this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2025
979 points (98.9% liked)

Memes

48364 readers
3218 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] itsralC@lemm.ee 12 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

I always like to point out how there's art of these two characters fucking by the same author

[–] __nobodynowhere@sh.itjust.works 5 points 7 hours ago

You forgot the link

[–] Opisek@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

Make love not war?

[–] taxiiiii@lemmy.world 19 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (3 children)

I mean, I was super curious what Sanders could've done if he had the chance. Instead, we got the opposite experiment.

If democrats in the US vote for stuff like Biden, then they're not voting for any radical change. Trump isn't comparable to that.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 8 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

If democrats in the US vote for stuff like Biden, then they’re not voting for any radical change

I don't exactly know the details, but weren't there accusations of meddling from the DNC that stoppered Sanders' chance of securing the nomination, and a belief among some that he might have won the nomination if it had been a free and fair primary process?

In other words, it's possible (though by no means certain) that your sentence above works if "democrats" means "the DNC and the establishment of the Democratic Party", but not if it means "people who by-and-large support the Democratic Party".

[–] Grapho@lemmy.ml 6 points 6 hours ago

The Dems did some delegate fuckery where all candidates endorsed Biden because ~~Bernie~~ Trump had to be stopped at all cost, and their delegates went to Biden even if he hadn't been voted for. Kamala contributed all of her 0 delegates and got VP for being ~~a cop~~ the first to drop out iirc.

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 17 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Americans voted for Biden because the primary system heavily favored Biden and Americans were told Biden was "more electable" than Bernie, even though every one of Bernie's policies and his messaging polled better.

If the DNC didn't put their thumbs on the scale, Bernie would have won in 2016 (or 2020), and guaranteed a democratic victory in the next election because nobody receiving free healthcare is going to vote to go back to the current system.

Bernie isn't radical, he's a social democrat, he just looks radical because the democrats are right of George W Bush right now.

[–] taxiiiii@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

I get it and I don't disagree, but- Well, I for one wouldn't mind some radical change. Just not in the direction that it is going right now. Radical in itself is nothing bad, when the status quo is as bad as it is.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 3 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Still nothing

Courts wouldn’t even let Biden offer student loan relief

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

They were only able to because of the way he went about it. He could have simply ordered the Department of Education to immediately forgive the loans and erase any record of the debt, and dared the SCOTUS to order him to create new debts (which he could simply ignore).

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Part of not being a dictator is not acting like it, you aren’t going to find a good person acting that way

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

You're not going to find a good person who puts following rules written to benefit the capitalist class above freeing people from crippling debt.

[–] taxiiiii@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago

Probably, but I'd only believe that there is really nothing to be done once I see someone actually left-leaning attempt everything in their toolbox.

I believe Sanders would have tried to change as much as possible in the US. I also believe that he would have failed regarding a lot of things. Would have really liked to see him try though.

[–] dessalines@lemmy.ml 25 points 13 hours ago
[–] Tikiporch@lemmy.world 87 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Democrats so afraid of being wrong they don't even try to do what's right.

[–] wpb@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

You misunderstand their incentives. They're beholden to the billionaires, not to you.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.world 45 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

That's not their purpose, they just need to look the part. They are comfortable in the 'my hands are tied' position. They can propose bills they know will not make it. When they have a supermajority, like they had not long ago, they are in trouble. They have no choice but to stop proposing bills and find reasons to say they are 'sabotaged'. They played this game for centuries, still works.

[–] Grapho@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 hours ago

They can propose bills they know will not make it.

they actively work to ensure don't make it. Manchin, Sinema and others like them are greatly valued by Dems for their role as scapegoats.

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 17 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

They in this case being libs in liberal democracies, not democrats specifically.

One way to resolve the contradiction between the capitalist class, which the state represents, and the masses, whom the state requires to maintain power is for the masses to believe their representatives want what's best for them, but are powerless to implement it due to foreigners or nature or some other group, or are trying and it will happen some indeterminate time in the future.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.world 9 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

What's this today? Been in the fediverse for barely 2 weeks only to be dissapointed by the same manufactured consent from its users (minus the bots).
All of a sudden I see anti-capitalist posts and based comments.
The 'libs' in Europe would be the shamelessly named socialist parties.
Invariably being horrible and keeping the status quo with only difference that they now and then throw a bone to the beloved working class and have their larping day on the 1st of may, sing the internationale like they mean it.

[–] Edie@lemmy.ml 16 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

You're on .world. It leans right-wing, essentially trying to be reddit 2 and having de-federated from the explicitly Marxist-Leninist lemmygrad.ml and Communist/Anarchist hexbear.net

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

I know about these 2 also just learned they defederated (and what that means).
Any more tips?

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 8 points 13 hours ago

.world defederated from them, meaning .world accounts cannot see their content. They still have very active posting, just not in your view.

[–] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 5 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (2 children)

I know it's tough, but consider making another account on an instance that is defederated with as few instances as possible. Then you can pick and choose which instance you yourself don't want to see anymore.

You can block instances, communities, and users in your settings menu.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Mouette@jlai.lu 30 points 1 day ago

They are not afraid of being wrong. They don't actually care about your well being, they are just here to make money for their corporate friends and themselves.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] fatur0000new@lemmy.ml 33 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

"You have to understand there's only so much I can do in this position"

Meanwhile, one of their former members named Huey Long: "Now I dynamite 'em out of my path"

[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 66 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Really though, beyond the Dems doing something legislatively, could you imagine if the party actually utilized it's network for direct action campaigns. Not that their donors or upper middle class members would be copacetic to any actual economic disruption. I mean christ, the Senate leader doesn't even want to let the Republicans shut down the government while they're busy dismantling it. Their current strategy is to appeal by saying they can bring back business as usual. Unfortunately they don't seem to understand that appearing ineffectual turns centrists off even more than appearing radical does.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (18 children)

Unfortunately they don’t seem to understand that appearing ineffectual turns centrists off even more than appearing radical does.

Does it though?

Look at how much .world or reddit downvote and deride posts critical of Democrat behavior since the beginning on the election and the only takeaway you can get is that they're in onboard with it no matter how much they hate it simply because Republicans are worse.

[–] newfie@lemmy.ml 3 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Look at how much .world or reddit downvote and deride posts critical of Democrat behavior since the beginning on the election

Agreed, but why should we still presume that upvotes reflect genuine user opinion as opposed to astroturfing?

It seems that lib-aligned groups use Reddit to manufacture approval for their clients. Given this, why should we view Reddit as a credible window into popular opinion? The entire site is an infomercial at this point

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 2 points 14 hours ago

reddit: definately, but lemmy: not so much

[–] grue@lemmy.world -2 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (2 children)

Okay, let me spell it out, yet again, since people still apparently don't get it: making a tactical decision to avoid expressing criticism during an election is not the same thing as being perfectly happy with what the party is doing. It's harm reduction, not agreement.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Harm reduction had led is to our first openly fascist President.

[–] grue@lemmy.world -2 points 8 hours ago

No, in terms of proximate causes, failure to perform harm reduction did that.

If you wanted to actually fix the Democrats' neoliberal bullshit, the time for that was in 2021-early 2024, not fucking October! Screeching about third-parties in October was purely pro-fascist concern trolling.

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

That "tactical decision" enabled the democrats to sleepwalk into oblivion.

The only way the democrats could have won the last election is if they stopped trying to be "reasonable republicans" and instead used every tool available to accomplish what their constituents want. Like what the republicans are doing, but for good things like women's healthcare and not drowning migrant children in the Rio.

[–] grue@lemmy.world -2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

And there was exactly 0% chance of screeching "don't vote for Kamala" in October accomplishing that, and everyone knew it. The only motivation for continuing to screech at that point was to concern troll in favor of Trump.

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Nobody was screeching "don't vote for Kamala", we were telling Kamala what she needed to do to win. Instead she listened to the same campaign that killed Biden's shot and we all lost because of it.

Nothing I could have done would have made genocide popular. Nothing I could have done would have made Kamala pledging to build the wall and get tough on crime look like anything but an admission that Trump was right the whole time.

[–] grue@lemmy.world -1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

we were telling Kamala what she needed to do to win

No, you weren't. Gaza was not the reason she lost.

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 hour ago

Facilitating genocide and calling all the politically-activated college students who would have been making up the dem's ground game if not at least phonebanking, antisemites for whom free speech doesn't apply were just a few of dozens of decisions the dems chose, knowing they would decrease turnout.

The dems lost because they thought they didn't have to listen to their constituents to win.

[–] AppleTea@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Ok, but that's a select group of people who choose to spend their free time typing about politics online. If you look at the actual election results, it would appear to back up the claim you're quoting.

[–] newfie@lemmy.ml 4 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

that's a select group of people

Analyzing your query: It is indeed challenging to accurately verify if responses on Reddit originate from authentic human participants or sophisticated algorithmic entities. Therefore, the reliability of Reddit discourse as representative data remains uncertain.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[–] venusaur@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Yall been taking the bait for years. Dems succeed on your fears. Why would they eliminate them?

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›