Sir Gobbersworth
@sirgobbersworth.bsky.social
Senior QA Analyst in the gaming industry. He/him.
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
![Joyce Carol Oates quoting a tweet that says “wherever he [Elon Musk] goes, he wants to leave”:
"wherever he goes, he wants to leave"-- that's because when he gets there, he has brought his own self along; & whatever club he's invited to join has been devalued by the invitation.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:buy3qvqcj3o76leo6ap7pn2p/bafkreifilfbsxemfsambf4kqwolr24ld2ekqcrz4ybgv3bv7kzi5e6kppm@jpeg)
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
The thing about the "I voted against this" position Schumer is taking is that either he is trying to mislead Dem voters by implying he didn't support reopening right now, or he has no control over his caucus.
November 10, 2025 at 9:35 PM
The thing about the "I voted against this" position Schumer is taking is that either he is trying to mislead Dem voters by implying he didn't support reopening right now, or he has no control over his caucus.
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
ok well i gotta give him this one
OSCAR ISAAC, on whether he'd return to "Star Wars":
".. Yeah. I mean, I’d be open to it, although right now I’m not so open to working with Disney. But if they can kinda figure it out and, you know, not succumb to fascism, that would be great."
@variety.com $DIS
variety.com/2025/film/ne...
".. Yeah. I mean, I’d be open to it, although right now I’m not so open to working with Disney. But if they can kinda figure it out and, you know, not succumb to fascism, that would be great."
@variety.com $DIS
variety.com/2025/film/ne...
Oscar Isaac Was ‘Not So Open to Working With Disney’ After Jimmy Kimmel Suspension, Said He’d Return to ‘Star Wars’ if Disney Does ‘Not Succumb to Fascism’
Oscar Isaac was not open to working with Disney after Jimmy Kimmel's suspension and will only return to 'Star Wars' if the studio avoids fascism.
variety.com
November 10, 2025 at 5:52 PM
ok well i gotta give him this one
Absolutely pathetic, goodness
weirdly honest messaging from the breakaway mod/institutionalist leaders who blew up the party strategy
they're explicitly giving up. "It wasn't working so we quit" that's the message
they're explicitly giving up. "It wasn't working so we quit" that's the message
November 10, 2025 at 3:08 PM
Absolutely pathetic, goodness
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
a lot of you could stand to follow Marshall's attitude here (which is very close to mine) and more importantly, get your friends and family to share it
November 10, 2025 at 8:10 AM
a lot of you could stand to follow Marshall's attitude here (which is very close to mine) and more importantly, get your friends and family to share it
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
part of the rage is that Ds seem to be lying about why they did this as well as lying about which senators wanted this.
like, the reasons for doing it are contradictory and nonsensical; claiming they won something on health care when they didn't; saying they won things that were already law.
like, the reasons for doing it are contradictory and nonsensical; claiming they won something on health care when they didn't; saying they won things that were already law.
November 10, 2025 at 4:31 AM
part of the rage is that Ds seem to be lying about why they did this as well as lying about which senators wanted this.
like, the reasons for doing it are contradictory and nonsensical; claiming they won something on health care when they didn't; saying they won things that were already law.
like, the reasons for doing it are contradictory and nonsensical; claiming they won something on health care when they didn't; saying they won things that were already law.
Yeah, this is why I keep stressing that my general suspicion that the fold camp was a rebellion only a bit larger than the actual vote isn't actually a defense of Dem leadership.
Even in that read it makes everyone in charge and their allies look like incompetent fuckwits.
Even in that read it makes everyone in charge and their allies look like incompetent fuckwits.
idk which possibility is more damning for Schumer
either
A) he helped orchestrate the fold
OR
B) he genuinely opposed the fold but was so incompetent that he was unable to stop the splinter group from folding
either
A) he helped orchestrate the fold
OR
B) he genuinely opposed the fold but was so incompetent that he was unable to stop the splinter group from folding
November 10, 2025 at 5:23 AM
Yeah, this is why I keep stressing that my general suspicion that the fold camp was a rebellion only a bit larger than the actual vote isn't actually a defense of Dem leadership.
Even in that read it makes everyone in charge and their allies look like incompetent fuckwits.
Even in that read it makes everyone in charge and their allies look like incompetent fuckwits.
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
This is most directly about the fake electors (none of whom face any federal charges anyway) but the actual wording of it is much broader: it's effectively a full and complete blanket pardon for anybody who had anything to do with trying to steal the 2020 election, not just the Jan 6-ers.
The language of this pardon is extremely broad.
It includes “all United States citizens for conduct relating to the advice, creation, organization, execution, submission, support, voting, activities, participation in, or advocacy for or of any slate or proposed slate of Presidential
electors…”
It includes “all United States citizens for conduct relating to the advice, creation, organization, execution, submission, support, voting, activities, participation in, or advocacy for or of any slate or proposed slate of Presidential
electors…”
November 10, 2025 at 5:02 AM
This is most directly about the fake electors (none of whom face any federal charges anyway) but the actual wording of it is much broader: it's effectively a full and complete blanket pardon for anybody who had anything to do with trying to steal the 2020 election, not just the Jan 6-ers.
