this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2024
1262 points (95.6% liked)

News

23267 readers
3216 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

let's gooo

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] moon@lemmy.cafe 58 points 9 months ago (6 children)

Once the hateful boomers die out, the republican party will be finished. They know this and is why they have been focusing on voter suppression so much.

[–] Welt@lazysoci.al 22 points 9 months ago

They're more powerful and influential than you think - they're not going anywhere. They might change their policies to suit the times (remember Lincoln was a Republican) but the so-called "Grand Old Party" ain't going nowhere unfortunately.

[–] FoxBJK@midwest.social 21 points 9 months ago (5 children)

I remember seeing this comment on Digg while people speculated that W would be the last republican president elected for a generation.

[–] AFaithfulNihilist@lemmy.world 22 points 9 months ago (2 children)

To be fair, he didn't win his first election by getting the most votes, and neither did Trump.

The Republicans realized during the Reagan administration that they would soon be unable to win the presidency with a majority of votes and took many steps to undermine the Democratic process. Voter suppression, purges, intimidation, voter ID laws, all of that began with Reagan.

Bush the elder was the last to win a "democratic" victory. If it weren't for 9/11, Bush wouldn't have been able to win his second election either. That fact always blows my mind. Like people rallied around the incompetent fool who managed to ignore warnings and let a terrorist strike happen only to then go on and invade the wrong country multiple times and spend trillions of dollars on nothing.

[–] FoxBJK@midwest.social 14 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I don't disagree. I'm just calling out the whole "things will change when conservatives start dying off" trope because people have been banking on that for 20 years.

[–] meliaesc@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

They keep living!

[–] pigup@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

" ya don't change horses midstream 🤠" was a literal campaign ad phrase back then I remember

Boomers have a lot of lead accumulated in their brains, not entirely their fault

[–] frezik@midwest.social 6 points 9 months ago

That was so dumb. We literally had a President die in office during the biggest war humanity has ever seen, and we still won. Not only that, but Truman was kept out of the loop on a lot of things ("What's the Manhattan Project all about?").

[–] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 15 points 9 months ago (5 children)

If the US president got elected by getting the most votes, there wouldn't have been a Republican since Bush senior. I really don't understand why electoral reform is not higher on the political agenda in the US.

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 9 months ago

Having it based purely on a popular vote will still wind up with a 2 party system. Ranked voting needs to be implemented. All of the benefits of a popular vote, with actual checks and balances to elevate 3rd parties.

[–] AFC1886VCC@reddthat.com 3 points 9 months ago

The Democratic party and Republican party are united in their opposition to electoral reform because they both benefit the most from it.

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

This was the deal with the devil that people in the North made with people in the South to convince people in the South to join them in a government specifically set up to defy the British. The US as a democracy has always failed because it was designed to give ultimate executive power to the states rather than to the people.

[–] I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world -2 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Because the DNC enjoys power more than democracy and does not allow such things to happen.

[–] Clent@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That's right wing spin.

Only the politically ignorant believe it.

[–] I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world -3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Lol. No. Only the politically ignorant think that the DNC is anything but a power hungry juggernaut, set on choosing candidates based on their own agenda regardless of the will of the people. They don't even really seem to care if their candidate gets elected.

I really don't understand how more of a fuss wasn't made when they cheated Bernie out of a fair shot, were sued by donors and used the defense "We were so blatantly favoring our favorite that anyone who thought we were being impartial wasn't paying attention and deserved to be swindled out of their money! Yes, we broke rules to get Sanders out of the running, but we were very obvious about it and they were our own rules and we can break them if we want, so get fucked." And the court was like.. "Yeah... sounds good."

https://observer.com/2017/08/court-admits-dnc-and-debbie-wasserman-schulz-rigged-primaries-against-sanders/

[–] Clent@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

You're still hurting over Bernie. That's cute.

Politically that was a long time ago and you're still holding a grudge over it. This is why the Democrats lose.

Many on the left needs to be placated with something new every election cycle while the right votes without any hesitation.

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

The DNC would actually benefit here because the popular vote would always bring in a Democrat. It's the small, red states that will never let change happen because Wyoming enjoys having more direct representation than California.

[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The PEOPLE would benefit since they are the ones doing the voting, not the states. It is just as ridiculous that Republicans in California have little say in the presidency as Democrats in Wyoming.

[–] nybble41@programming.dev 4 points 9 months ago

It is just as ridiculous that Republicans in California have little say in the presidency as Democrats in Wyoming.

The Republicans in California have a better chance of seeing a Republican president with the electoral college than they would with a national popular vote, even if their particular votes carry less weight. In a sense that gives them more representation in the end, not less—their voices are ignored but they get what they wanted anyway.

[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Or because it would take a constitutional amendment. The only way around that would be making the electoral college irrelevant via the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact which has largely only been signed by democratic leaning states. In fact, of the states that have passed it, zero have been right leaning.

There are certainly shitty corporate democrats that do fall into your category but to say the party as a whole is that way is ignorant.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 4 points 9 months ago

That must be why Republican-dominated states have passed the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. /s

[–] banneryear1868@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yeah this has been a thing forever. DeSantis was the strong culture war candidate too and... yeah. Trump has a clear role in culture war but he doesn't seem to care personally, he flip flops all the time on many culture war issues depending on what is convenient or funny to say in the moment.

[–] Clent@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

It's almost like he's playing both sides of many issues; as a conman does and as the mark allows.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 5 points 9 months ago

So far he's the last to win the popular vote (and only for his second term).

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

It's important to remember that collapse doesn't happen overnight, and then suddenly it does. It takes a great deal of times for cracks to form and a structure to fall, but once it goes, it goes.

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 19 points 9 months ago (1 children)

There are still plenty of ignorant and angry Gen X and Millenials. I agree that the GOP is finished, and it's only a matter of time. There will always be stupid people to pick up their mantle, however.

[–] vimdiesel@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Plenty ignorant Gen Z while we're on the top, ain't nothing special about y'all. Vote democrat or you're just helping Trump turn America fascists and then the reeducation camps will start

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

I’m Gen X, but thanks. I work with university students and trust me that everyone else is a dinosaur.

[–] daemoz@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Tdont kid yourself,, look at the numbers, Trump is propped up by gen x. The demographic loudest against biden are gunna be around a long time.

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago (2 children)

demographic loudest against biden

And add in the "Biden = genocide but I have no alternative to offer so I guess I want Trump to win" crowd and you can be in trouble.

[–] OneWomanCreamTeam@sh.itjust.works 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

As terrible as Biden's stance on the Israel/Palestine conflict is, he's still the lesser of two evils. Another Trump presidency would not spell good things for Palestinian civilians.

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

And that's my point. Trump CERTAINLY will be worse, but people have decided that they will let the greater of two evils in by default rather than work to bring in the lesser of the two.

People who think that Biden is genocidal have seen nothing yet compared to Trump being in that role agian.

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It's like they forgot all of the pro-Israel moments of Donald Trump's 4 years in office. But since October 7th 2023, people have actually started to receive an education in Israeli/Palestinian relations. Most people thought it started on October 7th 2023 and not, you know, 75 years before that.

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

It is the first real conflict in a generation or so, there are probably many people who never thought of it before and are suddenly interested.

[–] blind3rdeye@lemm.ee 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The fact that crowd exists is a scary reminder of the power of propaganda, advertising, and manipulation. It's a clear and devastating example of using people's values against them. It's an entirely artificially created demographic. To people who didn't get caught on that particular baited hook, it looks insane.

[–] Delta_V@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

The fundamentals of how to wage information/cognitive warfare should be part of public schools' curriculum so our kids will recognize when its happening.

[–] pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml 15 points 9 months ago (2 children)

They nearly overrode the vote last time around. They faced no consequences and they’re very close to being in a position to do it again and make lasting changes to seize power forever. Nothing good is guaranteed.

And they’re rewriting education including made up history to ensure that more kids are conservative in future generations. Things aren’t looking good.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

They faced no consequences

Except the 200+ people who were convicted and are currently sitting in jail.

And, as cynical as we might be, we have to remember that Trump's various trials are not over yet.

[–] pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 months ago

Ues. The pawns were convicted and the people with actual power faced no consequences. The ringleader could very well be elected president where he ignored the law consistently. His trials keep getting delayed and the corrupt judge he appointed keeps helping him. It’s very scary times.

[–] vimdiesel@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

They literally have plans on concentration camps for reeducation into christofascism.

[–] CaptainProton@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago (2 children)

But what will replace them? Uni-party doesn't work either (e.g. NYC)

[–] proudblond@lemmy.world 29 points 9 months ago

Hopefully the Democrats. No seriously, I hope the Dems become our more conservative party and we get a more progressive party. But… I’m not holding my breath, honestly. Feels like wishful thinking.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 8 points 9 months ago (2 children)

A new party will pop up. The Federalist Party died out after Hamilton was shot and also the War of 1812. They fielded their last Presidential candidate in 1816 with 30.9% of the vote.

Then the National Republican Party (different from the current Republican party) evolved out of the Democratic-Republican Party.

Personally, I'd love it if Democrats became the right-most party by staying exactly as they are, and a new party breaks off of them or evolves out to their left.

[–] nybble41@programming.dev 3 points 9 months ago

Personally, I'd love it if Democrats became the right-most party by staying exactly as they are, and a new party breaks off of them or evolves out to their left.

I'd say it's more likely to go the other way, with the more moderate or right-leaning Democrats breaking off to form their own party and perhaps steal away the more moderate Republican voters. There are a lot of voters who would naturally align more closely with traditional Republican political views voting Democrat only because the Republican party has been taken over by a radical faction. Having laissez-faire fiscal conservatives and outright socialists in the same party isn't really sustainable long-term; there are too many critical points of disagreement.

[–] CaptainProton@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Democrats aren't exactly a healthy representation of moderation. They're too authoritarian for me to want the other party to be the actually-socialist party. Socialist and libertarian would be a balance, but it requires a big chunk of the Democrat platform to burn alongside MAGA. Honestly actually-socialist and actually-libertarian would be the two parties we really need today.

[–] Delta_V@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

actually-socialist and actually-libertarian would be the two parties we really need today

they're the same party

[–] CaptainProton@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Which one is that? I'm not sure you understand the difference if you think both can possibly be represented by the same party.