all 84 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 44 points 1 day ago* (3 children)

Some of them should probably use a brick instead. It isn't like Fetterman's brain can get worse.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 109 points 1 day ago (9 children)

    GOP: We see you as subhuman and want to hunt you for sport.

    Centrist Dems: That’s someone I can work with to craft bipartisan legislation that only compromises 95% of what my voters want.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    This "progressive" vs "centrist" bullshit is a false narrative. You could describe James Talarico or Adam Hamilton as centrist, but they have more in common with Bernie Sanders than with Chuck Schumer.

    This battle is about ethics and tenacity vs corruption and fecklessness, not "progressives" vs "centrists." Schumer clearly greases the wheels for his donors, represents the interests of AIPAC above those of the United States, and does not have the skills to lead with new ideas or stand up to would-be authoritarians. All the Democrats who represent the working people should unite to support another candidate for Majority Leader.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 19 hours ago* (2 children)

    I see what you're saying from a rhetorical standpoint: it would perhaps be more effective at uniting the democratic base against feckless and corrupt leadership if we drop the lateral-proximal political spectrum dichotomy.

    But from a purely descriptive standpoint, there absolutely is a difference between progressives and centrists. 'Centrists' in this context is shorthand for "fiscally conservative neoliberal establishment corporate dems committed to the status quo and appeasement."

    Whereas 'progressives' refers to "the party caucus fighting for the working class, reparative justice, pro-social policy, meaningful climate action, and other necessary reforms."

    One is beholden to large corporate donors, one only answers to their constituents. In practical terms, there's a huge difference.

    If we can communicate that better than simply saying "progressives" and "centrists," I'm all ears for the proposed vocabulary we should use. I'm not attached to the labels, I'm only interested in implementing the necessary changes that centrists actively stand in the way of.

    About Progress, Regress, and Status QuoWhat it boils down to is we have three options: progression, status quo, or regression. Only one of those is viable for the enduring wellbeing of democracy, the planet, and the common good. That much should be clear.

    Regression tries to glorify a bygone past and attempts to return to a fantasy of what was, while ignoring the policies that led to the few parts that were actually better (boomers are nostalgic for FDR's economy, so they demand Nixon's and Reagan's policies which destroyed the comfortable living standards they enjoyed growing up).

    Status quo attempts to treat the present moment as static, and it thinks we can ride out the coming storm by resting on whatever imaginary laurels a few people have amassed for themselves by creating, perpetuating, and accelerating the problems in the first place.

    Progression is the only option that looks into the future, assesses the paths in front of us and says "We can't go down this or that path because they end in disaster. This other path though gives us a chance." The only option that looks at where we need to go, what the goal is, (i.e. societal and planetary healing followed by collective flourishing), and asks "Okay what policies do we need to implement in order to start down this better path?"

    It should be abundantly clear by this point what we need to do, and it's incredibly frustrating that so many people still don't see that. And we're running out of time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 17 hours ago (1 child)

    I genuinely believe this is a false dichotomy. The descriptors you assign to each category may apply to some politicians, but many more hold complex views that don't fit into these boxes. The "fiscally conservative neoliberal establishment corporate dems" you're discussing are the corrupt people I'm talking about. These are the people taking bribes and not representing their constituencies, which is a totally standalone issue. This conversation must be about political reform and anti-corruption rather than some left-center conflict theater

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 15 hours ago

    The line isn't even that blurry. There are caucuses. The progressive caucus has over a hundred members in the next session of congress. The "New Democrats," i.e. fiscal conservatives, have slightly more, for now.

    There may be some in between but they need to make up their minds because this is the battle for the soul of the Democratic party, and if the progressives can't act quickly, 2028 isn't going to go so well, and as I've said before, we're running out of time.

    The moment for bold climate action was years ago, but now we have to scramble just to manage the catastrophe as best we can to minimize the damage it's going to cause. If you think this is merely about "conflict theater" then go home, if this is a game to you then stop playing. We're running out of time.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 21 hours ago

    "Yes we gave ICE a $50 trillion budget for next year, but in exchange we recieved a gentleman's agreement that the president would consider allowing the permit for 1 wind farm to be reviewed."

