831
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Sharkticon@lemmy.zip 64 points 4 months ago

Brother she ain't running no more. What are you fucking talking about?

[-] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 22 points 4 months ago

People not voting for her is why we're where we are today.

[-] Sharkticon@lemmy.zip 43 points 4 months ago

Or maybe the fact that killing innocent children in Gaza was more important to her than winning the election is why we're here today.

[-] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 12 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Every single candidate who could have won was pro-Israel. That's the default position of the US government regardless of which party's in power. It's NOT the default position to randomly genocide, say, Iran, though. It is BS that you have to vote for more genocide support or less genocide support? Yes. But voting for more genocide support or not voting at all so the ones that support more genocide win worked out really well, huh?

[-] Sharkticon@lemmy.zip 30 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

So you're saying the default position was to lose the election. She made the conscious decision to not want to win. All I'm hearing. There's a pathway to win she chose to do the opposite.

[-] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

You realize that presidential candidates also have to take international relations into account, right?

So breaking from Israel to win an election may not play out great with Israel after being elected. That goes for any of our allies.

But hey, we got a felon rapist pedophile that lets Israel tell him to do whatever they want him to do. So I guess that worked out for us, right?

[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 20 points 4 months ago

If Israel wants it, then it is the default position. If you don't think Harris would have bombed Iran, then I have a bridge to sell you

[-] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

Nah. We're here because braindead Americans can't accept that they aren't going to get a perfect candidate and are willing to burn their nation to the ground in retaliation for that.

Adults make the right decision, even if it isn't perfect. Adults don't need a candidate to be perfect in order to do what's right for their nation and themselves.

[-] Killercat103@slrpnk.net 20 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Perfect is really doing some heavy lifting. Sure shes better. I would have voted for her if i was an US-American. But shes still garbage. She kind of is controlled opposition. Making us look away from what would be actually good vs whats better than the worst option. It serves to legitimize their position in fear of the alternative. Thats not democracy. I am not saying that you should not vote, endorse or even accept the shitstain we get in the USA that is represented by Trump but running to the Democrats as the goal or seeing voting as the primary political action is a big blunder in my eyes. (again do vote).

[-] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 16 points 4 months ago

You simpletons keep confusing "perfect" with "the bare fucking minimum"

[-] njm1314@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

If only Harris had been an adult and made the right decision to try to win the election instead of sacrificing it because killing brown people was more important to her.

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 7 points 4 months ago

You make it sound like democracy was a mistake

[-] kreskin@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

lololol you think this is democracy? Its not. The vast majority of both parties dont support the actions of the elected representitives. The US runs on bribes and rich people's wishes and has for a long time. Theres a reason law enforcement dont prosecute the rich, even when they are caught raping kids on an industrial scale.

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 3 points 4 months ago

I agree and that's why I am not the one pretending voting is the reason for the system we have. People who blame voters will end up concluding that democracy is a mistake.

[-] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 2 points 4 months ago

I mean it kinda was but that's a much more complicated topic

[-] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 42 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Kamala losing is like part 250 of a 250 part shitshow that started with Reagan and that is why we're here. You're just conscious enough to be around for this latest bit and aren't taught the previous ones in school, makes ya think?

[-] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 8 points 4 months ago

Goes back much further than Regan but the bastard did exacerbate things.

[-] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I mean I could just say the assassination of franz ferdinand and probably be right lol

[-] traxex@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 4 months ago

Damn didn’t know people standing up to genocide are the reason we are still letting Israel genocide people. TIL.

[-] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 14 points 4 months ago

The people who "stood up" to genocide allowed the ones who genocide MORE into power. Good job!

[-] traxex@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 4 months ago

Oh so you can never hold anybody to a higher standard since there’s always someone worse out there. Interesting. Must be miserable always settling in life.

[-] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 9 points 4 months ago

You can indeed! But voting in the horribly broken US system is about harm reduction.

[-] traxex@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 4 months ago

Alright well, enjoy voting for Gavin Newsom I guess. Crazy the election is 2 years away and we are already talking about “harm reduction”. Hope the DNC paycheck is worth it.

[-] alzjim@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Gavin Newsom will support genocide and be anti-trans, each lesser evil is a slow step towards evil.

[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 months ago

Just like Biden, voting in Harris would have been harm reduction in the short term, and harm multiplication in the long term. She would have continued to do nothing to address the treason that Republicans committed, and she would have done nothing to mitigate the terror that the next Republican president would bring. The only way voting for conservative Democrats is harm reduction is if no Republican ever wins an election again, and Republicans are going to win some elections.

The biggest difference if Harris had won is that Republicans would win in 2028, and they would have a competent fascist in the Oval Office. We need democrats who will fight Republicans, not just delay them.

[-] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Oh so you can never hold anybody to a higher standard

Literally no one said that. You're saying that to try to make your point stand, which it doesn't.

there’s always someone worse out there

Sure is. Now they're in power and things really aren't going well.

Must be miserable always settling in life.

It's called being an adult. A big part of being an adult is damage control. Welcome to reality, it's far from perfect and sometimes you have to choose the path of least destruction.

[-] bear@slrpnk.net 11 points 4 months ago

The people who “stood up” to genocide allowed the ones who genocide MORE into power.

Is there any point at which you think we should draw the line in supporting our own party, even if the other party is still worse?

[-] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago

Yes, but by that point both would be so ridiculously evil that there's nothing left to do but burn the whole thing down.

[-] bear@slrpnk.net 12 points 4 months ago

If genocide isn't that line for you, then what is?

[-] alzjim@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

High gas prices obviously

[-] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 11 points 4 months ago

We have already reached that point for a while now.

[-] Ryanmiller70@lemmy.zip 8 points 4 months ago

I mean for a lot of us that certainly seems to be the way we see it already. We're just waiting for the rest of you to catch up.

[-] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 13 points 4 months ago

What an utterly simplistic and reactionary statement.

[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago
[-] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 7 points 4 months ago
[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Your reluctance to explain suggests otherwise

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 9 points 4 months ago

Praise Allah for killing the petro dollar though

[-] Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 4 months ago

Genocide is non negotiable. If you think it is, I hope you're prepared to defend your property when the fascists comes to take it for themselves like they're doing in the West Bank.

[-] GeneralEmergency@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Shame too many people are willfully ignorant to the blood on their hands.

[-] Orygin@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago

Isn't she considering running next elections?

[-] Sharkticon@lemmy.zip 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I mean I seriously doubt it, but maybe if she wants to try to grift some more money she will. She certainly wouldn't be the first. However she has no chance in hell of winning a primary much less an election. So I doubt it'll be a serious, or seriously funded, campaign

this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2026
831 points (100.0% liked)

Political Memes

12371 readers
2564 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

1) 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.

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

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

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

5) No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS