels became less important.

The companies building these projects became very rich. Oil companies noticed. More and more oil companies defected to the side of the scientists, deciding to become part of the solution instead of the problem. The money they made helped with the decision. They shut down their oil operations and began building renewable energy projects instead.

At first the team with the scientists were suspicious of these defectors from the opposing team. After all, they had been the ones causing this massive problem, why should they be forgiven so quickly? Shouldn't they all be put in jail, or worse?

But these ex-oil companies worked hard to prove that they were serious about becoming part of the solution. Each oil field they closed had a real positive impact on saving humanity. Eventually, the scientist team came around and accepted them. These companies had the power and money and knowhow to be valuable team members.

The 2050 deadline to stop emitting greenhouse gases loomed. The science had become very clear that the situation was dire. The destruction that raged around the world made their research more visceral.

By 2040, the team of oil companies was hemorrhaging members. Most employees wanted to be part of an inspiring future. Executives of any company that hadn't switched sides and had deliberately delayed progress on the climate crisis were being jailed in some parts of the world. Protests had become so effective that these individuals often could not appear in public. Boycotts and bans on anyone investing with these oil companies made life very difficult. Profits became thinner and thinner, life became harder and harder.

Life on the other team, with the scientists, was getting sweeter and sweeter. Renewable energy had become so ubiquitous that for most people it was essentially free. You could ride electric transportation as much as you wanted and get anywhere you wanted, pollution free. Cities had been transformed into green spaces with parks, bike lanes and playgrounds. No one paid to heat or cool their houses - technology made sure it was done efficiently. On nice days, you could program your house to automatically turn off the air conditioning and open the windows.

In 2045, a consortium of the last remaining oil companies in the world consolidated all it's members into one giant oil company, called United Petroleum. They entered a siege mentality to hold strong with oil. Oil was not the only product in which the company was invested, they had found plenty of profits mining minerals, many of which were used in renewable energy projects. They also built carbon capture projects, which had become very popular and profitable and genuinely contributed to reducing the amount of carbon in the atmosphere.

In early 2048 the board of United Petroleum elected a young new CEO named Nancey Lopez; an ambition upstart that had opposed the siege mentality. Within her first six months, she implemented sweeping changes, not all of them popular among the employees. Then, on June 8, 2049 she made a major speech to the entire company. She announced that United Petroleum was shutting down it's last oil fields. They would no longer be selling fossil fuel-based products. Instead, they were shifting their remaining resources into minerals, carbon capture and emerging climate tech. The name was being changed from United Petroleum to United Energy.

Ms. Lopez had worried about the employees' reaction at the announcement - would they revolt and call for her ouster? Instead, the moment she made the announcement, the crowd burst into cheers. It had been hard for these employees to be on the losing team, selling a product everyone hated. Now they were entering an exciting new phase of the company. Maybe they would even be cool again, coming up with innovations that would make life better for people.

The news swept the world rapidly. Headlines read: Last Oil Field to be Shuttered and World Enters New Post-Oil Era. The news was greeted with jubilation from every corner of the globe. The company that had been a piryah since it's inception became an inspiring symbol of humanity's ability to adapt and change. Ms. Cole's status skyrocketed and she traveled the world giving speeches.

With no fossil fuels to burn, emissions of greenhouse gases disappeared. Humans had saved themselves at the very last minute. For decades, scientists had been saying that emissions would need to cease by 2050. Humans had done it without a moment to spare. In July 2049, a month after the big announcement from Ms. Cole, the world began preparing for a worldwide celebration for January 1, 2050.  Called World Day, it became the first official international holiday observed annually across the globe.

But the change didn't stop there. For so many years, humans had dumped greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and a huge amount had accumulated. Now it had to be cleaned up. The carbon capture projects that had been built leading up to 2050 helped do that, and more were built to help speed up the process.

A global movement to bring green vegetation to cities around the world blossomed. These cities taught each other best practices, and soon native plants and trees proliferated in cities and towns from Johannesburg to Beijing, from Guatelajera to Riyad. Growing healthy food in community gardens became a fashionable practice.

The years of work to solve the climate crisis had taught humans other valuable skills as well. Advanced technology and artificial intelligence made most work optional, so building community became a central theme for humans around the world.

The renewable energy projects that powered all this advanced technology continued to pump out power day after day. The technology had become so advanced that robots could repair and replace anything when it broke or wore out.

Some people found a lot of purpose developing even more advanced technology that could help species be healthier, happier and to thrive. They found new ways to help bring the Earth to a healthy harmony with nature. The ocean began to team with life, nursed back to a thriving ecosystem. Forests full of animals existed within major cities.

On World Day in 2200, a documentary was released that took the world by storm. Titled Saving Ourselves, it told the dramatic story of humans in the 21st century who had taken the Earth to the brink of destruction, only to save it at the last minute. Everyone had learned the story in school, but there was something about how the story was told in the documentary that made it hard to look away. While no one was alive who remembered the actual events leading up to 2050, the shocking drama of the story captivated the world. After the movie, communities would gather and celebrate the wonderful world they had created.

