this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
179 points (68.4% liked)

shitposting

1712 readers
989 users here now

Rules •1. No Doxxing •2. No TikTok reposts •3. No Harassing •4. Post Gore at your own discretion, Depends if its funny or just gore to be an edgelord.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PunnyName 76 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Forgot to put the portion where Reps try and block every single fucking thing that Dems try to accomplish.

Wanna know why abortion wasn't enshrined into law when the Dems had the majority? Because they didn't have a filibuster proof super majority for the handful of weeks they had all the power.

We got the ACA instead.

[–] pjwestin 25 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They had the super majority at the start of that term. They couldn't have pushed something as complicated as the ACA through, but they could have moved on something small like affirming Roe. Besides, the Republicans always find a way to ram through legislation without a super majority (and I'd suspect we're about to see them abolish it entirely), but the Democrats never do.

For example, when the Senate parliamentarian tells the Democrats that they can't pass a $15 minimum wage through a simple majority, the Democrats give up. When the parliamentarian tells the Republicans they can't do something, they ignore them, and one time, they just flat our fired the guy.

You can argue about whether the Republicans are being unethical or underhanded, but at the end of the day, they achieve things, and the Democrats don't. The Democrats will tell you that they need 60 votes to do anything and that the parliamentarian won't allow them to pass non-budgetary items without one, but Senate filibuster rules can be changed, and the Parliamentarian has no real authority. Playing by the rules while your opponent cheats isn't noble, it's stupid.

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

The super majority at the start was those 4 weeks when Dems had any potential. When you get a time machine, go back and tell them to do Roe instead. Don't listen when they absolutely disbelieve Roe is at risk. We all thought Roe was safe back then.

[–] pjwestin 3 points 1 month ago

I mean, the fact that they only had any potential with the super majority is the problem. In 2001, the Senate Republicans just fired parliamentarian Robert Dove because they didn't like the answers he was giving them. In 2010, Senate Democrats realized they only had four weeks to get their agenda through unimpeded, passed a single bill, and spent the rest of Obama's presidency comprising with obstructionists. In 2021, Biden let immigration reform and a $15 minimum wage get killed by the parliamentarian despite his party begging him to ignore her. Now, in 2025, a literal fascist will be in the White House and his allies will control both houses of Congress; do you really think he's going to care if someone in an advisory position gives a non-binding ruling saying he's not allowed to do something? The fact that Democrats can't get anything done without 60 Senate seats isn't an excuse, it's embarrassing.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago

There's also just a massive element of the Democrats no longer functioning as a coherent political unit. It wouldn't help in an instance needing a filibuster-proof majority, but since being a Democrat is mostly negatively defined as "We're not the Republicans" these days, it has grown to encompass a range of views that prevents them from having a cohesive platform backed by all members in the way the GOP largely operates today.

Yes, Republican obstructionism is a major element in the dysfunction of our government at the moment, but even before you run into that, you have a party that embraces the Joe Manchins, Kyrsten Sinemas and Joe Liebermanns of US politics, while also having your Bernie Sanders and AOCs. Even before you encounter the obstructionist tendencies of Republicans, you have Democrats who don't fall in line that can hold the party platform hostage, and no meaningful mechanisms to force them to do so.

The Democratic Party really needs to start defining itself positively, rather than the current "We're not the other guy, so at least we aren't so bad" stance, and presenting a unified front in the face of Republican obstinance. There should be a time a place for intellectual debate, but the Democratic status quo not only makes them look incompetent when they can't hold members to task for failing to support major elements of the party platform (see Manchin's stranglehold over Biden's agenda that left quite a bit dead on arrival prior to Republican efforts), it also demotivates would-be voters.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Also forget the portion where dems do not use their powers unless it is needed for Israel.

[–] Maggoty 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yup the whole Republicans ignore the rules and Democrats don't thing hurts extra hard when you watch Democrats throw the rules out the window to support a genocide.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Democrats very much followed the rules when supporting Israel's settler-colonial genocide, that's been a part of the rules since the settler-colonial project started.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] darthsid 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I’m not buying this anymore. Dems could do the same if they had balls. Enough of this when they go low we go high bs.

[–] PunnyName 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Here, have an actual teacher - who goes to insane lengths to find shit (including the fact that many Dems were quite conservative) - explain:

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP8L9EfNx/

[–] [email protected] 52 points 1 month ago (2 children)

oh yeah sure. expanding overtime rights, over the counter birth control, getting rid of junk fees, clarifying the vice presidents role in certifying elections as ministerial, funding infrastructure while simultaneously stimulating energy efficiency and renewables, forcing airlines to refund canceled flights, fighting for loan forgiveness extensively as well as to put a stop to non compete clauses. nothing for the working class though as this does not hit specific things I find important so lets just go worse in all possible ways because thats a solid plan.

[–] IMongoose 3 points 1 month ago

But what have the Romans done for us?

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

I wish we could take your comment and put it in a bot every time someone says both sides are the same, not for the working class, etc.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 month ago (1 children)

republicans: we will shit on the working class

tankies: omg, dems so bad

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (9 children)

Reps: we will crap on the working class

Dems: we will crap on the working class ✨

Leftists: The Dems don't actually help the working class, both parties derive their power and legitimacy from their donors, wealthy Capitalists. They function as businesses that sell policy to the highest bidder. We need a revolution in order for the people to have a real say.

Liberals: Shut up, tankie!

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 month ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago

Company that installs Overton windows said to be leaving then on moving dolly, left mumbling something about install it yourself morons.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

You work within the system until you can get the change you want. By throwing your hands up you...ugh why even bother.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

are you getting the change you want by working within the system?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

If you can't get necessary change by working within the system then you must work outside it and replace it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] a9cx34udP4ZZ0 22 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's a great take if you completely ignore that laws are written by congress, and in the last 30 years Democrats have only had both chambers and the executive, by a slim margin for 2 years and a wide margin for 2 years. In those 2 years of a wide margin (Obama) they passed the ACA, which was watered down by republicans because it was the only way to get it to pass because they still didn't have a super majority.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 month ago (3 children)

The Democrats have utterly failed to appeal to workers, and as such fail to bring out the votes. The DNC is a business that sells policy to wealthy Capitalists, it doesn't represent the working class.

[–] a9cx34udP4ZZ0 10 points 1 month ago (3 children)

The Democrats have utterly failed to appeal to workers, and as such fail to bring out the votes. The DNC is a business that sells policy to wealthy Capitalists, it doesn’t represent the working class.

Huh? Did you actually follow the election at all. Trump's solution for the working class was "I'll get you better jobs with more pay" and when asked for specific examples, he couldn't provide anything of substance. But he was fond of talking about how he hated unions and paying overtime during his speeches and talking about killing the ACA. VERY pro worker.

On the flip side Kamala was offering up cutting taxes on the middle class, lowering food prices, expanding the ACA, assistance to first time home buyers, and more assistance around childcare.

I don't know exactly what you think "appeals to workers" but she checked literally every box beyond promising "more pay" without any semblance of a way to do so. Is your idea of "appealing to workers": you just need to lie more?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago

You're talking about Kamala "means testing" Harris, who paraded around with Liz Cheney, and comparing it to Trump who ran a far-right populist campaign running on ideas like "no tax on tips." Harris failed to run on popular programs like Medicare for All, and Trump did his usual awful schtick while exploiting the fact that Harris had no solid policy.

Neither party represents the workers, they both sell policy to wealthy Capitalists, and that's it.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] DrQuickbeam 17 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Now make one with an elephant in the middle to put next to this one. It will be equally trite.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 month ago (1 children)

False. The one with the elephant in the middle accomplishes things. Terrible things. I'll take do-nothing over do-wrong

[–] captainlezbian 4 points 1 month ago

Yeah it’s a promise of $20 that never comes vs a punch to the face

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 month ago

GOP gives their base red meat. This is because it is compatible with their donors' interests. This contrasts to Dems, for whom delivering for their base runs counter to their donors' interests.

What is deliverrd by the GOP is marginalization, of course, but this is still a more direct and materiap response than what the Dems do, which is just PR.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago

Yeah it will be, because that’s how the corporate-run political duopoly works.
It’s a big club and you ain’t in it [1][2]

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 month ago (4 children)

They all fuck us. Doesn't matter what color tie they wear.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Hikermick 13 points 1 month ago

This is why you don't base your political opinions on memes

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

Republicans are garbager and yet....

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

"Every nation gets the government it deserves."

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

If this is shitposting, I don't understand what is shitposting anymore.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

What or whom exactly is this post for ?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's leftist agitprop showcasing the failures of the DNC for disaffected liberals.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LovableSidekick 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I think it's for people who are angry that the world isn't getting better by itself while they scroll through memes.

load more comments
view more: next ›