Will 2026 finally be the year when a critical mass of Americans wakes up and realizes that Republicans always screw up the economy?

Donald Trump inherited an economy from Joe Biden that was perhaps not firing on all cylinders but was in pretty good shape all the same.

For the third straight time, a Democratic president handed a Republican president an economy that was at the least pretty good, and at most (Bill Clinton) really humming along very nicely. And, for the third straight time, the Republican has made things worse. Which also means that Democratic presidents have to clean up messes left by their GOP predecessors.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 69 points 5 months ago (25 children)

I think even if this was on billboards and schools started to teach this basic fact, it would take decades for it to finally sink in.

I cannot tell you how many "non political" people tend to believe it, too. I could see dumbass cult members parroting nonsense talking points about how magical Republicans are on the economy, but the fact that people that barely pay attention believe it is just exhausting.

Far too many idiots think: "the government should be run like a business, and Republicans bend over the hardest for business, therefore we should put a Republican in as a President-as-CEO, preferably someone also from the world of business".

It's all so very fucking stupid, starting with the very premise...

  • source
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] [S] 22 points 5 months ago (19 children)

    In the presence of continued propaganda from the GQP and the duplicity of the Fourth Estate supporting and distributing that propaganda I don't think it will ever sink in.

    Oligarch owned mainstream news providers have become Republican disinformation tools - slightly veiled versions of Fox News held to no standard at all. Facts have little chance against widespread lies repeated constantly almost everywhere.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 5 months ago

    Hell, even before Faux came along, the mainstream media was and is embarrassingly skewed to the right.

    But that was not enough for the Bircher types. They resented that something like Watergate was allowed to bring down their Nixon. They needed outlets that were ridiculously, cartoonishly even, right wing. And they had the balls to call them "fair and balanced".

    The funniest thing is when you see some Bircher bitching about how Faux is "woke" or something unhinged like that.

    I mean, Network skewered the corporate capture of news quite well, and that was 50 years ago.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -10 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (17 children)

    The liberal media helped fascism grow in the 1920s and 1930s in America. They also did the same the second time in the mid 2010s to now.

    edit: seems quite a few don't like to acknowledge reality

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Explain how liberal media supports fascism

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (9 children)

    There have been less than 48 DNC senators for over 13 years now, the majority of the 2010s to now, so I'm interpreting this as you somehow thinking the GOP are liberals...?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (8 children)

    What do you think "media" means? Does it mean Congress?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (7 children)

    Ooooh, okay, I get it, you're saying the liberal media somehow enabled fascism while not being fascists themselves?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (6 children)

    Take a look at the Behind the Bastards link I shared in another comment in this chain. You too can learn all about it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago* (5 children)

    Nah you don't have enough credit in my book for me to click your links. I accept your resignation, sucks to suck.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    I mean it's a youtube podcast, but you do you I guess. Enjoy your bubble

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago* (3 children)

    Linking people to videos between 20 minutes and several hours and then complaining that they didn't understand whatever point they have no idea you were trying to make is pure idiocy.

    Why don't you just hand us a reading list and then ask us to decode some vague statement for you, while you're at it? It works so well for those fuckin tankies.

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

    Here's Google's summary of the podcast for anyone too lazy to listen. But you're going to have to read more than 2 sentences so prepare yourself:

    The Behind the Bastards two-part series, "How The Liberal Media Helped Fascism Win," explores how establishment press organizations in the 1920s and 1930s normalized figures like Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. It argues that liberal institutions paved the way for fascists by treating them as legitimate political actors, focusing on order over morality, and failing to sound the alarm until it was too late.

    Key Themes of the Series

    Legitimizing Autocrats: Mainstream newspapers treated early fascist leaders with immense deference, heavily influenced by a fear of working-class uprisings and communism. By focusing on their "ability to restore order," these outlets normalized fascist violence and political subversion.

    Profit and Sensationalism: The U.S. and European press often viewed fascist movements through the lens of sensationalism and entertainment. Publications profited from the dramatic rhetoric and spectacle, prioritizing high readership and ad revenue over journalistic responsibility.

    Both-Sides Rhetoric: The episodes emphasize how "respectable" media outlets consistently attempted to compromise or reason with fascists, mistakenly believing they could be integrated into the existing political framework without destroying liberal democratic norms.

    The "Who Goes Nazi?" Analogy: The series draws heavily from historical sociological frameworks, particularly the classic 1941 essay Who Goes Nazi? by Dorothy Thompson, to highlight how the polite, affluent segments of society often capitulate to or accommodate fascism rather than confront it.

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

    Republicucks always said they were fiscally conservative. It's always been what they touted as a defining characteristic when you took idealogy tests.

    Turns out, that was all lip service. At least for the last few decades.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    They just want a strong Daddy type (or a facsimile of one, like PEDOnald, who strikes me as one of the most effete people in the public eye, but I digress. It doesn't have to make sense to people of average+ intelligence) that tells them it's okay to say the N-word, grab women by the pussy, burn whatever you want and cut everything down, and own the libz by rolling coal on bicyclists and sneaking meat into the diets of vegans or whatever.

    That's pretty much it.

    All the other lofty rhetoric coming from conservatives is just window dressing.

    Of course the donor class running the party just wants tax cuts and businesses to be completely unrestrained by law.

  • source
  • parent