• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      144 months ago

      I would like to have a respectful disagreement.

      I put forward that while it is understandable to desire the death penalty when serving justice, that the government should not enjoy that power. That it is too often erroneous in it’s prosecution of justice, if not occasionally willfully so, to be entrusted with the power to execute any criminal, no matter the crime or preponderance of evidence.

      Your rebuttal, sir/madame/all else.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          73 months ago

          I see those as arguments to correct it

          It’s administered by humans and so there will always be error, intentional or otherwise.

          You’re saying you’re comfortable with the state occasionally straight up murdering the wrong guy.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              43 months ago

              The links aren’t really relevant. What about other cases where the state murdered an innocent person? Just because they get it right sometimes it doesn’t excuse the other times when they don’t.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  53 months ago

                  There are unequivocable monsters in our society that should be exterminated

                  And who gets to decide who falls under that? If you ask former (and possibly future) president Trump, the left is “vermin” and immigrants “poison the blood”; his pick for VP is happy to sign off on progressives being called “unhuman”. Should these groups – in their view unequivocable monsters – be exterminated?

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  33 months ago

                  Ok. I see no reason to continue this discussion if you’re just going to ignore the point I’m making. One last time: the system can’t be “corrected”, there will always be errors, innocent people will die.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          64 months ago

          This is a pretty reasonable take on the death penalty, one I actually pretty closely align with, even with as much as I don’t like it. It needs to be the absolute last resort for only the most heinous and indefensible of crimes.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              5
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              I would hypothetically be for the death penalty for heinous crimes if our judicial system was 100% foolproof. Unfortunately, false convictions happen surprisingly often, there have even been cases of death row inmates being exonerated. I don’t think the benefits of the death penalty justify even one single wrongful death, so practically I’m against it.

        • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝
          link
          fedilink
          English
          43 months ago

          What would you say about using the death penalty in a case where corporate mismanagement causes hundreds of deaths, and all those deaths can very clearly traced back to one decision made by one individual, who knew and also should have known the potential consequences?

          Something like the Boeing planes falling out of the sky.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      13 months ago

      Bernie endorsed Genocide Joe to stay as candidate at the peak of unpopularity. Bernie has wasted all his endorsement cred

  • ThePowerOfGeek
    link
    fedilink
    English
    124 months ago

    The photo of Walz in the thumbnail just made me realize that he is the antithesis of Trump physically.

    He has very pale skin (not trying to hide it with a shit load of orange toner).

    He’s proudly bald (not trying to hide that with a ridiculously elaborate comb-over).

    He’s a very cheerful and open person (not hiding behind a manufactured aura of authority).

    Yes, he’s significantly younger than Trump. But my point is that Walz is leaning into his image. He’s clearly comfortable in his own skin (as the saying goes). And he doesn’t need to try to exude authority or demand respect because he exhibits and gets those through his attitude and his actions.

    It’s refreshing. In an era where appearance is everything and there’s so much posturing and focus on looks and stage demeanor, his candidness and positivity is naturally infectious.

    Harris also seems content in her own skin. And it’s tougher for her because of the stereotypes associated with her gender. But she juggles those expectations while not fixating on it.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    73 months ago

    Centrists are progressive in the US. They’re not leftist, but they’re still further left than most of the Democratic Party.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      23 months ago

      Overton window has shifted so far to the right that Donald trump is a normal candidate and has been for almost a decade.