Pretty sure the masters of gaslighting are the Republicans who have spent the last month telling us that the innocent people they're murdering and disappearing in the streets of America are "domestic terrorists" orchestrating a "massacre".
Pretty sure the masters of gaslighting are the Republicans
Agreed. Both of the parties are gaslighting the public and the Republicans are MUCH better at it than the DNC are.
To the point that they're more successful in spite of being MUCH more out of touch with the needs and wants of regular people when it comes to actual policy rather than propaganda.
That doesn't mean that the DNC leadership isn't dishonest. They're just not anywhere near as good at messaging as the fascists are.
GOP, there's a reason they are called gaslighting, obstruct and project. Weird how leftist don't even blame them for anything, it's almost like they Talk like them
Because it wasn't wrong about the most important fact, that they gaslight a lot. The hyperbole of calling them the "masters" of it is sometimes deliberately used (though not by me) to mean that they do it a lot, and I figured that all but the nittiest of pickers would get that either intuitively or after considering it briefly.
Congrats on being part of that elite, I guess 🤷
GOP lie so much more than the Dems it's absolutely unreal
Which is itself hyperbole. While the GOP lie more often (and a LOT more blatantly), the difference in frequency isn't anywhere near as big as it's commonly believed to be by most non-fascists.
thanks for the downvote by the way shows your maturity
There's nothing immature about registering my disapproval of lazy and illogical nitpicking used to distract from valid and important points.
Which is itself hyperbole. While the GOP lie more often (and a LOT more blatantly), the difference in frequency isn’t anywhere near as big as it’s commonly believed to be by most non-fascists.
To be clear, this is unfalsifiable we have no idea how many "is commonly believed to be" by non-fascists.
There’s nothing immature about registering my disapproval of lazy and illogical nitpicking used to distract from valid and important points.
It's not nitpicking, there's a context in which you're using hyperbole and the direct obvious comparison to be made is the GOP whom are in charge and have power and lie constantly and more often. In using hyperbole, you're diminishing the lies by the GOP either intentionally or not.
In terms of distracting from valid points. I would say you're doing that by attacking the minority party by letting the majority GOP keep going with ICE and their overseas wars.
Wild to see these sort of memes finally being upvoted. Pity it had to take until fascists were murdering people in the street, in broad daylight, and protected by the fascist state.
But they weren't the white people. Once they started openly murdering us whities they didn't care. Something something love me I'm a liberal going on here.
They can't use their "you're complaining about US in a US platform, lmao" gotcha anymore. And well, also censor and hide it as well as they do on mainstream platforms.
One of the Democrats opposed to shutting down the government to hold ICE accountable said something like "the reality is that we need to be in power to fully address this". Ok... but people won't vote for you in the midterms if you don't use the tools at your disposal to address this NOW.
Pretty sure everybody was warning the Democrats about ICE when Biden was up, and all they did was... give them more power. They knew when they had the ability to curb it down.
They're also still voting to give them more money.
Everyone was warning Biden about ice and you thought they wanted less ice agents? How out of touch. I'm actually shocked how much of a bubble you need to be in to hold this opinion.
I'm criticizing the ones PRETENDING to be on our side rather than pissing into the wind by pretending that a fascist party that OPENLY opposes everything I believe in or their supporters would ever be receptive to my critiques.
Just like you don't convince people of the fact that zionism is inherently genocidal by pretending that fanatics like Netanyahu, Smotrich, and Ben-Gvir are the only problem.
People on ML and DB0 generally support the GOP over the DNC, I've noticed. Even now while Donald Trump is being outed as serial child rapist, pushing for death of exodus of every Palestinian, threatening war with NATO, and sending his Gestapo to murder people in the streets they have nothing to say except "DNC bad".
The public uproar after the murder of Alex Pretti was able to make Trump and the GOP flinch and you still can't comprehend anything beyond the liberal democratic system? Centrist propagandaegot you good, dammit.
But if you need it to be spelled out for you: ML is predominantly Marxist-Leninis, and DB0 predominantly anarchist. I doubt those instances have much sympathy for the outright fascists.
But opposing Paul von Hindenburg must probably mean being in favour of Hitler, I guess. /s
Yeah, the Democrats have not beaten the paid opposition argument with me at all. Most of them seem okay with voting for ICE funding and Trump appointees. They cannot even form a cohesive line in the sand like the fascists can except hen it comes to performative voting like denouncing socialism. The neo-liberal is NOT out way out of this mess.
The Dems haven't had more than 48 senators in 13 years and ICE funding always gets bundled with funding for other agencies like housing and transportation.
The problem seems to be that republicans make the decisions when republicans are in charge, and when democrats are in charge the republicans also make the decisions.
It's what happens when there's only two right wing parties to choose from.
The Overton Window has shifted way too far.
Democrats ought to move further left to get more nonvoters to vote for them, instead of trying to move right to convert right wing voters.
Then they'd be saying it's too late to object. You have to do party building on non-election years, including midterms, and not until the new party has 51% support.
There's that tired whataboutism we know and loathe 🙄
Criticizing the Dems ≠ saying that the fascists aren't worse than them. Just like decrying the Israeli genocide of Palestinians ≠ saying that it's worse than the Holocaust was.
And nope, I criticize the Dems (and the fascists and every other politician I'm aware of deserving criticism) EVERY year. It's not my fault that YOU only pay attention during election years.
ironically I haven't seen anything out of you in 2025
Because you haven't been CHECKING in 2025. I've been criticizing them for their cowardly compliance with the fascist regimes of the US and Israel more times in 2025 than I've posted pictures of my two cats The Fabulous Staredycat Sisters and that's SAYING something 😁
Lol I believe it! its just the first time I noticed was all. I think there just more active users than when I joined Lemmy so your posts were a much larger chunk of visible posts back then.😆
Based eternal criticism! I'lll take your word for it, as I don't track individual posting habits. I just notice a general uptick in "dems bad", "don't vote", and similar when we get closer to an election.
I just notice (...) when we get closer to an election.
That's my point. Claiming without any proof that any criticism is based on it being election season and therefore might be false flag bottery is a classic deflection tactic not unlike many that the fascists use when people on their side criticize the Mango Mussolini.
Hahaha buddy, pump the breaks, you may want to live up to the username and enjoy some nature. Pointing out meme trends without cyberstalking every poster on the Fediverse first isn't cryptofash tactics.
Probably because the original Lemmy users and Developers are all eastern propagandists for Russia and China, there is a funded campaign complete with troll farms pushing anti-DNC sentiment because the east actually favors Trump over a competent POTUS.
Now that Piefed is around we should really normalize defederating ML.
Exactly. Had Harris won we would STILL have alienated almost every ally we've had for centuries, deployed a completely undertrained ICE brute squad to liberal cities to kill citizens, attempt to destroy the economy with tarrifs, pull back support for Ukraine and assist Putin, appointed insane maga lifetime federal judges that would cause a generation of suffering, destroy NATO incentivising more nations to build their own nuclear stockpiles... this was all inevitable no matter who won because the dems candidate was a genocidal maniac. Harris = Trump.
/s
It must hurt Viking's brain that we live in a fascist world
Of course. If the return of fascism to the richest country in the history of the world DOESN'T hurt your brain and several other parts of you, you're either extremely ignorant, extremely twisted, or both.
where all we have to pick from is the lesser of the two evils.
Yeah, there's that learned helplessness that Neoliberals and their enablers trot out the moment anyone dares hold them to account from the Left 🙄
In terms of existing at all you're right, but in terms of being the base ideology of the government, it did.
The US was fascist before the term existed.
It shared significant aspects, yes, but that's not the same as fully BEING fascist any more than being an overrated team sport with a ball makes basketball the same thing as baseball*
I think you imagine there is another option when the entire world is ran by wealthy and their favorite proxy the corporation
Again: that's an aspect of fascism, but also an aspect of many OTHER bad forms of government such as Neoliberalism, paleoconservatism, and anarcho-capitalism.
Show me a country without an every widening income gap and I will believe you that there is another option besides starting over.
Capitalism ≠ fascism. The latter is the inevitable consequence when the former isn't sufficiently kept in check and both need to be abolished for the good of humanity, but that still doesn't mean that they're the same thing.
*yes, this example WAS ridiculous on purpose to inject a little levity.
I have studied the American revolution with a critical eye and I can definitely tell you that the "founding fathers" were the very definition of corporatism. They also ticked off all the bad things people usually associate with fascism as well. I go off Mussolini's definition of fascism as opposed to scholars who don't want believe their country is fascist.
Viking, 90% of all policies in every nation in the world are written by corporations. We live in a corporatocracy which is arguably the natural result of corporatism in the modern world.
I think you are imagining capitalism as the mythical "small business capitalism" when in reality it always leads to concentration of power hence the reality we live in. You can prove me wrong by showing me a capitalist practicing nation that doesn't have an ever increasing wealth gap.
Capitalism leads to corporatism that leads to a corporatocracy. I also don't buy into the "keeping it in check" belief that tries to condition us that capitalism will work under the right circumstances.
Of course it will work, by concentrating power leading to fascism like it already has. It will never be regulated into small business capitalism because that is just the larval stage.
Does anyone have a coherent argument for abolishing ICE without repealing the laws in their official scope?
I ANGRY AT ICE!
I MAD!
is not a coherent argument.
Opposing misconduct, unlawful abuses, excessive budget & employees has nothing to do with whether there are legal enforcement duties demanding existence of enforcers.
Acting illegally means any federal law enforcement can abuse authority the same as ICE: Customs & Border Protection, TSA, Secret Service, Coast Guard, DEA, ATF, FBI, IRS Criminal Investigation, Postal Inspection Service, Marshals Service, Forest Service, Park Service, Fish & Wildlife Service, Odometer Fraud Investigation, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, EPA, etc.
An executive agency is just an organization administered by executives.
Abolishing an executive agency doesn't stop the executive administration from reproducing the same abuses elsewhere.
They can even move the same employees & resources elsewhere.
They can withhold & misappropriate funds again as they've done before.
Beyond discredit supporters as ignorant & incapable of thinking through stupid shit, abolishing an organizational unit of the federal executive branch doesn't seem to accomplish much.
Getting ideas taken seriously at the very least requires ideas that aren't stupid AF.
::: spoiler Post needs text alternative.
Images of text break much that text alternatives do not.
Losses due to image of text lacking alternative such as link:
usability
we can't quote the text without pointless bullshit like retyping it or OCR
Does anyone have a coherent argument for abolishing ICE without repealing the laws in their official scope
What a nonsense caveat. Regardless of what they do or don't do, repealing or amending the applicable laws IS necessary to abolish that abomination. That's how the system works.
Ignoring that, the only things ICE ever did that other agencies didn't do before is dial the abuse of undocumented immigrants and anyone else caught in the crossfire up to 11 at first, roughly 175 by now.
It's the American SS or Gestapo and has precisely zero mitigating circumstances to even begin to justify its existence in a modern democracy.
ME ANGRY AT ICE! ME MAD!
is not a coherent argument.
Neither are your disingenuous strawmen.
Opposing misconduct, unlawful abuses, excessive budget & employees has nothing to do with whether there are legal enforcement duties demanding existence of enforcers.
Yes it does and here's why:
As pointed out earlier, there's no need for the kinds of enforcement that ICE was created to carry out. On the contrary, it has only made the whole immigration situation MUCH worse than it would otherwise have been.
Pretending for a second that reason 1 ISN'T enough, there's the question of proportionality: even IF they did anything to benefit society, there's an upper limit to the amount of abuse and waste thst said benefit would be worth.
No benefit is worth spending more than most countries spend on their armed forces on jackbooted thugs whose function is to abuse with impunity.
Nope. ICE was specifically created to visit MORE abuse on people with less oversight and fewer consequences. While other federal cops can (and far too often WILL) also abuse innocent "suspects", ICE is BY DESIGN more likely to do so with impunity.
An executive agency is just an organization administered by executives
Sure, there's no difference between regulatory agencies like the EPA and custodian entities like the Park Service and designated brown people hunters! 🙄🤦
They can even move the same employees & resources elsewhere
You can also hire a baseball player as your interior decorator. Doesn't make the jobs equivalent to each other.
Abolishing an executive agency doesn't stop the executive administration from reproducing the same abuses elsewhere
It DOES when part of the law you pass to do so specifically forbids those kinds of abuses and/or gets rid of so-called "qualified immunity".
They can withhold & misappropriated funds again as they've done before.
They can also murder people as some of them have done before. That doesn't mean that murder should be legal or not prosecuted.
discredit supporters as ignorant & incapable of thinking through stupid shit
Wow, the projection is strong with this one!
Getting ideas taken seriously at the very least requires ideas that aren't stupid AF.
Nah, people took the idea of creating ICE seriously to the point that they even did it. In spite of everything I've explained above about it being a mechanism for ethnic cleansing and abuse on purpose from day one.
What a nonsense caveat. Regardless of what they do or don’t do, repealing or amending the applicable laws IS necessary to abolish that abomination. That’s how the system works.
disingenuous strawmen
Then use words correctly: abolish ICE literally means exactly that.
It doesn't mean repeal the laws, which would make sense.
Otherwise, why not say repeal those laws?
It's not a strawman to interpret your message exactly as stated.1
It's no one else's duty to make up unstated justifications for a poorly argued demand.
Given the lack of explicit context & justification for the demand to abolish ICE other than current events, the reader is justified to assume the only justification is current events (ICE's abuse of authority under the Trump administration).
It's unjustifiable to expect the reader to assume the demand is predicated on ICE's lawful purpose, too.
While I agree that US's immigration, naturalization, & border policies are mostly unnecessary bullshit2, I also follow the news enough to be aware I'm in the waning minority.
Right up to the election, the people clearly favored less immigration & stronger enforcement of border policy.
That's been a consistent pattern: popularity of immigration controls steadily increase until some illegal or outrageous shit (like a Muslim ban, family separation, or murder of civilians & violation of their rights) hits the news, when they decline until the next administration is voted in.
Then their popularity recovers & continues to increase as if all is forgiven.
Voters seem to love immigration controls as usual.
I've never seen a popular movement to oppose those bullshit naturalization tests most US citizens would fail.
Moreover, ICE has existed since 2003 through the Bush, Obama, Biden administrations without calls to abolish it gaining traction.
Before ICE, INS was performing similar duties of arresting, detaining, and deporting illegal immigrants.
During all that time, calls to abolish INS never took off despite it performing raids & having overseen World War 2 internment camps of "enemy aliens".
Voters only cease to love immigration controls when they don't operate as usual.
Despite existing through multiple terms, abolish ICE only gained traction under the 1st Trump term.
Then people stopped giving a shit with Biden's term.
Now we're back.
It seems voters give a fuck only with overtly illegal or abusive conduct and otherwise support the whole contradictory system of wanting immigrants labor for work citizens won't do yet opposing immigrants.
It's clear to me that voters only care about ICE's latest spate of illegal conduct & abuse of authority without objecting to the concept of ICE itself.
While voters can easily accept that illegal conduct & abuse of authority should end, that doesn't imply abolish ICE.
It implies repealing Trump era changes & addressing the administration's ability to perform illegal conduct.
Convincing voters that ICE needs to be abolished & the laws in its scope of enforcement need to be repealed takes an altogether different argument that demands a reversal of their usual position.
Without articulating an effective argument, abolish ICE is fairly construed by the general public as mindless, outrage-fueled stupidity.
As pointed out earlier
Link missing.
there’s no need for the kinds of enforcement that ICE was created to carry out. On the contrary, it has only made the whole immigration situation MUCH worse than it would otherwise have been.
The detentions & harsher Trump policies aren't necessary.
Much immigration policy is counterproductive & stupid.
