U.S. Senate Republican leaders expressed confidence Tuesday they’ll be able to tamp down opposition to various elements of the party’s “big, beautiful bill” in time to approve the measure before the Fourth of July, though they acknowledged there’s considerable work left to do.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 12 points 1 year ago (19 children)

At least there's a silver lining.

  • source
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago*

    I think this actually plays into GOP hands. We’ve already seen Republican voters seem to vote with their feeling on their local situation, without much overall awareness or larger perspective. So now this situation gets worse for them and it’s easy to see karma at work. But from their perspective things suck and we see they’re easily manipulated by people claiming they have the solution, demonizing a scapegoat, claiming they’re going to disrupt and change, claiming it’s “a big beautiful bill”.

    Isn’t this more of the same? Rural voters descend into ever worse situation, are unable to lift their eyes to see the full picture, get manipulated into ever more extreme actions.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    No.

    I don't care, an increase in human suffering is not worthy of celebration.

    And, way to play into their hands; the more people think like you, the more strongly the fascist fucks well believe that their tyranny is justified.

    Eye for eye, until the whole world is blind? Sounds like a damn stupid plan to me...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Ive tried for years to convince themselves knuckle draggers all while they wish me nothing but the worst for wanting things like universal Healthcare and equality. I smile everytime I see a story like this. Evil people need to feel the consequences of their actions.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Sounds like they convinced you instead. Because taking pleasure in the misery of others is precisely what they're all about.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Taking pleasure in the (self inflicted) suffering of others, but voting for and supporting policy change to fix that suffering seems very different from actively participating in the increase of suffering of others.

    Not everyone has to be as holy as thou to not be evil.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

    That's a pretty damn thin line, and a recipe for hypocrisy while you're at it.

    No, abandoning your empathy is not gonna lead anywhere good.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    A tolerant society can't tolerate intolerance. Fuck'em.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I agree. But abandoning your empathy is a great way to become one of the intolerant ones. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    That it'll hurt rural hospitals...? Please tell me you mean something else about it, or that there's a joke I'm missing...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Its not quite clear to me either. My guess is that the majority of rural populations vote GOP. So the ones that will face this particular impact are GOP voters. Again, this is just my assumption of what @Pistcow@lemm.ee was referring to. I'm not trying to strawman them.

    Personally, I don't want anyone to lose healthcare, especially the poor rural folks, even if they are GOP voters.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    If they're just taking solace in it not hurting demographics that didn't vote for this I guess I can understand trying to find ways this isn't quite as awful.

    But rural folks suffering is awful. I don't wanna root for suffering, or consider it a good thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It is a good thing because these people lack empathy and can only change their ways when they experience lose and pain.

    I phone banked for the Democratic party during both elections. Just to remind to vote for registered democrats. So many times a family member answered and said the most vile threatening things. Man, Im an asshole for wanting human rights.

    At this point, these people are evil and deserve every bit of pain. If I had magic powers, and could snap my fingers to give everyone of them stage 4 cancer, I'd do it immediately and sleep like a baby. They deserve it all and our society would be better without them.

    A tolerant society cannot tolerate intolerance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Propaganda outlets will tell rural voters all their problems are caused by Democrats regardless of who is in power and regardless of who passed what bill.

    The silver lining here is not that rural voters will experience the consequences of their actions and have some sort of epiphany (they are incapable of that), the silver lining is that this suffering reduces their resources. Which means they are less effective in their war on society.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Rural areas tend to vote republican.

    So leopards eating faces and all that jazz.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I’m reminded of all the rural voters in Texas that vehemently didn’t want “private school vouchers”… but voted Republican anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment