596
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Jaysyn@kbin.social 155 points 5 months ago

The dog caught the car & is desperately trying to escape the pull of the tire.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 96 points 5 months ago

It is genuinely remarkable that so many of those idiots still think theological patriarchy is a viable strategy in this day and age. I think we’ll be safe (as in, demographics will make it not viable for them to remain a political party) by 2030, but the next two presidential elections are gonna be a fucking nightmare.

[-] Masterblaster@kbin.social 70 points 5 months ago

2030 is too far away and i think that's naive. we need them gone now. you don't understand how ingrained conservative thinking is in rural areas. they aren't going away. they're making new ones every day.

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 39 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

We've been saying conservatives will be marginalized soon since the 90's. I really hope it happens in my lifetime. The infestation has only gotten worse.

[-] djsoren19@yiffit.net 9 points 5 months ago

But they have been marginalized, that's why they're not winning the popular vote.

What we are witnessing are the death throes. They can no longer achieve their goals through democracy and so they have started trying to dismantle democracy.

It was never going to be a peaceful transition of power, we'll have to tear it from these dinosaurs' dead claws, but the transition has already begun. If America can survive, I think we'll start to see more and more left-leaning politics as Gen X and millenials replace boomers as a major voting bloc.

[-] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 months ago

And had Gore won it may very well be true, but just cause something seems inevitable doesnt mean it is. Nothing great has been achieved through ignorant inaction.

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Nothing great has been achieved through ignorant inaction.

Agreed. Physical training, education and preparation will save innocent lives. Successfully resisting the conservatives will require it.

It's a great idea to join a local John Brown Gun Club and learn to shoot, even for non-combatants. First-aid / trauma-aid classes and MMA classes are also extremely helpful, even for pacifists.

Conservatives are not pacifists and will not be kind or merciful to those who are unable to defend themselves.

[-] OpenStars@startrek.website 23 points 5 months ago

still think

This is where you went wrong - they don't "think" that, as in they sat down and logically reasoned it out, they "know" that, as in they were told it from a pastor behind a pulpit, who they pay part of their salary to. If they thought it then they could be convinced by the presentation of facts to now think differently, but since their belief comes from authority, there is really no way around that kind of brainwashing. That I know of at least, in anything like a mere few years.

I honestly don't know if our democracy will survive this challenge. What country has ever survived after devolving into a mere two party system, such that neither side does anything except try to block the other one? (That's a legit question btw, if anyone knows the answer)

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 22 points 5 months ago

I think we’ll be safe (as in, demographics will make it not viable for them to remain a political party) by 2030

If it were not for gerrymandering and several other kinds of election tampering, that would have happened at least a decade ago.

As it is, they're still clawing away at democracy to such a degree (and meeting so little resistance other than empty words for the press from the only ones with the power to stop them) that they're likely to remain competitive indefinitely unless something changes dramatically.

the next two presidential elections are gonna be a fucking nightmare.

Sadly, it's much more likely that every presidential election for the rest of my life will and I'm "only" 41.

[-] Zorque@kbin.social 15 points 5 months ago

Considering it's gotten them power thus far, it seems to be working pretty well for them.

I don't disagree that it's morally repugnant... but to say it doesn't get them what they want is naive.

Oh, what I meant was that this whole “frighten all people who have a uterus such that they’ll vote against you in vastly overwhelming droves” strategy doesn’t seem like it’s gonna end well for them. I just hope it doesn’t end well for them quickly.

[-] OpenStars@startrek.website 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Most conservative women that I know aren't one bit frightened. They should be, but they are not. They still think that nothing will happen to them, and they will go on thinking that despite all evidence to the contrary.

On the other hand, what they are frightened of and angry about is the LGBTQIA+ agenda being pushed onto schools. Do NOT overestimate the level of logical thought that such people are willing to put into voting, as compared to respecting authority structures (chiefly, the ones they are told to respect at church, while conversely disrespecting the other stuff they are told to do so with, also at church).

[-] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 2 points 5 months ago

It is a viable strategy as long as you don't depend on actually winning elections.

[-] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 66 points 5 months ago

Fucking disgusting how they talk about it. As if it's just another political stratagem that went a little awry. Fucking fuckers.

[-] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 39 points 5 months ago

Because it was. It was a great wedge to capture religious types and people who were vaguely "in favor of not killing babies" but didn't comprehend the reality of abortion bans. Now that they actually killed roe and we're seeing the devastating impact, they can't tout it as a success. And since roe is already dead, they can't use it as a wedge to activate voters. So it goes away.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 12 points 5 months ago

Worst thing that can happen to conservatives is achieving their stated objectives. Not only do people realize how terrible it is, but they also have to go find another issue to scare people about.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 6 points 4 months ago

As if it’s just another political stratagem that went a little awry.

that's all it ever was to them. they don't believe in anything other than their own power.

[-] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago

Yeah they have to. Those who desire power or money above anything else are more likely to achieve it. Because of this almost all powerful politicians or billionaires are some type of sociopaths or very narrow minded "emotionally retarded" person. Otherwise they fall behind competing with other sociopaths.

I've never heard a name or seen a discussion for this phenomena. It seems to me to be the defining characteristic of those in power and the most important thing to understand in order to fix the systems of power.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 56 points 5 months ago

What idiot is pro choice but doesn't already know that Republicans aren't?

[-] Dkarma@lemmy.world 48 points 5 months ago

Conservative women. They love to pretend they are pro life. Until their own ectopic pregnancy...

[-] Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 25 points 5 months ago

"But this is different." I have straight up heard that without any thought to the irony or interest in this one time exception.

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 6 points 4 months ago

A lot of these people legitimately don't believe that is an abortion. They have been convinced that "abortion" only applies to elective termination of pregnancy as a form of birth control. And they believe there are people who are doing this multiple times per year as their primary form of contraception.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 3 points 5 months ago

Values that are loudly stated mean something more than if we just know someone holds certain values. If we flip the script for example, and consider a democrat who has generally been pro-choice, Vs a generally pro choice democrat who campaigns on making pro-choice law so that the roe Vs wade repeal cannot stand. I'd be much more likely to vote for the latter candidate, largely because this stance will put off people who are anti-abortion.

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 49 points 5 months ago

Yeah, they got their base solidified with lying about the abortion bullshit but their base isn't enough to stay in power, so now they need to lie to the rest of us as well to try and take in as many vote as possible to stay in power, sweet power.

Can't piss off our base though, do be hush hush about it.

Fuck Republicans

[-] TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id 32 points 5 months ago

I wonder what other hugely unpopular positions they can poison themselves with. This is what minority rule looks like. The only way we stop this is by defeating Trump and reforming our democracy. Minorities should have enough power to protect themselves from oppression, but not so much that they can impose their views on the rest of the country. This is what's happening with the far right, which very much is a minority that's far out of step with mainstream American opinion on virtually everything.

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago

I really can't wait for Trump to lose and then continue to insist that he will keep running for president until his dying breath, continuing to hold the party hostage for at least several more years.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 27 points 4 months ago

they are lying and they will take this from you if given the opportunity.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

As always, when they tell you who they are, believe them. When they profess change, make them prove it.

[-] MagicShel@programming.dev 25 points 5 months ago

We asked why

Hahaha.

Grabs their hand holding the anti-abortion sign, bashing then repeatedly in the face with it.

"Why are you hitting yourself? Why are you hitting yourself? Why are you hitting yourself?"

[-] plz1@lemmy.world 25 points 5 months ago

I really hate this "quietly deleting" / "quietly removing" trend in news headlines. Politico's don't "publicly announce" things they want to stop talking about, so it's always going to be "quietly". It's not like their teams have to go into some secret room/SCIFF to remove a paragraph of text on a web page...

[-] dantheclamman@lemmy.world 58 points 5 months ago

Seems quiet to me, in a metaphorical sense, if they delete something from PR page which they previously considered important enough to have as a campaign position, but without articulating a new position. They are obscuring their position.

[-] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 30 points 5 months ago

It's emphasizing that they would prefer people not find out about it, which is different to regular deleting.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CodeName@infosec.pub 21 points 5 months ago

You can hate it if you want, I guess, but isn't that what they are doing? They know the polls are against them so they are flip flopping, to use Repub terms, but doing so in a cowardly fashion hoping no one will notice. But we've all noticed.

How would you frame these types of stories?

[-] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 23 points 5 months ago

Well duh. It's an election year. People will actually go out and vote end of the year.

Hopefully.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2024
596 points (98.1% liked)

politics

18042 readers
3077 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS