1158
Please vote
(media.pubeurope.com)
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 28 Jun 2024
1158 points (89.9% liked)
Political Memes
5620 readers
2758 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes 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 misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Funny the way you mentioned Obama because you are spot on.
Obama was by far the best US president in recent history and maybe ever. Then the Dems just went like OK we'll never ever do something like that again.
I voted for him twice and don't regret it but you're being a little too generous with this one
G.W.Bush looks like an absolute genius compared to the shit we have today. That said, I can see why it would be easy to see Obama as one of the best, because man we're striking out...we haven't seen a non-clown contender in a while.
As a European, I miss seeing Obama being nice to everyone he meets. I also liked the tan suit btw.. Shame he didn't run again.
If you ignore public policy and just fixate on optics, maybe.
DNC: This is the way
Youre doing Lincoln a disservice. And Washington too.
Obama droned a lot of kids, he really wasnt that good
As someone who can speak and think on his feet, I like Obama so much more. On actual accomplishments and policy, I think I actually like Biden better. Mostly.
True
Nah, fuck him he sucked.
You wanna fite?
You mean the only thing Washington was ever good at? 😛
Biden has been a far more successful president than Obama when it comes to implementing policies in a progressive direction.
I mean, it's because instead of pulling the DNC left. He just abandoned it because it was a relic of the past and it was easier to just ignore the DNC and let state parties handle their own shit.
His mistake was not completely burning the DNC down. So after he left office and moderates retook control in 2016, they've made a lot of moves to ensure a moderate or Republican are the only two options.
People talk about how much Obama pissed off trump.
But its nothing compared to how much Obama pissed off "moderates".
Are you being fucking for real right now
Obama, and I say this as someone who has a positive opinion of Obama insofar as one can in the political environment that he came to power in, was very much himself a moderate. He didn't 'piss off' moderates. He was one.
Jesus Christ.
Are you kidding?
The Dems lost the house of representatives in Obama's years 3 and 4. Again in years 5 and 6. And then lost both the house of representatives and the Senate in Obama's years 7 and 8.
And you're wondering why they didn't make a big move left after? They lost control in 3 out of 4 elections under Obama. There is more than just the presidential election you know. The left voters never showed up after the first election.
(And imo Hilary did make a move left in climate change with the map room. And guess what, the left voters didn't show up.)
To be fair, Clinton didn't show up in a lot of swing states, either. She just assumed her Blue Wall would vote for her.
So what do you as the informed left voter, that wants things to move left do? You vote for Dems. You don't wait to fall in love, you vote.
On the contrary: that person is an "enlightened centrist" that blames every Dem loss ever on "going left", even those of near-republicans with no charisma Hillary and Kerry 🤦
Your conclusion that they're not worth the bother is absolutely right, though.
Lol I'm not a centrist, nice strawman.
More accurately I blame the left voters that never show up. These logical voters, that logically want a logical platform, that makes logical sense, and until then they will logically not vote, or logically vote 3rd party, because they are logical, but wait they need charisma to feed their feelings.
You really do show it's the old "Dems fall in love, republicans fall in line."
Nah, I've never missed an opportunity to vote.
Pretty sad state of affairs that you think it's a binary of either no criticism of whatever corporatist is selected for you or ignoring that they're the least awful choice 🙄
As for "Dems fall in love, Republicans fall in line", it's the opposite now: Republicans worship Trump and most of the people voting for Biden have no love for him but fall in line to avoid Trump.
Nice, now convince the other left people.
Lol know what's a sad state of affairs? Me pointing out that Dems lose when they move to the left (because left voters don't show up) and you twisting and backflipping that into me being a centrist lol. Binary? Lol I'm criticizing and you are the one binary categorizing me as a centrist because of that. I'll chalk that one to projection.
Least awful choice? What I've said repeatedly is that if you want things to move left, if you want policy to move left, if you want the Overton window to move left, then you vote for Dems. Funny how you think I'm centrist when I keep telling people how to move things left. This isn't about least awful, it's about moving things left (over multiple elections).
Dude you said it yourself with charisma. Charisma for everyone to fall in love with. Maybe not you, but you see it and want it for all those logical voters.
That's just not true. The last time Dems ran from the left was Obama's first campaign where he ran on hope and progressive change. He won that election in a landslide with high voter participation.