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 hour ago

    it’s bipartisan because it gives half my electorate something they selfishly want and only destroys the lives of 10% of my electorate for no reason! that’s what i call a compromise

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 1 day ago (11 children)
  • [–] 34 points 1 day ago (10 children)

    I know it's just nit picking, but I can't stop trying to imagine holding a tone on a silent 'e'.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    Oh good, I’m not alone! 😂 Huge pet peeve of mine when people write drawn-out words like that and the letters they choose to repeat make no sense whatsoever 😅

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    Yeah I hate when people do that. Mistak-EEEEEEEEEY!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 child)

    To be fair, if I made a hugely obvious social mistake in public, if someone shouted "mistaaaaaake!" I'd probably be annoyed, as JD is in the gif.

    If someone pronounced it as the caption describes, I'd probably still be annoyed but refocus on how someone could make that kind of mistakey.

    If someone pronounced it as "mis-stake-eh" it probably wouldn't help in the situation but might actually cheer me up in the face of what would otherwise have been despair.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 15 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

    They should also be required to have an advisor that is a 5 year old child. If the 5 year old child can outsmart their plan, then a Republican probably can too.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

    I dunno, I feel there should be some exceptions to this.

    Sometimes a sturdy book instead of a newspaper.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 7 hours ago (1 child)

    The only way to “return to normal” is to prosecute those who violate laws. Because “normal”, to me, is when criminals are held accountable.

    Like what the fuck.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 22 hours ago

    100% support this.

    Now is not the time for such divisio—

    Shht!

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 18 hours ago (1 child)

    YOU ALL ARE FINALLY GETTING IT. Violence is not the answer, but it can be part of the solution!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 20 hours ago
    [–] 22 points 1 day ago (5 children)

    There are some very humane shock collars on the market.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 18 hours ago

    A little bit happy to see that casual microblog screenshots don’t come from Twitter anymore. I’m sure Lemmy would prefer it be Mastodon, not Bluesky, but still, change is good.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

    Hakim Jefferies could use this treatment.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 7 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    I'd love to see who comes out with a wet head.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 9 hours ago (3 children)

    Where are you gonna find all those newspapers? Print them?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

    Hakeem and schumer needs one. and all the Dinos that recieved AIPAC MONEY. hakeem and schumer is doing everything they can to shield the rest of the Aipac-DNC from being primaried next election.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 20 hours ago*

    Don't do that "Rino"/"Dino" thing. It is sadly a fact that these people are part of the democratic party, as bad as that is. everything else would be a case of a "true scotsman"-fallacy, and delay needed change. (As in: make them NOT part of the democratic party anymore)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 9 hours ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 5 hours ago

    Arms would get tired if we added "two more weeks" to the banned phrases. "Just two more weeks until we stop Iran from having a bomb." "The shutdown will just be two more weeks." The United States is somehow two weeks away from everything.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    Put some thumbtacks into that rolled up newspaper and you got yourself a deal

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 21 hours ago

    This is the problem, they will do anything painful for money.

    All you're doing is turning into a worse kink,

    Pavlo "You work for AIPAC?" TzzzzzzzzzzT Rep D "I work for no one but my electorate" TzzzzzzzzzT Pavlo "You work for AIPAC?" TzzzzzzzT Rep D "I work for AIPAC, but can you give me one of those? it's the only thing that gets me of since I lied to my electorate"

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (6 children)

    Why are you treating actual adults whose job it is is to represent you as being nothing but a misbehaving animal when they don't do their fucking job.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 17 hours ago

    Because we want to pretend like they're innocent little dummies who mean well and aren't blatantly selling us out.

    Look at every single conversation in leftist spaces about ranked choice voting. There is a resounding consensus. And then like our wish for a rolled up newspaper, we wish for RCV to already be in place. They absolutely know what we want, and they're playing games trying to appease their donors too.

