I dislike how the stories end. The buildup is alright, the setting’s the same. But then the ending is terrible. The Doctor isn’t being clever or smart or witty or whatever, a solution randomly presents itself and that’s it.
It’s like, great you can move the space station by causing a burst of baby farts, but you have a TARDIS. You can take the babies yourself. You even talked about that with the only adult there! He then was soundly defeated by the Maestro, only for the Beatles to randomly show up and play a random chord? They even had a clever way to defeat the Maestro (the bubble of silence that the sonic could create), and then did nothing with it.
It’s just so… Meh. If only they could write the Doctor to be clever again, I’d enjoy it so much more!
In a 2 party FPTP system, the people don’t have that power. That’s the point. The DNC can just shrug it off and say “okay, then Trump wins, and that’s even worse”. The DNC can survive a Trump term. Gaza may not.
Putting Trump in charge doesn’t hold Democrats accountable. It would move them further to the right, which is the exact opposite of you want. They don’t care about disinterested non-voters, they only care about courting those that do show up to vote.
Change needs to come from within. Organize within the DNC. Primary their candidates. That’s how you get people like AOC elected. Once the primaries are over, there’s no shot at moving them further left.
You’re in a 2 party FPTP system, it doesn’t give you reasonable representation by design.
You get someone you dislike and someone you dislike even more. Voting 3rd party is literally voting against your interests. That’s not an ideological choice, or a political choice, it’s a deeply saddening mathematical reality.
The only way you get your position heard is by fighting candidates for your least-disliked party during the primaries. Get someone you like as the congressional or senatorial candidate. Help them get elected. Even a small number of senators or congressmen can make the difference (see Synema and Manchin for example, or hell even Boebert and MTG who all wield(ed) significant political power well beyond what their voteshare should give them).
By fighting the fight you can’t win (e.g. the vote for president), you only weaken your least-disliked choice. So whoever you really don’t want ends up getting elected. Why? Because the US election system sucks balls.
Voting for the Green party makes it less likely that climate change legislation goes through. That is the sad, paradoxical reality. Being an ideological crusador in this matter doesn’t help anyone and is due to the reality of the shit voting system, despite the best intentions, immoral.
Merkel and Schroeder gambled on Russian gas imports as a holdover to transition from the aging nuclear plants and coal plants towards renewables. They did so because according to Merkel “it made sense at the time” and she did not really see the larger geopolitical picture. When Russian gas suddenly dried up due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, they had to delay the closure of several coal plants to keep the power on.
So they’re trying to replace nuclear and coal with gas.
The nuclear plants in Germany were too old and too expensive to maintain. At some point a reactor is just end-of-life. They get operational issues causing semi-frequent shutdowns. The reliability issues become a problem that skyrockets the costs further.
Closing a nuclear plant like that puts enough money back in the budget to afford a faster transition to renewables, which ultimately closes down the coal plants faster too. It’s about the big picture, it’s not as simple as simply saying “we’ll do less coal” or “we’ll do less nuclear”.