top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 145 points 8 months ago (36 children)

Imagine the world we’d live in if those corpo fucks didn’t screw over Bernie

  • source
  • hideshow 36 child comments
  • [–] 59 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    Or persecuted Nixon, or Reagan, or Bush Sr, or didn't give up when gore "lost" to bush jr

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

    No see taking office when elected by hoth popular AND electoral vote is divisive and bad politics. You dumbfuck commies understand nothing about politics. Now drink my slushy poop without making any faces and be my slave forever OR YOU ARE LITERALLY A FASCIST AND IM CALLING ICE ON YOU

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

    You dumbfuck commies understand nothing about politics. Now drink my slushy poop without making any faces and be my slave forever OR YOU ARE LITERALLY A FASCIST AND IM CALLING ICE ON YOU

    Ah yes totally goes with saying we should punish/investigate criminals instead of going we must only look forward not back so the country can heal. We can't do anything about past crimes

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

    Probably better than what we have now in many ways but don't get your hopes too high from people who belong to the current establishment. In europe plenty of "good" politicians from alternative parties won elections and guess what? Once in power they didn't do shit of what they promised and ended up licking the boot or corporations like anyone else.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -7 points 8 months ago (21 children)

    He would have been absolutely hamstrung by the the bullshit factory that is the legislature, and nothing good would have happened that wasn’t undone immediately by the next administration.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 8 months ago (17 children)

    Haven’t you been reading the news? Apparently you don’t need congress.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago (10 children)

    People are OK with auth right. But auth left? Oh no, that's not gonna happen. The military would coup the shit out of that real quick.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 8 months ago (8 children)

    Auth Left is still inherently abusive.

    No matter how much you pretend that it's for the greater good, authoritarianism will always be detrimental to the relatively powerless masses.

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

    Using authority against billionaires is good actually

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

    Yeah, but it's not like auth left stops there.

    You can have egalitarian taxation and common sense regulations without being generally authoritarian, and you should.

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

    So we’re to show no authority against billionaires and their enforcers (police) and validators (law workers/politicians) because it might go too far? Slippery slope claims tend to just reinforce the status quo since it stops people from doing anything functional. The status quo is definitively authoritarian.

    Not saying that it has to, but is there an example of “without being generally authoritarian” out there in the wild somewhere? Because imo every country on earth uses authority to uphold some class structure and my country, even if we had all the things we wanted to make us happier (affordable housing, free medical care and education, public transit, etc) it would still show authority over the global south to maintain itself.

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

    Iirc the Spanish and Ukrainian anarchists were doing a good job of that while fighting off fascists and monarchists before the communists stabbed them in the back.

    Also the Zapatistas have some territories and practice direct democracy.

    My line is you can use force, organised even, but don't give the state a tool that can, and historically has been, turned on you

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

    Oh I'm not pretending anything. Just saying that auth left would never get as far as Trump is getting.

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

    auth left would never get as far as Trump is getting.

    History would very much disagree with you.

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

    Not talking about history. Talking about what would happen today.

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

    And I'm pointing out that history repeats itself when you don't learn from it.

    Just like the fascists of today are fucking shit up like the ones in 1920s-40s Europe, the auth left extremists would fuck shit up like the likes of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot.

    The horseshoe theory shitlibs trot out to defame the left may be bullshit (definitely is), but auth left oppresses people because it's auth.

    You just don't get good things from a select group excessively controlling everybody, no matter which group that is and how good their initial intentions are.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -7 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    The problem with the Democrats is that they still have respect for the constitution and institutions. Otherwise they’d get a lot done.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 child)

    I don’t agree. They waited until they lost a supermajority in congress to push healthcare reform (what became Obamacare). And dang, wouldn’t you know it, mean old republicans wouldn’t let us have single payer.

    So we got a healthcare bill that mandated we buy (generally) private market insurance. A bill written by Penny Pritzker, an insurance industry lobbyist.

    It’s kabuki. There’s only one party — the billionaire party.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

    No, the problem with the leading Dems is that they ONLY respect the institutions. And their owner donors, of course.

    They'd rather let a million people die from lack of political action than subvert the Holy System or inconvenience the rich people legally (and sometimes illegally) bribing them.

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

    The problem with democrats is that they feign respect for the constitution and institutions when it means enabling fascists.

    They didn't give a shit about the constitution or institutions when they ignored the Leahy law to play arms dealer for genocide.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -10 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    We'd have an additional 4 years before Trump fascism.

    Cool.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 child)

    At least you’re admitting Bernie would have won in 2016.

    But yeah, I’m similarly pessimistic about the 2016 Bernie alt-history. Too many conservative democrats would have stood against his agenda.

    The electability argument has been proven to be false —Kamala lost, Zorhan won—, conservative dems don’t offer to improve people’s lives materially. What is the positive case for conservative democrats at this point? (Other than “They aren’t as bad as Trump”.)