    (No, I don't believe a significant number of people support score voting and not RCV)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    It's more of the same that they did, treating each other as subhuman. The cycle continues.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 18 hours ago* (2 children)

    Oh no, quite the opposite infact. The smacking is to get them to stop acting like subhumans. They already are and we'd like them to not be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

    I think a gun would be both a better deterrent and more effective solution. But only if the stand-behind-person(derogatory)-with-a-gun also gets the same treatment. Like those russian dolls.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 day ago (8 children)

    The do-nothing Democraps remind me of that song lyric from Nothing But Thieves. "Why would you wanna do good when you can feel good?"

    Like can we please get something, ANYTHING from this fucking Blue Wave?

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 day ago (7 children)

    The main something anything is the stoppage of shifty and harmful R bills going through Congress.

    And you realize that only starts next year right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

    Hakeem Jeffries is there right now though still working and he just failed massively to whip the vote on the Hesgeth impeachment. It starts now. The Republicans are still legislating. They are still pushing things through while they have a chance. The Democrats can't just roll over in the mean time and wait until next year. We need fighters, not loyal opposition.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

    Your comment shows why people are just confidently ignorant of the politics and why the right win.

    Can you pause for a second and consider why the vote failed? And I mean consider it beyond the twitch reflex to hate on Democrats.

    Ready?

    It's because Mike Johnson did his job as majority speaker.

    He always had the votes, because the motion was to table the vote to committee instead of actually voting on it. So no, technically the Republicans are not on record opposing impeachment. And since they still have the majority they would have succeeded at any point because Mike Johnson decides when the vote takes place. And he wouldn't call for the voting without the votes.

    He scheduled the vote (on the same day a few hours before) right in the middle of a publicly scheduled event the Dems would be at, honoring Nancy Pelosi.

    So no, the missing Dems aren't magically in love with the DUI hire secretary. The timing was planned, but even if the Dems cancelled everything waiting for the vote, the Rs still had the majority.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 15 hours ago* (1 child)

    Fascinating perspective. Everyone else is ignorant about politics. Well I might not be a political genius but unlike some I can count. The vote passed 204 to 211. Which, hold on let me do the math for a second, yes it appears to be a 7 vote margin. Which let's see, oh yes 7 is less than the 11 democrats who missed the vote. Huh how about that?

    Mike Johnson did his job you say. I agree 100%. He did. He whipped the vote. Hakeem Jeffries did not. He failed spectacularly. It's his goddamn job to whip votes. It's by far his biggest job. Why then did your chosen leader fail to do his primary job? Why was he so easily outsmarted? Why did he allow Mike Johnson to so easily outmaneuver him?

    Mike Johnson can keep track of public schedules but Jeffries can't? Your entire argument proves why Jeffries is not cut out for the job. Because either he is not competent enough for it, or he is failing on purpose. Either shows a failure of leadership from your chosen leader.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 15 hours ago

    It ended 211 to 204 right?

    It's a 7 vote margin because only 211 votes were needed.

    The vote ended at 6pm, decided again by the speaker, when 6 of the Dems returned. They held another vote shortly after that only Republicans voted for and Dems rejected.

    Guess how that vote went? 215 to 209.

    Remove Massie and the independent (who voted to table impeachment btw) and it's still 213. Republicans would have had the votes regardless, or it would not have been voted on. They didn't vote simply because they weren't needed.

    You're also counting on a vote from Haley Stevens who took her mask off the day before the election, and from a rep who was in surgery. I guess Jeffries should tell that person (Luis Correa) to skip surgery huh?

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    No, I mean right now. I am so pissed off that Abdul El-Sayed hasn't delivered on any of his promises since he was elected!

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

    Not sure if a poor attempt at trolling by copying this onion piece or just a fool...

    https://theonion.com/why-hasnt-abdul-el-sayed-accomplished-any-of-his-campaign-goals-since-winning-2-minutes-ago/

    Mans doesn't even get sworn into office until January.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment