all 76 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 74 points 7 months ago (3 children)

We are all Hungary, and it's time to eat.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 7 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 24 points 7 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 16 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Context? What happened in Budapest?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 64 points 7 months ago (33 children)

    While I agree with the sentiment, I'm not sure if the current democrats have enough of a spine to oust the sitting president, even if they get enough of a majority...

  • source
  • hideshow 33 child comments
  • [–] 145 points 7 months ago (9 children)

    Vote in the fucking primaries so you can get better democrats.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (6 children)

    I agree with that sentiment, shame I'm not actually from the US. My in-laws are but they're (allegedly) too disconnected from politics to care. I still feel like they might be closeted Trumpers that don't want to openly say so but who knows.

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

    Even if they aren't, they are satisfied with status quo apparently.

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

    Well I have been hearing them complain more about it being more difficult to make ends meet. Perhaps that'll finally make them rethink their political stance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    I mean just stating the endless facts, would be enough for a somewhat sane person to grasp how fucking awful this current administration is. There's endless fuel every day. Just collect a list of the worst stuff, you can still fill the whole day with a fairly neutral list of facts... That should be enough motivation to vote them away...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    But if they don't care, some facts won't change that.

    And if they believe that Kamala would have been worse, you are done.

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

    sane person

    If you don't care about getting poorer everyday, well you probably aren't a sane person. Unfortunately the amount of insane people in the US seems to be growing for some time I guess...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 27 points 7 months ago (9 children)

    You think if the most unbelievable thing happened and a Democrat won every election to somehow hold both a majority in the House and 60 votes in the Senate, they wouldn’t toss him out?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Conviction in an impeachment trial needs 67 votes. They currently hold 45 seats. In order to get to 67, they'd need a clean sweep of all Senate races.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 7 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] [S] 29 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Damn. Well that’s some quality cynicism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Tbf at this point it's well earned. The Republicans are still not switching positions about Epstein, the 25th and other things and their voters sure as hell did, so one can only conclude the more cynical position, that is, there is so much corruption it takes more than an elite sex abuse ring for the Republicans to finally do something.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 7 months ago

    even if they get enough of a majority...

    And there's the rub.

    The House is one thing, the Senate another. Only 1/3 of the current Senate seats go up for election, and the majority of seats up for vote that are currently held by Republicans are from very safe Republican stronghold states. I don't think there's a chance that the Dems get control of the Senate, even if they gain a couple seats.

    As for the "problem" Dems, Fetterman isn't up for reelection. Schumer isn't up for reelection. Kaine isn't up for reelection. Shaheen and Durbin are at least retiring, but none of the other sellouts are on the ballot until 2028 at the earliest.

    Best we can hope for is that the House flips to a Democratic majority (a supermajority is still beyond question) and that turns the next two years into an ineffectual lame duck Congress. But it's not like that'd be all that different from the situation right now anyways, because Trump has demonstrated he doesn't give a shit about Congress and will just issue illegal executive orders for everything he wants to do, while the courts twiddle their thumbs and maybe question the legality of his actions 10 years from now.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (8 children)

    Didn't they literally just file a bill to get him removed...?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (7 children)

    Well, there's a pattern with this kind of thing. File a bill on a popular issue when they're in the minority, but just flat out ignore the issue when they've taken the majority.

    Not feeling arsed enough to dig up examples, probably because I've given in to cynicism on the matter. But I doubt it would take much digging for anybody curious...

    Edit: from my feed today-

    Oh, wait, that doesn't happen, so I'm the one imaging things. 🙄

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

    There's no such pattern. You're talking out of your ass.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    Sure, buddy. Whatever you say 🙄

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    "This is totally true, but I'm not going to give a single example. But trust me, it totally is".

    Yawn.

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

    Couldn't care less if you trust me. Don't even care about your misplaced trust in politicians. Your loss, after all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    Stole this image from my feed. I didn't even have to do any research and found an example.

    But you don't like my argument, so I must be wrong.

    How's that for "cute", dumbass?

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

    Oh no, some random tweet?? Whatever will I do!

    Have you actually used any braincells to engage with it? Or did you see it, race over here to comment, and forget to actually think?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago

    Budapest, Mozambique, take your pick.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago*

    !mst3k@lemmy.world

    EDIT : I didn't realise it was Tv's Frank when I first saw the text of the post

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    Paula Poundstone is doing her part, above and beyond the call of duty for any patriot. Go post-trump USA!

