you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (49 children)

Im still trying to figure out how people like you think half the population voted for him. He won a plurality, which means more than his opponent. A majority is over 50%.

Only <65% people of voting age even voted (including 3rd party candidates). He didnt even win a majority amongst only those who voted. And who of the remaining 35%+ is fascist or anti-fascist? They're pretty vocal, now.

Any other option lmao. Dude, he's the least popular president in history. What are you huffing?

Regardless of supporting someone who attempted to overthrow our government, he is surrounded by convicted rapists and pedophiles. Why would he do that?

Regardless of his fascination with dictators and his love of rapists and pedophiles, his Iran war BS is being used explicitly for stock market manipulation. Presidents are not allowed to manipulate the stock market for profit. They actually have some pretty specific rules about what kind of money they can gain, use, and their possession of property is typically very scrutinized for a variety of reasons.

A rapist and pedophile loving, dictator admiring, stock market manipulating, genocide supporting and threatening, wonderful president.

Let me ask: Who won in 2020?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 49 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Almost half of the voting population clearly saw the possibility of him becoming a president again, and decided that preventing that is not worth an afternoon of their time. That's a choice. That's a direct, active action that those people did.
    Most of americans were either in favour or a pedo becoming their king, or didn't see anything wrong with it.

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

    I wouldn’t say that. There’s a lot of disenfranchisement going on with many people across the country. They could still be able to vote but for a myriad of reasons simply be unable to.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    I guess so, but I don't think even with those people included, the statistics will change a lot. Unless there is way more people who were barred from voting, like, millions more. Which means there is so much deeper issue underlying all that, and nobody really talks and knows about it. Which will be so much worse.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    "Didnt have time because they were working to avoid homelessness" is also an option. That isnt a direct, active decision. Voting and getting your ballot thrown out isnt your fault, either.

    A lot of ancient people who dont need to work are the ones voting against their, and our, best interests. Voter suppression, throwing out millions of valid democratic ballots, extra ballots with only Trump on them, a lot of interesting things happened in 2024.

    Most people didnt vote for Trump. Most people who didnt vote who would have, actually abstained due to the success of the anti-Kamala Palestinian propoganda. It was a whole ultra-liberal BS thing that I saw a ton of. Some people certainly didnt care, but your phrasing makes it sound like you believe a majority of people wanted Trump in power. That is simply untrue.

    Our country did what it usually does when it gets too comfortable: Get extremely angsty and shoot ourselves in the foot because we think one candidate is so obviously evil they cant win. We are (and this is true) as smart as a headless ostrich. Overconfidence and a lot of moral grandstanding got us where we are.

    Hope you're happy, idiots. Thats not directed at you, just annoyed the comparison between eating gross tasting food vs trying to eat shards of glass resulted in people choosing shards of glass. George Carlin had a piece on something very similar, I just cant remember the exact quote.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (22 children)

    Only <65% people of voting age even voted

    That's because democrat voters couldn't bring themselves to vote for a woman.

    They said her problem was that she smiled too much.. Then the country chose the rapist who's destroying them as we speak.

    American voters from both sides are responsible for all the death and suffering caused by their president.

    And somehow it's never their fault.

    he's the least popular president in history

    Still he was elected by the american people, after being a convicted rapist and trying to overthrow democracy in the USA.

    Americans should be ashamed that he even was a candidate.

    Don't try to make excuses, americans did this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago

    Trillions being spent on a curated entertainment system (and protecting it) really does that. Fox Entertainment News (the real name of the show) is just allowed to misrepresent themselves as a non-satirical platform, though thats what they argued they were in court to try to get around lying constantly. They got sued due to election lies propogated by them on behalf of Trump. We know why now, its the threat of public humiliation (not even prison time) for wealthy people. If people find out Bezos eats babies, that wont stop Amazon from being profitable. People will just be repulsed by him to a further degree.

    There needs to be a genuine mechanism for punishing media outlets for spreading malicious lies that literally resulted in a terrorist attack on the capital of the country. Like, what?

    Yes, the laziness and assumed victory due to volume of people who were anti-Trump, and people who felt safe being anti-Kamala while voting for moral grandstanding reasons, thinking they wouldnt get punished by Trump winning because it seemed impossible, definitely fucked us over immensely. Propoganda is just better when you have a system that exerts absolute control over everything you see, hear, and read.

    I live in a small republican town. They literally have no idea whats happening in the world around them. I spread the knowledge of what ICE is doing, and a tiny bit of change has happened. There are a LOT less redcaps and more people half-joking about ICE. Someone literally made a joke about calling them for a mexican standoff. I live around some racist people who dont care about deportations, until you describe and prove the conditions those poor people are forced to live in. Everyone they know watches fox. Everywhere has it playing on a tv in the corner, even a lot of stores do. Its hard to crack that egg because they're just SO FREAKIN INSULATED FROM REALITY. These are people who vote, but only hear about politics and the world outside their lives through their kids, when they listen to them.

