117
submitted 3 weeks ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/usa@lemmy.ml
all 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] mindaika@lemmy.dbzer0.com 34 points 3 weeks ago

The Dems have moved so far to the right that what used to be the far-right (Bush/Cheney) now supports them

[-] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 15 points 3 weeks ago

This is all you need to know about the Democratic Party. How many years before they make Trump look sane?

[-] Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 weeks ago

current day libs will have rehabilitated trump sometime in the next 20 years. I am willing to bet every dollar I own on that. it will happen, just like bush and cheney have been rehabilitated.

[-] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago

The United States is also a one-party state but, with typical American extravagance, they have two of them.

  • Julius Nyerere
[-] dessalines@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago

The dems have already rehabilitated GWB, McCain, and Cheney. It's a trueism that the democrats of today are the republicans of 20 years ago.

[-] Nurgus@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

I do think Bush/Cheney etc are also moving away from DJT.

[-] qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website 25 points 3 weeks ago

Affordable Care Act, LGBTQ rights, marijuana reform...not to mention a Black man was president, and a Black woman is the party nominee.

Yeah, it sucks that progress is so slow, and yeah, it sucks that some things have gone backwards. But there has been a huge amount of progress in the past however-many years. We went from "don't ask, don't tell" to having a Catholic president openly support gay marriage in a relatively short time.

Using Harris' Glock anecdote as evidence the party is moving to the right is just lazy editorializing IMHO. Almost as lazy as just asserting that the party is moving to the left because of the issues that you decided illustrate the left-right difference...

[-] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 16 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Affordable Care Act, LGBTQ rights, marijuana reform…not to mention a Black man was president, and a Black woman is the party nominee.

Oh do lgbt people have more rights now? Oh fuck, I'll let my trans refugee friends know.

[-] mashbooq@lemmy.world 20 points 3 weeks ago

The fact that your trans refugee friends continue to suffer is deplorable, but does not mean lgbt don't have more rights now. You're employing the same fallacy that anti-vaxxers use when they say it's pointless to get a vaccine when it doesn't 100% guarantee protection from the illness. Things are better for some people and still desperately need to improve for many others.

[-] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 weeks ago

The fact that your trans refugee friends continue to suffer is deplorable, but does not mean lgbt don’t have more rights now.

Trans people are experiencing low key genocide but we also have more rights now?

Things are better for some people and still desperately need to improve for many others.

Things are desperately worse for some people and have improved slightly for others.

Genocide of trans people > gay marriage on the impact on the queer community

[-] eldavi@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

the only thing lazy here is parroting democrats who took credit for things they didn't do

Affordable Care Act

democrats walked back on medicare for all reforms ensuring that the aca will cease to function.

LGBTQ rights,

the democrats gave us don't ask, don't tell; doma; and 10450. the gays became accepted through portrayals in tv and movies; not because of democrats. the closest thing that could be misconstrued as lgbt right is the defense of marriage act which did nothing but give gay marriage bigots legal protections since the supreme court invalidated doma 8 years before.

marijuana reform…

nothing but lip service for the last 20 years

not to mention a Black man was president

a member of the ruling class

Black woman is the party nominee.

acab and a prosecutor who put many innocent people behind bars and then fought to keep them there once it became clear that they were innocent to just to save face.

[-] Archer@lemmy.world 19 points 3 weeks ago

Oh look, more vote-third-party slop pushed right before an election. What a coincidence!

[-] Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml 25 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

the democrats have received endorsements from dick fucking cheney and ex-reagan staffers. they have campaigned on building the border wall more efficiently, shutting down asylum and hiring more border guards. in the debate she promised the American military will be the most lethal fighting force in the world. democrats USED to campaign on medicare for all, a path to citizenship, ending forever wars, etc. the rightward shift of the party is abundantly clear to anyone not just playing team sports. you need to come to terms with the fact that your party has been assimilated by neoconservatives and push back on it, or it's only going to continue.

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 weeks ago

Including Obama who surrounded himself (top cabinet posts) with the most zionist neocon republicans in the democratic party, Biden and HRC, unprimaried Harris continues the tradition of Republican sympathizer nominee, as some desperate attempt to avoid a stronger fascism that DNC/media keeps humanizing. Media and Zionist first political donations is an insurmountable problem, though.

[-] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 weeks ago

Third parties are never even mentioned in the article. Is all left criticism of Harris "vote-third-party slop"?

What a coincidence!

This is one of those things where we all know what it means but you have deniability if someone calls you out on it. Just say what you mean instead of resorting to dogwhistling.

[-] Samvega 12 points 3 weeks ago

It may well turn out that humanity chases itself towards more and more hate and scapegoating as they make the world they live in less liveable.

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 3 weeks ago

Have been my entire life.

[-] TunaCowboy@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago
[-] Psythik@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Well when 30% of the country wants you dead just for being Democrat, can you blame them for wanting to defend themselves?

[-] TunaCowboy@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

Democrats are not the left.

[-] Psythik@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Not this shit again. Go away.

[-] whostosay@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

This is kind of a shit take. Yes, the Democrats are, but we are approaching a whole new part of the spectrum on the other side.

[-] Uebercomplicated@lemmy.ml 13 points 3 weeks ago

Sure, the bad guys are getting worse, but does that excuse the good guys getting less good? The article wasn't particularly original, and certainly didn't serve enlightenment, but it did make me ever so slightly less cheerful about Harris. Now might not be the time to complain about details like this, but — if those concerns are founded — the details are still worth remembering.

[-] TheOubliette@lemmy.ml 16 points 3 weeks ago

The "good guys" were never good. This is the party of slavers, Dixiecrats, Jim Crow, colonialism, settler-colonial genocide, multiple coups and wars, and material supporters of basically every racist cop there has ever been. Oh, and right now, they are doing a genocide. They also were under Obama but nobody cared because Yemen gets little press in chauvinist media. They've been making rightward shifts in most policies since Clinton.

[-] Grapho@lemmy.ml 11 points 3 weeks ago

This is what the democrats have always been, just now they stopped pretending to care about people abroad or the issues that matter to the voters (and not the donors) and surprisingly that's still good enough for the blue no matter who crowd.

[-] davidagain@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Take heart from her announcing a more than doubled federal minimum wage at $15. It's not going to make anyone rich, but that'll make a big difference to a lot of very poorly paid workers.

[-] Isa@feddit.org 4 points 3 weeks ago
[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 7 points 3 weeks ago

thanks for providing a great example of a self referential comment

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

I respectfully disagree. Half of independents and a quarter of Democrats said they'd support militarized camps for undocumented people.

The corporate/conservative propaganda is working.

[-] itsonlygeorge@reddthat.com 4 points 3 weeks ago

If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you. -Lyndon B. Johnson

[-] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 weeks ago

That polling was mentioned immediately in the article, but it then points to the wealth of issues where the headline is true.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

None of that matters to me. You can be conservative and give renters a break. As long as they're the right renters. This idea of in groups and out groups that is the core of conservative ideology is gaining ground.

Edit to add - It's struck me that the article and I are actually talking about two different things. Their real complaint is that the Democrats are moving towards servicing the donor class more than their constituents. My complaint is that the constituents are getting too cozy with the idea of in groups, as long as they believe they're on the inside.

[-] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago

The donors -- the domestic owning class -- were always a self-aligned ingroup, and it's been that way since before the country was founded. The fact that they have gotten complacent in just green-washing and rainbow-washing their marketing instead of allowing actual concessions to be made is not really a change in their ideology so much as their strategy. They still have the same goals that they've always had, it's just that the tiny little check on their power that the left and the working class more broadly represented has been systematically dismantled.

It's not a matter of what the owning class "believes" as though these conditions are a highly subjective thing, because ingroups are not just a quirk of psychology or social perspective, they can be and often are interest groups, people who share a common material interest. The owners are correct that it benefits them broadly to crush the power of labor so they can maximize profits, just like they know it benefits them broadly to do other things like scapegoat minorities, use drug policy as a pretext for mass-incarceration, and so on.

this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
117 points (100.0% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7211 readers
206 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS