• GiddyGap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 days ago

    So much for the 1st Amendment. Guess that’s only valid when it fuels the Trumpsterfire.

    • The Spectre@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      There is only free speech when it agrees with the capitalist elite or it doesn’t directly threaten them

  • Richie Rich@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    What can you say to that? The Americans knew what they were getting into. They elected a fascist to power who is abolishing democracy. In case you didn’t know it yet, let me tell you: America is on the way to becoming a dictatorship.

    • MithranArkanere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      The American politicians basically barred the ability for any other party to get into power, until people gave up going to vote, and fascism won by a third of the votes.

      It all started before the Red Scare. The moment the Robber Barons got their plans thwarted, they started planning so it would never happen again, and they played the long, long game.

  • Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    I’m not in his district but I was so impressed by Rep. AL Green’s (https://algreen.house.gov/about) courage in standing up to and calling out Krasnov’s and the GOP’s lies yesterday that I wanted to donate some money. Unlike all the impotent, sclerotic clowns who call themselves the Dem “leadership” and constantly ask me for money whilst the most they do are write “Strongly worded letters” and finger wagging, Rep. Green’s website was all about service to his district. I literally could not find a way to donate to him. But he is now a hero of mine. If only HE or one of the few with his courage and fire were leading the Dems. I wish he were 20 years younger. He’d have made a great president.

  • PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 days ago

    honey look, freedom of expression and the right to protest in America just got dropped.

    • rational_lib@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      Let’s not keep making the mistake of assuming Trump’s tweets have force of law. He’s just talking out of his ass again, just like he’s not actually invading greenland and canada. Notice how he’s talking about at least 4 different actions here, I’m pretty sure none of which he can actually do. 5 if you count thanking us for our attention to this matter (?). If Trump tries to do anything in this regard no judge* will uphold it.

      *Obligatory other than Clarence Thomas

      • Laurel Raven@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        Let’s not keep making the mistake of assuming the rule of law matters at this point. If he does something and nobody stops it, its legality or lack there of is moot. If he says to do something and people do it and nobody stops him (or judge’s rulings about it are ignored), then it doesn’t matter that it was illegal.

        I know you’re just trying to get people to calm down, but at this point, people are right to be scared and right to think these things could actually come to pass considering it has happened before. Maybe it won’t get that far… But plenty has already happened that should never have happened, and the US currently has a president who is illegally, specifically unconstitutionally, holding office and was allowed to be sworn in anyway, so it’s probably not a good idea to assume this won’t happen just because it’s also unconstitutional.

      • PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        People in power do what he says. His word is de facto law, even if it’s illegal. It literally does not matter. You are in denial if you think he’s not going to get away with this.

    • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      Apparantly, (in the US) any protest that needs to occupy the road requires a permit. Yea imagine how stupid it is, you want to protest the government and you need to apply for permission?!? I was shocked when my teacher told me about this. Seems like a huge First Amendment violation to me, but society just goes along with it. 😓

      So unless your protest is strictly on the sidewalk, you need a permit. So fucking dumb.

      • e$tGyr#J2pqM8v@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        You don’t need a permit to march in the streets or on sidewalks, as long as marchers don’t obstruct car or pedestrian traffic. And that makes a lot of sense because if you block a road perhaps emergency services need to know ahead of time that they can’t take that route. Or others concerns may be relevant. For the very same reasons this is similar in countries around the world. Source: https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/protesters-rights

      • pappabosley@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        So that’s why they’re so car centric with their infrastructure, more sidewalls = more protests

        • cheers_queers@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 days ago

          that’s literally why blocking roads in protest is so effective. enough angry calls to the mayor office due to people being late for work etc, is how protesting puts pressure on representatives to actually represent the people.

          or did you think that huddling on sidewalks holding signs was supposed to do something?

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            Blocking roads in protest has proven effective at exactly one thing: Increasing the enforcement and penalties for jaywalking.

            It is counterproductive at everything else.

            did you think that huddling on sidewalks holding signs was supposed to do something?

            Where did I say huddle on sidewalks?

            I think JSO should be firebombing ICE car dealerships, gas stations, muffler shops, and other entities and agents of the oil industry. Not harassing victims of that industry.

            • ABCDE@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 days ago

              Blocking roads in protest has proven effective at exactly one thing: Increasing the enforcement and penalties for jaywalking.

              Well… no.

                • ABCDE@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  I can cite many news articles which show that protesting in this way is more effective.

              • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                4 days ago

                You would have a point if “protesting” was “life”. But it’s not.

