this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
1458 points (97.0% liked)

Political Memes

5611 readers
1103 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] dual_sport_dork 86 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And if it wasn't Reagan, you have pretty good odds it was Nixon.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

And if it wasn't Nixon just choose literally any other (former) Republican president.

* Former in parentheses for future reference

[–] dual_sport_dork 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Any post-Nixon one, anyway. The list before him is fairly non-objectionable. Lincoln. Grant. Roosevelt. Hoover. Eisenhower. I guess Taft through Coolidge were fairly forgettable, by today's standards.

[–] rockSlayer 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don't know about that. Woodrow Wilson was a major factor in the regression after reconstruction. It's important to remember that democrats before the 1930s were the conservative party.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

While it wasn't popular at the time, Wilson's decision to enter WW1 was actually the best thing for American interests in particular and worldwide democratic reform in general.

People really don't understand exactly how fucked in the head Kaiser Wilhelm and his allies were. Absolute monarchies could very well still be the world wide norm without the decisive, undeniable loss of the Central Powers to the liberal nations.

Does that decision undo all the harm he did? Who knows?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] toxicbubble 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

btwn the two of them (correct me if I'm wrong, just going from memory): raised housing costs, stopped social benefits, criminalized drugs, were against worker's rights & minimum wage, against universal healthcare, overall made life harder for everyone except the upper class

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

Casual reminder that Nixon set his federal minimum wage at something he considered unreasonably, insultingly low, and that was $12 per hour adjusted for inflation.

[–] guriinii 72 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also Thatcher if you're from the UK

[–] Tagger 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or, now Boris (Maybe Cameron)

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

Thatcher : Reagan :: Boris : Trump

But Cameron should not escape blame

[–] Tagger 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, I actually think the lasting impact of Cameron's Brexit will be more damaging than Boris's tenure.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FReddit 68 points 1 year ago (13 children)

My father was kind of a low level fixer in California politics.

He tended to vote Republican but regarded Reagan as a marginally literate moron.

After Reagantard reached the presidency in 1980, part of his obscene transfer of wealth to the rich brought on taxation of some of social security income.

One day I was talking to my father and kind out of nowhere he said, "Fuck Ronald Reagan."

I don't think anyone in the family voted RepubliKKKlan after that. For a lot of reasons. One of those reasons was his refusal to treat the rise of AIDS seriously.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 year ago

Smart family. If only more in this country were capable of seeing the slow-motion disaster happening in front of our eyes.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I miss those kind of conservatives. The ones with brains and principals.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That's the problem with the modern GOP - it's not compatible with having brains or principles.

...but if you like perpetually terrified dumb, bigoted culture war nonsense, have I got a bridge to sell you.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] flossdaily 39 points 1 year ago (1 children)

At least under Reagan, many of these policies had never been tested.

Republicans of today are several orders of magnitude worse. We've now witnessed the damage of trickle-down economics, of vilifying "pinko commies", of ignoring a global pandemic... And yet they do it anyway.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It may be tempting to think that, but those policies all had precedent. Trickle-down just used to be called 'Horse-and-sparrow' economics. We had red scares before, and each of them were just as stupid, if not moreso (the one time we actually should have been wary, in the early-mid 40s, we were blithely complacent - go figure). And prior influenza epidemics and the spread of longer-term diseases had shown the danger of taking a lackadaisical approach to public health.

Reagan wasn't the birth of these policies - he was just the one most successful in lodging them long-term into the rotting craw of American politics.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Only good thing Reagan did (just because I believe in credit where due) was to speed GPS availability for civilian use in response to Korean Air Lines Flight 007 being shot down by the Soviets after it went off course. Everything else he did was complete shit.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] kromem 27 points 1 year ago (5 children)

And the majority of the times you'd be wrong is because it was Nixon.

[–] cogman 18 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Agree, but I'll say that Clinton and Bush had their fair share of fucking up the US.

Clinton's Neo-liberal politics weakened public support in favor of privatization and bush accelerated that while helping to advance christian nationalism and eroding personal freedoms.

We've, no joke, not had a great president since Jimmy Carter and he was canned because of economic circumstances outside of his control.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago

I'd take it a step further than Reagan, and point the finger directly at Jerry Falwell. A lot of his money paid Reagan.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (5 children)

If not Reagan, then probably Newt Gingrich

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago

Wrong with society: Regan

Wrong with me: Mum and Dad

[–] Hazdaz 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

More importantly.... one political party in this country continues to try to push those awful polices onto us no matter how much Reaganomics has hurt this nation. And yet election after election people decide to just sit it out because they can't be bothered.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

"The Republicans are good for the economy. I'm an independent thinker." - words I never want to hear from American voters again, but am certain that I will.

[–] Hazdaz 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

To be fair you can't blame them. (let me explain)

Republicans repeat that time and time and time again. They stick to that messaging all the time. Republicans are good for business. They are good for jobs. They support American workers. They repeat these slogans all the time. It is all a lie, but they repeat them so much that people do indeed believe them.

On the flip side Democrats have no idea how to communicate with the general public and tell them otherwise. Right after I posted in this thread, I read another story posted on Lemmy about how the economy is doing great, but Americans don't believe it. That's a Democrat problem because they are never able to explain to the American people WHY they are better than Republicans. For most of the last 50 years, a Democrat in the White House has meant a stronger economy. They are better for the workers, the environment, consumers. Yet they are terrible at sending a positive message to those groups and get them excited.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

No, I live in a right-wing area. I know these people. I grew up with these people. I know how they think. I know how they process arguments.

I can blame them.

But yes, Democrats fucking suck at messaging.

[–] Hazdaz 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

You can do both. Blame them, but goddamn it is infuriating seeing Democrats miss one opportunity after another at connecting with workers and average folks.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] fne8w2ah 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And a major case of fuckyouigotmineitis.

[–] AllonzeeLV 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Trump was a big dumb animal.

Reagan knew how to fuck shit up. Competent malice.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago

Reagan was a dumb animal too. He just was less hostile towards his handlers.

[–] Subverb 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'd argue that incompetent malice has been pretty effective at fucking shit up too.

[–] AllonzeeLV 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Trump made the culture worse with his rhetoric, but was thankfully a legislative failure. He passed all of 1 piece of meaningful legislation, a hand out to the rich. His SCOTUS appointments were McConnell's achievement.

Reagan got his grotesque agenda passed, and succeeded in getting his "opposition" party to take the corporate bribe money, abandon unions in all but rhetoric, and go full neoliberal into today.

We haven't had an anti reaganomics, trickle down, rigged capitalist economic President from either party since. Now our 2 party's largely align on the economic issues that exacerbate the social issues and fight over those.

That is Reagans legacy, setting the table for the owner class to siphon every last crumb from the peasants in perpetuity, both in legislative framework, and cultural acceptance.

Because in "turning the bull loose," you just became a temporarily embarrassed millionaire, amirite?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (4 children)

To name another specific problem, "closing mental institutions and turning the afflicted out onto the streets" was a neat one-two punch perpetrated by both Kennedy and Reagan. Kennedy's last major thing before taking the plane to Dallas was to sign CMHA and step towards deinstitutionalization. Reagan further exacerbated the problem by closing some of the local facilities that supposedly replaced the system closed by Kennedy.

90% of the current homelessness crisis in major cities is attributable to these policies. The result was generations of mentally ill and addicts traipsing the streets instead of being corralled towards mental healthcare away from general populace.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Illuminostro 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So... when are we going to start building the guillotines?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

Or Milton Friedman. And if not him, then the guy who put lead into gasoline.

[–] tinfox 12 points 1 year ago

RIP fairness doctrine.

[–] reynman 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] jopepa 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What is Hank’s law, no charcoal bbq-ing?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Hank's law is when you die in the middle of nowhere by Nazis because you got pranked by your brother-in-law.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sebinspace 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I had a drive fail on my RAID5 this morning.

Thanks, Reagan.

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

Reagan and Bush Jr. If it wasn't for Bush Jr. then we'd have started on climate change, and stem cells would be much farther along in research

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Also, a certain multi-trillion dollar war that resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths and incredible damage to US moral authority.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] rockSlayer 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Climate change inaction is actually pretty firmly in the laps of corporations. ExxonMobil knew climate change was being caused by human use of fossil fuels, but instead of continuing their research on biofuels during the oil crisis, they fired all the researchers and hid their scientific research.

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

Yes but their propaganda campaign worked a lot better when the VP was an oil executive and the President was spreading it for them.

Don't know why you got down voted though. You're right.

load more comments
view more: next ›