this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
1175 points (98.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

5771 readers
2567 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I mean, yeah, this guy is wrong for thinking Trump will keep us out of wars, and the idea that you would vote for someone you think it like Hitler to stop new wars is both contradictory and morally reprehensible. But I've heard this take before (well, except the Hitler part, that's bat-shit insane) and it might be worth reflecting why a lot of the electorate no longer sees the Democratic party as the anti-war party. That's a big shift that's occurred in my lifetime, and it's worth examining.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

But I’ve heard this take before (well, except the Hitler part, that’s bat-shit insane) and it might be worth reflecting why a lot of the electorate no longer sees the Democratic party as the anti-war party. That’s a big shift that’s occurred in my lifetime, and it’s worth examining.

Because they're idiots?

Every major war started in my lifetime (including the "war on drugs") was started by Republicans.

The Democratic party is the party of complacency, I'll grant them that, and we were in wars for several administrations that Republicans started. So it's hard for their donkey brains to remember when and why the wars started and when they ended. A lot of people think that Obama was in office when 9/11 happened. The country is full of idiots.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (17 children)

I think you can't approch it from a party line issue. People want to see it in fact as action for the candidates, and at least right now Biden dropped the ball on Isreal badly. He should have put harsh levers on Isreal to get them out of Gaza quickly, Ukraine is a more complicated problem, but the US should focus more on ending conflicts quickly rather than let them drag on forever. But that takes real policy and leadership.

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (2 children)

Saying they're the party of complacency isn't really accurate. Obama may not have started any new wars (although there's an argument to be made that his operations in Somalia represented a new, unsanctioned war front), but he didn't get us out of Afghanistan, kept joint military operations going in Iraq, and created a massive, unaccountable robot assassination program that killed thousands of people, including U.S. citizens. That's wasn't an act of complacency, it was expansion.

To me, the difference in Democrats' and Republicans' positions on military use can be best summerize by how Obama and Trump reported drone deaths. Obama reclassified every adult male in a target zone as an enemy combatant so that he could artificially lower the number of civilian casualties. Trump just stopped reporting the numbers. One is obviously better than the other, but I wouldn't call either anti-war.

But let's say you're right; the Democrats are mostly anti-war, but they're too complacent with the status quo, and Trump voters are all idiots who can't tell the difference. What are we gonna do about it? 51% of the electorate went to Trump. Are the Democrats going to stand up to the military industrial complex to make their anti-war stance so clear even an idiot could see it? Or are they just gonna lose forever?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

The democrats are not anti war.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 20 hours ago

Yeah, that's certainly how I feel.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (7 children)

But let’s say you’re right; the Democrats are mostly anti-war, but they’re too complacent with the status quo, and Trump voters are all idiots who can’t tell the difference. What are we gonna do about it? 51% of the electorate went to Trump. Are the Democrats going to stand up to the military industrial complex to make their anti-war stance so clear even an idiot could see it? Or are they just gonna lose forever?

You're predicating your false dichotomy on the idea that: (A) the electorate will vote consistently for pacifism and for pacifists, (B) the electorate tracks the policy positions of politicians. Neither of these things are true.

This single issue did not decide this election, and it will not decide future ones (if we even have them) either.

The electorate is vibes based and has been for some time now.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (3 children)

It's because they aren't. Clinton and Gore were 100% interventionist, and had no issues with preemptive war, some accused Clinton of starting a war to boost his popularity. Kerry was anti war historically, but pragmatic on Iraq, Hillary again with Bill not at all anti war-->

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago

Obama's military adittude was ''a Democrat can't say no to the military'' and allowed whatever the joint chiefs wanted, which is never going to be anti war. And Biden was the same. Harris clearly not anti war either. Trump says he is, and that's more anti war than any Dem in my lifetime. Can he effectively govern for war reduction? No. He's an idiot, and liar. But he's selling it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 23 hours ago

Being "pragmatic on Iraq" turned off a lot of the left. Ralph Nader's running mate, Peter Camejo, remarked at the time "Kerry isn't Bush Lite. He's Bush Smart! We do not need a smarter Bush!" Apparently the electorate agreed, because W. Bush went on to win a second term.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

Hillary again with Bill not at all anti war–>

Directly responsible for escalation in Libya, as Sec State, and the deaths of tens of thousands as a result.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 23 hours ago (4 children)

it might be worth reflecting why a lot of the electorate no longer sees the Democratic party as the anti-war party

The only reflection I am able to accomplish is to look at the GOP and say "Worse, tho".

If you aren't voting for the lesser evil, I have to assume you hate America and want it to fail. And that's worse than genocide.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

The only reflection I am able to accomplish is to look at the GOP and say "Worse, tho".

OK, but so far, that hasn't been a very effective electoral strategy. I think we should try something else.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

It doesn't need to be effective, because the pendulum of politics always swings back in the end. Trump will become the next scapegoat of American politics just like he was back in 2018 and then 2020. If the economy tops itself (as is increasingly likely), they'll be facing even bigger headwinds. Even if it doesn't, inflation and sky high rents aren't going away. Consumer debt isn't getting any lighter. The Trump Admin isn't going to be nice to people.

That's the electoral strategy at the end of the day. Just to keep being the Other Option and wait for people to come around. Wait as long as it takes. Maybe it'll take twenty years, like in Arizona. Maybe forty years, like in Georgia. Maybe it'll be over 60, like in Utah. Doesn't matter. Just keep squatting on the Other Option until the day comes.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

It seems like having policies that make people want to vote for Democrats would deliver more immediate and lasting results than allowing American conditions to continue deteriorating and hoping our opponents receive the blame.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

Dems have to deliver on those policies when given the opportunity. If all they can deliver are excuses, they won't have a base that trusts them.

Go down to Mexico and see how this is done. AMLO and Sheinbaum have been on a historic electoral tear, in large part because they've been so effective at delivering their reforms. They're crazy popular right now.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 23 hours ago

The only appropriate response

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago

Done went from being the guy we'd kill if we had a time machine to the guy we voted for in less than a decade. Pretty impressive trick.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (17 children)

Maybe, even if they hate him. Know he is bad. The one takeway is that they liked Kamala even less. It is combination of desperation and despise. If the Dems don't learn from this, they will repeat the same mistakes over and over. Pick someone likeable

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

No matter who Democrats pick they will always be painted as unlikeable, losers, and evil by Republicans. If you think picking a "likeable" candidate is the trick then you too have fallen for the endless Republican framing trap.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Shoulda ran Walz as prez from the get-go. Dude ticks all the masculinity boxes the right loves while being a real human being.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 23 hours ago

That was my first thought when I heard Walz speak: "Wow! Can this guy be president instead?"

Now he has no hope of becoming president, because he's connected to a historically losing campaign. The Democrats would never nominate him now.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Maybe he just meant all the good qualities of Hitler. Like the ones he used to get away with his evil fucking mass murder for so long.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

Say what you will about that Hitler guy - but at least he did do a good thing or two, like killing Hitler!

load more comments
view more: next ›