HSI special agents investigate violations of more than 400 U.S. laws that threaten national security, including counter-proliferation; human smuggling and trafficking; weapons smuggling; narcotics smuggling and trafficking; human rights violations; transnational gang activity; financial crimes, including money laundering and bulk cash smuggling; cyber crime; child exploitation and sex tourism; trade crimes such as commercial fraud and intellectual property theft; smuggling of counterfeit pharmaceuticals and other merchandise; document and benefit fraud; the manufacturing, sale, and use of counterfeit immigration and identity documents; mass-marketing fraud; art theft; international cultural property and antiquities crimes; export enforcement and visa security.
Addressing your other points
No benefit is worth spending more than most countries spend on their armed forces on jackbooted thugs whose function is to abuse with impunity.
is still an argument for repealing Trump era changes.
ICE was specifically created to visit MORE abuse on people with less oversight and fewer consequences.
Nah, people took the idea of creating ICE seriously to the point that they even did it.
Nope, ahistorical & addressed earlier: existed since 2003 with predecessor INS & its predecessors tracing back further.
Sure, there’s no difference between regulatory agencies like the EPA and custodian entities like the Park Service and designated brown people hunters! 🙄🤦
Doesn’t make the jobs equivalent to each other.
Maybe you have no fucking idea what it means to act unlawfully with impunity: is ICE legally violating constitutional rights, defying court orders, or murdering?
When government decides to disobey laws, the laws do not limit it.
It DOES when part of the law you pass to do so specifically forbids those kinds of abuses and/or gets rid of so-called “qualified immunity”.
Again, the administration isn't following laws or court orders.
Where are the Epstein files?
Impeachments & cutting funds are necessary.
That doesn’t mean that murder should be legal or not prosecuted.
It already is illegal.
Have you paid attention?
Prosecution is up to federal (good luck) & state prosecutors.
Wow, the projection is strong with this one!
Nah, that's you: stop forgetting history & expecting everyone to mind read.
Footnotes
The only ones to blame for miscommunication are those who assume their inept phrase abolish ICE should mean anything else to everyone else.
Instead of willfully ignoring how language works & that no one can read your mind, communicate better: state what you mean. ↩
Before the 20th century, there were practically no immigrant regulations: largely open borders, no requirement for passports, visas, or pre-approved, permanent residency.
Immigrants could simply purchase a steamship ticket, arrive at a port, pass basic inspections for health & criminal record. ↩
Personally, I support the DNC and their plan to tax the rich and remove money from politics. I feel like even if they got a supermajority and abandoned literally every other stance, those two things alone would fix this nation in the long run.
SuperPACs became a thing because they couldn't even handle PACs.
if we gave them the chance.
Is the problem with your whole idea. They don't have an incentive to change anything, and they certainly won't pass a constitutional amendment without a significant amount of pressure from constituents.
The whole point of voting Biden was to undo what Trump did. and ensure he was properly prosecuted for his crimes. He half assed both and then refused to step down for a primary despite being unpopular.
They didn't have any incentive to change anything in 2003, either, then. So why did they? And the DNC today is further left than those 1995 assholes were, too.
The thing about democracy is that when we all work to create a better world then we all benefit from living in one. Greed only creates suffering, even for the people who hoard wealth.
Greed only creates suffering, even for the people who hoard wealth.
I mean the last election pretty clearly showed how greed from the democrats not wanting to upset the AIPAC cost them the election. But yea sure they'll surely do the right thing next time, right?
I don't know what you're smoking but sure seems like copium.
Biden did not do nearly enough to stop Israel, and far more DNC voted to pass weapons sales to them than I am comfortable with, but he and the DNC as a whole were negotiating for lasting peace, even withholding large ordinances that Israel had already payed for, although hardly anybody believes that because of propaganda by Israel, China, and Russia who all favored Trump winning the election.
That said, anybody who actually cared about a single palestinian life should have been out on the streets begging people to support Harris' election as POTUS, because the alternative is the Trump Admin whose official stance is according to Department of War's Pete Hegseth: Death or Exodus of every Palestinian.
What does that even mean? I'm not physically restraining them. They run their own party. Their party platform has never been put up to a vote directly for me where I mandated they use PAC funding. Individual candidates have declined PAC funding and I've contributed to them, but the DNC can do whatever it wants and it clearly doesn't want to ban PAC funding. I've now helped vote in multiple democratic presidents along with democratic congresspeople. What chance am I not giving them?
We have not given the DNC more than 48 senate seats in over 13 years. We collectively haven't given them power. We need to give them power to create any progress at all.
They run their own party. They can ban PAC funding whenever they want. If they wanted to reject PAC money there is nothing stopping them. Plenty of Dems have run and won without it. If they legitimately think it's a bad thing they can do something about it right now.
Obama did no PACs in 08. AOC and even Kamala ended up rejecting PAC money. 52 sitting reps ran a PAC free campaign. My solution is to actually have a coherent platform. If we believe PAC money is compromising, why should we elect people we believe to be compromised? People have proven PAC free campaigns can be done, often by mobilizing grassroots support. The thing about elections is that money doesn't actually win them, votes do. Candidates that engage with the people they represent can drum up support in the form of votes, regardless of ad spend.
People have come to believe the Dems don't actually believe in the things they supposedly support. I think they'd gain a lot of traction if they actually committed to a single ideal. Corpos are now all in on the republicans anyway. Now would be a great time to make rejection of PAC money a core part of the party. People want to vote for people who are honest about their beliefs. It's hard to believe they care about getting money out of politics when they're beneficiaries of PACs too. Let's see them put their money where their mouth is. Or literally on any of their positions since they're willing to cave for anything, happy Charlie Kirk day of remembrance.
Just because you have an ignorant, self-indulgent opinion, doesn't mean they're wrong.
A leftist should at least put their values into practice in their online conduct by setting alt text.
::: spoiler By lacking accessibility, this image of pure text sustains a pattern of systemic discriminatory exclusion.
Images of text break much that text alternatives do not.
Losses due to image of text lacking alternative:
usability
we can't quote the text without pointless bullshit like retyping it or OCR
As is pretending that the DNC leadership is in ANY way for getting money out of politics. That's how their machine is fueled.
Most huge donors donate to both parties and in the case of for example the healthcare insurance leech industry, Dems receive MORE of the legal bribes than the GOP does.
The enemy of your enemy is rarely actually your friend and in this case your "friend" is actively working against the very thing you vote for them to do.
The leadership of the DNC are the Weimar Republic equivalent, NOT the courageous resistance fighters you seem to imagine them as.
The DNC already tried it once only for it to get blocked by the conservative SCOTUS judges.
From 1995 they tried to ban PAC funding for campaigns and limit individual contributions, it passed in 2003, and after a lawsuit by Citizens United in 2007 it was declared unconstitutional in 2010.
In order to try it again requires a constitutional ammendment, 67 senate votes.
As for Tax plans, there is no question that the DNC campaigns on taxing the wealthy and that they've increased audits on the rich. Kamala Harris promised an unrealized gains tax over a million and no tax increases on those who make less than 400k. Unfortunately they've had 48 or less senators for over 13 years and as a result the GOP have managed to keep cutting taxes repeatedly in that timeframe.
Closer, but still over two DECADES ago, and with little to no meaningful follow-up.
As for Tax plans, there is no question that the DNC campaigns on taxing the wealthy
Bolded the operative word. What the DNC campaigns on and what they ever actually DO are vastly different things. That's the gaslighting part of the meme. The gaslighting that you are perpetuating right now.
they've increased audits on the rich
Not by anywhere near as much as has been in their power to do. Plus they've continued to facilitate through both inaction and active support the loopholes that make it perfectly legal to cheat your ass off on your taxes as long as you're rich and careful enough to do it the "right" way.
Kamala Harris promised
She's notorious for being untrustworthy even by politician standards. She was the first 2020 candidate (after Bernie, of course) to call for M4A, but she was also the first to stop doing so and pretend she never did as soon as the insurance leech industry lobby cut a check for her.