Then he governed as a moderate and won reelection by a much narrower margin and with much lower voter participation to a corporate raider and animal abuser turned centrist Republican incarnate.
Then they insisted on Hillary, who, in spite of the "map room" you keep babbling about to salvage your busted hypothesis, ran to the right of most Democrats, which in combination with her Pied Piper strategy resulted in extremely low voter turnout and the worst entity to ever run for the office coming within cheating distance of the white house.
That's just not true. Remember Hillary's PUMA? They retconned it into "people united means action" when they made it into a corporation, but the original words behind the acronym was "party unity my ass"
A much higher percentage of PUMAs and other Hillary 08 primary voters voted for McCain or not at all than Bernie voters for the Mango Mussolini or not at all.
Well if it walks like a centrist and spews condescending lies about the left like a centrist.. 🤷
Yeah, you're unfairly criticizing the left for not showing up to vote. Which is a common centrist smear job when their corporatist candidates fail or almost fail to win.
You know that words have meanings, right? 🙄
Yes, Biden is awful but much less awful than Trump. Shouldn't be so hard to understand.
Which is what centrists who haven't heard about or deny the ratchet effect keep claiming. It's not true, though.
Dem leadership fights the left MUCH harder than they ever fight the fascists on the other side of the aisle. A good example is how the Hillary-endorsed establishment favorite beat Jamaal Bowman with money from AIPAC and crypto scammers, outspending him 7/1 in the most expensive primary this election cycle.
With the exception of Obama's first campaign (but none of his time in office), Dems have kept following as the GOP move further right ever since they learned the wrong lessons from Carter losing to a well-funded and charismatic demagogue.
So yeah, pretending that you move left by voting for Dems IS a very centrist kind of bullshit claim. One the ultraincrementalist corporatist Dem leadership itself loves repeating.
As I've explained above, neither of that is actually true. It's just comforting lies that center right to right wing Democrats use to fool people into voting for them rather than the people whose policies they agree with.
If it was all about charisma, Biden wouldn't have won. Meanwhile, the utterly repulsive Trump has a perverse kind of "strong man charisma" that makes fascists and stupid people fall in love with him.
Nah, tbh I'd much rather have boring politicians with great policy positions than people like Obama who seem cool but self-identify as moderate Republicans. There's far too much demagoguery in politics.
Well I have 2 breakdowns saved for conversations exactly like this.
Let's run through the recent story so people have it:
Jimmy Carter: Told people to conserve and got voted the fuck out. AKA left voters never show up.
Bill Clinton: After successive losses Bill figured out "it's the economy stupid". And when you run against an incumbent (Bush senior) you run from the center. So that's what he did. And he won.
Gore: After the population hopefully warmed up with Bill Clinton, he stuck his head out left with climate change, that supposedly big important issue to left people. And bam he lost the election. Thanks 3rd party protest voters!
Obama: So guess what Obama learned? Don't stick your head out. He ran on vague "hope", hoping the ambiguity would be enough considering Bush's disastrous wars. And he won.
Hillary Clinton: After the population hopefully warmed up with Obama, she stuck her head out just a tiny itty little bit left on climate change (that thing all the leftists care about right?) with the Map Room. And guess what happened? Bam she lost. Thanks protest non-voters! AKA left voters never show up.
On to Biden. Just like Obama learned from Gore, Biden learned from Hillary that you don't stick your head out left. And he was running against an incumbent, so once again when you do that you run center. He's actually been governing more from the left, but he ran center.
And people are amazed that they don't run an extreme left platform? Every time they stick their head out a little itsy bitsy tiny bit left they lose. And the next guy learns to go to the center to win.
So how do you get them to move left? By giving them victories. Consistent and overwhelming victories. Because when they lose, like they've lost 20 years out of the last 24 years, they will go to the centre to find votes.
The Dems lost the house of representatives in Obama’s years 3 and 4. Again in years 5 and 6. And then lost both the house of representatives and the Senate in Obama’s years 7 and 8.
They lost control in 3 out of 4 elections under Obama. There is more than just the presidential election you know. The left voters never showed up after the first election. AKA the left voters never show up [after the first election].
And you’re wondering why they didn’t make a big move left after? Hilary made a small move left on climate change, that big important issue.
Oh man and you're still on it. Yeah you're projecting hard with your binary categorization simply because I'm informing you that when Dems lose they go to the center. Well given that we'll see how much of the rest I'll reply to.
Very fairly, see history above.
Fucking lol at your backflips. I'm telling left people how to be effective and you're backflipping that into a centrist smear job.
Oh man you just continue with jabs the whole way down. I'm not going to call them all out, just that you do that.
Ok I've had this conversation and realized that people can't do the math. So lets do it:
Let's evaluate the last say 24 years and when the Dems had all 3 of the House of Representatives, Senate, and Presidency. Obama had it for 2 out of 8 years. Biden had it for 2 out of 4 years. Let's add it: That means Dems had control for 4 out of 24 years. Read that again, they had control for only 4 the last 24 years.
And that can still be filibustered. So if you want the filibuster proof majority, then Obama had it for 4 months. Not years, MONTHS. Biden never had it. Add it up: Dems had filibuster proof control for 4 months of the last 24 years.
Look at those stats again: Dems had control for 4 years of the last 24 years. For filibuster proof control, Dems had control for 4 MONTHS of the last 24 years.
This is why Dems compromise and reach across the aisle, because they basically never have control. To get literally anything done they need to compromise. Take your pick, either 4 years of the last 24 fucking years, or the 4 months or the last 24 years. And you wonder why they have to compromise? And why they go to the centre on the next election?
If you want progress you have to give Dems overwhelming and consistent victories.
Want to add Bill Clinton? That goes to 6 years of the last 32 years, and still 4 months for filibuster proof for the last 32 fucking years.
Want to add Bush senior? Then it’s 6 years of the last 36 fucking years.
Want to add Reagan? Then it’s 6 years of the last 44 years.
That's right, 6 years out of the last 44 fucking years that Dems had control. And for filibuster proof majority they had 4 months of the last 44 fucking years. Not 4 years, 4 MONTHS of the least 44 fucking years.
Where do you think things would be if Gore won? It would be further left.
Where do you think things would be if Hilary won? It would be further left.
People need to stop waiting for this left candidate that's they think is going to magically appear (and until then they will logically protest no-vote). If you want things to go left you give Dems wins consistently and overwhelmingly.
Some left people think this is a mexican standoff, and that they just need to standoff and then the Dems will move left. But no they won't. The dems will just go to the voters that show up, which is, drumroll please, the center. Every time they lose they go to the center.
A center voter is worth double, because it's both a vote for you and a vote taken away from the other party. So when Dems lose, they go to the center voter (worth double) that actually shows up. Do you want the Dems to move left? Then be the voter that shows up, so that the Dems don't lose and have to go to the center to find voters.
Ah I skimmed through and see your jabs and insults. There's no good faith discussion when you rely on this, so we'll see what I respond to (and this will be my last reply, after I report your comment).
Jimmy Carter didn't just lose, he was unceremoniously punted the fuck out. That's the left voters not showing up.
Bill Clinton. What are you even suggesting? Charisma? He won because he went to the center. Many people here say he went right past center and went to the right. That's what he had to do to find votes.
Oh we had President Gore? You can talk about courts all day, we did not have President Gore. Thanks protest 3rd party voters!
Oh you do another jab.
Obama was broad "hope", thinking that was enough after the wars. And after those wars that was all was necessary. And what did his first 2 years of ACA get him? Voters that didn't show up for his years 3-8. AKA left voters didn't show up.
Oh you do another jab.
Hilary after seeing voters not show up for Obama's years 3-8 stuck her head a little left on the one issue that supposedly matters to logical leftists: Climate Change. And guess what: The. Left. Voters. Did. Not. Show. Up.
And a big jab. Yeah this will be my last reply when you act like that.
Biden, like i said when you run against an incumbent you run center. If he ran left, who know what would have happened.
Oh yeah no subtleness there, you just go for insults. Definitely report and last reply. No logical discourse is possible. I'll hurry this up and skip over the rest of your insults and whatever else.
I can say it again, they go center because they keep losing. They've lost 20 of the last 24 years. So they go to the center to find votes. Because guess what? left. voters. never. show. up.
Since 1992? You mean when Clinton needed to go center to find voters after repeated dem losses?
