- cross-posted to:
- usa@lemmy.ml
- politics@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- usa@lemmy.ml
- politics@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
We didn’t deserve Carter. We still don’t. He’s a better category of human than nearly all of the politicians we have at the moment.
That is why the Democratic party drastically changed its primary rules after Carter was elected (to make them less democratic, and to give establishment elite party members more power).
They tried to tighten the collar on the public even more when Occasio-Cortez primaried an establishment Democrat.
The left-wing of the Democratic Party, including President Jimmy Carter, are the red-haired stepchildren of the party, and they’ll never let us forget it.
There are more secret fascists than it appears who will Hail Hydra when Secret Hitler makes his appearance.
lol secret hitler? who’s that? too secret to tell?
Tis a game.
It’s a fun game. Like at a party, until you realize it’s likely real life.
never heard of it (obviously lol) I’ll check it out, thanks!
I think they take turns being the Secret Hitler, sort of like a Congressional game of Manhunt
Didn’t the rules change because Hubert Humphrey got snubbed by the DNC just flat out ignoring the primary results in states that had them?
Hubert Humphrey got snubbed by the DNC just flat out ignoring the primary results in states that had them?
I didn’t know this and am eager to find it. Was it during the 1968 election against Nixon?
I don’t quite remember, all I personally have off the top of my head is that it was the major contributing factor to the chicago DNC riots, and an overhaul of the nomination rules to appease the folks who called fowl.
Think “the superdelegates will only vote if a majority candidate isn’t found in the first round ballot” but I think it was actually even bigger when it happened.
The Democratic party tried to primary AOC 3 times afterwards, too ☠️
Yeah he helped create it. The first US president to begin to embrace neoliberal ideology and fictitious capital. Set the path for Ronald Reagan to bring in neoliberalism proper. And armed the Mujahideen, which lead to the crisis in Afghanistan. This is equivalent to Eisenhower warning everyone about the military industrial complex.
Had to scroll all the way down for this comment. The only response to this article should be : “Thanks for making this happen”
It’s frustrating. They say good things when they are removed from power. He sounds like a good person, but he was not a good president. Obama will probably gradually come around to this kind of talk when he gets older too. He recently all but admitted middle class decline due to concentration of wealth was responsible for the rise of MAGA. Don’t know if he will ever admit that drone “assassinations” he was in charge of were war crimes (assassinations in quotes because more than half the time the intelligence wasn’t even correct).
Just testing out IDF doctrine
Jimmy Carter is a fucking legend
Too bad this guy wasn’t in a position to do anything about that back when that started happening.
That was sarcasm
It’s hard to change a system when everybody else in that system wants you gone.
That was sarcasm
You can use
/s
I think people really overestimate the power that the president has, realistically when it comes to these sweeping systematic changes the only thing the president has is veto power. Otherwise you just have to hope that everyone else in congress and the supreme court do what you want them to do
I think people really overestimate the power that the president has
Yeah, the billionaires are the ones who really run everything
true OG
He, like all US Presidents, is a complete ghoul responsible for horrific crimes around the globe.
well of course but prob the least ghoulish of recent history, especially for individuals born nearly a century ago 🤷♂️
It’s sad that they only say the truth after they are far removed from power.
He’s been pretty consistent.
Not when it could have mattered
you should look up his foreign policy
Yeah, that’s true. I also remember a time when the CIA was doing their dirty work down in South America while Jimmy Carter was in office. Dude isn’t as great as everybody thinks he is
deleted by creator
Perfection is the enemy of good
Pretty sure the CIA will CIA no matter who is in the White House.
I’d love to know which president had the CIA stop everything they were doing.
What was his name… I can’t think of it…
I’m an idiot, so I don’t know if this is a sensible take. However, coming from a place of political strategy, I’m not sure a lot of presidents can out-maneuver military much. Presidents have term limits and military personnel don’t. Both for understandable reasons to be clear. However, it sets up a dynamic where one knows the ins and outs like the back of their hand and the other is like a substitute teacher with a class full of CIA operatives.
Seems reasonable
Jimmy Carter may have not have been a great president and the US government may have sone some shitty things while he was in charge, but he is probably the most upstanding American president of the last half century. Pretty much everyone after (with maaaybe the exception of Obama) has been of lesser character.
Which, now that I’ve written it out, sounds really sad. The best the country could do was Jimmy Carter, who … wasn’t great.
Dude, Obama ordered more drone strikes than any president before him. Just because he was a good speaker and charismatic doesn’t make him a good person.
How many drone strikes did Truman order? How about Garfield? Maybe a metric of “Everyone who came before” isn’t very good for technological advancements like that.
Note the maybe, but whatever. Tell you what. Name one post-carter president who was better than Carter. Dude doesn’t have to be good, just better than Carter.
The president doesn’t control every government branch like a marionette puppeteer 😅
Dude sold his company before becoming president. More ethics to this one than you’ve given credit.
It’s insane to think this guy, who was a pastor, lost the Christian vote to the cheating twice divorced Reagan
It’s very clear what the evangelical vote actually is for. They also largely voted for Trump over Biden, who’s a Catholic.
