all 70 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 23 points 8 months ago

Guess which Democrat senator voted in favor? That's right, strokeboi.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 8 months ago

    "Immigration tactics" again being a euphemism for "shooting innocent people in the face in broad daylight."

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    ICE still has over $70B in other funding so…

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 8 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Yeah through the all-or-nothing Big Beautiful Bill that was shamefully voted through last year.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 65 points 8 months ago (52 children)

    Performative bullshit. They'll fund the fascist department they helped create (DHS) soon enough. Primary the old dems out!

  • source
  • hideshow 52 child comments
  • [+] 35 points 8 months ago (18 children)
  • [–] 42 points 8 months ago (16 children)

    It's OK. Nothing would make me happier than to be wrong in this case. Hopefully they stick to their guns, shut down the gestapo, and finally do something to restore democracy and protect the safety of their constituents. I'm not holding my breath.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Regardless, I'd recommend getting shitty Schumer out.

    He weakened the democrat's response into jelly, and loves Israel. That bastard straight up said "All the aid that Israel needs, I will continue to fight for it" and called aid for Israel his "baby"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 15 points 8 months ago (10 children)
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (8 children)

    No, we need a complete overhaul of our voting system. As things currently stand, a third party will never have any real power on the national level. And don't get me wrong, local elections are really important, even more than national in many ways. But without proportional representation, there will never be real meaningful change.

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

    Third party gets in power and then packs the Supreme Courts. Then passes vote reform and proportional voting. Then disbands the electoral college. Then dismisses the Senate.

    LOOK A PERSON CAN DREAM OK!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    I totally agree, but I think it’s a question of how to go about achieving that overhaul. I think the best method for that right now is to “hijack” the primaries of one of the political parties, get the old guard out, and nominate new candidates that want to see that reform. I don’t see that happening with the Republican party for hopefully obvious reasons, which just leaves the Democrats.

    All the while leading up to midterms, get organized outside the party system, stage protests and strikes advocating for changes to the system. And if it’s clear the midterms are rigged, or the newly elected Democrats fail to push reform, use those same external organizations to tear it all down and probably write a new Constitution (something I didn’t think I’d be advocating for two years ago).

    But right now, the most important thing is getting involved in getting organized and getting involved in the primaries. Here’s a list of dates I found: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-primary-elections/calendar

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago*

    And one more detail that we don't want to overlook: the path to shaking up primaries starts right in your backyard. But that I mean the local elections. It feels so small to think about how much some random city officer means in the grand scheme - but the truth is the opposite, the unknown random jackass that maintains the lift stations (or whatever), those are the people who matter. Not a cheetoh-faced McDictator who thinks he matters but can't remember why.

    And here's why: that tiny sliver of "power" in the hands of the little guy, if, and only if, you combine that with the tiny sliver in the hands of all the other nobodies, the combined strength is unstoppable - far more than a Mango Mussolini in a diaper.

    But, fucking eh have they gotten good at convincing all us nobodies to avoid solidarity. But we have to just figure it out anyway, cause there is no losing. Not this time. It's win, or there nothing left to win or lose next time....

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (2 children)

    While I agree an overhaul is needed, I disagree about a third party not being able to have power. We used to have the Whigs, whose party was much like our Democratic establishment regarding ICE/Slavery. Eventually, many of their supporters got fed up and made the Republican Party, going on to side with the Union in the Civil War.

    While I wouldn't mind the Democratic Party being hijacked by a leftist tea party, I am also fine with it getting overtaken by a new party. Both are valid options, so long as we are willing to believe in the possibility.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    That's only ever happened temporariily during a shifting of the power and influence of the parties. And although it's may appear we had three parties, only two are really in power at a time. Also, the third always loses relevance and disappear.

    Frankly, this isn't a matter of opinion, anyway, and to frame it as such is either ignorant or malicious. It is literally_impossible_ to sustain three parties within the rules of our voting and political system.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    I would say the collapse of the Whigs is pretty relevant, seeing as how that is one of the things that made America edge closer to the Civil War.

    Also, your ad hominum about ignorance and maliciousness is shitty. You are being a jerk.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -4 points 8 months ago

    He is fixing some of the fraud at least.

    If democrats don't take fraud seriously then people will want someone who will. We need a more logical democrat who takes tax dollars seriously, to efficiently distribute the money to those who need it and cut down on waste to optimize tangible value.

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/03/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-eliminates-information-silos-to-stop-waste-fraud-and-abuse-60f3/

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    There’s only so much they can actually do.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -9 points 8 months ago (24 children)

    My dude, the primaries are probably not gonna matter since Trump is very likely to just steal 2026 and 2028.

    None of this would be happening if Kamala had won, but you're an .ml user so I wouldn't expect you to be able to comprehend that fact.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    Can we stop with the Kamalaposting now please? I don't think any minds are going to be changed on that front anymore

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Also it's wholly irrelevant at this point. If someone didn't vote for Kamala in 2024 and still thinks that was the right decision they are either so stupid so as to be involed, republican but I repeat myself, or just an asshole.

    Point is theres no point beating that particular drumb at this point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    well I think that is who he is responding to or would seem like it. I mean so would you say just block people rather than continue trying to point out the differences?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    He's actually one of the least radical .ml users around and generally has pretty sane takes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago (15 children)

    All Kamala winning would do is delay the inevitable.

    Electing a Democrat to the Presidency these days is like draining an epidermoid cyst. Electing a Republican is letting the cyst rupture.

    Draining a cyst won't get rid of it. The only way to remove a cyst for good is to cut the whole thing out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (3 children)

    I disagree. The important thing is for republicans to not win anything. Without them and yes the dems would split into a more properly left and right party rather than a big tent not coocoo crazy say they are right but would be recognized by their ancestors just 30 years back party. Right now its a sane vs crazy vote. Until we eliminate the crazy we won't make progress on left vs right.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    That will never happen. The elite would never allow the Democrats to achieve decades of victory, let alone split into progressive parties.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (7 children)

    All Kamala winning would do is delay the inevitable.

    #BothSides, for sure. But how do YOU define "harm reduction" and "binary choice"?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    Easy. States that disapprove of unconstitutional laws and EOs can declare that they're null and void in their states.

    Don't think that the states are completely powerless against whoever occupies the office of President. They've nullified laws before, they can do it again.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (5 children)

    States have their own legislatures. What you're proposing is up to them. Federal legislators don't have anything to do with state policy, they can only enact federal policy

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    Yes, it is indeed up to them. Do you see what I'm getting at here?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Are you suggesting defederation? I view that as a last resort. Despite all the threats to electoral integrity, the election hasn't been stolen yet. There's still a chance to save this ship.

    New England or the West Coast would be fine after a dissolution of the Union of States, but what about all the disadvantaged people in deep red states? You want to just leave them behind?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    No, I propose the thing that is less serious than secession, but will probably piss off the federal government: nullification. Basically, the state agrees to stay in the Union, but the state will no longer follow federal laws that they deem unconstitutional.

    Take California, for instance. Suppose they are done with Trump's shit. The California Supreme Court rules that Trump's tariffs are unconstitutional, causing the tariffs to be voided in the state. While this is guaranteed to piss off Trump, it is likely that it would restore some faith with America's allies. It might even give a boost to commerce that goes through California.

    And remember: the exact situation I describe happened before in the US, and it ended peacefully. There were concerns of a civil war, but Congress passed some things to placate the state engaging in nullification. The same could be done today.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    I agree that states should nullify as much of this unconstitutional and oppressive federal policy as they're able. It'll probably bring retaliation, impounded funds, a swarm of ICEstaffel, and maybe some sham investigations into politicians. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it, but be aware of the risks.

    The thing is, the feds aren't really acting within the confines of the law. They're not really passing much legislation for the states to nullify. Potus is ruling by decree with unconstitutional executive orders, and the mechanisms of the federal government are just falling in line. All congress has done is pass some funding packages and give tax cuts to billionaires while cutting essential social services.

    States should do what they can, yeah. But the feds aren't exactly following the law so states need to be willing and able to enforce their countermeasures.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Yeah but delaying it until after I die would have been nice.

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

    I hate to break the news to people but there was an article just the other day about "swing voters" in Arizona. It was a mix of Rs, Ds, and independents who voted Biden in 2020 and Trump in 2024. They asked their opinions on ICE, etc. etc. Pretty much all IIRC said that ICE is going too far, people are living in fear, etc.

    The thing that stood out is the last sentence- NONE said ICE should be abolished/dismantled.

    Reading in here you'd think the popular opinion is that it should be. I can tell you it's not true. Even some of my more liberal/left friends don't always think it should be abolished, not to mention anyone more center.

    I personally think it should've been abolished yesterday and the entire DHS dismantled but I also realize that is not the popular opinion, or at least seen through polling etc. I hope all the people thinking it should are voting in primaries for candidates who argue it should. Or convincing their neighbors that it should and they also vote accordingly.

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

    Ok but these people are too stupid to care about. Just jangle some keys after abolishing ice and they'll forget about it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 4 points 8 months ago* (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (2 children)

    I understand that. My point is why pander to the nonsensical policy prescriptions of "normal" middle class America? They are illiterate. Just tell them they'll still have shopping malls and Netflix and we're abolishing ice.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 8 months ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    I didn't say fuck them. I said ignore whatever polling you think these people represent. These people's opinions do not matter, they will hold whatever political opinion you put on tv in front of them. They will follow anything.

    As for your arguments about political power, I only somewhat agree. Political power springs from the barrel of a gun.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    To disregard those is a mistake. That bloc’s opinion needs to change in order for them to help do something about it. They’re needed, because it’s a big bloc. It might include many of those who don’t care enough to vote.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

    They want to be the ones over funding ICE and doing nothing about their targeted oppression

    Edit sp

  • source