Unfortunately they've had 48 or less senators for over 13 years
Because they keep allying with republicans to go for the increasingly tiny "Republican but doesn't automatically vilify anyone with a D behind their name" voter bloc while largely ignoring when not condescending at anyone to the left of Ronald Reagan.
as a result the GOP have managed to keep cutting taxes repeatedly in that timeframe
Yes, as a result of the DNC being stuck in 1992 when it comes to messaging and campaign strategy (and a shitload of voter suppression that's at its most effective when voters aren't enthusiastic about any candidate), the GOP are extremely successful in spite of being deliberately out of step with the needs and wants of roughly 99% of the population.
The status quo is abysmal for Dem electability but absolutely fantastic for Dem politician profitability, so they just keep pissing on the constituency and telling them that not only is it raining, but the GOP bears 100% of the blame for said rain.
How dare they judge us based off who we voted for, like our actions have consequences or something. It's bullshit. I just want to criticize everything, contribute nothing, and still receive praise from actual leftists.
The people being mocked by this meme isn't people who voted for the Dems. It's the Dems who keep abusing the trust of anyone that does by breaking their promises of affecting meaningful change for regular people.
To put it another way: this is criticizing Lucy for pulling away the football more than Charlie Brown for thinking she won't do it this time.
Ironically, you missed the point of him mocking leftists who don't want to be blamed when they do stupid shit like protest voting.
Do you know why Donald Trump won in 2024? Do you think he gained millions of voters since 2020? NO. Donald Trump won because 9 Million people who voted for Biden in 2020 did not show up to vote for Harris in 2024. That's why Republicans are making everything worse, causing starvation and disease across the globe, pushing the world towards the dual cliffs of climate change and nuclear war. Because of "leftists" choosing to "resist" the DNC's competent leadership, opting for a genocidal maniac instead.
The fact that you don't even register the conflicting statements you just posted.
For example: Tim Walz said in the VP debate that they need to Expand Israel's Borders, but you claim he was more popular than Kamala Harris and also that the Israel stance lost her the election. It is also nonsensical to believe Donald "Kill Their Families" Trump would help a single fucking Palestinian.
You also talked about the popularity of literal DNC policy platform.
This is a great example of how the DNC candidates themselves weren't the problem, rather how tens of millions of people can be easily deceived is the problem.
No wonder you're still confused if you didn't even bother reading them.
Tim Walz said in the VP debate that they need to Expand Israel's Borders, but you claim he was more popular than Kamala Harris and also that the Israel stance lost her the election.
You must be referring to the last link. Which, if you read, was about Walz' policies on increasing the minimum wage, taxing the wealthy, lowering cost of prescription drugs, and legalizing weed. Not remotely his stance on Israel, which when he toed that DNC line on the debate change, I'm sure significantly hit his popularity. That's about the pivoting point when popularity that initially surged for Harris/Walz waned as they made absolutely there 'nothing would fundamentally chance' compared to Biden.
Israel was a significant factor, perhaps see the 34 polls linked for details, instead of just the link text.
It is also nonsensical to believe Donald "Kill Their Families" Trump would help a single fucking Palestinian.
From a previous comment of mine:
So how was Trump able to come off as the 'dove' candidate? He did this same strategy of framing himself as a peaceful 'dove' in 2016 against Clinton. I put dove in quotes because anyone who pays attention to Trump's actual foreign policy knows that's not remotely true. High propensity voters aren't fooled by this but plenty of low propensity voters sure can be. Trump was only effective as framing himself as a Dove because of how terrible the Biden admins Foreign policy was for the last fifteen months. If Harris pivoted from Biden on Palestine, as the vast majority of all voters wanted and as required by domestic and international law, Trump wouldn't have been able to frame himself as a Dove. I'm fact, if Harris not only pivoted but harped on Trump's connection to Netanyahu, it would've been incredibly easy to frame Trump as a warmonger cozying up to genocidal fascists
You also talked about the popularity of literal DNC policy platform.
No, I pointed out what they need to be a popular platform.
This is a great example of how the DNC candidates themselves weren't the problem, rather how tens of millions of people can be easily deceived is the problem.
Again, this only makes sense if you repeatedly ignore the significant and overwhelming evidence that shows which of their policies (and lack there of) caused them to become unpopular, and which policies would make them popular
I'm done with this convo. All the answers to your questions are in those links, which anyone who took them seriously would know.
None of that changes the fact that the reduction in Democrat voter turnout exactly as protest (non)voters advocated won Trump the election.
That protest (non)voting "strategy" was shit advocacy.
Larry Sabato, the director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, acknowledged that Biden voters who swung toward Mr. Trump played a part in Ms. Harris’s loss, but pointed to low Democratic turnout as the larger factor.
Later, the article highlights clear cases (in some swing states) where Democratic voter turnout would have made a difference.
Where Trump gained a little and Harris lost a lot.
Mr. Trump won Florida’s Miami-Dade County, becoming the first Republican to do so since 1988. But again, Ms. Harris’s loss was just as much of the story as his gain: Mr. Trump won about 70,000 new votes in the county, while she lost nearly 140,000.
Other counties that Mr. Trump flipped had similar vote disparities.
In 21 of these 77 counties, Mr. Trump received fewer votes in this election than in 2020, but the Democratic vote drop-off was much steeper. This happened from coast to coast, from Fresno County, Calif., to Pinellas County, Fla.
It was the Democrat's strategy that resulted in low voter turnout. The votes were up for grabs, they ran away from them.
It's not like the campaign was unaware of what messaging and policies were unpopular. They chose to ignore it. They chose to run to the right on policy and messaging.
If they gave a shit about being an opposition to fascism, about actually winning, they would have heeded all the warning signs and run a different campaign. Instead they prioritized the interest of their capital donors, and gave a fuck you to their constituents that they are supposed to represent.
Ironically, you missed the point of him mocking leftists who don't want to be blamed when they do stupid shit like protest voting.
Nope, I caught that. Just didn't want to dignify his tired strawman by directly addressing it.
Do you know why Donald Trump won in 2024
Many reasons, chief amongst them the Dem leadership running one of the worst campaigns in living memory.
Around the time where they had taken the senile old man off the ticket and added the authentic and compassionate governor, they had FANTASTIC momentum and were sailing towards a landslide victory by creating almost unprecedented enthusiasm within their own base.
Then they started listening to the donors and Clintonian strategists and pissed it all away in favor of their usual "Centrist" (actually significantly right of center by today's standards) strategy from 1992.
9 Million people who voted for Biden in 2020 did not show up to vote for Harris in 2024
See above for the main reason.
That's why Republicans are making everything worse, causing starvation and disease across the globe, pushing the world towards the dual cliffs of climate change and nuclear war. Because of "leftists" choosing to "resist" the DNC's competent leadership
Nope. You've got it upside down again.
The outwardly incompetent (but actually shrewd when you realize that they value tradition and their legal bribes over getting elected) DNC leadership threw the Left off the cliff, pissing on them all the way down while receiving billions of dollars from rich donors for their trouble.
You blame the dnc doing a poor job campaigning (trying to pull in some centrist vote) as the reason they lost, it's the same as blaming the gop doing an effective job campaigning (by lying). Nope. It's the fault voters who are stupid and blind that failed to see through the posturing and effectively voted for the fascist assholes who are now destroying the U.S. You shouldn't need handholding to see the gop is evil and the dnc isn't as bad. You had a choice between those, and you picked trump 2 - you own the result.
Seriously. It's the bare minimum obligation as a member of society to be informed and engaged in the civic process, including understanding how our system works in practice and the ability to look past what pols say and simply see how they vote, and how those policies actually affect the country. It takes very little time and effort and intelligence to be at least this engaged, and 70 percent of Americans can't be fucked. Trump and maga are fully the fault and responsibility of the average US American non and third party voter.
This is basically how I feel. I agree generally with the original meme but it's also still absolutely the voters fault for being so fucking stupid and uninformed.
Ah finitebajo has arrived to shut the thread down with his troll posting. Here comes 20 coments with negative scores and everyone departing in disgust.
