Liking Zohran and hating AOC is not the result of coherent analysis

I will say there is the odd possibility of them just hoping a social imperialist executive vs legislator can get some of the treats running again to stave off fervor, thus improving their lives for a blip of time even if it otherwise doesn't progress things.

i.e there might be analysis but the analysis is opportunistic in nature. It's why I've joked about it being American first "socialism"

Yeah, basically this. Most data suggests a large portion of Americans aren't exactly big on trump. Criticizing him is good small talk— or agitation with specific issues—but isn't a tactical question. If you convince a DSA type that no social-chauvinism isn't the path forward then you have someone who touches grass and talks to people doing it to build worker power instead of just canvas for a social-imperialist.

Yeah but the person above is arguing directly against that, saying no great man could save this.

Some do have that reasoning, and they are people being disillusioned from their liberalism. Others are tired of what they see as the praising of blatant opportunism.

I.e some want a great person to rise up and create the party and are upset when betrayed, and others are tired of seeing, "the Mensheviks are the way!"

But this topic doesn't just concern the "Great Man" when these debates pop up, as this often is the result of genuine organizating efforts. If a Mamdani administration doesn't do much to advance a socialist cause, harms it, etc. that is thousands who spent months of effort backing an opportunist cause instead of something that may actually advance struggle, and desiring to prevent that in anyway is obvious. Not every critic is productive of course, but it is something worth struggling over as it is a fundamental question of tactics.

Oh, I agree but from what I've seen whining in the direction of DSA at least gets them to have some struggles sessions (or at the bare least argue if something may be right), Like how some of their chapters/caucuses are signed onto a letter calling for Zohran to dump Tisch. So if we're arguing a "the complaining should have value," argument, complaining about DSA types has more use. If the view is the complaining is pointless and just venting the DSA SIOs are can at least be whined about with mental spiraling and the call to adventure. Also, there is something about someone proclaiming to be of the same viewpoint as you then staunching acting against that which can be especially grating in comparison to them calling themselves something entirely different. It's why you see dozens of people constantly polemicizing against national socialism, national Bolshevism, ACP-types, in a way they don't MAGA. If a fascist goes "I'm a fascist" vs. "I'm a communist" you only are going to need to argue with one of those statements.

Very correct lol.

The assertion above is he will be useless once he is in, and Stalin/Lenin/Mao would be just as useless come January if you dropped them in his position and told them their goal was a socialist mayorality.

Counterpoints:

1. DSA types actually occasionally read and have chapter adjustments and realignments from these complaints
2. The types of complaints we levy about Trump types and the solutions to that get mods on us for "fedposting" (A shitposter can't be a fed? I thought this was a left space! its tradition!)

That's basically my stance. And there isn't an issue with liking and wanting human art! It's exactly what I mean when I said people that value it will seek it out.

You can argue how automation in a socialist society can be used to better people's lives, but you can never argue that automating such a creative process so fundamental to human expression that it has been used since we were cave men is not a bad thing, let alone a good thing to "increase creativity" no matter what economic system present.

This makes a lot of assumptions.

1. Everyone is trying to make a masterpiece. Not everyone is and some people want to just kit-bash things together. I've been playing VNs from my childhood that are just people stealing assets or using quickly gathered photos to put together a story that was interesting instead of obsessing over every detail. They still had some care for their craft, but didn't care for meticulous control over every aspect. No different than making art out of hundreds of rocks you find that you leave intact otherwise. Would a real craftsman only use rocks they handcraft to suit their exact image? Maybe the creative vision of the artist requires a lack of spirit and soul in certain parts? For something so valuable and long-lasting human creativity must be a fragile thing to be extinguished by a probability machine.
2. Most people that want to put hard-work into art still will. It's like complaining that photographers are trying to skimp on hard work since they aren't trying to choose the right colors and brushstrokes for the project they want. The only way it undermines unappreciated artists is because it financially harms them. If there is no financial need or incentives due to a system that makes such redundant, what harm is it causing? The people that just want to look at pretty things already have chosen alternatives throughout history. There are people that stare at the stars, sky, or even just bloodstains because its visually interesting without a damned care about "human spirit." Automating it, can be plenty good, is the photograph bad because artists no long choose every color in capturing as scene? Is the typewriter bad because you lose the complete flexibility of how your script expresses itself? If people want to and care about that aspect they will.

Hell, there are entire fields of art I have zero care for in creative aspects. Never gave a damn about sculptures outside of their technical difficult, the vision can be damned, I just like seeing a human with shitty tools accomplish it, which auto rules AI out. Some types I only care about because they look pretty, like a lot of anime-styled art, though not all. And there are plenty that only are particularly desirable for me when I'm trying to suss out the creators meaning such as horror-based work or essentially all creative writing.

For me, I'm obsessed with my own writing voice so I refuse to use LLMs for my writing in almost any capacity on that motive alone. I also prefer drawing my own art, but that's because I like drawing, if it wasn't for the horribleness of the AI industry in so many ways there are plenty of cases where I would find an image to be "good enough" for whatever I want it for, like a tabletop character design, Hell, even since I started playing I only rarely drew or commissioned them and instead just found a picture I liked that looked, "close enough."

This is either Luddism cosplaying as something else, or your argument implies a doubt about the inherent meaning of art itself as if it has meaning, people will seek that meaning either way. The main issues I find with generative AI are economic, environmental and honor-based with how it is working out. IDK though, when I have an inability to understand where a large percent of people are coming from on things like this I just blame the neurodivergence, so maybe I'm just missing something.

90% of the benefit of IoT is turning things on and off automatically or with notifications (may be ADHD talking). Most of this is done fine via smart plugs alone.

Captain America is distilled contradiction. Reading him in something like his own runs vs X-Men is hilariously different people with the only underlying through line being American exceptionalism given form.