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

    Here's a fun idea: how about no more presidents?

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

    Very fun idea, I'd like that. Counterpoint: how do we accomplish that?

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

    Wish I knew honestly. Vote for radical change makers and/or build dual power. But it's not going to be easy.

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

    No more presidents requires either 1) enough representation to call a Constitutional convention to change Art. II 2) enough grassroots support to circumvent the Constitution entirely. My aversion to power vacuums and general assessment of the populace pushes me towards 1, but in either case you're right that it won't be easy. And in either case it will be slooow. Part of that is going to have to be supporting Dems as the lesser evil when their support dwarfs that of the radical change makers, to practically minimize opposition to radical change.

    2 years is, unfortunately, a small period of time on the scale we're talking about. There may be methods to sway a plurality of voters, but until we reliably secure those methods, voting for someone who stomachs a little genocide might be the best choice against an alternative that yearns for a lot of genocide. I didn't vote for Biden or Harris because I liked them. I did it because the alternative which was poised to win was much more enthusiastic on that front. When you're in the minority, you don't vote for who you wish would represent you, you vote for the easier enemy to fight.

    It won't be easy, but the easiest path has the shortest obstacles.

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

    I mostly agree I just want people to stop thinking the right president will fix everything. Not going to happen, so we need a different plan. But yeah tactical voting for people you hate might be part of that plan.

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

    Yeah I don't think we're going to get the right president anytime soon. But we still get to vote for who it will be, and tactically we should be voting for whichever candidate, with enough support to actually win, poses the fewest obstacles to a different plan.

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

    Don't you know you cant criticize any politician because they may be the appointed "lesser evil" possibly in several years.

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

    You can criticize, protest, fundraise against them.

    And you'll call them trumpers every single time they do.

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

    They're telling you their standards. You don't want them to have standards because, and I cannot stress this enough, you want everyone to support genocide and nothing else just like you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 57 points 8 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 13 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    I could comment on this post, but it's just too sad that they are still getting away with it. Power to the people.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago

    Vast amounts of money from the network of pedophile billionaires means you can run hundred guys named Joe Hamburger on the platform of "Protect Adorable Babies" and "Money for People Who Deserve It", then roll them up into the political caucus that shows bipartisan support for military cannibalism.

    That's what keeps guys like Henry Cuellar and Gavin Newsom firmly rooted in the party, even as they function no differently than "moderate" Republicans in the same role.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (24 children)

    As a non-American I have to admit that I don't understand how primaries work in that country. Why are the liberals who choose the candidate and not the leftists?

    EDIT: Just to be clear. I know what primaries are, we have them regularly in my country. What I don't understand is how these work specifically so that the bases cannot choose freely. Or is it that the Democratic base would be happier with a candidate like Hilary? If that's the case, the complaints I frequently read here and on other sites would not be very legitimate.

  • source
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] [S] 10 points 8 months ago

    In the 80's liberals got control of our progressive party, the DNC. Back then it was possible to pull voters from the right by appealing to wealth and so Clintons won by doing it.

    But every election our candidates are supposed to be elected by popular vote within each party. Recently they just kind of stopped though because it turns out that was apparently just a tradition and not like an enforceable law or anything. And the Clintons wanted to have the White House again.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 8 months ago*

    The vast majority of people don't vote in primaries for some reason so the demographics are different from the general, but also the DNC has plenty of tricks at its disposal to get the results they want. Now part of the reason those tricks work is that American leftist politicians tend to be pussies who are unwilling to take shots at liberals, but yeah the whole process is captured by DNC liberals.

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

    As an American, I can assure they don't work. It's a fucking party. Guess why that wasn't a misnomer and what they mean by "Jerry Rigged" and "Glass" house.

    Or did you think Propane was just a coincidence in naming?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago*

    Why are the liberals who choose the candidate and not the leftists?

    Because the liberals are the entrenched power in the party and they set the primary rules in their favor. And ignore them as convenient. Even successfully argued in court that they are under no obligation to follow their own stated rules. And sometimes they don't even hold primaries.

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

    We got layers of elections. The states administer them so you have a different system for each state. Primaries are different in every state, too. Then you have Federal elections that are still run by the individual states, just for federal offices, but then the President is elected through an entirely different system altogether that the states also individually have to administer.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 8 months ago (13 children)

    The US doesn’t have leftists.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 8 months ago (9 children)

    They're around. They just rarely receive media coverage and what little they do get is infantilization or being called a socialist 😱 or a criminal🚨.

    Few get into office then it's the same story.

    It's worse now under this admin.

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

    Great, then their lack of action just makes them leftist cowards, which makes them about as useful as liberals.

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

    You either have solidarity or you're part of the problem. It's not a lack of action. You're working from a garbage media filter.

    Maybe try Coolzone Media or Unicorn Riot or It's Going Down to name a few decent ones.

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

    I don’t see any articles about Nazis being shot in the head.

    I DO see a bunch of articles about Nazis racking up a body count by shooting innocent people on US streets and murdering democratic lawmakers in their homes, though. Huh. Must be my garbage media filter.

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

    OK then where's the article about YOU shooting a nazi in the head?

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

    Your country is the one with the most urgent Nazi problem at the moment. I’m sure your inaction will make it our problem eventually, though, so I guess I’ll have to let you know.

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

    I'm confident there's nazis in yours assuming you're in the west. The US might be taking off the mask but the surge to the right has been a phenomenon ubiquitous in the western world.

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

    Yes, we have an alt-right problem thanks to you allowing a house fire to start on our street after three decades of responding like assholes when we told you not to let your kids play with matches.

    “Your child’s going to start a fire and it’s going to spread.”

    “Shut up, you’re America’s hat.”

    And now that everything we’ve been telling you was going to happen IS HAPPENING, your response is. “LOL, it’s hittng your house next.”

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

    People have been working and dying to fight this on the left in the US since well before either of us were born. Attempting to blame the left instead of liberals or the fascists for the actions of the liberals and the right is antagonizing at best and maliciously doing the fascist's job for them at worst.

    I assume you're coming from a place of wanting a better world, but expecting people to kill outright is disregarding their position and the safety in their communities. People have lives and friends and families. When they lose what's left for them to protect then you'll probably start getting what you want.

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

    Exactly this.

    And yet the handful that do exist never fucking stop whining when the Democrats don't pander to this non-existent bloc.

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

    Well, if you get them to even tell you what a "liberal" is, you are lucky.

    Their primaries are a real election they have inside each party to pick the candidates. If you have only 2 parties, it's a hard requirement. The people enlisted to each party vote on them (it seems that if you only have 2 real parties and primaries are your real elections, lots of people enlist in a party).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago*

    Primaries are generally much more extreme, because everyone voting is part of the party. So the candidates will be closely toeing the party line to pick up the passionate voters.

    To be clear, the individual parties aren’t actual government-funded organizations. They’re private entities, who choose to hold primaries and then put the party’s support behind whoever wins. This is an important distinction because this means the individual primaries can be run however the party wants, even if that means not having a primary and simply running a sitting president (like what happened to Biden, then later Kamala after Biden dropped out). And registering to vote with a party is typically exclusive, meaning you can only vote in one pre-chosen primary election per cycle. Like if I were to register as a republican to vote in the republican primary, the democrat party wouldn’t allow me to cast a vote in their primary.

    Then whoever wins the primaries goes on to the general election. While winning the primary is only a soft requirement for the general election, (anyone can run as an independent candidate), the US’ first-past-the-post voting system means it’s virtually impossible to win the general election without the support of one of the two big parties. And if you want to get that support, you need to win the primary. Independent candidates are generally thought of as wasted votes, meme votes, protest votes, etc…

    Notably, in the general election, democrats’ campaigns tend to take a strategy of “move farther right to grab the center/center-right swing voters.” Since any registered voter can vote in the general, swing voters often determine who wins and loses the general. Which means candidates tend to disproportionately focus on appeasing those swing voters. And this tends to piss off the democrats/leftists/etc who prefer the farther left policies. Especially when those same candidates have spent the past month parroting the official democratic party platform to win the primary, then suddenly about-face and cozy up to the centrists in the general.

    So even if leftists were able to get enough votes for a far-left candidate in the primaries, (they can’t, because America has no notable far-left/leftist voting blocks), that same candidate would then immediately shift to the center to grab the swing votes in the general.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 49 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (6 children)
  • [–] 14 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Even if you did, because someone else who we see as undesirables we will never lift a finger for occasionally murdee for fun or because theyre getting uppity but broadly half tolerate most of the time because theyre fucking stupid enough to vote for us a lot of the time didn't vote for them this time, because they were holding out for an option that does not endorse their family being murdered with their (and your) tax dollars .

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [+] -4 points 8 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 17 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    By this logic, 1920s German Jews were responsible for Hitler.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 10 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Oh I am done with electoral bullshit. Our voices will never be heard as long as both parties are ran and bankrolled by corporations and billionaires. No single DSA candidate can dismantle that system, either.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago* (2 children)

    You were up for something other than he meant when he said he'd piss on you if took his shoestringing tax blah blah blah.

    He really was a RR, wasn't he? Oh, what? Did you say you gotta shit, now? Hang on. I want my Kim Chi to enjoy this scene.

    Corn is overrated. Just because I am in THAT state right now doesn't mean I was born sucking candy from a tall hatted stalker.

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

    I thought the US had two term limits?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 38 points 8 months ago

    The post is probably referring to our previous elections he ran in.

    But the dude's been testing the waters to break that amendment. He's kind of in this weird state of transgression where when he does pull shit nobody takes him to task because they either directly benefit from it or they benefit from publicly opposing him but failing to to hold him accountable.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›