    These cudgel wielding, clay tablet carving asspickers are why we're here. Rupert Murdoch is a large part of why we're here. Poor education is 100% at fault for this. Im just around average intelligence and the people in this town think Im a genius. Great for my ego, terrifying for our future. Im not smart enough to make decisions about our future, or to completely understand what we're living through. If thats smart, we're fucked.

    Yes, the people are definitely to blame. I fully agree. Anti-Kamala moral grandstanding and refusing to vote ruined us. I hope everyone who didnt vote for moral reasons sleeps well, knowing they incited and supported multiple genocides, including the one they were a widdle angwy about. We couldve fixed that with public opinion. We cant fix a dictator who has a psychotic koolaid following of people who genuinely think he's never done anything wrong. Some people here think 1/6 was a hoax or a protest, if they even know about it. Im not saying it isnt the fault of the people, but there was definitely a lot of money and cheating (as per usual) put into that election.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (11 children)

    If you honestly thought that was true, aren't you saying it was irresponsible of the Dems to run a woman when the election was supposed to be an existential matter?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (10 children)

    Maybe you're right, maybe it was irresponsible of them to trust the intelligence of americans.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (9 children)

    They obviously don't, which is why they didn't run a primary.

    But let's pretend that it was sexism that kade Harris lose. Isn't failing to anticipate that a huge error by Democratic leadership, who anointed Harris?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (8 children)

    Exactly what I said.

    Democracies have been ready for female leaders for decades but somehow americans still prefer convicted criminals.

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

    Ok, so if Trump was an existential threat, why did the Democrats choose to run a woman?

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

    haha they didn't choose a woman, they chose Harris.

    Because she is qualified for the job.

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

    The job was to win the election. Which she failed to do, completely.

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

    You know I meant qualified to be president, find an argument.

    And this wasn't the point, the voters are the ones responsible for the result of the election and all its repercussions.

    I was just saying she was objectively the better choice.

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

    the voters are the ones responsible for the result of the election

    The candidate is not supposed to win elections?

    Given the Democrats avoided a primary in 2024, claiming it's the fault of the voters is especially ironic.

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

    So your point is that the US isn't a democracy?

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

    My point is if you believe the US is incapable of electing a woman candidate (which is what the people who claim, falsely, that Harris lost because of sexism are doing), then isn't nominating a woman candidate choosing to lose the election?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    There is definitely a part of sexism in it, who knows in what proportion. But the problem in its whole is making that choice, and the list of reasons why is very long. Obviously including only the reasons that were known before the election.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -6 points 5 months ago (7 children)

    Correction, voters couldn't bring themselves to vote for an incompetent candidate. The Democrats had years to find someone electable and failed. Biden was a self-stated bridge candidate. Orange Julius was elected because the Democrats failed.

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

    She was and still is objectively the most competent candidate, saying otherwise is exactly what enables trump. His propaganda works with you.

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

    If she was competent she would have won the election. Just look at what she was running against. A clearly deteriorating Joe Biden was able to beat him in 2020 and buy the DNC some time to get their shit together. Why are some unable to see that the Democrats own a big chunk of where we are today?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (4 children)

    Are you aware that the Biden administration, as a condition of Joe stepping aside, insisted that Kamala not deviate from the administrations policy positions at all? She was hamstrung from the beginning.

    You may be unaware that when Joe stepped aside the only person who could legally replace him on the ticket was Kamala Harris.

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

    If true, this information makes her even less competent. Only a fool would agree to be hamstrung by the policies of the prior administration.

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

    It was the current administration. She wouldn't have been able to run at all without that agreement and Trump would have won by default.

    It's telling that you blame Kamala for the constraints put on her rather than Biden who put them there.

    Ideally, Biden should have resigned in 2024, making her president and giving her the incumbent advantage. That was a serious miscalculation.

    We have a serious problem with aging politicians hanging on to their positions for far too long. We were screwed by RBG, Biden, Feinstein and now Schumer. We need progressive candidates to primary every one of these ossified centrists and zionists.

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

    But Kamala wanted to eat babies (Palestinian babies at that!) she wanted to grab every single Palestinian by the neck and personally strangle them. I couldn’t be bothered to vote for her because nothing would be different right now! Biden was senile and I insisted they changed the candidate. When they did, I just knew Kamala would start a war with Iran! I am just glad I stayed home and let things spiral out of control. Any day now things will get better thanks to me staying home!

    — some idiots here who I am more and more convinced are bots or paid trolls.

