The Hill always lies. It’s an undeclared right wing propaganda site.
Instead of focusing on what is actually happening with National Guard and Marines being deployed, we see the pattern of pointless arguing in circles about why the candidate lost in the comments below. Analysis Paralysis is the exact intention for articles like this. This helps the current criminal administration continue their behavior.
This reminds me of another woman presidential candidate who was also right about Trump. I’m starting to see a pattern.
It was an opinion piece by a guest columnist.
Who is a piece of shit, but regardless.
https://books.google.com/books/about/Outrage_Inc.html
he is derekahunter on siteformerlyknownasbirdsite
I mean is anyone surprised? The media’s capitulation and normalization of a felon rapist traitor and his enablers is why we are where we are. Because drama makes them more money and this nation lacks the rules necessary to prevent the media from lying to Americans.
I mean is anyone surprised?
I am genuinely surprised that we made it four years under his first term without getting this far in, but we’re speed running to military dictatorship inside six months.
If you actually read the article it is absolutely swimming in reactionary revanchism. There’s everything from the author defending Trump’s association with the Charlottesville rioters to whining about MSNBC sound-bites to referring to immigration during the Biden Presidency as a “Border Invasion”.
This isn’t even the boilerplate Politico “Lying when their lips are moving” false-equivalency. This is Derek Hunter, a talk radio frothing fascist and senior columnist for Townhall.com, doing exactly what his corporate handlers pay him to do.
All we need is more rules and theyll stop breaking the rules!
We need to reach out harder to the republicans, and we need more AIPAC money. Whoever gets the most election funding tends to win! (except for last time of course)
So lets reach out to AIPAC and ask how we can close on more campaign funding, and ask the Cheney family to send someone stronger than Liz next time, to stand next to Harris. Is Dick Cheney busy? Maybe he can shoot a dem in the face and have the dem apologize for it. I bet Dick Cheney would say yes to this.
/s
Everyone knows leftists are lazy idiots that’ll make up any reason to rationalize not voting. You’re rationalizing so hard now you’ve gone down some antisemitic rabbit hole.
care to clarify who you mean by ‘leftist’?
Removed by mod
Hillary was right. Harris was right. Misogyny ignored them.
Americans didn’t vote for Hillary or Harris because apparently they wanted a whiny bitch to be president instead.
Lets not pretend the presidential election is all about gender and nothing else. Thats just not true.
I posted a post-deep-dive take on what gave Trump the presidency here, but I will say that misogyny did did no small amount of heavy lifting.
What we need to figure out before the GOP finds its next cult leader is how to neutralize the massive far-right propaganda machine that is churning out false information and disinforming the public.
We’ve decided before that ethically we can’t trust human beings to make sound decisions in some conditions. Gambling, for example. Sometimes humans get addicted to just giving the house their money when it’s coached in a probability game. But then we’ve just invented loopholes (and lootboxes) to circumvent regulation. So I don’t know how we’re going to deprogram massive viewerships of media that promotes hate, including misogyny.
If we fail then the
ice zombie armyclimate crisis (and running out of water for agriculture) is going to drive us to extinction.That’s not what they said.
hmmmmm… stats say otherwise. A lot of males did not vote for her because she was female. That said, US is clearly not ready for female president.
All? No, not all. But it is very evident that most Americans seem to hate women. The right hates on women, the left hates on women, the men and the women hate on women. If you doubt me, look how news articles disparage male senators compared to female ones.
Edit: All you four people who downvote without responding only give me more validation. The people hate the truth.
I could understand Hilary not getting elected, but Harris? She’s as blank slate as any presidential candidate could get ( and maybe that was the problem). But the demographics which shifted the most politically, was the Hispanic and black male (whom tend to be less educated) voters towards the right. That could either be populism or misogyny, and considering they were leaning left when elected Biden the previous term, I’m leaning towards the latter reason.
She was also a candidate we didn’t vote for, Biden being shoved down our throats again then him dropping out are what gave Trump the election. The focus on her gender and nothing else is to keep you from remembering that the DNC fucked us again and a large number of voters protest voting because “She’ll genocide the Palestinians” like TRUMP wouldn’t.
“The DNC” does not have the power to force Biden to step aside when he doesn’t want to.
They aren’t a military or a government. They are a club, and Biden was far and away the senior member.
The fact that when it comes to politics I see Americans nowadays keep repeating over and over and over again “this can’t be done”, “they don’t have the power”, “that will never happen”, is to me astonishing. When I was growing up, America was where things HAPPENED. What happened to you guys? Where did this learned helplessness come from?
So your party structures are broken and unable to produce good outcomes? Change them. Reform them. Update them. What the fuck is wrong with you people? You made democracy into a fossil that you no longer fit in and you’re despairing. It’s supposed to be a living breathing thing that evolves all the time. WTF.
I have to agree, it is very weird that people treat their society like an thing set in stone.
She’s a former cop and prosecutor that wasn’t selected through a primary process (not that Dems ever allow anyone not selected by party elites.)
She’s basically a Republican with zero progressive policies, which isn’t going to appeal to an increasingly radicalized base.
There were a lot of problems with her that had nothing to do with her being a her.
Democrats keep chasing votes to the right, abandoning the actual left and the working class.
If the Dems wanted to stop losing they could have selected Sanders. It’s not about gender, it’s about trust, and nobody trusted Clinton or Harris (nor should they, frankly). Meanwhile Sanders has spoken for the working class the whole time he has been around.
Remember how Dukakis got tanked by a goofy helmet? Yea, Harris sank when she couldn’t propose any change from Biden.
tanked
nice pun cuz iirc he was riding in one while wearing that helmet
Knowing my paisanos, it was plain old ignorance. I mean, we did elect a woman president this year. 😅
Kamela lost because she’s a woman
Were there other problems in Clinton and Harris than the gender, then? (Except them “lying” that Trump would use the army against US civilians, of course)
Clinton is a fuckin capitalist and Harris is a fucking neoliberal. Neither of them actually care about anything more than upholding the status quo. They are not working class or even for the working class.
This all being said, status quo is far better than fascism, but we can do better.
Basically, just like someone being a woman wouldn’t make them a bad president, it would also not make them a good one. Having good policies makes you a good president.
The status quo is a slow slide into fascism. And we are at the end of that slide. At some point, and that point was 2016, enough people would rather vote for the fascist than the woman that, at best, would continue the slow decline.
Agreed.
Good luck finding a presidential candidate with good policies in USA.
You asked what the other problems with them were, not whether there was a good presidential candidate, i was answering your question
No unclarity regarding that, don’t worry :)
Oki dokes! :)
Were there other problems in Clinton and Harris than the gender, then?
If it was misogyny alone was the cause, then why did harris lose across every single demographic of women? She lost across every single voting demographic of general voter except a 1 point gain in college educated white men.
We have polling data, we could dig through it-- and the results must be a statistical understanding of a number of reasons. There wont be a unifying single smoking gun across this many voters and issues. We aren’t that uniform of a group of people for that. Although there will be some that are larger than others, like Gaza, consumer prices, wage stagnation, and misogyny.
Dems are failing to honestly analyze why we lost, just like they failed to figure out how we could win. So we’re on track to lose again, and comments like the one you made show we arent making much progress-- or that we even have any will to.
women can be misogynistic too
Uh… If the misogyny was enough to remove enough votes from them to allow the worse candidate to win, then obviously it was a decisive factor. Being a decisive factor does not equal being the only factor.
If the misogyny was enough to remove enough votes from them to allow the worse candidate to win, then obviously it was a decisive factor.
Sure, but how do we put actual numbers behind that “if”?
No, it wasn’t the decisive factor. The misogynists wouldn’t have voted for Harris either way. The decisive factor was Harris failing to inspire her own base while pandering to the elusive “undecided voter” by propping up Liz Cheney, among other things. Don’t get it twisted, Harris lost because she and her team were too incompetent to read the room.
What is this the decisive factor you’re talking about? You can have several.
Yes.
I have NO idea why the democrats chose Harris as the nominee. The country wouldn’t vote for a white woman last time. You REALLY think they’re going to vote for a woman of colour? REALLY? And then a bunch of them didn’t. As predicted.
I can almost the trolls saying ‘well Ackshually he sent the marines, not the army! Pwned lozur!’
Isn’t the National Guard the Army?
Kind of, sort of, it’s complicated.
They’re independent organizations under their given state, they’re coordinated with the army and air force through the national guard bureau.
They sort of become part of the army and Air Force when called up federally.
So technically they’re part of the army right now in LA as they were called up federally.
All that’s not strictly accurate but, like, roughly that’s how it works.
Not really, since I don’t think he sent anyone for the Air Force.
The National Guard is a state-based military force that becomes part of the U.S. military’s reserve components of the U.S. Army and the U.S. Air Force when activated for federal missions.[2] It is a military reserve force composed of National Guard military members or units of each state, the territories of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia, for a total of 54 separate organizations. It is officially created under Congress’s Article I, Section 8 enumerated power to “raise and support Armies”.[3] All members of the National Guard are also members of the organized militia of the United States as defined by 10 U.S.C. § 246. National Guard units are under the dual control of U.S. state governments and the U.S. federal government.[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_(United_States)
According to this, its 100% correct. He sent them on a federal mission so they are Army now. The Air Force did show up. It was the National Guard
Yah but they’re only under the army when called up federally, which they are in LA right now, but still, it’s weird.
No.
The President deploying Marines inside the U.S. without invoking the Insurrection Act, declaring an emergency, or getting local/state approval — especially just to respond to peaceful protests — is unlawful on multiple levels:
- Violates DoD Directive 3025.18 – Active-duty military (including Marines) can’t engage in domestic law enforcement unless explicitly authorized.
- Violates the First Amendment – Peaceful protest is protected. Military suppression = unconstitutional. (NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886).
- Violates the Fourth Amendment – Military detentions/searches are illegal without cause. (Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32).
- Ignores Posse Comitatus limits – PCA (18 U.S.C. § 1385) applies to Army/Air Force, but DoD extends it to all branches.
- Unlawful military orders – Troops must disobey unconstitutional orders (UCMJ Art. 92; U.S. v. Calley, 48 C.M.R. 19).
- Impeachable abuse of power – Violates Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.
This isn’t just controversial — it’s flat-out illegal.
EDIT: Formatting EDIT: Better Citations: (DoDI 3025.21, Enclosure 3, Section 3)
https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/302521p.pdf
- EXCEPTIONS BASED ON MILITARY SERVICE. By policy, Posse Comitatus Act restrictions (as well as other restrictions in this Instruction) are applicable to the Department of the Navy (including the Marine Corps) with such exceptions as the Secretary of Defense may authorize in advance on a case-by-case basis.
LISTED EXCEPTIONS
a. Such exceptions shall include requests from the AG for assistance pursuant to section 873(b) of Reference (al). b. Requests for approval of other exceptions should be made by a senior official of the civilian law enforcement agency concerned, who verifies that: (1) The size or scope of the suspected criminal activity poses a serious threat to the interests of the United States and enforcement of a law within the jurisdiction of the civilian agency would be seriously impaired if the assistance were not provided because civilian assets are not available to perform the mission; or (2) Civilian law enforcement assets are not available to perform the mission, and temporary assistance is required on an emergency basis to prevent loss of life or wanton destruction of property. 4. MILITARY READINESS. Assistance may not be provided if such assistance could adversely affect military preparedness. Implementing documents issued by the Heads of the DoD Components shall ensure that approval for the disposition of equipment is vested in officials who can assess the effect of such disposition on military preparedness. 5. APPROVAL AUTHORITY. Requests by civilian law enforcement officials for use of DoD personnel to provide assistance to civilian law enforcement agencies shall be forwarded to the appropriate approval authority. a. The Secretary of Defense is the approval authority for requests for direct assistance in support of civilian law enforcement agencies, including those responding with assets with the potential for lethality, except for the use of emergency authority as provided in subparagraph 1.b.(3) of this enclosure and in Reference ©, and except as otherwise provided below. b. Requests that involve Defense Intelligence and Counterintelligence entities are subject to approval by the Secretary of Defense and the guidance in DoDD 5240.01(Reference (ar)) and Reference (j). 24 Change 1, 02/08/2019 ENCLOSURE 3 DoDI 3025.21, February 27, 2013 c. The Secretaries of the Military Departments and the Directors of the Defense Agencies may, in coordination with the ASD(HD&GS), approve the use of DoD personnel: (1) To provide training or expert advice in accordance with paragraphs 1.e. and 1.f. of this enclosure. (2) For equipment maintenance in accordance with paragraph 1.d. of this enclosure. (3) To monitor and communicate the movement of air and sea traffic in accordance with subparagraphs 1.d.(5)(b) 1 and 4 of this enclosure. d. All other requests, including those in which subordinate authorities recommend disapproval, shall be submitted promptly to the ASD(HD&GS) for consideration by the Secretary of Defense, as appropriate. e. The views of the CJCS shall be obtained on all requests that are considered by the Secretary of Defense or the ASD(HD&GS), that otherwise involve personnel assigned to a unified or specified command, or that may affect military preparedness. f. All requests that are to be considered by the Secretary of Defense or the ASD(HD&GS) that may involve the use of Reserve Component personnel or equipment shall be coordinated with the ASD(M&RA). All requests that are to be considered by the Secretary of Defense or the ASD(HD&GS) that may involve the use of NG personnel also shall be coordinated with the Chief, NGB. All requests that are to be considered by the Secretary of Defense or the ASD(HD&GS) that may involve the use of NG equipment also shall be coordinated with the Secretary of the Military Department concerned and the Chief, NGB.
Only illegal if someone enforces the law, and I have a sneaking suspicion the chances of that are low
You’re not wrong, but it’s important to call it out. And to CONSTANTLY call out the message to our troops that it is incumbent upon them to refuse to follow illegal orders.
Donny can’t possibly wriggle his way out of this one!
I said that about the stolen top secret documents because of all the obvious treason and the even more obvious° sending/selling of said documents. Yet the american public decided it was a good idea to vote him in once again so he could pardon himself.
Nothing will happen to him. I see no one over there with the backbone to do anything to bring him to justice. The best you can hope for is death or debilitating stroke.
The bad news is even if that happens today then Fatboy Tangerine has shown just how easy it is to be a dictator. The next guy will be more organised.(°Why obvious? There was a fax machine right there. A fax machine in a toilet. The fact that there was old tech like a fax machine shows what it was being used for, but to move one to a fucking toilet full of the documents is plain damning. Anyone who believes differently is either an idiot, or corrupt. Or both.
End of, full stop, no further explanation is needed.)We got him this time, fellas!
Thats what I thought about the mocking of the disabled man, the “grab em by the pussy” comment, the Epstein-thing, the impeachement, Jan6, the classified documents, Musks salute, …
If you have the majority of the voting public, parties, media and judges behind yourself then you are pretty safe doing illegal things, even in a Democracy.
He can’t luckily he doesn’t has to.
Uh so Trump is doing something illegal. So like, Tuesday?
Yeah, but this time it’s Very illegal, and Very not cool!
This seems like it was probably written by AI. Has anyone actually fact checked this?
Smells like AI, but that doesn’t mean it’s just slop. You can look up each of the cited laws—they’re not long or particularly difficult reads. They are all arguably accurate citations.
-
Iffy “explicitly authorized” is a loaded phrase for this use case. He controls enough DoD leadership to make it happen legally without much resistance.
-
Legit.
-
It depends on the framing. If rocks were being thrown at ICE, the argument likely wouldn’t hold up.
-
Likely legit.
-
Legit, but remember that this simply means the military can be held accountable for their actions. If they assault or kill someone, they can face legal consequences. It’s just precedence. Essentially, this is the point in law where you can’t say you were just following orders.
-
Legit.
However, within this framework, prosecution depends on willingness—someone has to actively push for it, and the government has to be stable enough to recognize these violations as valid. For the most part, these are pardonable offenses.
TL;DR: Until there’s a regime change, none of this will carry much weight.
-
It was. I keep seeing this at work. ChatGPT especially loves to add the unnecessary icons.
But is the information wrong?
No, the information is correct from what I can determine. But it would have taken me a lot longer to find the relevant sections of law and precedent and sift through them on my own.
They’re all mercifully short reads (at least enough to get the idea if they apply) and famous enough to be easy to find. I just went through them in a higher-level post. They’re all right-ish. 3 are solid, the other 3 are technically accurate, but there’s enough wiggle room to get out of it.
I edited my post with some relevant citations and links
I added the relevant citations for you
That user posted that same comment on multiple posts as well
Definitely needs fact checking, but yeah I do the same thing when I have some good points to be made on a popular topic that is being discussed in various threads. Not everyone needs a super special unique response when copy-paste is a thing. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I don’t think I’m a bot or AI…🤖
Hillary Clinton too.
And Elizabeth Warren.
Naw, she got Bernie Sanders’d
Yes it’s truly macho to lose elections. Big muscle energy. This person is stoked to lose the next one. As long as they’re “correct”… jfc.
So you think increasing military spending in exchange for having no healthcare, and supporting a genocide is correct?
I’m so glad that the one that did win ended the genocide, got us universal healthcare, and decreased military spending… oh wait…
Removed by mod
Wow, it’s almost as if there wasn’t a proper candidate?
Harris was the correct option.
only option.
Harris was the better option. That’s not the same as a good one.
Clearly not, she lost
Do you have eyes and ears? Are you currently alive and breathing with minimal brain functionality?
Harris was CLEARLY the correct option.
You must be wearing horse blinders. Remember to keep to the track. Turn left. And left. And again. One more time. It’s the final stretch now…
Congrats, you placed fifth. Your odds are now 44-1.
Left? Like Dale Earnhardt and Hillary Clinton, she failed to turn left, then smashed into a fucking wall.
deleted by creator
Not my favorite candidate. By any means. Better than what we have with Trump? Absolutely undisputed. It’s not even a conversation. Wild that someone would even try to contend it.
Welcome to the reality of the broken US voting system bud
And instead of doing anything to fix it, I’m jerking off to what would have happened if another terrible candidate would have won.
I’m just in the spectator seats, we have preferential voting in Australia (not a perfect implementation, but probably one of the best in the world.)
Despite this, still under capitalism. So. Not rosy.
Just that, not voting tactically - while fighting like hell to get a third party candidate in, or get enough members of the less shit party to push through voting reform - is stupid.
It’s stupid.
A shit candidate that’s less shit, is still less shit.
This is the spoiler effect, and being high and mighty about not having voted is your copium. There may well have been enough people like you to have avoided a Trump presidency.
And if you think there’s no difference? Then you’re getting high on your own righteous supply.
Anyway, I’ll be over here enjoying my slightly left of centre government, and actually have a viable pathway to getting further left parties elected here. 🎩🦘
You’re insufferable because you think you’re better than everyone else who actually understands how the voting system works.
not voting tactically
In most of the US, who you vote for literally doesn’t matter, because your state will go to the candidate from whatever party has won your state for the last couple decades. Unless you live in the 8 or so states that could actually, realistically flip in a given election cycle, there’s literally no point in voting for the lesser of two evils.
Going into any given election, I can say with high certainty that my state will go to the dominant party with a 15% split with very high confidence, and that all votes outside of the top two will be under 5%. The only way for this to not happen is for the minority party to run a very strong candidate, the majority party to run a very unpopular candidate, and for a large third party to steal a ton of votes from the majority party… And even then, you’ll probably trim the gap to 5% or so and the majority party candidate will still win by inertia.
If you understand that, you can be free to actually vote your conscience and pick one of the third party candidates. If third party candidates collectively get enough votes to actually spoil an election in your area, maybe you have a chance to get voting reform discussed on the media, and if the majority candidate doesn’t get 51% because of it, maybe it features in the debates.
So until the gap between the top two candidates narrows to where all third party voters collectively voting for the second candidate could actually flip the state, I’ll keep voting for a third party candidate.
I love how any criticism of your chosen deity makes you think I didn’t vote, or believe that there’s no difference between the two.
Incredible.
There was a correct candidate and an incorrect candidate. America chose incorrectly.
If she had run a competent campaign she would have won, I’d say that the DNC chose incorrectly but that’s not true either, they chose a candidate that aligned with the interests of their billionaire backers because they knew they’d get paid whether she won or not
If she had run a competent campaign she would have won
Lol. The fact that you think Kamala didn’t run a competent campaign, while her opponent was a felon rapist who has confirmed lied more than any other president in U.S. history, sent a mob to our capitol to assault police, illegally attempted to overturn an election, and makes time every single day to divide Americans tells me all I need to know about your intellectual capacity.
Anyone that points a finger at the non-felon rapist traitor habitual liar and says they should have run a better campaign is fucked in the head and needs to get their priorities straight.
Voting? You must love genocide…
/s
Expressing any criticism at all means I didn’t vote.
You are truly a genius of equal of intellect as Musk. Are you why the Dems want him as an ally and to take his money/sperm (frozen, turkey baster)?
I think it’s more correct than sending the FUCKING MARINES TO SHOOT AT PEACEFUL PROTESTERS IN YOUR OWN FUCKING COUNTRY. Something something Tiennemen Square…
And you were fine with sending marines to shoot people in other countries, stop whining that it happens to you.
When did I say I was fine with it? Also we are still doing that too. GTFO with your all bad choices are equally bad bullshit. That’s not how the world works.
The feddieverse is still a small place, so PSA @BrainInABox@lemmy.ml is really just here to troll some both sides stuff. If you try to have some dialog where you ask what their alternative is they will just never answer. They are just here to troll and grand stand about how much they care, but not enough to do something material for the cause.
When did I say I was fine with it?
When did I say “bad choices are equally bad”, you hypocrite?
But I’ll comfortable interpreting you complaining about using marines domestically rather than just on foreigners to mean you think one is worse than the other.
Fuck off back to whatever Putin-compromised chanboard birthed you
Any criticism of liberals means I’m alt-right?
Is your name Israel, by chance?
Gotta love the freaks over here complaining about a prosecutor with a doctorate in law while a felon rapist traitor descends fascism upon our nation and sends the military to assault Americans.
Pull your head out of your ass.
I wasn’t old enough to be politically involved when Al Gore ran, but I heard he had good policies. How many people can tell you what policies Kamala ran on?
I voted for Gore, but a bunch of my moron friends voted for Nader in that election. And Nader an ego was so big he could never admit fault for fucking up the next 2 decades of our country.
Now it looks like we fucked for the rest of this century.
Thankfully the Left learned from this mistake and added ranked voting
Oh wait that was New Zealand. But yea, everything since 9/11 is Nader’s fault
Harris ran on a continuation of existing beneficial politics with a trend of effectiveness and some tuning after she took over the post.
In short, her position was
** gestures at 4 years of positive tending numbers **
. Oh: and not fucking up the treason trial for Trump.
But the sparkle junkies need everything to pop-pop-pop, so incremental improvement wasnt as good as destruction of America.
Trump: ok so stocks went down 50% because of me, but look since then it’s up 80% !!!
Maga crowd: Yess, wooow!!!
There are absolutely lots of people that don’t understand that down 50% and up 80% means you just lost 10%.
For anyone who’s like me (where math and I are not friends), if you start with $1 and drop 50%, that’s 50¢
Go up 80% from 50¢ and you’re at 90¢
Your original $1 is now worth 90¢.
Yeah, my stocks are almost back to where they were at the beginning of the year, and it’s almost 100% due to Trump messing w/ tariffs. I’m not rich or anything, but seeing my retirement savings fluctuate at Trump’s whims doesn’t feel great.
Wealth inequality continued to grow under Biden, and the average net worth of black families decreased.
This neoliberal obsession with “incremental improvement” is a fucking plague. It’s so easy to blame voters for not recognizing marginal changes, but it’s delusional to think today’s American voters are any different from voters in any other era or part of the world. Not recognizing that is political malpractice on the part of Democrats.
This pattern that we are living through is the same pattern behind every fascist movement since Mussolini. It starts with a failure of leadership from out of touch liberal elitists.
Democrats stand for absolutely nothing. They check the polls to figure out what people think they want to hear, but they never follow through because they have no conviction. Someone who is passionate about starving children doesn’t slow down to brag when starvation falls by 10%. Democrats do, and that registers with voters - consciously or unconsciously. Democrats can point to charts and figures all day long but,without genuine passion, they will always fail to break through.
Voters want conviction. Republicans have it, and Democrats don’t. Shaving half a point off inflation won’t change that.
Biden’s administration was a dam holding back fascism. It was never going to make the river disappear but it definitely slowed things down and if we continued that path we eventually would have real permanent solutions.
People blame Democrats but we haven’t had 50 of them in the senate without caucus in over a decade.
People blame Democrats but we haven’t had 50 of them in the senate without caucus in over a decade.
Don’t blame the broader caucus when people who ran as democrats vote with republicans.
Biden’s administration was a dam holding back fascism
Holding back fascism within the US*. Biden happily was releasing fascism in Israel.
Anyway, how did that “fascism holding” work out? You mean it did exactly nothing but postpone the thing for 4 years while having presidential powers?
Biden promoted peace which favored Israel, which is a trash stance imo, but it’s a world of difference from Trump admin’s Pete Hegseth promoting literal bare definition genocide, unapologetically.
Biden promoted peace
No. Funding and giving political support to a genocidal state while crushing down on demonstrations against genocide isn’t promoting peace. It’s a very close thing to what the Trump administration is doing, marginally less bad but not “promoting peace” in the slightest.
We did continue down that path, and it brought us back to another Trump presidency - not permanent solutions. Fascism was the only place that path was ever going to lead.
We have been hearing constantly about slow and steady progress for 60 years of the hollowing out of the middle class. It’s not fucking working. Not materially in people’s lives, and not politically.
It was Clinton who signed NAFTA. It was Clinton who said “The era of big government is over” as he dismantled federal safety net programs and broke unions. It was Obama who put the impact of the mortgage crisis on the backs of homeowners and bailed out Wall Street. (Then collected millions in speaking fees from Wall Street firms within weeks of leaving office). It was Obama who sidelined real healthcare reform and put in a right wing healthcare system that guaranteed cost increases of 10-15% every damn year.
Biden was a modest improvement, but nothing will forgive his slavish devotion to a genocidal Israel.
Democrats threw the trans community under the bus. They threw immigrants under the bus. Time after time they surrender to Republican framing then wonder why Republicans keep winning.
Know how Hillary got the DNC to put a finger on the scale for her campaign? She bailed them out of near bankruptcy. Why were they bankrupt? Obama funneled money that used to go to the party into his own campaign coffers. That’s how he won a second term while losing Congress. Overall, the Democrats lost over a thousand state and federal seats in the 8 years of his presidency.
This isn’t all about the big bad Republicans. It’s not all about stupid voters. Republicans are no better or worse than they ever were, and voters are no dumber. Democratic leadership has a lot to answer for as well. Quit trying to shield them from the change that desperately needs to happen.
Your opinions are bad, and you should feel bad.
Yeah, the Democrats have actually been doing everything right and have just had a string of bad luck. Bad dice roles on their voter generator. There is no reason for them to reevaluate or change anything. /s
Trumps votes barely changed from 2020 to 2024. Whay changed is 8 million less people voted for Kamala tban Biden.
We did not follow the path, we abandoned the DNC and that is why we have fascism.
The Democrats lost ground with every demographic but college educated women. 2020 was an unusually high turnout election. 2024 was a regression to the mean, yet Trump’s vote total went up.
Blaming the voters is just electoral masturbation. It doesn’t lead anywhere. Do you have a plan to get better voters in 2028? Blaming voters is for politicians that don’t care about winning. In other words, it’s for establishment Democrats.
We did not follow the path, we abandoned the DNC and that is why we have fascism.
The DNC abandoned us and expected unconditional votes.
So I’ve been going on and on about how “democrats bad” is a huge narrative being pushed hard on Lemmy. Always with the caveat that criticism is warranted, when it’s specific and targeted.
This is specific and targeted. This is how you properly criticize Dems. But that wouldn’t jive with the people seeding that other narrative. They don’t want to be helpful. They’re not interested in how to get other people to vote. Their objective is the opposite.
Maybe the Dems should switch their incremental improvement to the fact that they need billionaires to buy them votes before their dollars turn into rubles. Yeah, the number is bigger. Look how much good that does the Russians.
They should be supporting both Elon-style directly, and indirectly through accepting tax policy to allow us to do big things. Find smart policies to support medical school so that we can push for more doctors/nurses the way we did for Software Devs from 1995-2015. Create actual medicare for all to finally get rid of the odd tie between your employer and your healthcare. Support real freight so we can have fewer semis destroying our roads and creating traffic. Support mass transit so we need fewer roads and can have more walkable spaces with more available housing. (Mass transit enables realistic high density housing.) Change Trump’s stupid ass tariffs to be a response to climate change, now that we’ve developed better tech to see where the CO2 is coming from.
Raise the federal minimum wage. Reduce the work week to 36 hours, with real teeth in overtime requirements and salary exemptions. Recreate the Civilian Conservation Corps to make sure everyone who’s willing to put in real work can find a job, even if AI doesn’t like their resume.
Healthcare, traffic, and work are the biggest things everyone in the country has to deal with. Address the things that actually affect people’s lives. This is how your dollars stay dollars instead of turning into rubles. The billionaires might have less of them, but they’re worth more. When people are less desperate, everyone’s lives are better.
Really large sweeping economic changes tends to have significant unexpected problems created from them. It would be bad if we lifted everyone up and then destroyed our ability to maintain that new status in the process.
Voters want conviction. Republicans have it, and Democrats don’t.
Agreed
“Changing shit means you have to adapt.”
So you’re saying it’s better to have the devil we know in the form of all the expected problems? What kind of regressive nonsense is this?
No, Im saying sweeping economic changes come with unforeseen consequences which is why many/most economists dont push for massive sweeping change.
Most economies are neoliberal/neoclassical, they’re literally a poverty cult based on empirically proven wrong axioms such as “printing money creates inflation”, “rising the minimum wage creates unemployment”, or “public expenditure in healthcare, pensions and education is bad for the economy”. You should do the opposite of what most economists preach.
Yeah, consequences like FDR getting elected President four times in a row. That was the last time the Democrats had a popular President.
I’m not sure if you noticed, but America’s ability to do much of anything is being dismantled before our eyes. The Democrats played it safe, so voters looked elsewhere.
60 years of unbelievable productivity gains and new technologies, and life has only gotten harder. I think we could do better than that. Bullshit excuses are easy to accept when it hasn’t hit you yet.
This isn’t “bullshit excuses” as you are focusing on the potential political gains and I am talking about the economic problems that could come about from sweeping economic changes.
When the New Deal passed the USA was a larger portion of the world economy and it was growing.
It’s absolutely bullshit. Most of what progressives want is stuff we had 50 years ago. The boldest new proposal is Medicare for All. Somehow every single other developed economy in the world can achieve universal healthcare, but the richest country in the world can’t manage it? BULLSHIT! While you wrong your hands people are dying and lives are being ruined every single day. It’s profane, and it’s pathetic. Yes, we can do a hell of a lot better.
Incremental improvement (genocide)
I mean, yeah
Well, get over it. Incremental change is over forever, your way failed. It’s time to do things our way now, because liberal democracy is dead.
Your way of sitting on the couch and doing nothing sure has worked wonders.
Yep, that checks out
“You’re from place I don’t like” isn’t a particularly strong counter-argument
It’s the basis of their entire political philosophy.
I seem to remember something about a genocide, too.
Good thing Trump ended that huh
It sure would have helped if either biden or harris credibly stood for anything else.
Harris stood for many good things. She should’ve also opposed the genocide yes, but the other choice was worse on it, making you a moron for not voting for her as a form of harm reduction.
I voted for harris.
You don’t give a shit. You just want silence from the critics of your genocide.
What does that mean?
She had a website, she promised to tax the rich on it. There were even some rightwing nutjobs producing cartoons about it claiming an unrealized gains tax would ruin the economy.
An unrealized gains tax would never make it out of committee, much less actually passing either house of Congress. She took absolutely zero risk w/ that one because everyone knows it’s not feasible.
If we vote for the Tax The Rich candidates then the Rich will get taxed.
Instead the anti-tax rich candidate won.
When has that ever actually happened? Like anything else, there will be exceptions upon exceptions because the rich have the money and influence to successfully lobby Congress.
And the rich already pay the most in taxes, and the richest get loopholes:
The top 1% of earners pay 45.8% of income taxes.
If you think the top 1% are going to pay even more in taxes without a massive concession, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.
Harris couldn’t pass that even if she actually, truly cared, and I fervently believe she’s just pandering to the left for votes. I don’t think she actually believes in most of the policies that made headlines, I think she just wanted to be Biden 2.0. She said as much in interviews, and it’s why she lost: she couldn’t convince her base that she’s actually different.
If you wanted actual, meaningful change from the left, Bernie Sanders was your best bet. I don’t even think he was that good of a candidate, but he actually seemed to believe in what he promised.
The tax laws that the GOP wrote in 2016/2017 expire this session and now they’re back in power to write the new ones.
Republicans have been the party cutting taxes for 50 years.
In 2023 they proposed tax raises across the board in order to have a chance of passing the senate with their 50 seat majority (with caucus) against the 49 Republicans, while they simultaneously expanded benefits like medicaid expansion so as to redistribute wealth to those who need it to survive.
GOP is the enemy. Remove the GOP, first and foremost.
EDIT: And also the Democrats removed money from politics from 2003 to 2010 until Conservative SCOTUS nominations struck it down with the “Citizens United Decision”, which every democrat has campaigned against since.
GOP is the enemy
No, the enemy is the two-party system. The GOP is merely a symptom of that larger problem. The GOP proposing terrible bills doesn’t imply that Dem bills are “good,” they’re both generally quite terrible since most representatives don’t really need to worry about their seat since their district is likely uncontested, so they’re more beholden to special interests than their constituents.
Fix the electoral system and maybe I’ll entertain a discussion about the GOP being “evil.”
Gore’s election was the first I could vote in.
I voted for Kucinich in the primary and then traded my vote for Gore in a swing state for a vote for Nader in MA.
Then my “Al Gore won the votes” bumper sticker was torn off my car while I was at work at Cracker Barrel.
Will you please tell me more about trading your vote? Are there communities online where you can meet people willing to do that? How did you do it during the bush/gore election? Online? I live in MA, I’d trade a vote w a swing stater, assuming we have elections again.
Yep, it was done over the internet. The idea was to get Nader to 3% without electing Bush.
Neither happened because people are terrible and we can’t have nice things.
5%. You need 5% for the federal grant.
Thanks. As you can tell I am very old.
It works like this: they say they will wote your choice if you vote theirs. Then both of you end up voting an orange ape.
Straight up cash to help buy your first house. I wasn’t thrilled about it.
Removed by mod
This has been tagged as misinformation. I suspect it is, but if it isn’t, please source it. I’ll remove it until I get the valid source.
If you’re reading this and want to know what it says so you can help source it or not, read the modlog for this community.
https://onlinevisas.com/us-immigration/kamala-harriss-25000-for-immigrant/
It was literally designed around first generational home buyers. Just cause people don’t like that doesn’t mean it’s misinformation.
Down payment assistance was only for first generation and she had proposed adding a tax credit for first time home buyers. That would include average people.The proposal includes $25,000 in downpayment assistance for 400,000 first-generation homebuyers, defined as those whose parents do not own a home. To qualify, these families must have a history of paying rent on time for at least two years. Additionally, the plan offers a $10,000 tax credit for first-time homebuyers. Here is another article
I don’t have the proposed plan specifically as it also changed a couple times and was more just a proposal without much meat other than primarily being what I said it was.
First generation isn’t immigrants, they’re US citizens because they were born here.
How do you become a first generation to a country without immigrating to it even if it is by your parents? The country was not founded at the time of their birth, the generation before them was an immigrant.
I’m sorry but that’s pointless pedantry to resist having to put my comment back of legitimate criticism against the idea that the Harris campaign was providing cash for buying homes to the average American.
Edit for myself that it was not Harris’s proposal but Bidens that is so restrictive and she resubmitted it and later adjusted around the end of August 2024 to be accessible to any first time home buyer. However, in a proposed 4 year plan that would limit to 1 million people a year and still require the rental proof and give preference to first generation homebuyers first.
Here is the campaign announcement.
provide working families who have paid their rent on time for two years and are buying their first home up to $25,000 in down-payment assistance, with more generous support for first-generation homeowners – or homebuyers whose parents don’t own a home.
Nothing at all about “immigrants”. Where did you hear that bullshit?
Mostly pro immigrant news sources that were happy about the benefit this would give directly to those communities and the fact that it targets people that have no other family members with a house in the US which those of us with older parents who were born in the US likely have.
The $10,000 credit for only first time homebuyers was a later addition and was not even set as it was more an additional thought tacked on and does nothing for actually giving money for the down payment but only credits you after you bought it.
Not helpful.
deleted by creator
Specifically, it targets individuals and families who have paid their rent on time for two years and are looking to buy their first home. The proposal offers up to $25,000 in down payment support, with more generous assistance available for first-generation homebuyers, meaning those whose parents do not currently own a home.
Proposed a $10,000 tax credit for first time home buyers.
Yeah, it was a shame it was so restrictive, literally was also set for a limit of 400,000 individuals when first proposed too.
Its a criticism of the garbage solutions that were brought forward for good headlines rather than actual support.
This plan will significantly simplify and expand the reach of down-payment assistance, allowing over 1 million first time-buyers per year – including first-generation home buyers – to get the funds they need to buy a house when they are ready to buy it," the Harris campaign said.
You keep making shit up. One million > 400,000.
The Biden-Harris administration initially proposed providing $25,000 in downpayment assistance only for 400,000 first-generation home buyers—or homebuyers whose parents don’t own a home—and a $10,000 tax credit for first-time home buyers.
This is from Harris’s campaign announcement. The extension to millions would be the 4 year plan. And was adjusted again after Biden’s original proposal of this was panned for being what I originally sourced. The very last offering she made by the end of the campaign was looser on restrictions.
I was incorrect, in that she removed the tax credit and made wider eligibility though stated that those still meeting the original criteria would get more assistance, though all would be required to meet the 2 year of proven rental payments through an assured rental agency.
I don’t think Kamala could even tell you what policies Kamala ran on.
She was pro fracking. Got to line those pockets afterall.
And Trump? What’s his policy about the environment? Please, do enlighten us!
The Rapture. Trump’s plan is to utilize the environment to Rapture the entire species, all at once.
That explains the Zionism, at least.
Eh what the funk did I just read!!?!?
The heritage foundations actual plan. Why we are funding the war in Israel. Isreal needs the one state solution so white evangelicals can have their rapture.
They’re in dire need of psychotherapy.
You just read highly classified top secret plans regarding mass emigration to the Kingdom of God.
You mean deportation?
As much as I hate having to use the word, this genuinely is whataboutism. You’re being provided with a legitimate criticism of one candidate and instead of actually addressing it you just point to a different candidate.
Because it’s an either-or choice. We were always going to get either Harris or Trump. Criticism of one candidate must be viewed in the context of the only other alternative. So calling out Harris on fracking is only meaningful if her position was substantially different than Trump’s. And if their positions are really no different, but only one candidate got called out for it, then the criticism is irrelevant and that makes me question the motives of the accuser.
Yes, it is. And I don’t give a f.
I’m so f… tired of the double standard.
I’m tired of these people pointing at one candidate’s speck of dust, while ignoring the other candidate’s plank to justify not voting against a fascist dictator.
She was pro fracking.
Maybe she was. Maybe she wasn’t far left enough. And so, because of that one specific detail, that as enough to tip the balance and swing the vote for the guy who is not only very pro fracking, but also for destroying the entire ecosystem and environment scorched-earth style?