                When demonstrators were pissed off at Elon Musk, they didn’t picket grocery stores and kindergartens. they didnt blockade old folks homes, delay firefighters and ambulances.

                They burned Tesla dealerships.

                JSO could learn a thing or two from these anti-Musk demonstrators.

  • ChiefGyk3D@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    “illegal protests” Pretty sure Freedom of Speech and Assembly is part of the first amendment. He’s a putz

    • easily3667@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      The point isn’t to stop it. It’s to scare a few people and ready the maga parents with school-age children who refuse to speak to them for the Kent state reruns we’re getting soon.

    • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      While I did vote blue conservative (for the last time), they were not worthy of that vote because they did not represent me. That’s how representative democracy works. What you advocate for is not representative democracy, it is a hostage situation and should be treated like the crisis that that entails.

      Why are you okay with people being underrepresented at the voting booth? Are you actively working to replace First Past the Post voting in your state? People should have the freedom to vote for the candidates they believe are best, while still ensuring their votes count against those they don’t want in office.

      It’s not as though democrats are just now learning of the mathematical flaws of FPTP. Every election I’ve seen the same bullshit excuses to take people’s inalienable right to vote how they want. Democrats in blue states made a choice to leave a huge portion of the population unrepresented, all for safe states and easy elections.

      We don’t need to wait for a miracle from Congress, we can pass election reform one state at a time. Should we have more elections, we must remove the democratic monopoly on this fight against the republicans. Don’t worry, blue conservative, you will be free to vote for your preference under a more representative electoral system. Because who would want to deny someone the right to vote for the person they feel is best? You apparently.

      Alaska has already abolished FPTP voting. After Ranked Choice Voting kept Sarah Palin out of office, Alaskan Republicans tried to pass a referendum to revert to FPTP, but the people voted to keep Ranked Choice. Why would you want to use the same voting system that Republicans favor? Do you support democracy, or do you get off on forcing people unrepresented in government to vote for your preference?

      Videos on alternative voting systems

      First Past The Post voting (What most states use now)

      Videos on alternative electoral systems we can try out.

      STAR voting

      Alternative vote

      Ranked Choice voting

      Range Voting

      Single Transferable Vote

      Mixed Member Proportional representation

    • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Your comment’s downvotes = how many profoundly stupid people who STILL haven’t learned from their mistake there are out there.

    • houseofleft@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      I’m not American so nobody got my vote, but seems to me like the issue is with the swathes of people choosing facism rather than progressives who chose not to vote.

      Choosing how to act in a world like ours is tricky, anyone following a sense of right and wrong (even if I disagree with their judgement) instead of fear, hate, greed or whatever gets a gold star in my book.

      • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Inaction is still a choice, though. I totally understand the sentiment behind that choice and even agree that we shouldn’t be forced to choose genocide, but the alternative that we got is a man who not only wants the same genocide, but wants to accelerate it, put American boots on the ground to assist in it, and then turn the bloodied ground into resorts while also wanting to worsen life across the globe. So, by refusing to act, they didn’t oppose that man getting into power. They cared so much about genocide that, ironically, they enabled making that genocide worse by not acting against that possibility.

        The biggest issue, though, is with the people who couldn’t be bothered enough to vote. Some, what, 40% of Americans never vote? Of course, there’s plenty there who can’t due to things like gerrymandering, but there’s a huge swathe of white suburbanites who simply prefer the status quo to actually improving things.

        • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 days ago

          by refusing to act, they didn’t oppose that man getting into power.

          you can refuse to vote for a Democrat and still oppose the man getting into power.

          • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            But thanks to the two party system, what effect does it have? And I’m specifically talking about the voting day of the presidential election here, not primaries or other elections. Because that’s where those efforts will have the most impact. Not that the Dems deigned to give us even the illusion of a primary this election (or in 2016, truthfully), but so many of these people seem to shake their fist once every 4 years and then go to sleep like cicadas awaiting the next presidential election.

            I don’t blame people for hating the weak candidates that the Dems consistently push forward to maintain the old guards’ leadership positions, but I do blame them for looking at the alternative and saying “I’m okay with the possibility of that man winning if I don’t vote or vote third party.” The chance of a Trump victory and all that it entailed was a line in the sand that they were willing to cross.

            As a trans woman, I blame them for saying, “Your life is not worth biting the bullet for.”

            • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 days ago

              The chance of a Trump victory and all that it entailed was a line in the sand that they were willing to cross.

              that chance was thrust upon all of us. accepting reality doesn’t make him acceptable.

              • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 days ago

                Yet refusing to accept the reality of mathematics that showed that, in a FPTP system, not voting for a viable candidate opposing a fascist only helps the fascist is acceptable? Nah. The blood is on the hands of both dems and non-voters. Non-voters/protest voters don’t give a fuck about trans people, as shown by their actions.

                • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  So it seems like you fully understand the flaws of First past the post voting. Have you done anything to fix it? Are the democrats doing anything to fix it? Nows the time. Not during the election

    • crusa187@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      Nobody pushing genocide is worthy of votes or support.

      It was incumbent on Dems to EARN votes, and they failed spectacularly. You’re wrong to try blaming voters for failings of our corrupt politicians.

      • Taldan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Will you still be saying that when Trump puts a resort in Gaza?

        Trump has made it crystal clear: He plans for the complete and total ethnuc cleansing of Gaza. All Palestinians will be killed or removed

        That’s what Arab and Palestinian Americans chose when they voted for Trump

        • m532@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          So according to you, the palestinians voted for trump and therefore deserve to be genocided???

          Tell me, how exactly would arab and palestinian people have been able to vote for trump? And why would they do that?

          Of course you dont have proof either because votes are secret, so, because you suspect some palestinians of voting for trump you want them all genocided???

        • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Will you still be saying that when Trump puts a resort in Gaza?

          Yes. Will you refuse to demand electoral reform in your state so the people of this nation can vote outside the two party system without a spoiler effect? Will you refuse to do anything about those who are without representation? Will you refuse democracy?

    • ceenote@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      I swallowed my misgivings and voted Democrat, just like I’ve done at each election since I turned 18, but handwaving away valid criticisms is not how you get people to side with you. Pressure needs to be put on the democrats to be better, too.

      • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        I’m 100% for valid criticisms—I don’t even consider myself a Democrat and I have no compunctions about criticizing them when I think they are wrong. But I’m pretty sure that meme is directed at those who withheld their vote.

        • Addv4@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          It would be in theory, but mostly it’s just spread around as how any protest against Israel cost the democrats the US election (despite how it was considered widely unpopular to support Israel’s genocide by most democrats).

            • Addv4@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              Then maybe Harris and her team should have listened to some feedback about their widely unpopular stance that seemed to somewhat equate them with the Republicans during an election which they absolutely couldn’t afford to be seen as remotely similar to republicans.

        • lobut@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          Yeah, they probably think, well the right is doing so well so that’s probably what the country wants. We need to move further right!

      • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Pressure needs to be put on the democrats to be better, too.

        They’re already 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000x better than Republicans. So someone would have to be pretty goddamn stupid not to vote for them when the options are them or Republicans.

        The majority of the fault isn’t on Democrats. It’s on goddamn stupid braindead asshole American voters for being goddamn stupid braindead assholes.

        • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          They’re already 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000x better than Republicans. So

          how can this be quantified?

        • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          No, they were never going to do that. They’ve already said that they learned their lesson, and in 2026, they’re gonna double down on the losing strategy that they’ve been running since Clinton was in office and run on building the wall on the Mexican border and deporting immigrants to court the moderate Republican vote that doesn’t exist and never would vote for them even if it did.

          By the Presidential election, it’s already years too late to force them to actually do good things. Protest votes and withholding your vote have done nothing to stop the slide that led to Harris campaigning with Liz Cheney in tow in the 16 years that I’ve been voting. If you want change, it’s only going to come by threatening the position of the people in charge of the party and replacing the old guard with people like AOC. Whoever gets elected President does neither of those things. Unless Krasnov declares the Democratic Party a terrorist organization and has them all arrested as political prisoners. But then we won’t have to worry about voting ever again, just like he promised.

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 days ago

            A few things.

            Firstly, we can dismiss the notion that the candidate can’t be moved. The citation for that is Biden in 2020, who effectively campaigned during the primary as a moderate Republican, and until the southern states which we’re never going to go blue anyways weighed in, was getting his ass handed to him. The Sunday before Super Tuesday, the rat-fuckening, Oblivious Warren. All that old history.

            And then something remarkable happened. Biden opened the doors to the tent and invited the progressive wing of the party in. He handed the Bernie-crats the platform and said “have at it hoss”. And it worked. Instead of disenfranchising the activist base, he embraced them, or at least, extended an olive branch by giving them the platform, without which he assuredly would have lost.

            So: Candidates can be moved.

            Second:

            By the Presidential election, it’s already years too late to force them to actually do good things. Protest votes and withholding your vote have done nothing to stop the slide that led to Harris campaigning with Liz Cheney in tow in the 16 years that I’ve been voting.