Pretty sure the masters of gaslighting are the Republicans who have spent the last month telling us that the innocent people they're murdering and disappearing in the streets of America are "domestic terrorists" orchestrating a "massacre".
Agreed. Both of the parties are gaslighting the public and the Republicans are MUCH better at it than the DNC are.
To the point that they're more successful in spite of being MUCH more out of touch with the needs and wants of regular people when it comes to actual policy rather than propaganda.
That doesn't mean that the DNC leadership isn't dishonest. They're just not anywhere near as good at messaging as the fascists are.
okay ...
hmm ....
I didn't come up with the post title, and it was close enough to the point even if it wasn't LITERALLY true AKA thematically accurate hyperbole 🤷
Why didn't you change it? It's not a news article.
GOP lie so much more than the Dems it's absolutely unreal
... k
thanks for the downvote by the way shows your maturity
GOP, there's a reason they are called gaslighting, obstruct and project. Weird how leftist don't even blame them for anything, it's almost like they Talk like them
Because it wasn't wrong about the most important fact, that they gaslight a lot. The hyperbole of calling them the "masters" of it is sometimes deliberately used (though not by me) to mean that they do it a lot, and I figured that all but the nittiest of pickers would get that either intuitively or after considering it briefly.
Congrats on being part of that elite, I guess 🤷
Which is itself hyperbole. While the GOP lie more often (and a LOT more blatantly), the difference in frequency isn't anywhere near as big as it's commonly believed to be by most non-fascists.
There's nothing immature about registering my disapproval of lazy and illogical nitpicking used to distract from valid and important points.
I remember this old nugget: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/01/24/trumps-false-or-misleading-claims-total-30573-over-four-years/
To be clear, this is unfalsifiable we have no idea how many "is commonly believed to be" by non-fascists.
It's not nitpicking, there's a context in which you're using hyperbole and the direct obvious comparison to be made is the GOP whom are in charge and have power and lie constantly and more often. In using hyperbole, you're diminishing the lies by the GOP either intentionally or not.
In terms of distracting from valid points. I would say you're doing that by attacking the minority party by letting the majority GOP keep going with ICE and their overseas wars.
😮💨
I can explain it to you and I have, thoroughly and clearly, but I can't understand it for you.
Have the day you deserve.
How is it gaslighting if everyone expects them to fold?
Ah yes, sure and what were democrats doing?
But but but... if we're splitting hairs and stuff and put our heads in sand, they're totally different and fighting for the people.
Wild to see these sort of memes finally being upvoted. Pity it had to take until fascists were murdering people in the street, in broad daylight, and protected by the fascist state.
quick fix
The fascists were murdering people in the streets well before now
Good fix
But they weren't the white people. Once they started openly murdering us whities they didn't care. Something something love me I'm a liberal going on here.
Thank you for reminding me of this Phil Ochs classic ❤️
There are multiple shades of political opinion. The shadiest is the liberal. <3
Fediverse working as intended.
They can't use their "you're complaining about US in a US platform, lmao" gotcha anymore. And well, also censor and hide it as well as they do on mainstream platforms.
One of the Democrats opposed to shutting down the government to hold ICE accountable said something like "the reality is that we need to be in power to fully address this". Ok... but people won't vote for you in the midterms if you don't use the tools at your disposal to address this NOW.
Pretty sure everybody was warning the Democrats about ICE when Biden was up, and all they did was... give them more power. They knew when they had the ability to curb it down.
They're also still voting to give them more money.
Everyone was warning Biden about ice and you thought they wanted less ice agents? How out of touch. I'm actually shocked how much of a bubble you need to be in to hold this opinion.
its the GOP, its in thier name. gaslight obstruct PROJECT. you are looking at the wrong enemy to criticize.
Nope.
I'm criticizing the ones PRETENDING to be on our side rather than pissing into the wind by pretending that a fascist party that OPENLY opposes everything I believe in or their supporters would ever be receptive to my critiques.
Just like you don't convince people of the fact that zionism is inherently genocidal by pretending that fanatics like Netanyahu, Smotrich, and Ben-Gvir are the only problem.
People on ML and DB0 generally support the GOP over the DNC, I've noticed. Even now while Donald Trump is being outed as serial child rapist, pushing for death of exodus of every Palestinian, threatening war with NATO, and sending his Gestapo to murder people in the streets they have nothing to say except "DNC bad".
Of course: If people hate the DNC, they must like the GOP. It's impossible to disapprove of two things at the same time. /s
Centrist, campist brainrot at its finest.
You're just now learning how FPTP works, huh? Explains a lot.
The public uproar after the murder of Alex Pretti was able to make Trump and the GOP flinch and you still can't comprehend anything beyond the liberal democratic system? Centrist propagandaegot you good, dammit.
But if you need it to be spelled out for you: ML is predominantly Marxist-Leninis, and DB0 predominantly anarchist. I doubt those instances have much sympathy for the outright fascists.
But opposing Paul von Hindenburg must probably mean being in favour of Hitler, I guess. /s
The uproar is a component of the Liberal Democratic System.
Only if it gets recuperated. Let's hope not...
Wow. What an ugly font.
Yeah, the Democrats have not beaten the paid opposition argument with me at all. Most of them seem okay with voting for ICE funding and Trump appointees. They cannot even form a cohesive line in the sand like the fascists can except hen it comes to performative voting like denouncing socialism. The neo-liberal is NOT out way out of this mess.
The Dems haven't had more than 48 senators in 13 years and ICE funding always gets bundled with funding for other agencies like housing and transportation.
Is a more verbose way of putting it.
I'll vote for any Democrat over any Republican. And I'll primary any Democrat that's a Republican cuck.
The problem seems to be that republicans make the decisions when republicans are in charge, and when democrats are in charge the republicans also make the decisions.
It's what happens when there's only two right wing parties to choose from.
The Overton Window has shifted way too far.
Democrats ought to move further left to get more nonvoters to vote for them, instead of trying to move right to convert right wing voters.
Is it an election year already?
Then they'd be saying it's too late to object. You have to do party building on non-election years, including midterms, and not until the new party has 51% support.
Every year
Hold on folks, it's only going to get worse the closer we get!
There's that tired whataboutism we know and loathe 🙄
Criticizing the Dems ≠ saying that the fascists aren't worse than them. Just like decrying the Israeli genocide of Palestinians ≠ saying that it's worse than the Holocaust was.
And nope, I criticize the Dems (and the fascists and every other politician I'm aware of deserving criticism) EVERY year. It's not my fault that YOU only pay attention during election years.
Every other year is an election year, ironically I haven't seen anything out of you in 2025 and now that it is an election year, here you are.
I'm not saying you weren't but its funny that I remember you posting alot in 2024 and your post actually made me think about it.
Because you haven't been CHECKING in 2025. I've been criticizing them for their cowardly compliance with the fascist regimes of the US and Israel more times in 2025 than I've posted pictures of my two cats The Fabulous Staredycat Sisters and that's SAYING something 😁
Lol I believe it! its just the first time I noticed was all. I think there just more active users than when I joined Lemmy so your posts were a much larger chunk of visible posts back then.😆
Based eternal criticism! I'lll take your word for it, as I don't track individual posting habits. I just notice a general uptick in "dems bad", "don't vote", and similar when we get closer to an election.
That's my point. Claiming without any proof that any criticism is based on it being election season and therefore might be false flag bottery is a classic deflection tactic not unlike many that the fascists use when people on their side criticize the Mango Mussolini.
Hahaha buddy, pump the breaks, you may want to live up to the username and enjoy some nature. Pointing out meme trends without cyberstalking every poster on the Fediverse first isn't cryptofash tactics.
Probably propaganda accounts. Notice how it's being targeted, no blame on the GOP or trump,.or very softball approach. It's a common right trolling
Interesting! I have literally never once seen Schumer defended by anyone on Lemmy, but my eyes aren't yours, and that is fishy asf with new accounts.
100% agree the DNC is an umbrella that we need to fill with good candidates that aren't bought out and beholden ti special interests.
Probably because the original Lemmy users and Developers are all eastern propagandists for Russia and China, there is a funded campaign complete with troll farms pushing anti-DNC sentiment because the east actually favors Trump over a competent POTUS.
Now that Piefed is around we should really normalize defederating ML.
Exactly. Had Harris won we would STILL have alienated almost every ally we've had for centuries, deployed a completely undertrained ICE brute squad to liberal cities to kill citizens, attempt to destroy the economy with tarrifs, pull back support for Ukraine and assist Putin, appointed insane maga lifetime federal judges that would cause a generation of suffering, destroy NATO incentivising more nations to build their own nuclear stockpiles... this was all inevitable no matter who won because the dems candidate was a genocidal maniac. Harris = Trump. /s
It must hurt Viking's brain that we live in a fascist world where all we have to pick from is the lesser of the two evils.
Of course. If the return of fascism to the richest country in the history of the world DOESN'T hurt your brain and several other parts of you, you're either extremely ignorant, extremely twisted, or both.
Yeah, there's that learned helplessness that Neoliberals and their enablers trot out the moment anyone dares hold them to account from the Left 🙄
Return of fascism!? It never left. The US was fascist before the term existed.
I think you imagine there is another option when the entire world is ran by wealthy and their favorite proxy the corporation.
Show me a country without an ever widening income gap and I will believe you that there is another option besides starting over.
In terms of existing at all you're right, but in terms of being the base ideology of the government, it did.
It shared significant aspects, yes, but that's not the same as fully BEING fascist any more than being an overrated team sport with a ball makes basketball the same thing as baseball*
Again: that's an aspect of fascism, but also an aspect of many OTHER bad forms of government such as Neoliberalism, paleoconservatism, and anarcho-capitalism.
Capitalism ≠ fascism. The latter is the inevitable consequence when the former isn't sufficiently kept in check and both need to be abolished for the good of humanity, but that still doesn't mean that they're the same thing.
*yes, this example WAS ridiculous on purpose to inject a little levity.
I have studied the American revolution with a critical eye and I can definitely tell you that the "founding fathers" were the very definition of corporatism. They also ticked off all the bad things people usually associate with fascism as well. I go off Mussolini's definition of fascism as opposed to scholars who don't want believe their country is fascist.
Viking, 90% of all policies in every nation in the world are written by corporations. We live in a corporatocracy which is arguably the natural result of corporatism in the modern world.
I think you are imagining capitalism as the mythical "small business capitalism" when in reality it always leads to concentration of power hence the reality we live in. You can prove me wrong by showing me a capitalist practicing nation that doesn't have an ever increasing wealth gap.
Capitalism leads to corporatism that leads to a corporatocracy. I also don't buy into the "keeping it in check" belief that tries to condition us that capitalism will work under the right circumstances.
Of course it will work, by concentrating power leading to fascism like it already has. It will never be regulated into small business capitalism because that is just the larval stage.
Pretty good rundown of how exactly the Dems are controlled opposition / rotating villain.
Does anyone have a coherent argument for abolishing ICE without repealing the laws in their official scope?
is not a coherent argument.
Opposing misconduct, unlawful abuses, excessive budget & employees has nothing to do with whether there are legal enforcement duties demanding existence of enforcers. Acting illegally means any federal law enforcement can abuse authority the same as ICE: Customs & Border Protection, TSA, Secret Service, Coast Guard, DEA, ATF, FBI, IRS Criminal Investigation, Postal Inspection Service, Marshals Service, Forest Service, Park Service, Fish & Wildlife Service, Odometer Fraud Investigation, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, EPA, etc. An executive agency is just an organization administered by executives. Abolishing an executive agency doesn't stop the executive administration from reproducing the same abuses elsewhere. They can even move the same employees & resources elsewhere. They can withhold & misappropriate funds again as they've done before.
Beyond discredit supporters as ignorant & incapable of thinking through stupid shit, abolishing an organizational unit of the federal executive branch doesn't seem to accomplish much.
Getting ideas taken seriously at the very least requires ideas that aren't stupid AF. ::: spoiler Post needs text alternative. Images of text break much that text alternatives do not. Losses due to image of text lacking alternative such as link:
Contrary to age & humble appearance, text is an advanced technology that provides all these capabilities absent from images. :::
What a nonsense caveat. Regardless of what they do or don't do, repealing or amending the applicable laws IS necessary to abolish that abomination. That's how the system works.
Ignoring that, the only things ICE ever did that other agencies didn't do before is dial the abuse of undocumented immigrants and anyone else caught in the crossfire up to 11 at first, roughly 175 by now.
It's the American SS or Gestapo and has precisely zero mitigating circumstances to even begin to justify its existence in a modern democracy.
Neither are your disingenuous strawmen.
Yes it does and here's why:
As pointed out earlier, there's no need for the kinds of enforcement that ICE was created to carry out. On the contrary, it has only made the whole immigration situation MUCH worse than it would otherwise have been.
Pretending for a second that reason 1 ISN'T enough, there's the question of proportionality: even IF they did anything to benefit society, there's an upper limit to the amount of abuse and waste thst said benefit would be worth.
No benefit is worth spending more than most countries spend on their armed forces on jackbooted thugs whose function is to abuse with impunity.
Nope. ICE was specifically created to visit MORE abuse on people with less oversight and fewer consequences. While other federal cops can (and far too often WILL) also abuse innocent "suspects", ICE is BY DESIGN more likely to do so with impunity.
Sure, there's no difference between regulatory agencies like the EPA and custodian entities like the Park Service and designated brown people hunters! 🙄🤦
You can also hire a baseball player as your interior decorator. Doesn't make the jobs equivalent to each other.
It DOES when part of the law you pass to do so specifically forbids those kinds of abuses and/or gets rid of so-called "qualified immunity".
They can also murder people as some of them have done before. That doesn't mean that murder should be legal or not prosecuted.
Wow, the projection is strong with this one!
Nah, people took the idea of creating ICE seriously to the point that they even did it. In spite of everything I've explained above about it being a mechanism for ethnic cleansing and abuse on purpose from day one.
Then use words correctly: abolish ICE literally means exactly that. It doesn't mean repeal the laws, which would make sense. Otherwise, why not say repeal those laws?
It's not a strawman to interpret your message exactly as stated.1 It's no one else's duty to make up unstated justifications for a poorly argued demand. Given the lack of explicit context & justification for the demand to abolish ICE other than current events, the reader is justified to assume the only justification is current events (ICE's abuse of authority under the Trump administration). It's unjustifiable to expect the reader to assume the demand is predicated on ICE's lawful purpose, too.
While I agree that US's immigration, naturalization, & border policies are mostly unnecessary bullshit2, I also follow the news enough to be aware I'm in the waning minority. Right up to the election, the people clearly favored less immigration & stronger enforcement of border policy. That's been a consistent pattern: popularity of immigration controls steadily increase until some illegal or outrageous shit (like a Muslim ban, family separation, or murder of civilians & violation of their rights) hits the news, when they decline until the next administration is voted in. Then their popularity recovers & continues to increase as if all is forgiven.
Voters seem to love immigration controls as usual. I've never seen a popular movement to oppose those bullshit naturalization tests most US citizens would fail. Moreover, ICE has existed since 2003 through the Bush, Obama, Biden administrations without calls to abolish it gaining traction. Before ICE, INS was performing similar duties of arresting, detaining, and deporting illegal immigrants. During all that time, calls to abolish INS never took off despite it performing raids & having overseen World War 2 internment camps of "enemy aliens".
Voters only cease to love immigration controls when they don't operate as usual. Despite existing through multiple terms, abolish ICE only gained traction under the 1st Trump term. Then people stopped giving a shit with Biden's term. Now we're back.
It seems voters give a fuck only with overtly illegal or abusive conduct and otherwise support the whole contradictory system of wanting immigrants labor for work citizens won't do yet opposing immigrants. It's clear to me that voters only care about ICE's latest spate of illegal conduct & abuse of authority without objecting to the concept of ICE itself.
While voters can easily accept that illegal conduct & abuse of authority should end, that doesn't imply abolish ICE. It implies repealing Trump era changes & addressing the administration's ability to perform illegal conduct. Convincing voters that ICE needs to be abolished & the laws in its scope of enforcement need to be repealed takes an altogether different argument that demands a reversal of their usual position. Without articulating an effective argument, abolish ICE is fairly construed by the general public as mindless, outrage-fueled stupidity.
Link missing.
The detentions & harsher Trump policies aren't necessary. Much immigration policy is counterproductive & stupid.
However, ICE was also created to enforce customs & related regulations in its directorate Homeland Security Investigations.
Addressing your other points
is still an argument for repealing Trump era changes.
Nope, ahistorical & addressed earlier: existed since 2003 with predecessor INS & its predecessors tracing back further.
Maybe you have no fucking idea what it means to act unlawfully with impunity: is ICE legally violating constitutional rights, defying court orders, or murdering?
When government decides to disobey laws, the laws do not limit it.
Again, the administration isn't following laws or court orders. Where are the Epstein files?
Impeachments & cutting funds are necessary.
It already is illegal. Have you paid attention? Prosecution is up to federal (good luck) & state prosecutors.
Nah, that's you: stop forgetting history & expecting everyone to mind read.
Footnotes
The only ones to blame for miscommunication are those who assume their inept phrase abolish ICE should mean anything else to everyone else. Instead of willfully ignoring how language works & that no one can read your mind, communicate better: state what you mean. ↩
Before the 20th century, there were practically no immigrant regulations: largely open borders, no requirement for passports, visas, or pre-approved, permanent residency. Immigrants could simply purchase a steamship ticket, arrive at a port, pass basic inspections for health & criminal record. ↩
Spoken like a true Jill Steiner.
Spoken like a true Hillbot 🙄
Personally, I support the DNC and their plan to tax the rich and remove money from politics. I feel like even if they got a supermajority and abandoned literally every other stance, those two things alone would fix this nation in the long run.
They've banned PAC funding before, they'd do it again if we gave them the chance.
SuperPACs became a thing because they couldn't even handle PACs.
Is the problem with your whole idea. They don't have an incentive to change anything, and they certainly won't pass a constitutional amendment without a significant amount of pressure from constituents.
The whole point of voting Biden was to undo what Trump did. and ensure he was properly prosecuted for his crimes. He half assed both and then refused to step down for a primary despite being unpopular.
They didn't have any incentive to change anything in 2003, either, then. So why did they? And the DNC today is further left than those 1995 assholes were, too.
The thing about democracy is that when we all work to create a better world then we all benefit from living in one. Greed only creates suffering, even for the people who hoard wealth.
I mean the last election pretty clearly showed how greed from the democrats not wanting to upset the AIPAC cost them the election. But yea sure they'll surely do the right thing next time, right?
I don't know what you're smoking but sure seems like copium.
Biden did not do nearly enough to stop Israel, and far more DNC voted to pass weapons sales to them than I am comfortable with, but he and the DNC as a whole were negotiating for lasting peace, even withholding large ordinances that Israel had already payed for, although hardly anybody believes that because of propaganda by Israel, China, and Russia who all favored Trump winning the election.
That said, anybody who actually cared about a single palestinian life should have been out on the streets begging people to support Harris' election as POTUS, because the alternative is the Trump Admin whose official stance is according to Department of War's Pete Hegseth: Death or Exodus of every Palestinian.
What does that even mean? I'm not physically restraining them. They run their own party. Their party platform has never been put up to a vote directly for me where I mandated they use PAC funding. Individual candidates have declined PAC funding and I've contributed to them, but the DNC can do whatever it wants and it clearly doesn't want to ban PAC funding. I've now helped vote in multiple democratic presidents along with democratic congresspeople. What chance am I not giving them?
We have not given the DNC more than 48 senate seats in over 13 years. We collectively haven't given them power. We need to give them power to create any progress at all.
They run their own party. They can ban PAC funding whenever they want. If they wanted to reject PAC money there is nothing stopping them. Plenty of Dems have run and won without it. If they legitimately think it's a bad thing they can do something about it right now.
Your solution is to just defund the campaigns of only Democrats? Thats how you're going to defeat Republicans?
You've gotta be astroturfing or some shit.
Obama did no PACs in 08. AOC and even Kamala ended up rejecting PAC money. 52 sitting reps ran a PAC free campaign. My solution is to actually have a coherent platform. If we believe PAC money is compromising, why should we elect people we believe to be compromised? People have proven PAC free campaigns can be done, often by mobilizing grassroots support. The thing about elections is that money doesn't actually win them, votes do. Candidates that engage with the people they represent can drum up support in the form of votes, regardless of ad spend.
People have come to believe the Dems don't actually believe in the things they supposedly support. I think they'd gain a lot of traction if they actually committed to a single ideal. Corpos are now all in on the republicans anyway. Now would be a great time to make rejection of PAC money a core part of the party. People want to vote for people who are honest about their beliefs. It's hard to believe they care about getting money out of politics when they're beneficiaries of PACs too. Let's see them put their money where their mouth is. Or literally on any of their positions since they're willing to cave for anything, happy Charlie Kirk day of remembrance.
The so-called USA is the only state I know that has PACs and it's by far not the only where capital manipulates politics.
You can't "get money out of politics" in a capitalist system.
You realize you just made conflicting statements, yes?
Where, exactly?
Every system is a capitalist system, but the USA is the only one with PACs, but you can't get money out of politics in a capitalist system.
So... where's the contradiction?
Just because you have an ignorant, self-indulgent opinion, doesn't mean they're wrong.
A leftist should at least put their values into practice in their online conduct by setting alt text. ::: spoiler By lacking accessibility, this image of pure text sustains a pattern of systemic discriminatory exclusion. Images of text break much that text alternatives do not. Losses due to image of text lacking alternative:
Contrary to age & humble appearance, text is an advanced technology that provides all these capabilities absent from images. :::
True. Fact is that I don't, though, and they ARE in fact wrong.
My ADHD and predominantly auditory mode of thinking makes that more difficult for me than for neurotypical people.
I'd be grateful if you wrote one for me to add, though.
Wow, what a non-argument.
As is pretending that the DNC leadership is in ANY way for getting money out of politics. That's how their machine is fueled.
Most huge donors donate to both parties and in the case of for example the healthcare insurance leech industry, Dems receive MORE of the legal bribes than the GOP does.
The enemy of your enemy is rarely actually your friend and in this case your "friend" is actively working against the very thing you vote for them to do.
The leadership of the DNC are the Weimar Republic equivalent, NOT the courageous resistance fighters you seem to imagine them as.
The DNC already tried it once only for it to get blocked by the conservative SCOTUS judges.
From 1995 they tried to ban PAC funding for campaigns and limit individual contributions, it passed in 2003, and after a lawsuit by Citizens United in 2007 it was declared unconstitutional in 2010.
In order to try it again requires a constitutional ammendment, 67 senate votes.
As for Tax plans, there is no question that the DNC campaigns on taxing the wealthy and that they've increased audits on the rich. Kamala Harris promised an unrealized gains tax over a million and no tax increases on those who make less than 400k. Unfortunately they've had 48 or less senators for over 13 years and as a result the GOP have managed to keep cutting taxes repeatedly in that timeframe.
So.. Over 30 years ago.
Closer, but still over two DECADES ago, and with little to no meaningful follow-up.
Bolded the operative word. What the DNC campaigns on and what they ever actually DO are vastly different things. That's the gaslighting part of the meme. The gaslighting that you are perpetuating right now.
Not by anywhere near as much as has been in their power to do. Plus they've continued to facilitate through both inaction and active support the loopholes that make it perfectly legal to cheat your ass off on your taxes as long as you're rich and careful enough to do it the "right" way.
She's notorious for being untrustworthy even by politician standards. She was the first 2020 candidate (after Bernie, of course) to call for M4A, but she was also the first to stop doing so and pretend she never did as soon as the insurance leech industry lobby cut a check for her.
Because they keep allying with republicans to go for the increasingly tiny "Republican but doesn't automatically vilify anyone with a D behind their name" voter bloc while largely ignoring when not condescending at anyone to the left of Ronald Reagan.
Yes, as a result of the DNC being stuck in 1992 when it comes to messaging and campaign strategy (and a shitload of voter suppression that's at its most effective when voters aren't enthusiastic about any candidate), the GOP are extremely successful in spite of being deliberately out of step with the needs and wants of roughly 99% of the population.
The status quo is abysmal for Dem electability but absolutely fantastic for Dem politician profitability, so they just keep pissing on the constituency and telling them that not only is it raining, but the GOP bears 100% of the blame for said rain.
How dare they judge us based off who we voted for, like our actions have consequences or something. It's bullshit. I just want to criticize everything, contribute nothing, and still receive praise from actual leftists.
The people being mocked by this meme isn't people who voted for the Dems. It's the Dems who keep abusing the trust of anyone that does by breaking their promises of affecting meaningful change for regular people.
To put it another way: this is criticizing Lucy for pulling away the football more than Charlie Brown for thinking she won't do it this time.
Ironically, you missed the point of him mocking leftists who don't want to be blamed when they do stupid shit like protest voting.
Do you know why Donald Trump won in 2024? Do you think he gained millions of voters since 2020? NO. Donald Trump won because 9 Million people who voted for Biden in 2020 did not show up to vote for Harris in 2024. That's why Republicans are making everything worse, causing starvation and disease across the globe, pushing the world towards the dual cliffs of climate change and nuclear war. Because of "leftists" choosing to "resist" the DNC's competent leadership, opting for a genocidal maniac instead.
And you think that these 9 Million people were leftist "protest voters"? O.o
Either that or they were stupid enough to listen to people like you.
::: spoiler Nevermind the actual data
Here Are 34 Polls That Show A Ceasefire & Weapons Embargo Help Kamala Win
Kamala Would Have Won With A Weapons Embargo
Democrats' Working-Class Failures, Analysis Finds, Are 'Why Trump Beat Harris'
2024 Post-Election Report: A retrospective and longitudinal data analysis on why Trump beat Harris
How Trump and Harris Voters See America’s Role in the World
Majority of Americans support progressive policies such as higher minimum wage, free college
Democrats should run on the popular progressive ideas, but not the unpopular ones
Here Are 7 ‘Left Wing’ Ideas (Almost) All Americans Can Get Behind
Finding common ground: 109 national policy proposals with bipartisan support
Progressive Policies Are Popular Policies
Tim Walz's Progressive Policies Popular With Republicans in Swing States
:::
The fact that you don't even register the conflicting statements you just posted.
For example: Tim Walz said in the VP debate that they need to Expand Israel's Borders, but you claim he was more popular than Kamala Harris and also that the Israel stance lost her the election. It is also nonsensical to believe Donald "Kill Their Families" Trump would help a single fucking Palestinian.
You also talked about the popularity of literal DNC policy platform.
This is a great example of how the DNC candidates themselves weren't the problem, rather how tens of millions of people can be easily deceived is the problem.
Those are all links to data, not 'statements.'
No wonder you're still confused if you didn't even bother reading them.
You must be referring to the last link. Which, if you read, was about Walz' policies on increasing the minimum wage, taxing the wealthy, lowering cost of prescription drugs, and legalizing weed. Not remotely his stance on Israel, which when he toed that DNC line on the debate change, I'm sure significantly hit his popularity. That's about the pivoting point when popularity that initially surged for Harris/Walz waned as they made absolutely there 'nothing would fundamentally chance' compared to Biden.
Israel was a significant factor, perhaps see the 34 polls linked for details, instead of just the link text.
From a previous comment of mine:
So how was Trump able to come off as the 'dove' candidate? He did this same strategy of framing himself as a peaceful 'dove' in 2016 against Clinton. I put dove in quotes because anyone who pays attention to Trump's actual foreign policy knows that's not remotely true. High propensity voters aren't fooled by this but plenty of low propensity voters sure can be. Trump was only effective as framing himself as a Dove because of how terrible the Biden admins Foreign policy was for the last fifteen months. If Harris pivoted from Biden on Palestine, as the vast majority of all voters wanted and as required by domestic and international law, Trump wouldn't have been able to frame himself as a Dove. I'm fact, if Harris not only pivoted but harped on Trump's connection to Netanyahu, it would've been incredibly easy to frame Trump as a warmonger cozying up to genocidal fascists
No, I pointed out what they need to be a popular platform.
Again, this only makes sense if you repeatedly ignore the significant and overwhelming evidence that shows which of their policies (and lack there of) caused them to become unpopular, and which policies would make them popular
I'm done with this convo. All the answers to your questions are in those links, which anyone who took them seriously would know.
None of that changes the fact that the reduction in Democrat voter turnout exactly as protest (non)voters advocated won Trump the election. That protest (non)voting "strategy" was shit advocacy.
It's been reported that low Democratic voter turnout played a large factor in the election outcome.
Later, the article highlights clear cases (in some swing states) where Democratic voter turnout would have made a difference.
Non-voters allowed Trump to win.
It was the Democrat's strategy that resulted in low voter turnout. The votes were up for grabs, they ran away from them.
It's not like the campaign was unaware of what messaging and policies were unpopular. They chose to ignore it. They chose to run to the right on policy and messaging.
If they gave a shit about being an opposition to fascism, about actually winning, they would have heeded all the warning signs and run a different campaign. Instead they prioritized the interest of their capital donors, and gave a fuck you to their constituents that they are supposed to represent.
Blaming voters instead of the party that lost the country is some self fulfilling fascism prophecy.
You can't expect people to vote for abhorrent policy, and blame them when they don't...
You just have to have good policy proposal, pretty simple
Look, you're the meme!
Also:
Nope, I caught that. Just didn't want to dignify his tired strawman by directly addressing it.
Many reasons, chief amongst them the Dem leadership running one of the worst campaigns in living memory.
Around the time where they had taken the senile old man off the ticket and added the authentic and compassionate governor, they had FANTASTIC momentum and were sailing towards a landslide victory by creating almost unprecedented enthusiasm within their own base.
Then they started listening to the donors and Clintonian strategists and pissed it all away in favor of their usual "Centrist" (actually significantly right of center by today's standards) strategy from 1992.
See above for the main reason.
Nope. You've got it upside down again.
The outwardly incompetent (but actually shrewd when you realize that they value tradition and their legal bribes over getting elected) DNC leadership threw the Left off the cliff, pissing on them all the way down while receiving billions of dollars from rich donors for their trouble.
You blame the dnc doing a poor job campaigning (trying to pull in some centrist vote) as the reason they lost, it's the same as blaming the gop doing an effective job campaigning (by lying). Nope. It's the fault voters who are stupid and blind that failed to see through the posturing and effectively voted for the fascist assholes who are now destroying the U.S. You shouldn't need handholding to see the gop is evil and the dnc isn't as bad. You had a choice between those, and you picked trump 2 - you own the result.
Seriously. It's the bare minimum obligation as a member of society to be informed and engaged in the civic process, including understanding how our system works in practice and the ability to look past what pols say and simply see how they vote, and how those policies actually affect the country. It takes very little time and effort and intelligence to be at least this engaged, and 70 percent of Americans can't be fucked. Trump and maga are fully the fault and responsibility of the average US American non and third party voter.
Must be a coincidence, but most the people defending the DNC and blaming voters instead, I've tagged previously for defending Israel.
Fuck Israel and fuck everyone who didn't vote dem since Hillary. Voters getting what they asked for.
This is basically how I feel. I agree generally with the original meme but it's also still absolutely the voters fault for being so fucking stupid and uninformed.
Ah finitebajo has arrived to shut the thread down with his troll posting. Here comes 20 coments with negative scores and everyone departing in disgust.
Or, Elon Musk handed him the election.