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
LITERALLY HOURS. THEY COULD HAVE WAITED HOURS.
BREAKING
The 1st Circuit REJECTS Trump DOJ's request to pause a judge's order to pay up Nov's SNAP funds to the states.
The SCOTUS stay will expire within 48 hours absent further action from the justices, per its terms.
Doc ecf.ca1.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servl...
The 1st Circuit REJECTS Trump DOJ's request to pause a judge's order to pay up Nov's SNAP funds to the states.
The SCOTUS stay will expire within 48 hours absent further action from the justices, per its terms.
Doc ecf.ca1.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servl...
November 10, 2025 at 5:13 AM
LITERALLY HOURS. THEY COULD HAVE WAITED HOURS.
They're really all some combination of spineless and absolutely fucking oblivious
Agree.
Sen Hassan, asked what will happen if Republicans don't carry out the deal, "Well, shame on them."
This is not what people were mobilizing for on Oct 18.
Sen Hassan, asked what will happen if Republicans don't carry out the deal, "Well, shame on them."
This is not what people were mobilizing for on Oct 18.
November 10, 2025 at 3:47 AM
They're really all some combination of spineless and absolutely fucking oblivious
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
The average SNAP benefit per month is $177 a person.
The average ACA benefit per month is up to $550 a person.
People want us to hold the line for a reason. This is not a matter of appealing to a base. It’s about people’s lives.
And working people want leaders whose word means something to them.
The average ACA benefit per month is up to $550 a person.
People want us to hold the line for a reason. This is not a matter of appealing to a base. It’s about people’s lives.
And working people want leaders whose word means something to them.
November 10, 2025 at 1:49 AM
The average SNAP benefit per month is $177 a person.
The average ACA benefit per month is up to $550 a person.
People want us to hold the line for a reason. This is not a matter of appealing to a base. It’s about people’s lives.
And working people want leaders whose word means something to them.
The average ACA benefit per month is up to $550 a person.
People want us to hold the line for a reason. This is not a matter of appealing to a base. It’s about people’s lives.
And working people want leaders whose word means something to them.
No seriously, the response to this is *so* virulent that I haven't heard anything beyond one quote from, I think, Shaheen that was basically like "it was this or nothing" which....uhhhhhhhh...isn't compelling.
It might be true but open capitulation does not compell me to back your side, actually.
It might be true but open capitulation does not compell me to back your side, actually.
all the posts I'm seeing are laying into the Dems for this, so much so that I only have a hazy view of how the pro argument is supposed to go
November 10, 2025 at 3:35 AM
No seriously, the response to this is *so* virulent that I haven't heard anything beyond one quote from, I think, Shaheen that was basically like "it was this or nothing" which....uhhhhhhhh...isn't compelling.
It might be true but open capitulation does not compell me to back your side, actually.
It might be true but open capitulation does not compell me to back your side, actually.
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
sounds pretty reasonable to me
Since the Democrats worked extra hard to hide who actually supported this, I think the No Kings/Resistance position should be to primary every Democrat unless they publicly call for Schumer's ouster this week
Either they go into total rebellion mode, which they won't, or the people will
Either they go into total rebellion mode, which they won't, or the people will
November 10, 2025 at 3:18 AM
sounds pretty reasonable to me
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
this is kinda true, but also kinda not true, King and CCM were anti-shutdown from Day 1 and they probably got enough support to roll Schumer (now, is being weak enough to be rolled over by Angus King a tenable political position? no.)
The coordinated nature of this—none are facing voters in 2026—means that either Schumer approved it or failed in his job as Senate Majority Leader to stop it.
Dems voting "no" get zero credit until they demand a change in leadership. Schumer out as Leader, Durbin out as Whip.
Dems voting "no" get zero credit until they demand a change in leadership. Schumer out as Leader, Durbin out as Whip.
so currently defectors are:
Kaine (2030)
Shaheen (Retiring)
Hasan (2028)
Fetterman (2028)
Durbin (Retiring)
CCM (2028)
Rosen (2030)
King (2030)
Kaine (2030)
Shaheen (Retiring)
Hasan (2028)
Fetterman (2028)
Durbin (Retiring)
CCM (2028)
Rosen (2030)
King (2030)
November 10, 2025 at 3:08 AM
this is kinda true, but also kinda not true, King and CCM were anti-shutdown from Day 1 and they probably got enough support to roll Schumer (now, is being weak enough to be rolled over by Angus King a tenable political position? no.)
