81
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2025
81 points (100.0% liked)
Asklemmy
51559 readers
281 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
Do I just get one shot or can I keep trying until I get it right?
Basically anything that reduces Republican power in the US is probably a win overall.
So, the Republican shift toward the far right was already in full swing by the 2000s. You'd need to go back to at least Reagan to head that off. Trickle down economics, Two Santas, etc. was already decades in the making. My dad had already been fully brainwashed by talk radio in the 90s.
But on the flip side, the Democratic establishment has made it painfully clear even to this day that their only priority has always been to maintain the status quo for the privileged NIMBY class. The Republican party didn't need to do anything to keep unaffordability rising, they all want to maintain the housing market bubble to protect the wealth of boomers.
We make it so Reagan still runs but doesn't win presidency, ever, until he dies. We make sure Bill Clinton doesn't do that incident with Monica that got him impeached so he can still have some goodwill with the people enough to make them think we want the current path he paved to continue.
Clinton mostly became president by embracing Reaganism, so he didn't really pave the path and it did continue
Yeah but my point is, we'd still have democrats in office to ensure no Republican is voted in to destroy the country from within. Gore would've won over Bush, we'd still have Obama, we might've even had Bernie Sanders or so. All politicians who're democratic who might not just keep Reaganism alive, they have their own ways too.
If Reagan was never elected, Clinton never would be either. I also see no reason why you think you'd have Obama still after Gore. You make it sound like the Lewinsky scandal is the only reason that Democrats didn't get 32 straight years in office.
Then advising Carter to get all the US embassy out of Iran before the revolution could do the trick.
If it's just a single shot, then preventing the Brooks Brothers Riot would be the best use of your time.
All it would take is an industrial sized can of pepper spray. Just like the kind police regularly use on leftwing protesters.