            Again. And I’m singling you out because you responded and well, here we are. This is an obtuse, bordering on bad faith interpretation of the argument being made. You aren’t arguing with me. You are arguing with the millions of voters who stayed home for Kamala but showed up for Biden. And you moralizing about an objectively misguided application of strategic voting didn’t/ doesn’t/ won’t/ change their votes. When your “strategic voting” strategy results in losing you the election, explain to me how and why its strategic?

            You don’t/ can’t move millions of voters to a new position. Or at least it hasn’t been shown to be possible (2016, 2024). Asking voters to “vote against” instead of “voting for” doesn’t work and we now have so many receipts, that they will write text books on the matter. What can be done, is that the candidate can be moved. Its also been shown through an evidentiary process to work.

            To summarize, candidates can be moved. Biden moved and won an election because of it. When you moralize about your own, demonstrated-to-be-wrong conception of strategic voting, you aren’t arguing with me, you are arguing with the literally millions of people left on the table by the Democrats. A strategy that when examined before hand will clearly lose, the insistence of then implementing it becomes a “burn the world down” moralization to wash your own hands: Democratic voters who reliably show up, but did not, because the DNC got a hall pass from those making the exact arguments you are making here. They did not need to respond to criticism because this argument you are making shielded them. And it cost us all, practically everything.

            • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              Further evidence that the democrats can be moved if we don’t let them maintain the delusion they can win while trying to be republicans: The entire party told Biden to drop out when it was clear he had no path to victory.

              Sadly Kamala was allowed to believe she could win while embracing the same policies and messaging that killed the Biden campaign. Instead of screaming at the party to campaign on overwhelmingly popular left policy necessary to win the election and use every power at the democrat’s disposal to accomplish it, blue MAGA told anyone pointing out that we’re headed back towards the waterfall to shut up and paddle harder.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Ahh. This bullshit trope from the class of people basically responsible for Trump winning the 2024 election.

      • fartsparkles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        Sorry, did you just blame the people who didn’t vote for Trump for being responsible for Trump being president? Interesting mental gymnastics there…

        • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          There are no mental gymnastics, and unless you’ve been absent in the debate since it began in 2023, it’s been one conversation regarding the direction of the Democratic party, with effectively two camps.

          The first camp, effectively taking the party line and acting as cheerleaders of the DNC, have taken a “No critisism of the Democratic Party is acceptable; voters need to move to the positions of the DNC” approach.

          The second camp took a “The DNC needs to be better and acknowledge it’s shortcomings, and make changes when necessary. The DNC needs to align itself with DNC voters and the party base.”

          The first camp, for the first 8 months of 2024, insisted we had to run Joe Biden. That there were no other possibilities, options, or potential outcomes. They defended the approach the DNC took to the primary process, which was by any measure, the least democratic primary they party had ever held.

          The second camp raged at the preposterous farce which was the DNC primary. They pointed out that Bidens poll numbers were so bad he basically had no chance of winning. That by insisting on this losing strategy we were losing critical time.

          Bans were made, here, regarding this debate. And the first camp was wrong. There was another way possible.

          After the candidates were swapped the first camp further insured that people just needed to move to where the DNC was, after taking effectively a pro genocide, Republican lite campaign philosophy as an outcome of the convention.

          The second camp pointed out that this would lose the DNC the election, that we needed our focus to be on moving the candidate to a more popular, more electable position.

          The first camp won the argument and lost us all the war, because their fundamental belief in what is being argued and whom they are arguing with is wrong. The first camp is responsible for the millions of votes difference between Kamala and Biden, because they insisted on this losing strategy.

          • Nat (she/they)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            I’m sure the first camp exists, but you should not imply that everyone who voted Democrat and wanted people to vote Democrat was that. I did that, and I encourage everyone to criticize their horrible decisions and actions, of which there are depressingly many.

            I’d love it if we pressured them to not be quite as horrible, but at the same time I did not want the Republican party to win control because I knew they’d be worse for people in almost every way. And now, as a trans person, I have to worry about what I won’t be allowed to do anymore, or how they’ll try to make my life worse just for existing. Sending a signal or whatever you think Democrats losing does does not justify the new shit minorities will face now.

            • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              Sending a signal or whatever you think Democrats losing does does not justify the new shit minorities will face now.

              I just want to point out, that you are making this about me as the rhetorician, when I haven’t even weighed in with my position. Its not me you are arguing with when it comes to the application of strategy; its the millions of voters for whom them sacrificing their ideals to get a milquetoast Democrat, pro-genoicde, draconian border policy, democrat into office doesn’t work.