Yeah. A lot is unclear atm but what I am willing to fully get behind is:
* A significant portion of the caucus as well as House Dems wanted to keep fighting
* Some portion were ready to quit from day one
* Leadership was chill with letting camp B chip away at the coalition until it collapsed
* A significant portion of the caucus as well as House Dems wanted to keep fighting
* Some portion were ready to quit from day one
* Leadership was chill with letting camp B chip away at the coalition until it collapsed
it's literally Rotating Villain Theory in real life there's a reason I despise these people
November 10, 2025 at 3:09 AM
Yeah. A lot is unclear atm but what I am willing to fully get behind is:
* A significant portion of the caucus as well as House Dems wanted to keep fighting
* Some portion were ready to quit from day one
* Leadership was chill with letting camp B chip away at the coalition until it collapsed
* A significant portion of the caucus as well as House Dems wanted to keep fighting
* Some portion were ready to quit from day one
* Leadership was chill with letting camp B chip away at the coalition until it collapsed
These people are so utterly broken and we need to respond to that by breaking them further and then tossing them aside.
Durbin said critics of his vote “need to understand how the Senate works”
November 10, 2025 at 3:01 AM
These people are so utterly broken and we need to respond to that by breaking them further and then tossing them aside.
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
The coordinated nature of this—none are facing voters in 2026—means that either Schumer approved it or failed in his job as Senate Majority Leader to stop it.
Dems voting "no" get zero credit until they demand a change in leadership. Schumer out as Leader, Durbin out as Whip.
Dems voting "no" get zero credit until they demand a change in leadership. Schumer out as Leader, Durbin out as Whip.
so currently defectors are:
Kaine (2030)
Shaheen (Retiring)
Hasan (2028)
Fetterman (2028)
Durbin (Retiring)
CCM (2028)
Rosen (2030)
King (2030)
Kaine (2030)
Shaheen (Retiring)
Hasan (2028)
Fetterman (2028)
Durbin (Retiring)
CCM (2028)
Rosen (2030)
King (2030)
November 10, 2025 at 2:43 AM
The coordinated nature of this—none are facing voters in 2026—means that either Schumer approved it or failed in his job as Senate Majority Leader to stop it.
Dems voting "no" get zero credit until they demand a change in leadership. Schumer out as Leader, Durbin out as Whip.
Dems voting "no" get zero credit until they demand a change in leadership. Schumer out as Leader, Durbin out as Whip.
Pretty good list, though I agree with the folks saying "fuck Jack Reed"
okay, so, with Dems successfully keeping anyone up in 2026 for voting for this turd let's take a look at who's up in 2026 anyway:
1. Cory Booker - apparently involved behind the scenes, constantly looking for bipartisanship. I don't dislike him personally but he doesn't have what we need. Primary.
1. Cory Booker - apparently involved behind the scenes, constantly looking for bipartisanship. I don't dislike him personally but he doesn't have what we need. Primary.
November 10, 2025 at 2:42 AM
Pretty good list, though I agree with the folks saying "fuck Jack Reed"
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
Fight don’t fold.
November 10, 2025 at 2:12 AM
Fight don’t fold.
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
I think it is notable that 'moderate-ness' does not appear meaningfully predictive of fight-ness.
November 10, 2025 at 2:08 AM
I think it is notable that 'moderate-ness' does not appear meaningfully predictive of fight-ness.
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
Really seeing once again, it seems, that the real divide in the Democratic coalition is not left/lib/moderate or anything like that.
It's the fight/no-fight divide. And the 'fight' dems are the ones winning elections.
It's the fight/no-fight divide. And the 'fight' dems are the ones winning elections.
November 10, 2025 at 2:04 AM
Really seeing once again, it seems, that the real divide in the Democratic coalition is not left/lib/moderate or anything like that.
It's the fight/no-fight divide. And the 'fight' dems are the ones winning elections.
It's the fight/no-fight divide. And the 'fight' dems are the ones winning elections.
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
Janet Mills being a NO on the CR is interesting. Most people thought she'd be a similar type to the Shaheen/Hassan/King folks who are pushing this deal, but even she reads the room I guess
November 10, 2025 at 12:52 AM
Janet Mills being a NO on the CR is interesting. Most people thought she'd be a similar type to the Shaheen/Hassan/King folks who are pushing this deal, but even she reads the room I guess
Reposted by Sir Gobbersworth
He has to resign. A Senate party leader should not be allowed to survive a successful mutiny by his caucus.
If you ever feel like you are not good enough at your job, just remember: you are better than Chuck Schumer at his.
November 10, 2025 at 2:00 AM
He has to resign. A Senate party leader should not be allowed to survive a successful mutiny by his caucus.
I know we are all justifiably furious right now but on the plus side...
Predator Badlands is a super fun movie.
Predator Badlands is a super fun movie.
November 10, 2025 at 2:19 AM
I know we are all justifiably furious right now but on the plus side...
Predator Badlands is a super fun movie.
Predator Badlands is a super fun movie.