People that don’t like the original after watching the parody probably wouldn’t like the original even without watching the parody. The parody just puts a spotlight on aspects of the show that lots of people noticed and they probably already have an opinion about those things in their media.

Don’t put too much stock into other people liking the things you like. They have their own very specific individual tastes and you can be good friends even without agreeing on lots of things.

Fun is also what fuels exploration and learning. I think the overall point here is that there are people who have fun with different experiences that may be at odds with each other. Some people like struggling with something until they achieve success, and others just want to relax and have a good time.

Personally, I’ve had my fun with hard games in the past, but I’m turned off from the idea of getting stuck behind a skill barrier because I’m older now and have less time to spend on games.

Can’t it be fixed?

People often segregate themselves into bubbles separated from others they oppose. I can say since the political affiliation is known from past elections, that has become a stronger factor when I am deliberating on which places I would want to live. I’m sure this is adding to the polarization, where people are gravitating to communities that more often reinforce their beliefs and give them fewer opportunities to challenge them.

How can we counter this polarizing force?

Probably shouldn’t say that

The Democratic candidate is chosen at the convention, which hasn’t happened yet. What would a legal contest even be based on?

From the article you linked to:

Election law expert Richard Hasen wrote that there is “no credence” to the notion that the Democratic Party could not legally replace Biden on the ticket, as he is not the nominee yet – the nominating process generally takes place during the Democratic National Convention.

That could be more an advantage with those on the left than it is a detriment for the bigots on the right or the middle. It is a valid point, though.

I hope you are happy helping the Republicans win

I think you are misunderstanding how the election system works. It is the Democrats vs Republicans and nothing else until a third party can get big enough to overtake one of the two and then it’s still just two major parties.

Save your energy for reforming the election system and then advocate for what you want. We have to be realistic here.

My take on the down votes is that it is dangerous to spread ideas about voting third party in a democracy with an election system that mechanically only supports two parties.

Even if you’re in a “safe” state, people from states that are more in the margins may hear the sentiment and want to participate out of principle. It makes the opposition more likely to win.

If we want the Democrats to win in the end, it’s safer to be pushing for engagement on all fronts. That’s what the Republicans are doing and they can actually be trusted to vote.

I’m not ready to encourage this because anybody can get pissed off for any reason. There is very little that a politician does that makes everybody happy.

Could we say that it’s improving the US externally?

I agree with you, but I want to point out that this conflation is a direct result of our election system because it mechanically cannot support more than two parties.

Any other political interests need to merge together into one big entity that is nearly impossible to disentangle from the rest, so now maga = conservatism and we lose a lot of nuance in or political decision making and ability to be represented.

I’m pushing for Election Reform this election to move past First Past the Post voting.

Sure, that’s true, but using Lego boys and Lego girls and just Lego people in general works too and is simpler, right?

I’m sure explaining that “Man is more like human in this case and not a gender or sex” is fun sometimes but ideas are evolving with more people and eventually it will just look too much like “Man is dogwhistle for subjugating women under men by calling them men”.

Is this bad connotation that more people will see over time worth holding onto the word Man as meaning everybody when we could just evolve our usage of language?

Why not Lego person instead of Lego man?

Enmity

Where does the judge say that? He orders him to report to jail, though, which might.

What’s the difference?

Nope, our election system doesn’t support it and actually has a spoiler effect because you end up tacitly supporting the other side by not voting for one of the two strongest parties.