              This is about a basic understanding of how the table is set, and no amount of willing the environment one finds themselves in changes that. Its like '16 Hillary supporters whining about winning the popular vote. The people who were out their using the argument of “strategic voting” to shield the candidates deeply unpopular positions among democratic voters did real significant harm this election cycle. If your strategy doesn’t or can’t result in a specific outcome, can we really call it strategic?

              My point is that the chiding of voters for not doing the job of the candidate is a way of morally washing ones hands of a strategy that genuinely hurt the candidates ability to get elected.

              • DogWater@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 days ago

                This is fucking despicable.

                We have a 2 party system. Does that suck? Yes.

                Should we fight to change it? Yes.

                Does that give anyone an excuse for helping elect a fascist, racist, xenophobic, physchopath who is in the pocket of a foreign enemy leader by not voting for Kamala?? Fuck no. You’re out of your mind.

                within the context of federal elections as operated in 2024, it’s certainly not the fucking fault of the people who were able to recognize that letting Putin’s puppet in the office of the president for a second time to subsequently leave Ukraine to fend for itself and to ensure a genocide in Palestine was the worse of the 2 possible outcomes.

                Giving in and voting center left establishment to ensure a win is a much better poison than what we have now. anyone who says otherwise is trying to “morally wash their hands” of the blood that’s being spilled in Ukraine and Gaza and domestically.

                The people who didn’t vote because the DNC chose an establishment dem to replace Biden are narcissistic or stupid.

                Trans people, gay people, immigrants, women, elderly people on social security fixed income, 1000s of workers in industries who will face layoffs in the face of these tariffs, farmers who are losing 2 billion (40% of the food USAID gives out comes from purchases from us farmers) in USAID food purchases per year, children whose education will be forever altered will all be much happier knowing those self righteous progressives stuck to their guns and didn’t compromise their morals as they get persecuted under this administration.

                WELL FUCKING DONE GUYS. Don’t break your arms jacking yourselves off.

                • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  You aren’t arguing with me. You are arguing with the millions of people who found your rhetoric insufficient and a pro genocide stance unacceptable.

                  If you want to continue to be the party of “loser Democrats”, just keep doing and thinking acting the same way you are presenting yourself in that comment.

                  When you behaved this way, when this was the rhetoric you used to convince people to vote Democrat, you did real fucking damage, and are in some small way responsible for Trump.

                  When your “strategy” has the obvious and demonstrated result of the opposite effect to what you want, it’s not strategic.

          • fartsparkles@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 days ago

            Makes sense; sow further division in the groups who don’t like Trump so there’s less opposition to him.

            • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              That division is much, much older. The beltway is full of people who benefit from corporations or come from wealthy families and are materially aligned against the working class, and their ideology reflects this. These people as a group stand to lose more from the democrats moving to the left and hurting the bourgeoisie than winning than staying in the middle and losing.

              This is a common dynamic historically; liberals in power need the people to maintain power, but their interests aren’t aligned with the people, so they pass policies that marginalize their own base of support, and so the conservatives take power and then do counterrevolution.

        • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 days ago

          It’s a very popular sentiment on Reddit and Lemmy, in my experience, to blame non voters as much as or even more than Trump voters.

          • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            That’s because the people who voted for Trump wanted Trump to win. The people who stayed at home who might not have wanted Trump to win assisted his win by not voting.

            • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              But you don’t know who non voters would have voted for. A study of non voters in 2020 showed a near even split, so it’s nothing but pointless speculation to blame people who didn’t vote. And I say this as someone who actually supports compulsory voting. I just find it much more productive, and accurate, to lay blame on those who we do know, for sure, actually voted for this result.

              • Lauchs@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 days ago

                Wait, this seems silly. You are in effect saying that it’s wrong to blame those who stayed home because some of them would have voted for trump? Like, we’d still blame those people too had they actually voted trumo.

                The blame isn’t just because you voted for trump it is because you didn’t try to stop him, which applies both to those who voted for him and those who didn’t vote.

                • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 days ago

                  Those who blame the nonvoters for Trump winning are implying that had they voted, Trump would have lost. We cannot know that and I do not find it productive. Again, I actually am in favour of compulsory voting, so urging people to vote is a good thing that I’m very much for. But I’m not going to blame those who didn’t vote for Trump for Trump winning.

    • cybersin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Imagine thinking 5 people on the internet caused Trump to win.