Oh, she showed she was just a little bit more right than center, she wasn’t left enough, so I’ll vote for the far-right fascist instead.
Every time I read some comment like what the person above wrote, I get to remember that these voters are “just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know…”
Criticizing a candidate doesn’t mean you voted for the other major candidate. It just means that the challenger to the other major candidate sucks. The DNC needs to run better candidates to actually convince people to show up and vote for them.
No argument, no talking points, no facts, no sources, just a biased opinion in a salty comment.
A lot was implied in that comment. Implying that she is corrupt. That wasn’t criticism. That was badmouthing.
And that specific style of badmouthing usually insinuates justifying a non-vote, which in this case, meant a vote for the the other guy.
She wasn’t absolutely perfect, and she wasn’t the absolute exact perfect fit for everyone. And yes, her campaign could have been run better. Nobody’s perfect. No one can please everyone. But hey, at least she didn’t wear a tan suit!
Removed by mod
As always, any criticism for harris is interpreted in bad faith as support for trump.
No argument, no talking points, no facts, no sources, just a biased opinion and a salty comment.
That’s not criticism. That’s badmouthing.
I’m tired of these people pointing at one candidate’s speck of dust, while ignoring the other candidate’s plank to justify not voting against a fascist dictator.
She was pro fracking.
Maybe she was. Maybe she wasn’t far left enough. And so, because of that one specific detail, that as enough to tip the balance and swing the vote for the guy who is not only very pro fracking, but also for destroying the entire ecosystem and environment scorched-earth style.
I’m so f… tired of the double standard.
I’m tired of these people pointing at one candidate’s speck of dust, while ignoring the other candidate’s plank to justify not voting against a fascist dictator.
You assume that about anyone with any criticism whatsoever of harris.
I voted for harris; you just can’t abide anything other than unconditional worship of her.
Maybe she was. Maybe she wasn’t far left enough. And so, because of that one specific detail, that as enough to tip the balance and swing the vote for the guy who is not only very pro fracking, but also for destroying the entire ecosystem and environment scorched-earth style.
And you’re doubling down on the bad faith assumption that criticism of harris is support for trump.
I wasn’t criticizing your comment. I never implied that you had voted for the other guy.
And I have no worship for her. She’s a politician. I only had hope, for the country and for the world, that the other guy wouldn’t take power.
She was pro fracking. Got to line those pockets afterall.
A lot was implied in that comment the person wrote. Implying that she is corrupt.
That isn’t criticism. That is badmouthing.
And that is what I have a problem with. The double standard, and the gratuitous smearing. That’s what revolts me. That’s what upsets me.
That’s the awesome part about democracy: you get one of two shitty choices.
*American “democracy”.
Other countries don’t have this problem, most picked other voting forms than “first past the post”, which over time destroyed our ability to have more than two actual serious political parties. So both those parties get overtaken by ethically dubious people, overtly for the entire republican party, and subtly with the establishment democrats, and it all collapses.
Yes but we don’t live in other countries. We live in the stupid one.
Other countries don’t have this problem
Have you seen the recent elections in Germany, Poland or France? Literally the entire western world is at risk of fascism. The problem isn’t “first past the post”, the problem is capitalism.
Whataboutism
Shitpostingism
Average liberal
Let’s list out all the good and bad policies Harris and Trump ran on then see which is the lesser of 2 evils.
And then throw them all away and burn it down with the greater evil just for funsies, apparently.
Yeah, but eggs are cheap again, so…
Oh wait.
And then Harris completely disappeared as soon as the election was over, failing to challenge his extremely questionable victory in any meaningful way
If she had challenged it, she probably wouldn’t have won the challenge, AND she would have fueled a whole smattering of “SEE, BOTH SIDES ARE THE SAME” bs
Well if people were going to say stuff, it’s awesome that she didn’t do anything! Close call. \s
This is the same flawed logic as the folks saying that violent resistance will give the other side a “justification”, they’re gonna make one up anyway so there’s absolutely no point in abstaining from any given course of action for the sake of not giving them one. Even if it hadn’t worked it would have demonstrated some commitment to actually stopping Trump, but corporate dems don’t actually give a shit what happens as long as they’re still getting paid.
Fuck that, the situation wasn’t the same and EVERYONE knows it. The solution isn’t to avoid the whole thing so the accusation isn’t made, the solution is to do the right thing, and when the accusation is made, you slap them down HARD!
Billionaires: " yes, she’s an obedient little soldier 👍"
It must be nice to have the billionaire’s hot air to fill your sails as you navigate these rough seas. However, woe betide those that displease the mighty donors, they will immediately find themselves in the doldrums, they no longer have a purpose and the billionaires await the next empty vessel.
It must be nice, it must be niice to have billionaires on your side.
It must be nice, it must be niice to have billionaires on your side.
She was a weak candidate and had very little political capital, it was a wild shot, but she was just a better choice than Biden. The dem party has almost ZERO strong presidential leadership that the general, liberal or progressive population can connect with, and I’m pretty sure it’s by design.
AOC might have a chance of rising and gaining prominence but she’s still regarded broadly as “too young” to do more than take a senate seat, which would be great either way. Zhoran Mamdani is going to be a titan on the left if he survives the concerted efforts of zionist liberal America to melt his efforts, but if he succeeds he’s going to be busy in New York for years to come. David Hogg isn’t going to lead the nation, but he IS making worthless old dems literally cry, so there is some marginal hope for a rally by next midterms.
But we also may not have midterms at this point. We’re edging closer to martial law and general, fascist, authoritarian dictatorship, and the best we’re getting from Dem leadership is “strongly worded letters” from Chuck “Less Than Worthless” Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries likes to reiterate that “Trump has a mandate” and is basically Schumer’s little shadow. Cory Booker gained national attention by doing a publicity stunt to literally promote a book. Bernie Sanders is still a voice of power and influence but he’s definitely past the window of electability, sadly.
We need better representation and that doesn’t spawn from nowhere, we need people on the ground, getting involved in local community, city and county elections so that real people with real passion get national attention. It’s not that they don’t exist, it’s that the left and liberals broadly are sitting on their hands waiting for something to be presented to them.
We have to get out of the “someone will do something” mindset and get out and DO stuff, even if it’s just joining the protests right now.
After hearing from walz I kinda wished he was the candidate
I think he would have been a strong candidate a few election cycles ago, but likely not a winner in today’s climate. We have a LOT of pent-up rage in our population, as a result of our national “fierce independence” reaching its own “late stage” level.
Waltz has bite and sharpness that would appeal to a lot of people if he were un-muzzled, but he’s still not going to fit the “WWE theater” spectacle that engages the stupidest people, and which because of systemic sabotage of our elections, is the only segment of the population who votes anymore.
While I don’t like him at all, I think Newsom fits this role the best and might be the strongest contender if we have elections again. (And he will probably be more likely to cheat in some way.)
But we also may not have midterms at this point.
I suspect we will continue to have elections, but they will strategically select specific races throughout the country to tamper with in favor of the GOP, and they’ll increase the number of rigged races with each election until our entire electoral process has been captured and we end up with something akin to Russia or Venezuela. We’ll hold elections, but they’ll be a complete sham. We’ll (officially) be a one-party state with one other party of controlled opposition to give people the illusion of choice.
Instead of AOC (however much I love her and her message) I’m thinking Whitmer would be better and has a great track record. Walz would be stronger than AOC, if they let him hammer 'em with his wit. Andy Beshear would totally freak the GOP out and would be a great choice.
Walz is a zionist. So is Pritzger. A zionist wont win.
AOC might have a chance
We should really stop this.
I like AOC.
I also realize we just elected a rapist felon traitor insurrectionist and declined the last 2 females who ran for president, despite being WAY more qualified than a felon rapist traitor insurrectionist.
This is not the time and not the country to elect a female president, especially one so “green”. If we try to push AOC, we’re going to lose, again.
This is not how I want things to be. It’s simply an observation of this nation and how extremely unlikely it is to elect a woman president. It’ll be Bernie all over again, but probably even more of a shutout.
You’re like, on the edge of political awareness, but you’re kinda stuck on the wallpaper.
Setting aside that I also said she’s not the right candidate for the time, I know for a fact that the “woman president will never win” mandate is a manufactured talking point and a lot of otherwise smart people ate that story up because they thought the system was remotely balanced and that democracy wasn’t compromised. (as well as latent, bitter, cynical sexism oozing out of the country’s pores right now.)
Clinton won the popular vote. It’s not the gender of the candidate, it’s the energy of the electorate and their ability to sidestep very real corruption in politics by people like Elon Musk controlling AI and search engines, and very real KGB tactics being used on our populace.
Trump’s victories have been hacks. They exploited every angle to make it happen. The people who voted him into power are the minority, they don’t represent the average voter. Our problem is the “average voter” is staying home, because, and I cannot stress this enough, our society has been compromised, hacked, unfairly influenced. In this current climate we won’t see ANYONE the corporate oligarchs don’t want to see on the throne. The Democrat party is in on this. There’s a reason they’re trying to undermine the Dems who don’t take the checks like AOC and Zhoran, people who are basically enemies of their own party.
We rebuild this a piece at a time from grassroots, and we need to push the “gender” questions out of public discourse and stop falling for the distraction. Every other nation is electing liberal or left-leaning candidates, men and women alike. This isn’t a fair democracy in the USA anymore, we have to get out of this mindset that we “just need our own version of Trump.”
We need the popular mandate but we also need a way to get around the artificial bumpers the current oligarchy has set up. If you buy the idea that we need to remove women from the ballot, or we need candidates who are more “moderate” (IE: right leaning) you’re falling for the ploy, hook, line and sinker.
Do not blame it on being a woman, statistically they win the same rate as male candidates just run far less often.
It’s just being sexist for someone else’s sake.
This is not the time to run status quo and low effort candidates but loud and effective ones which we have a shortage of in the DNC.
Do not blame it on being a woman
I’m not. I’m blaming it on the American electorate, which is what I stated in my comment that you didn’t read thoroughly.
statistically they win the same rate as male candidates
Not for president they don’t, and if you read my comment thoroughly, you’d know that’s what I was talking about. Open your eyes bud. It was a woman or a felon rapist traitor who ALREADY FAILED ONCE AS PRESIDENT. We chose the rapist instead of the woman. Welcome to American reality.
And it isn’t just that she’s a woman. She’s a woman AND extremely liberal. That combo simply doesn’t work for a lot of the American electorate.
This is not the time to run status quo
I didn’t say status quo. Did you read my comment at all? You can run all sorts of people that aren’t status quo and also not a woman. I WANT A WOMAN PRESIDENT. Spoiler alert, it ain’t happening anytime soon in America. But if you’d like to ignore reality and lose again…that’s your right as a voter. That kind of behavior is why we are where we are.
The American electorate is not who is writing your comments.
You are distinctly ignoring other critiques to focus on gender as the main component. Do not assign your own bias to everyone else. We do not all think as you do and can’t be blamed for what you think to be true.
Statistically across the world women win elections at the same rate as men.
Support a female president you want then instead of telling them all that none of them can win because of their gender. It makes you sound like the sexist.
Lol.
Still blaming Harris as a coup unfolds.
So productive.
A challenge would have gone nowhere and given the other side ammunition. Focus on something worth your time.
Still simping for dems while they sit back and watch a fascist coup unfold, you’re as spineless as they are and a thousand times stupider. You have no idea whether a legal challenge would have worked or not, at the very least it would have demonstrated any commitment whatsoever to stopping Trump, but Harris doesn’t actually give a shit and never did, she just wanted money and power. You should focus on developing some dignity.
Still simping for dems while they sit back and watch a fascist coup unfold
Americans voted for it, dipshit. Americans voted the GOP into TOTAL CONTROL. Americans HANDED THE REIGNS to the GOP.
you’re as spineless as they are
Motherfucker, I vote for the Dems because I did my homework and KNOW they regularly vote in favor of the middle and lower classes, don’t threaten rights, and are historically better for our economy. I vote for the Dems because I’m not some dumbfuck like you and I know that we are nowhere near ending the two-party system in America so the INTELLIGENT thing to do is vote Dem to maintain our rights and prevent Republicans from gaining control and doing, oh yeah, exactly what the fuck they’re doing now. But you and the word “intelligent” don’t exist in the same space together.
You’re just whining like a little bitch about Harris while missing the bigger picture. Who the fuck cares if behind the scenes she was some power hungry asshole that just wanted her name in the history books? She was STILL, BY FAR, the more intelligent option. You aren’t just voting for the candidate you fucking loser, you’re voting for the party and the policies attached to it, which in the Dem’s case, is way better than the policy of fucking fascism.
You’re just a whiny little bitch. Get the fuck off .ml, that shit is frying what’s left of your brain.
As bad as his victory was, it wasn’t even vaguely questionable.
Of the people that turned out, more of them voted for Trump, plain and simple, even by the popular vote without having to complain about the electoral college.
The only objective fact that gives an asterisk is he didn’t manage to get over 50% of the popular vote, but he still had the most of any candidate.
I’ve seen the mentions of “inconsistencies” and “Musk manipulated the votes” but a read of them seems about as credible as 2020 election denials.
You’re not supposed to question the victory of a presidential election when done in free and democratic elections. Doing anything like that would be horribly anti-democratic.
It would be horrible if Harris had challenged Trump’s victory. That would just make her another Causescu/Trump/Mussolini.
I said he would eventually place armed soldiers on every street corner
I will stand by that prediction
Kamala DID lie. They didn’t send the Army. They sent the Marines.
Stupid smart Kamala.
I understand that the hill published this, but it was an opinion article. I get that some people value that, but they are almost never opinions of people that should have an opinion on the matter. Either way, I don’t consider opinion articles to be something that you can nail an organization to the cross over. Just sharing a perspective is all.
There have to be consequences for platforming fascists. This whole “civility and decorum” crap has got to stop, we are in a fascist coup and cannot afford to tolerate any enemy activity.
Our media has been completely complicit in the fascist coup because our news has been entirely captured by corporations hell-bent on profit maximization.
It’s called the court of public opinion. It doesn’t work if we don’t participate. And no one participates.
This whole “civility and decorum” crap has got to stop
…cool… You should tell that to someone that called for you to act with civility and decorum because I sure as shit did not.
enemy activity
🙄
Calm down combat carl. I fully believe the actual fascist coup to begin any day now, but falling face first into a rake is not exactly a fucking panzer attack. You’re trying to defend a clearly false and misleading post by misdirecting with semantics and sensationalism. I’m amazed you didn’t try jangling your keys.
People are already being shot in the streets, and the military has been deployed domestically in blatant violation of the constitution. People are being kidnapped by masked unbadged thugs and disappearing without any court appearance. What more will it take for you to recognize the coup?
Firstly, I never said that the coup didn’t exist. Is every response from you going to be a straw man of what you wish I would have said?
And secondly, was it a coup when it happened in Portland? Because I’m not seeing a distinction here. You can pretend all you want that this situation is different because of the obvious illegality, and this admin IS different, but the situations are identical in every fucking way.
I was in the military. It was 20 years ago but I’m reasonably confident that not much has changed since the “don’t ask” days. We trained on how to conduct operations IN populated areas. If you told me that we got our training from Steven Seagal, I would laugh my ass off. Would you like to venture a guess on who hires a shit stain conman like Steven Seagal? Yup, it’s those cops that you would argue are legal to deploy and “trained” for serving the public. Sadly, they are not. I trust a misplaced marine every day and all day over an unregulated highschool dropout. I agree it is wrong, but until they use actual bullets on domestic streets, I’m not really any more worried than I already am at the guys who WEREN’T trained for the military grade equipment they were issued.
Fyi, I was skeptical of your application of the word “enemy”, not implying denial. If you are using the word to describe cops then, of course, but it’s been this way since the very origin of cops so what makes now so special? But if you are using that to describe people, then I have no doubt that conservatives appreciate your assistance legitimizing their endeavors.
And if you think there is something to win on the streets of the US pushing back against the organized boots then you’ve already lost.
Should organizations platform anything and everything? Should there be no standards?
Hey now, they blacklisted Katie Halper for talking about Palestine.
Never say The Hill doesn’t have standards.
That’s entirely up to them. I sure wish they wouldn’t, but capitalism is what it is. And if the mass of metaphorical Beakers hangs their hat on each and every controversial word regardless of bias, then they’re going to do that. If platforming chucklefucks keeps the lights on… So there it is.
There should be standards. Agreed. I have literally no say in that and my opinion means literally nothing on this. However, that doesn’t mean calling meaningless shit like this out doesn’t hurt the rest of us. I’m as sympathetic as the next person. It sucks. But if we are going to cry wolf and alligator tears every single time an already trash organization does a thing you - without a shadow of a doubt - expect them to do, then you are doing their work for them. Stop hitting yourself.
Take it on the chin, ignore them, and move on. I work in one of the most remote places on the planet with about 1000 conservatives, and these aren’t the GOP “gays are cool now” conservatives, these are the “gays are pedophiles and we should exterminate them all” conservatives. These are InfoWarriors and flat earthers. Deep state theory is assumedly foundational and antiestablishmentarianism is the MO. I pointed out, a single time, that even Alex Jones said Trump was “mobbed up with the russians” and I have been known as “the liberal” since then. These proverbial tweakers are drawn to plausible deniability like a catalytic converter. Sure, they are the lowest common denominator when it comes to human prototypes, but they are also the low tide and they know it. If they can sanitize bigotry then the cool GOPers will be able to use them to justify it. So we (the opposition to authoritarianism) need to sterilize easily defensible shit like this.
Look at the replies I’ve received… All I did was point out the plot hole in the assertion implied by OP exposed by the reality that one could say that “the hill” did not say it themselves and furthermore that the hill has a giant warning at the top of the article that literally states they DO NOT hang their hat on opinion pieces (and btw, fuck the hill but they do). All I’m pointing out is to not say the hill explicitly called Harris a liar, because based on the facts, they didn’t. Several replies still allude to the culpability of the hill… Which is best case scenario semantic when totally generalized, but more likely consolatory and akin to someone splitting hairs over “travelling” in street basketball.
“The right” could say that “the left” would polish brass on the titanic. And we could know that they’d said it too. But here we are, God forbid we pass a single piece of brass without giving it a mirror shine and then gasp Pikachu faces when the right says “see?”.
How did we lose the election? Shit like this. We need to be better than this. This is teaching a pig to sing.
Sensationalism is their game. Leave to play it amongst themselves.
You should. Arguably, you should nail the to the cross for opinion pieces more, because opinion pieces exist to launder articles that the paper can’t reasonably justify publishing… but still really wants to publish.
They can be used for that but they are absolutely not solely for the purpose of misinfo laundering. That’s a proposterous and indefensible claim. Fucking ridiculous.
Look, you can dislike it all you want. I do. I dislike them. And I refuse to read opinion pieces, from anyone. That’s what you do when you’re intelligent. You check what you’re reading before you read it. Do you not check your beverages to ensure they aren’t floor cleaner? When your beverage tastes unpalatable do you not remember to check then? At what point does drinking a gallon of bleach become your own fault?
I hate ads. I stopped watching TV entirely because of how much I despise ads. I wasn’t good at manually filtering them out so the responsible things to do was to stop watching TV until I had a solution. So over the years, I found solutions. After a while I was able to use a smart phone completely free of ads. I filtered my data and was able to use a lot of sites again. Now I get all my media from Usenet. Every now and then I walk past a TV at work and it’s playing ads and I find it hilarious. I literally forget about ads. And hearing the simple fucks cry about YouTube and chrome is yet another joke for me.
I can’t imagine being so opposed to something only to invest absolutely nothing into remediation and then blaming everyone else for my failure to act. Because that is what you remind me of when I read your response. You don’t get to have your bleach and drink it too. At what point does reading an opinion article become your fault?
Misinfo? I’m talking about opinion pieces. “Israel has a right to defend itself” isn’t strictly misinfo, but it is, arguably, an opinion. And you’re correct. They’re not only used for opinion laundering - they also appear to be a sort of make-work program.
And I don’t know what conversation your tangent on what you’re reminded of comes from, but it’s not the one we’re having.
because opinion pieces exist to launder articles that the paper can’t reasonably justify publishing… but still really wants to publish.
Your words. Not mine. And this is what the tangent is about. You said we should nail them to the cross for publishing opinion pieces - something which I also abhor but happily accept the responsibility of avoiding. I’m not going to blame a capitalist organization for doing what a capitalist organization is always going to do. I’d be blisteringly stupid if I did that.
Once again, I’m not sure what conversation you think you’re having, but it’s not this one.
After seeing your rationale, I have no doubt you feel that way.
You should. Arguably, you should nail the to the cross for opinion pieces more, because opinion pieces exist to launder articles that the paper can’t reasonably justify publishing… but still really wants to publish.
Literally your words bro. It’s right there.
An agreeable position if those opinion pieces were written in good faith by a respectable journalist who knows what they’re talking about. Honest opinions are never wrong.
But in today’s news it’s just a way to publish straight-up misinformation and propaganda, they can just abuse their position to just say whatever and people internalise it because, well, it’s the news.
Journalists and news outlets used to depend upon a reputation of integrity and factuality built over the years. Now anyone can open up their “news” website, or be a politically motivated party with lots of resources, claim completely made-up stuff, and when those articles reveal themselves to be complete bullshit, nothing happens.
Also, the world seems to really have lost the conception of what is a fact vs what is an opinion, a deduction, a belief, and so on. Guess the nature of Internet communication doesn’t help with that.
I understand that the hill published this, but it was an opinion article.
Authored by a far-right talk radio host who fully endorses mass deportation and execution of liberal dissidents, sure.
This is where I challenge you to find a single opinion article published by the hill from a reputable person about a worthy opinion. And when you say “that doesn’t exist” I’m going to respond “no shit sherlock, that’s what an opinion piece is, a disreputable person seeking your unearned attention.” Good thing we gave it to them…
Also Marines are Navy, so…technicality?
🤣 Trump really is playing 5D chess. You can’t nail him down. He’s like a bar of soap, that is also a pedophile.
It’s worth nothing that “The Hill” has always been liberal garbage.
If only the dems had had 4 years to do something…
Any attempt by the Democrats to forestall this would have allowed Trump to paint them as anti-American traitors. So the Democrats did nothing and Trump painted them as anti-American traitors.
And he’s painting them as anti-American traitors to this day as he makes Nazi poses around the WH.
Hey now! He was convicted of all 34 indictments he was charged with!
And sure, those charges were delayed for years. And they were a fraction of the 91 indictments he could have been tried for. And they had to be brought in a municipal court, by a local DA, because nobody above Alvin Brag was willing to bring a case to trial.
And then the court never bothered to issue a sentence, because it would have been rude to punish a newly elected President.
But they did something!
Reformists try not to capitulate to fascists challenge REDUX(…again)
Watch the news try to play it like it’s the Marines not the army so Kamala lied.
I remember after her DNC speech, NPR put out an article listing all the misleading things in her speech and #1 was that she said Trump will jail journalists, and the article linked to a tweet of Trump saying “dishonest” journalists should be jailed but she’s still being misleading because it wasn’t actually a part of his official campaign platform.
No similar article existed for his RNC speech. Having preferred NPR for years, that moment made me realize just how hard the media failed the country.
I was a supporter of my local NPR station for decades. It’s crazy how far right the coverage has gone. Slowly over the years, then really hard in recent months. It’s like they’re desperately trying to show that they aren’t left leaning, by going way the other way. I’ve heard long interviews with wackos from things like The Heritage Foundation all the time, with little to no pushback on the BS. I watched a magat congressman interviewed on PBS the other night with zero pushback to his bullshit magat talking points. The list goes on. I stopped watching/listening to them, but I’ve been kind of at a loss as to where to check up on news. AP or Reuters is about it, I guess.