And since 1992: they've had control of all 3 houses for 6 years of the last 32 years. And you're amazed that they're forced to reach across the aisle to pass anything?
You mean the thanks that Obama got for the most progressive healthcare reform ever was, drumroll please, losing the house of representatives. AKA. the. left. never. shows. up.
On to the next point. First you say:
Then you say:
Barely a line apart!
And you wonder why I have to point out there is more than the presidential election! He was president, but he lost congress in 3 of the 4 elections. Obama's reward for the ACA was the left not showing up to give him congress.
More jabs from you.
Again, they go to the center to find votes. When they lose elections, they go to the center to find votes. Because center is worth double and, wait for it, those are the voters that show up.
You want leftists to change this? Then you/leftists have to make sure Dems don't lose. Because, drumroll please, when they lose they go to the center to find votes.
You're the one that has this backwards. You/they won't get it when Dems keep losing elections. Because when they lose they go to the center. That's all there is to it. They aren't going to court the left voters that never show up. They are going to court the center voters that do show up.
Thus what leftists can do: Show up. And vote for Dems.
This is why there are so many of these sayings: You walk before you run. You stick your toes in before you take the plunge. All of those.
Whenever the Dems stick their toes in, they lose. What's that definition of insanity? Doing the same thing twice and expecting different results. (Except in this case it's like double insanity, going even further and expecting different results.) The results are: the. left. voters. never. show. up.
That's not how it works. They aren't going to go further left when they constantly lose when they go a little bit. That's why there's so many of those sayings: Walk before you run, and all those.
Ok gotta speed things up and I'm mostly repeating anyway.
What the ever loving freak is this? You keep going on about how they just need to run left and they're going to get all these votes. And then you say there's no voters there on the left? Are you saying that the centrists are suddenly going to vote for them? They are centrists by definition.
It's just like above about the presidential and congress elections.
Oh more jabs and insults. That about wraps up the bad faith and insults from you. Again, this is my last reply and your comment is reported.
As long as other people learn I'm happy to do it.
Here's what I told someone else:
The Dems lost the house of representatives in Obama's years 3 and 4. Again in years 5 and 6. And then lost both the house of representatives and the Senate in Obama's years 7 and 8.
You need more than just the president. They lost in 3 out of 4 of Obama's cycles. And you're wondering why they aren't running to the left? They lost 3 out of 4.
You think they lost because Obama was too far to the left? He was extremely centrist in office.
Sigh.
Why was Obama center for 6 years? Because he didn't have control of Congress. You need Congress to pass anything. So he was forced to reach across the aisle.
Why? Because left voters never show up. And because left voters never show up, the Dems move to the center to find votes.
Left voters showed up to vote for him and then he basically abandoned the coalition he formed. He had a super majority and did like one, watered down Republican healthcare policy. He should've kept up the organizations and email lists he utilized to get into office to keep up the pressure on Congress in midterm elections, but that basically stopped as soon as he became President. He's not unusual in that regard, every President except for Trump, does this. But it's especially annoying for Obama because he had the closest to a broad coalition in recent history and it got him a super majority.
Bernie is basically the only Presidential candidate who has shown any awareness of how bottom up coalitions are used, not just to get one into office, but to continue to pressure with the power of the people. That's why socialists were excited for him. Because he would've been an organizer-in-chief. Every other politician rules the same standard way.
Well, Trump does a bit of the organizing thing, too, makes good use of the bully pulpit, and keeps up his movement between election cycles, but mostly to keep himself in power and enrich himself from them. Still, he's done a similar thing of gotten a lot of non-voters to show up, and pushed the party right. Democrats could do the same thing, and actually push the party left if they wanted to try, instead of showing open contempt for leftists, but it's admittedly harder because you'd have to fight the corporate owned media and pass legislation, or show you're actually trying hard to help normal people in public.
Ok Obama and ACA (or more broadly his first two years). He likely reached out for two reasons. One: he wanted to mend the divisions after Bush’s disastrous wars. Get the country unified and back on track and all that jazz. Two: any intelligent candidate knows it’s unlikely they’re going to have control of Congress for all eight years, so he wanted to come off as reasonable and could be worked with, so that he could still accomplish things later in his presidency. I barely blame him for that. Who knew that the GOP was going to explode and become obstructionist to that degree because a half black man got elected. (BTW Biden learned from that and said nuts to it, he’s doing what needs to be done. Biden ran center, but is acting left. Let's see if it costs him the election when left voters don't turn out.)
And what was the thanks for the most progressive healthcare legislation? He lost control for the next 6 years. And then the GOP tried their hardest to overturn it. (So no, not a watered down Republican healthcare policy. They fucking hate it.)
It's congress. The house or reps and the senate. It's not the people, it's congress. That's why Obama couldn't do much for his last 6 years. He lost control of the house of reps and the senate.
And to further prove this point, congress even shut down the fucking government under obama. That's where the power is. Bernie or obama or bill clinton, doesn't fucking matter. It's CONGRESS.
Dems need all 3 of presidency, house of reps, and senate to pass anything. They've had all 3 for 4 years of the last 24 years. And when they don't have that they need to reach across the aisle to do something as basic as pass a budget.
The GOP needs only one of those to block literally everything. That's mostly what the GOP wants to do: Block progress. Hit the big giant pause button on society. And they can do that with only 1 of those, which they've had for 20 years of the least 24 years.
That's the unfortunate reality of progress. Progress takes all 3 houses. Progress takes time, effort, and hard work.
Stagnation (or regression) requires fuck all.
So no, the Dems can't go left like the GOP goes right. If you want things to go left, then you need to give Dems consistent and overwhelming victories on all 3 houses.
The problem is even when they have control they can barely do anything because of dumb rules like the filibuster, or blue dog senators.
Biden also doesn't act very left. He's passed a couple good pieces of legislation, but he doesn't support popular movements like labor strikes and prefers to make backroom deals (which residues their power for the future organizing), and he's very staunchly pro genocide for some reason, and been as hard on the border as Trump. He's just not as fascist as Trump but don't let the skewed Overton Window deceive you. He's a centrist moderate Democrat, like an Obama who learned to stop trying to reason with Republicans earlier and picked a few really good people for some cabinet positions (not Blinken, but like for the Secretary of the Interior BLM or FTC) and many meh people for others.
Biden is acting more left than expected. Because when you run against an incumbent (when he ran against Trump) you run a center candidate. You then have that candidate for 8 years. Considering that, he's pretty left with the green energy, trains, student debt, weed, drug prices, and yes unions, etc. I don't blame him for stopping the rail workers from striking. A rail strike would be absolutely devastating for the economy.
Every president does this, right. The DNC will only let in presidents who do this, who never reach out to their voterbase, and instead focus on an increasingly shrinking, aging, middle class centrist population. So they can then go out and every single time compromise with republicans on policy that makes them look good, and then basically be the exact same on most other policy issues, most notably on foreign policy. Then when they don't get anything done, oh, well, oh darn it's gonna be by the metric of whoever the rotating super-corrupt bad guy is in the DNC, by whatever margin they might need. Oops, looks like you guys needed to all vote harder to get rid of manchin and sinema.
Point this all out, and people will call you a conspiratorial "both sides" -ing nutcase, but then people plod along every election with basically all of this baked in as a ground floor assumption, and the same exact strategy as always, and then are either surprised when it blows up and nothing happens, or they stand around with their hands in their pockets and bloviate about how everyone else just needed to vote harder, even though people will endlessly point out about how we have an electoral college, so it doesn't matter, how the candidates pushed in the primary are guaranteed to be institution candidates, so it doesn't matter, how voting districts are gerrymandered to shit, how we live in a two party fptp system, how studies confirm that well-funded political interest groups and lobbyists shape policy. How even if we give consistent and overwhelming victories we've been shown no indication that things are going to change beyond this, further down the line, because no change is even being attempted earlier on with less power.
They've actually shown the opposite by trying to outflank trump on whoever can be the most racist to migrants. They're totally unwilling to even briefly entertain the idea that they could or should actually take a progressive stance on that issue, or try to explain how maybe migrants are all pretty much more chill than your average american, so instead their genius-level play is to try to take the same position as the guy who's entire deal has been how racist he can be to migrants. It's like they basically want to lose and keep the pendulum swinging.
It's nuts, I don't understand how nobody's seeing this shit, we're totally cooked.