• Carmakazi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      “Tankies” are largely accelerationists of a few flavors unified by one desire: watch the United States burn to the ground. You shouldn’t take their viewpoint seriously except as adversaries.

    • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      God you guys are as obsessed with tankies as republicans are obsessed with trans people.

      First, can you define a tankie? Secondly, can you tell me how many tankies you think live in the US?

      • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        You, apparently.

        As did everyone. There’s no study showing that the amount of rapes per soldier by the soviets is higher than that of other nations.

        Wow, what an incredibly normal and sane thing to say right at the top of your comment history.

        Edit: There’s genocide denial and blaming NATO for Ukraine too. I’m not even slightly surprised. This is what we refer to as “entirely predictable.” Get some fucking help and exit your information silo. I keep my information ecosystem healthy by talking to people IRL, and I recommend you do the same.

        • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          “Tankie is when you bring up that Nazi anti-communist propaganda about rapist soviets isn’t scientific”

          “Blaming NATO for the invasion of Ukraine is when you say NATO isn’t good and there should be a European military alliance instead while you condemn primarily the Russian Government for the invasion”

          “Genocide denial is when you compare the treatment of minorities in the US and in China”

          Grow up

  • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Between “Democrats say ‘Vote’” and “Democrats do nothing to fight back,” they didn’t vote in 2016.

    This Supreme Court is a result of that inaction.

    Congratulations on proving abstention hands the government to Republicans.

    Let’s not do that any more.

    • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Well said, but sadly they are a lot of people here that don’t care. Which is ironic, considering the meme.

      • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        During the last year of that, Obama was denied the ability to nominate a Supreme Court Justice on an Election Year. Then, Trump got 2 nominees appointed to the SCOTUS, one of which was on an election year.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            As in the Republican Senate decided they weren’t going to vote on any nominations from Obama.

            • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              As in republicans could veto the nomination?

              Could dems veto the new justices?

              Sorry im not American and am trying to understand. I thought dems could have but chose not too due to integrity.

              • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                How to appoint SCOTUS judges:

                1. Vacancy on Court (usually means the old Judge died)

                2. Presidential Nomination

                3. Senate votes to confirm


                How to remove judges:

                1. Impeachment hearings in congress

                2. Senate votes to remove Judge

              • candybrie@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                The Senate has to confirm the president’s picks. The Republicans controlled the Senate during Obama’s last years in office. So they just didn’t confirm his pick. Their reasoning was that it was an election year. When Trump faced the same situation (supreme court vacancy in an election year), the Republicans still controlled the senate and confirmed his pick.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                Ahh okay. When the President wants to nominate a new federal judge the Senate has to approve them. At the time the other party controlled the Senate. The effect was to leave the Supreme Court with an even number of Judges for a while, making tie decisions possible. They also broke their own rule once they had the Senate and Presidency. So they aren’t making arguments in good faith.

      • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Only Congress can increase the number of Justices on the Supreme Court. We had two years of congressional majority in the last twenty. They focused on healthcare.

          • thallamabond@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            And even that was a monumental task. One vote away in the Senate, and that one guy got rid of the single payer option for the cost of his vote. Joe Lieberman if you want to look him up, the guy who started no labels political party (without a platform).

      • someguy3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        You had the first 2 years of Obama. Obama’s thanks for the ACA was voters not showing up and losing the house of representatives for year 3 and 4. And again for year 5 and 6. And then both the house and Senate in years 7 and 8. Congress is what passes laws and has power. They even shut down the freaking government under Obama.

    • abracaDavid@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      This Supreme Court is a direct result of Ruth Bader Ginsberg refusing to retire because ???.

      Thanks again DNC. Couldn’t have done a worse job.

      • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Don’t bring up reality.

        Blame Republicans for the Democrats forcing the Supreme Court to be used as a voting carrot.

        It’s all the lefties fault that they didn’t vote for corporate overlord Hillary Clinton.

      • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s true. Had Obama appointed a Justice we’d just have 5-4 rulings instead of the 6-3 we have now. Trump’s immunity would still have passed.

    • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      Ελληνικά
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Not just voter abstention, but ineffective voting too. Voting 3rd in this election is a surefire way to get trump back in office. If you wanted to stick it to Biden and get someone else, your chance was 4 years ago during the primary.

      You’re not voting Biden because you like him, you’re voting Biden because you want to be able to vote for someone else in 2028. That is literally what is at stake here, and it can’t be said loud enough or often enough.

      Before the “real left” quisling trolls respond, please tell us two things… Who is the 3rd party candidate you are supporting instead? What are their chances of winning this election?

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            We have absolutely aborted the campaigns of incumbent presidents before. The DNC and White House however worked very hard to shut down any criticism during the primary timeframe, refused to have debates, disburse money, etc

            So if they’re going to treat this full election as a preference poll on Biden, then so will the people. And his approval numbers are bad.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                I said aborted the campaign, not lost the nomination. Usually the candidates have the good sense to bow out before that happens.

                • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  Ελληνικά
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  Are you talking about Truman? One guy who started to seek the presidency, after serving 1.5 terms, and then pulling out before being the presumptive nominee? I don’t think history is on your side for this one.

                  Also, answer the questions please.

                  Edit: You actually said “We have absolutely aborted the campaigns of incumbent presidents before.” Implying that the candidate did not win their nomination. Let’s go ahead and put those goalposts back where they were initially.

    • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      More people (as a percentage of the eligible voting population) voted in 2016 than 2012, and more in 2020 than in 2016.

      Finger wagging at people for criticizing the current ruling party (which is sending weapons to a country that is using them to commit genocide) instead of recognizing that we live in an undemocratic system is taking it out on the wrong people. Clinton literally won more votes in the election you’re saying people didn’t vote hard enough in. It’s spitting in the face of everyone whose votes were shat on by the Electoral College to turn around and blame the people who were disenfranchised.

      • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I get your point, but only 48% of registered Democrats voted in 2016. 25% were abstention due to dislike of the candidate.

        Unfortunately, more Democrats need to vote than Republicans, because of the disproportionate weight of Republican states’ electoral votes.

        https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2017/06/01/dislike-of-candidates-or-campaign-issues-was-most-common-reason-for-not-voting-in-2016/

        https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2018/08/09/an-examination-of-the-2016-electorate-based-on-validated-voters/

        • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          I’m not seeing where in those links it says only 48% of registered Democrats voted? If I’m missing it please point it out. The overall turnout was about 60% of eligible voters, so Democrats pulling in less than that and STILL getting more votes would be shocking.

          Getting angry at voters for not voting hard enough after turnout increases every election cycle should illustrate that yelling at people to vote harder isn’t a solution, it’s a stopgap. It doesn’t change that it’s an intentionally undemocratic system, and it doesn’t prevent the exact same “the person with less votes wins” result from happening again.

          • doctordevice@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Not sure who’s downvoting you for asking for clarification. I think the person you responded to misinterpreted the first figure in their second link. It says among validated voters, 48% voted for Clinton and 45% for Trump.

            Nowhere in those links does it say the percentage of voters by party registration that voted, and I can’t find it in any other searching either. Your 60% turnout of voting-eligible population comes up all over the place though.

            • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              I don’t see the downvotes since I’m on Blahaj, that’s funny though. Sorry for reading the sources I guess? The 60% figure was straight from one of the linked articles!

        • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          25% were abstention due to dislike of the candidate.

          Sounds like the problem is with who the DMC puts up, then. If 25% of your own team refuse to participate you’ve got s fucking problem

        • crusa187@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Run better candidates to get more votes, it really is that simple. Blaming the voters just makes you look like a tool.

          • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            And thinking that Democrats are primarily progressive makes you look like one.

            A better candidate for progressives would have been Bernie. DNC fuckery aside, he was very polarizing to half of the party.

      • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        No one is finger wagging for criticizing. They’re being chastised because they whining to everyone how they’re refusing to vote.

        Criticize the fuck out of him. I don’t see anyone giving a shit about that-

        FUCKING VOTE ANYWAY.

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Right. Voting third party truly is trying nothing, since we already know it’s pissing in the wind.

      • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        No you don’t understand voting is doing nothing and not voting is a heroic action worthy of Stalin himself

  • frickineh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    You know what? Don’t vote. You’ve done basically nothing but agitate for people to hand the election to Trump, and it’s obvious you’re either too privileged to be hurt by that or too stupid to realize that you will be. I hope that if he wins, you can look at all the people who lose their rights at best and die at worst, and feel really good about taking a stand or whatever in arguably the worst possible election to do that in in decades. I would love for there to be a genuinely progressive candidate with a snowball’s chance in hell of winning, but there isn’t. A progressive third party candidate (and Jill Stein is not it) is not going to win. That’s the reality we live in, and anyone pretending it’s not is either a liar, a child, or a moron. I have too much to lose by throwing my vote in the trash, but you do you.

    • return2ozma@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      You know you can be critical of the Dems and still vote for them. Everybody should be critical of all our politicians. Always.

      • frickineh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        You can be critical in a productive way, and you aren’t. It’s post after post of “Joe Biden Bad,” without any discussion of how to push for meaningful change that might make for a viable third party or a more progressive Democrat party. There’s a reason a ton of people have you blocked. When all you do is criticize, it’s only barely better than the obvious shills trying to get the left to vote for spoiler candidates or stay home, except at least they’re probably getting paid.

        • return2ozma@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          What can I say that will push Biden Left? He’s been shifting to the right. “We gotta get the Haley voters!”

  • gardylou@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Yeah, it was too much voting by the young and lefties in 2016 that put Trump in power, don’t you remember?

  • Dkarma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Democrats are the fighting back. Primaries are your opportunity to move the needle even further left.

    • hark@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I remember when the needle only barely started to move toward Bernie before the democratic party super-geniuses swiftly moved in to make a whole bunch of candidates drop to put their full support behind decrepit Biden right before Super Tuesday while funding a PAC to keep Warren in the race to split votes with Bernie while running their media machine in overtime talking over and over about the “Biden miracle” after the endorsement in South Carolina gave Biden his only victory up to that point. You know, South Carolina, which didn’t even end up voting for Biden during the actual presidential election.

      Are these the democrats who are fighting back? Well, they’re certainly fighting off the leftists with all their might, that’s for sure.

  • peopleproblems@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Ok, let’s point out how poorly timed this meme is.

    The election isn’t until November. It’s July.

    We did vote, and we can’t vote for any state or district that we are not in. Democrats won 2020, and avoided total disaster in 2022.

    Americans cannot and never have had the ability to vote in SCOTUS.

    The last chance the Democrats had at preventing this shit show was under Obamas first term when he could have briefly stacked the courts.

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Americans did have the ability to vote in SCOTUS. it’s called the general election. and they did in 2016, except democratic voters didn’t feel like it. so now you get 6-3 decisions that are dismantling the whole country.

      • Snowclone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah, the FBI director got ahold of Anthony Wiener’s laptop because he’s a fucking awful dirtbag, and at some point his wife had logged into her work email, so IDENTICAL information from The State Department was on it, so FBI big brain decides to make a big ol press conference to reopen the case against Hillary Clinton days before the election just in case maybe there was more than just duplicate information. Except, he already knew it was all duplicate information. Everyone with a brain new it was all duplicate information.

        What a brilliant guy. He deserves a lot more blame than he’s ever gotten.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        The base voted. The left even voted, despite the party’s claims. Her result is what happens when you take your victory for granted and insult the demographics you need in swing states.

      • bl_r@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Blaming voters for not voting hard enough in 2016 is pretty asinine.

        Hillary had the most popular votes. But she didn’t do a good job campaigning in the states that mattered and banked too hard on the “i’m not trump” factor.

        Blaming the voters takes the blame away from the parties that deserve it more, like Clinton, the DNC, etc.

    • abracaDavid@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      So put your head between your legs and kiss your ass goodbye, because this is what voting blue no matter who gets you.

      We are fucked, and the DNC doesn’t care.

      Prove me wrong.

      • PotatoKat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        We didn’t “vote blue no matter who” in 2016 and trump got 3 supreme court picks. If we did Hillary would have gotten them instead and we wouldn’t be here. So you’re literally wrong.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      God forbid we point out problems and demand reforms while the politicians are asking for our vote. All protests must apparently wait until the president is safely ensconced in office and can ignore us again.

  • GundamWang@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Hmmm I wonder why they don’t do anything about? 🤔

    Oh well I’m sure all those millionaires, billionaires, and their lackeys in both parties will want to stop it.

  • rsuri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    The consequences was losing the election in 2020, no? I mean Democrats are really, really, really bad at fighting back. Like bringing pool noodles to a gun fight bad. But saying they do nothing is a bit much.

    • Stern@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      “They go low, we go high”, has absolutely rotted Dem brains. Going low has worked pretty fucking well.

    • WarlordSdocy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s not really a consequence, more like a slight slow down of their plans. All Democrats really do is not make things worse cause as soon as they “try” to make things better they run into some problems that you know the Republicans would never let stop them. So that just means losing elections is just a slow down rather than a serious consequence for Republicans cause eventually people will get tired of the Democrats not being able to do anything and end up either not voting or voting Republican.

  • njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    You notice that you said vote singular there? That’s why. You vote once and then you act surprised that everything doesn’t change immediately. You want change? You got to keep winning. That’s how change happens. That’s the only way it happens. You think the Civil Rights Act happens without almost 30 straight years of democratic victories?

    • nomous@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      A significant portion of the right believe in a Unitary Executive and that is what they’ve been working towards for decades. They believe the president has the power to control the entire federal executive branch. They’ve captured the judiciary branch and gotten the rulings they want.

      Our current situation really is the culmination of almost 70 years of rightwing efforts. They turn out to school board meeting and ban books. Their base is extremely mobilized and there are dozens of grassroots movements with varying interests. At the end of the day they all show up to vote for their guy(s) to push their party the direction they want, it’s worked and that party has mainstreamed extremism.

      I tell people as often as I can, especially my trans and bipoc friends; now is the time. Get a couple guns (a long one and a short one) and learn how to use them. Learn some basic first aid, you really just need to know how to stabilize someone. Start networking with like-minded people in your communities. The police will not protect us, they’ve proven they’ll happily club senior citizens to the ground and shoot any protesters in the face with rubber bullets while escorting a rightwing murderer to safety.

      Iran was a secular, liberal state until almost 1980 when they (mostly legitimately) elected an Islamist theocracy; it could happen here

    • someguy3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      The problem is that Dems have had control of all 3 (presidency, house of reps, and Senate) for only 4 years of the last 24 years. When you don’t have all 3 you are forced to reach across the aisle.

      *If you include Bill Clinton then it’s 6 years of the last 32 years. If you include Bush senior and Reagan, then it’s 6 years of the last 44 fucking years.