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

    When can you ever push back on the DNC for being unable to put forward a good candidate?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago

    You can primary whoever you want. Go for it. Progressive policies are always popular with the youth, but those fuckers don’t vote.

    Mandami kinda gives me hope, but I’m not going to hold my breath. If you can’t get the votes with progressive policies, don’t be surprised you end up with Pelosi, Clintons, etc. That’s politics. Or you can pretend your way is the only way and do whatever you want. Not like there haven’t been progressive candidates. They just don’t get votes.

    Carter tried to treat the US like adults and run progressive policies, and we decided to boot him and go with Trump lite.

    When someone is offering you fascism, you go with the non-fascist every time. Or not, I guess.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (12 children)

    because 2/3 of voters did not vote against him, therefore they are either okay with it or were unable to vote

    my assumption is that the size of the latter group, while significant, is not 15% of voters

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 5 months ago (11 children)

    By that token, more people didnt vote for Trump. That means he lost because 2/3 of people didnt vote for him.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (10 children)

    not really how popular votes work

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (9 children)

    Exactly my point. Thank you for agreeing that your argument was silly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (8 children)

    I see what you're trying to do, and you're failing. it's not the same logic.

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

    It literally is. Your argument is that people who didnt vote for Trump wanted him to be president. All people who didnt vote for Kamala are somehow pro-Trump. If that wasn't your intent, you need to work on how you phrase things.

    All I did was say precisely what you said lol just the other way around. Thats because people who didnt vote... did not vote! Ascribing a desired candidate to people who didnt participate is ... not how it works!

    Everyone that doesnt go to subway hates subs so they absolutely must like burgers! See? Silly.

    A lot of people felt disenfranchised and abstained due to a sense of moral superiority to be sure. That doesn't mean they voted for Trump or felt like Trump was the superior candidate. People who dont pay attention to politics didnt vote for or against either candidate, people who didnt vote also didnt vote for or against either candidate.

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

    I'm not reading past your second sentence because you showed that your reading comprehension is garbage

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    Cant defend your opinion, thats okay. Have a good time.

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

    I don't need or want to defend my opinion against somebody who can't read.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    If someone doesnt understand you, you insult them lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    yet more proving that you can't read, there were no insults from me

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    I'm not reading past your second sentence because you showed that your reading comprehension is garbage

    Not an insult!

    I don't need or want to defend my opinion against somebody who can't read.

    How kind, another neighbourly comment

    yet more proving that you can't read, there were no insults from me

    Glad these arent insults, phew. Your reading comprehension is awe inspiring. Its a good thing you didnt insult me as a part of saying you didnt insult me.

    Your argument was that:

    everyone who voted for but didnt vote against Trump wanted him to win/were okay with him being President, or they werent able to show up.

    People who dont vote didnt voice an opinion and we have no ability to read minds. If you cant read minds you cant make claims as to how others will vote.

    Unable to vote is not voicing their opinion, just like deciding not to vote. We cant decide how big either group within this unknown quantity would behave. Deciding not to vote due to a lack of information, constantly changing polling locations, and a billion other arguments for or against whatever you're trying to say. Those are 2 small seeming but incalculably large or small amounts to try and staple an opinion to, especially because... they didnt voice their opinion for whatever reason.

    You're a genius but you wont elaborate, your argument or explanation is just insulting people instead. Substantiate your idea, communicate better. Its not hard. Why do you think you can read minds (lol), and how do you know how they were going to vote?

    If all those people were known to be okay with or voted for Trump, we could say one way or another. We cant say that without also saying some conservatives didnt vote, so they mustve been cool with Kamala, despite her being so hated in MAGA. Its a coin, there are two sides. Claiming one side is heavier without seeing the coin or knowing what kind of coin it is, is a little insane. A loud small group on the internet was mad about Palestine to the extent they said they wouldnt vote, and some people voted third party. There could be 10 or 10000 or 10000000. We dont know. The people who voted 3rd party fall into the "okay with a Trump victory" camp. They voiced an opinion and it wasnt the best method of not having Trump become president. They can definitely fit into your description. People who have an unknown opinion have an unknown opinion.

    My point: If you can read minds, get a job where thats utilized. Cuz its a unique and amazing ability. People overseas, in the military who werent able to vote, those are unknown quantities, people working, but it isnt just people who couldnt vote and wouldve voted the way you want. Thats people popping up with your opinion out of nowhere, but not people who disagree. You just assume more people are Pro-Kamala, or Anti-Trump. Some people are so disconnected with the news that they dont know who the president is. Yeah, they exist, and we also dont know how big that group is, or how they would vote.

    An Australian system would solve this confusion. Because then we wouldnt be trying to read minds. Compulsory ranked choice voting. We would know more accurately how people feel, though we also dont know if those people put any bearing on political positions.

  • source
  • parent