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (6 children)

    Hungary elects their Prime Minister in parliamentary elections. US elects majority leader and speaker of the house in midterms (kind of). It looks like some people don't understand the difference.

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

    Hungary did not elect a prime minister, it elected a parliament. The new govnernment incl the prime minister is just a consequence of parliamentary majorities, which changed.

    Each party elects their party leader before the elections. The party leader pretty much represents the party during the electoral campaign. The system in Hungary is mixed so people vote both for a specific candidate from their district and party as a whole. The elections are as much about electing the next PM as the next majority party. In US you first choose representatives and then they vote for the Speaker of the House. You don't really know who will hold this office when voting for one party or another in the midterms.

    While that won’t push the US president out if power, it could turn him into a lame duck.

    Trump rules by executive orders. A lot of things he does require congressional approval and he just blatantly ignores the law. The courts already confirmed that everything he does is legal and that even his illegal decisions are biding. Midterms will not turn him into a lame duck.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    Still these votes are for Parliament/MPs on the ballot, not the prime minister directly, aren’t they. Yes, parties will campaign with a certain perdon as prime minister in mind, but that position is not directly elected, is it?

    Technically yes, people vote for MPs but PM is running the government by selecting ministers and prioritizing the legislation and this is how he gets elected. There's a great focus placed on the party leaders in the campaign and the person tagged to be the PM has huge impact on how people vote. The party can change him (and sometimes they do) but it's still very important during the campaign.

    In US on the other hand the midterms do not serve to elect on confirm party leadership in any way. Party leaders have job to do but they will not be running the government if their party wins.

    Trump can only rule by executive orders because the other institutions let him and majd no fuss. Things would get a whole lot mire diffucult for him if the majority in the legislative actually did make a fuss about it.

    The supreme court lets him. The legislative has nothing to do with it. Democratic leaders can make a fuss about things now but they don't because they are useless. They will be as useless when they are majority. Of course you should vote for democrats now because humiliating Trump will be great for everyone but this will not fix the country the way elections in Hungary can. Those elections are not equivalent in any way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    Trump is nervous because he's a psycho who needs constant validation and humiliation in midterms can damage his image of beloved leader.

    His agenda is fine. All the institutions are already dismantled. DOGE already fired everyone that can be fired, they got the budget they wanted, billionaires got their tax cuts. What will democrats do with the majority? Republicans will filibuster everything, Trump will not sign anything they will pass. Will they provoke another shutdown? Remember how the last one ended? Democrats folded. The midterms will not change Democratic leadership. You can cling on to technicalities but the midterms will not Budapest anything because the system is completely different.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    So fill congress with people who are better on one specific issue but practically the same on every other issue? Congratulations, we could be guaranteed a Republican victory in 2028 as Dems will become widely known as the party that does nothing but get in the way.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Excuse me, it's two issues. The rest is business as usual at best.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    Didn't they just end up electing another conservative?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Peter Magyar was even in Victor Orban's Party "Fidesz", and formerly the husband of Orban's Justice Minister Judit Varga. Then two years ago there was a schism over a pardon of someone who covered up child abuse.

    His new party "Tisza" is conservative, centre-right, but also pro-European and anti-corruption. I hope it wasn't a mask that drops soon, but I don't know enough about their politics, to say much.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [+] -7 points 7 months ago (7 children)

    How many times do i have to say electorilism is not an answer and Magyar is also a far right ethnonationalist.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] [S] 15 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    So, just get crushed?

    Or did you have a pamphlet or something

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Organize outside of government so many ways to do so from labor to support for various orgs to agtiting for political conscious on and on. Literally millions of ways.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    All those thing still only build awareness and rely on election to vote them out. I thought you're talking something more radical.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 7 months ago

    Does endorsement by their socialist and green parties mean nothing?

    If they had elected Orban again, would that make positive change more likely?

    If Magyar was lying and goes further right, is revolution somehow less possible than it has been? Especially if Orban loyalists are gone/not-on-his-side and Orban policies are actually undone in such a way that future elections are more fair? (though that actually assumes their left parties can actually gain traction)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago

    Revolution is inevitable

  • source