[torispencerkeene-blog]

BE A HERO. WEAR A MASK (Take Two)

In the past few weeks I have been trying (mostly without success) to spread the message that HEROES WEAR MASKS. I find so much of this disturbing, but recently I came across a post from someone who was giving their reasons for not wearing masks. I don’t want to call that person out, or make them feel bad, so I decided to do a little bit of research. I came up with eight main reasons that people don’t wear masks, and I want to show you what they are and give you a hint as to how those things could be countered if you have to explain this to anyone. 

I would also like to remind you that we are all in this together. Please don’t get into a fight about this. Healthy debate is great, but don’t let anyone pull you into a fight. It could be more dangerous than them not wearing that mask. 

*******************************************************************************************

1. It's harder to breathe when I wear a mask. 

If you find it more difficult to breathe while wearing a mask, then you should absolutely be the FIRST one wearing a mask. Take that feeling, of having a hard time getting air... now quadruple it. You might be getting close to the first stages of what asthma feels like. 

When I can't breathe it absolutely terrifies me. I have asthma, and wearing a mask sometimes does make it a little harder to breathe. But I wear the mask because the idea of having a tube down my throat just so I can get air is ten-million times more terrifying. I don't want to die from Covid-19. I really, really don't. 

2. It makes me uncomfortable. 

There are other masks out there. If you can't find one that is comfortable, you can make one. It's fun and interesting to make your own designs and just do what you want with the material. There are masks that are made from spandex that are much more comfortable and slip right up under your glasses so they don't get all foggy. If I can do it, so can you. 

3. It isn't my responsibility to keep other people safe. 

Maybe not, but it isn't only strangers you would be protecting. When you wear a face mask, social distance, and take proper precautions (like washing your hands with hot water and soap for a full 20 seconds), then you are protecting yourself, your children, your parents, your friends, your neighbors, your grocery store clerk. Most of them are people you see all the time. You like them. You want them in your life. Wear a mask for them. Be a hero. Being a hero isn't about only meeting your responsibilities, it is going above and beyond for other people. 

4. It makes me afraid (Or, it’s fearmongering).

If you weren't afraid, I would be worried about you. Seriously, we're all afraid. Every single one of us has some fear. Maybe it isn't Covid-19. Maybe it's a fear of a car accident, or fear of losing someone, or a fear of the dark. All of us have fear. But rising above that fear and doing what is best for other people is a sign of bravery. Like Clara from Doctor Who, perhaps whisper, "Let me be brave." 

When you are afraid of the dark, you bring a flashlight. When you are afraid of a stranger, you carry pepper spray. When you are afraid of a disease... you wear a mask. 

5. It doesn't work. 

Actually, that is where you are wrong. No, I’m not about to get up on a political soap-box and preach at you about who is right or wrong in politics. I don’t like Republicans, but I also don’t really care for Democrats. I guess, maybe, I could be called an Independent, but even they don’t really fit my criteria. So me saying this isn’t about politics. Please hear me when I say that. I don’t care who you vote for... wear a mask when you do it. 

If masks didn't work, why would doctors and nurses have been wearing them for so many years? It doesn't make them look important. It's because they don't want to carry any diseases home to their families. It makes perfect sense. If you were working with asbestos, you would wear protective gear for that too. Doctors know viruses and diseases can spread, so they protect themselves. 

The medical workers and scientists working through the Covid-19 pandemic have been pretty clear about masks in recent weeks. The more we learn, the more we know we need these masks if we want our country to completely re-open, and to STAY open. I did a bunch of research on this, mostly because I got into a debate with someone about it, and found literally dozens of articles and PDFs about the effectiveness of masks during the pandemic, and all (except a few older pieces by someone I wouldn't want treating me for a splinter) said the same thing. Masks help slow the spread. 

In fact, one news report I watched said that in a hair salon, two customers had Covid-19 but didn’t know it. The stylist and other customers didn't get it because those customers were wearing masks! Keeping a mask on protects everyone you come into contact with. It isn’t a perfect solution (there are none) but refusing to wear a mask only keeps the spread of the disease going on and keeps us shut down longer. 

6. It violates my rights. 

Which ones? 

Laid out in the Declaration of Independence it says that 'all men have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.' I will grant you that. And you have the right to express your opinions (I can show you how) but that does NOT mean that you have the right to put other people in danger to exercise those rights! I have the right to LIVE. I want to live. I don't have grandchildren yet. I would like to actually live long enough to meet them. I want to live long enough for my son to get married. I want to live to pursue some of my dreams, to find that happiness for myself. Wearing a mask protects my rights!

Are you talking about your first amendment rights? That is the right to religion, free speech, having a free press, the right to assemble, and the right to petition the government. 

 - If you want to practice your religion, services are being held online by so many churches I couldn’t begin to name them all. (If you are a shut-in like I was, you already know this) There are dozens of churches that post their services on their websites. It’s how I watched when I couldn’t get to church. 

- If you want the right of free speech, make your own mask into a statement!

- If you want the press, it’s everywhere! 

- If you want to assemble, no one is stopping you (unless the area where you live has increasing numbers of Covid-19, in which case they are trying to save your life).

- If you want the right to petition the government, you can... just do it safely. There are more ways than one to petition. Start an online petition. Do a drive-by petition where every family makes statements on their car. If you want to, you can even make your mask a petition. There are more ways to do it than gathering together without simple protection for yourself and the ones you love. 

7. It's a political statement. 

 Actually, it isn't. It's a statement that you think you know more than every doctor and nurse, every scientist in all the countries around the world. Masks have NOTHING to do with politics. But they can... Let me tell you how. 

Get blank black or white reusable face masks and either fabric markers or puff paints. Then you can write whatever you want to say on your mask! Then it can BECOME a political statement! 

8. President Trump doesn't wear one, why should I? 

First, let me reiterate what your mother probably asked you at least once during your formative years (if your mom is anything like mine). “If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you?” 

All I am saying is use common sense. It's not up for debate. We know wearing masks slows the spread. Don't do something dangerous just to have solidarity with the president. If you want to impress him, find a red reusable face mask and write ‘Make America Great Again’ all over it with white puff paint. 

*******************************************************************************************

So, what reasons do you have for not wearing a mask? Is it something I didn't cover on the list? Is there something you want to know and no one has given you an answer? Do you wear a mask and want to know how to convince others to wear one? Do you wear one, but don’t even know why? 

Ask me. If I don’t know the answer, I will try to find it for you. I am up for healthy debate (but no actual fighting) about the pros and cons of wearing masks. If you have real evidence to support not wearing one, I’d love to see it. Anything that can help me answer questions and teach people. 

Also, if you want access to my research, type in the pros and cons to wearing a face mask to fight Covid-19 in your search bar. Yeah, you might pull up a couple articles from people who are against it, but if you look for MEDICAL research, you will get the same answer every time. Masks slow the spread. There are tons of videos on YouTube about it as well. 

Look, we're all pretty smart people. No one is asking you to change your political beliefs. We only want the chance to live. We don't want to die. We don't want our kids, our parents, our brothers and sisters, or our friends and neighbors to die. We have seen that countries that practice social distancing, mask wearing, and proper precautions are already on the other side of the curve. If we want America to be fully open (and stay that way) we need to do our part. 

BE A HERO. WEAR A MASK!

[lastoneout]

Part of the reason Arizona has been going blue is because we have INCREDIBLY lax voting regulations, which is one of the best things about living here(the other best thing is no daylight savings time). Thing is, the Arizona GOP wanted voting to be easy here because a lot of old folks who tend to vote red retire here, and it's hard for older people to get to the polls, and so they didn't try to change our lax voting regulations...until Trump lost in 2020. The Arizona GOP immediately did a heel turn and started viciously attacking our voting rights, and in 2022 they TRIED to pass voter ID laws, got it on the ballot and everything, and they failed. Because Arizona voters, even ones who vote red, really like how easy it is to vote here.

But I do think it's really important to keep that heel turn in mind. Because the Republicans here were ALL for lax voting laws...when it helped them win. The second our easy voting started to work against them they started trying to make it harder to vote. And that's because they KNOW that Arizonans are moving farther and farther left with each year. In 2022 not only did we stop the voter ID laws, almost EVERY major position in our state gov that was up for election went blue. Hell, Kari Lake was like the perfect little Trump disciple and she got decimated so bad that two years later she's STILL going on TV and insisting the election was stolen from her and screaming about suing people and voter fraud.

It's easy to say "If voting didn't work they wouldn't be trying so hard to stop people from doing it" but Arizona is proves it. We've been going blue because it's easy to vote here, and because activists work SO fucking hard to get people to the polls. They legit have canvassers fucking standing around in parking lots helping people register to vote. We go blue because we put in the work to make sure as many people as possible get to the polls, and it pays off.

So please, take it from someone who has seen first hand how pissy the right gets about voting when they start to lose, if voting didn't work they would not being trying to stop you from doing it. Do whatever you can to make sure they don't stop you.

"I live in a red state my vote doesn't ma-"

If your vote didn't matter they wouldn't try so hard to make it harder to vote in red states. Voting in red states can turn them into swing states like Georgia, Ohio, and Arizona. And voting in blue states can keep them from becoming swing states.

California used to be Red. Texas was Blue long ago. Florida was once a swing state. Obama took Indiana but it's gone redder since. Ten years ago Arizona and Georgia going blue was unthinkable.

Things change and we can make them change.

And that's before getting into more local elections. Turning cities blue, the state legislature.

Red states have flipped blue in recent years at those levels too.

Because people vote, and if we vote in high enough numbers we can turn a tight election into a walk in the park. If we vote in high enough numbers, we can turn a loss into a win. So many good things have happened in states where someone won by like 100 votes. (arizona is one)

[saberboi-1]

[Start ID : Image 1 is a tweet from Bernie Sanders. It reads: Ask yourselves. Why are Republicans so interested in making it harder and harder to vote in this country? Why are businessmen so keen on making it as difficult as possible for workers to form a union? It's simple - it's all about taking power away from working people. No More. The second image is a post from COMMON on Twitter. It reads: If your vote didn't matter so much, they wouldn't be trying so hard to keep you from voting. : End ID]

No more