That one like half makes sense because evangelicals are obviously protestant and Trump is nominally protestant, but he is literally the fakes Chsitian to ever live. He is the kind of fake Christian you would only see in Christian media aimed at kids. I hate orange man bad “humor” but his saying “Two Corinithians” to an audience of Christian university students and faculty will live rent free in my head until I die.
Racism do be like that
it was a concerted strategy on the part of the republicans who made anti-abortion policy a cornerstone of their platform while convincing pastors to preach about how it was a sin.
It’s an oligarchy?
Always has beenIt’s a feudal system of corporate lords with a priesthood of economists, politicians, and lawyers.
I still don’t understand how lobbying is legal. Like, it’s straight up bribery.
Lobbying is supposed to be making your case to a politician, and hoping they vote/propose a bill/etc. With that interest in mind. You yourself are allowed to lobby your congress critters…technically.
We’re allowed, but without a fruit basket stuffed with money they’re not going to listen.
They’re surprisingly not that expensive to buy though, 10k will get you pretty much whatever you want…
I wonder if I could use $10k to get a law passed that every company needs my safety manual in their business that I totally had professionally bound and didn’t print at Kinko’s.
The majority of Americans don’t have 10k unneeded liquid cash
No, but a bunch of Americans together have 10k, it just so happens that it’s just the conservative ones who figured it out.
$10k will get you access, but you won’t convince a politician to do something that will cost them all of the other $10k checks they get from special interests.
Like if you wanted to buy a senator in order to get some earmarks for your development projects, you could probably get that buying a table at a fundraiser or two. But if you want them to pass legislation supporting unions or reducing the influence of money in politics, you’d basically have to bankroll their whole campaign because they wouldn’t raise another dime.
That’s the point. It is meant to be legalised bribery.
Exactly. Its legal so they’re not corrupt, but they still get to keep bribes
Read about Citizens United please
If lobbying were illegal, that would mean all of the organizations that fight for justice lose their voices too.
Lobbying isn’t bribery, it’s persuasion
No it just means they use their voices not money
Money ≠ speech. Now go back to bed, Mr. McConnell
The lobbying is not the problem. The donations that sway opinions are the problem. If it was entirely unrelated to donations and the congress person was just hearing out all sides of an issue, that’s a good thing.
Which will happen when hell freezes over
Edit- not saying you’re not wrong though
deleted by creator
If donations did not affect outcome, no company would donate.
Even when a legislator’s decisions are unaffected by lobbying, companies still control legislation by ensuring legislators who earnestly believe in legislation that favors the corporations over the people get elected.
This is how Biden sided with banks and the prison-industrial complex for half a century yet didn’t have enough money to fund his son’s cancer treatment without selling his house until Obama paid off his medical debt.
Donations aren’t to sway opinion they’re to maintain a stock of dependent politicians who already agree with your position but who also need your funding to stay in office
“hearing out all sides” somehow invariably turns into siding with whoever controls the most capital - I wonder how that happens.
I think politician should be under 24 hour stream.
id love to see them all going to the bathroom 😁
Because the people who decide what is legal are the people who benefit from it.
If you ever called or wrote a letter to your congress person about an issue you cared about you were a lobbyist when you did that.
The problem is not lobbying, the problem is pay-for-play. Something like 80%-90% of candidates who spend the most money end up winning their election. Our politicians are owned by wealthy corporate interests who fund their elections. The solution is to get money — especially corporate money — out of politics.
There are a number of policy proposals that might limit the power of money in our politics, federally funded elections, regulations for how much air time each candidate gets, perhaps bring back the fairness doctrine, just to name a few.
Yeah but there’s a difference between making one phone call and your job being to convince people to do things they would never do otherwise.
Or lobbyists being involved in drafting legislation.
The “tea party”/freedom caucus are literally groups funded by the Koch brothers. The entire “movement” existed because they willed it to be with their money.
“Americans for prosperity” is Koch manipulating politics through who they fund to run.
In theory, it’s partially meant to educate politicians who cannot be experts on everything in a world where information exponentially grows, but this system has clearly been intentionally used to abuse power.
Met a dude in 2015 who was a lobbyist for Boeing in DC. I heard he made 750k a year back then. He must be a really good educator!
And I know lobbyists who are just regular people who looked up the process and did it. I’m not advocating for it, just giving context.
There are other examples of programs and policies being used in this way. Now, to me, the question is whether or not they are intended to easily abused by design. I don’t have the knowledge to say one way or another. However, as previously stated, it’s obviously being used as a bribery under another name.
I used to work for a lobbyist on the hill, doing line standings. I would get paid to stand in line for hearings and committees and then the lawyers would come relieve you right before the hearing. Sometimes they wanted you to camp out the day before the hearing, and usually there were other line standers and it would be a circus, lots of fun.
Cool gig actually
Oligarchy is baked into the U.S. constitution. Only rich (land-owning) White Males had any say. The Senate (mostly wealthy) has a permanent veto over any real power sharing. Oligarchy is nothing new in the USA, they have just added window dressing to make people THINK it ever was a democracy.
And yet people will still get upset at you, if you express any viewpoint not in line with a party line. Guess the oligarchs are winning.
Guess the oligarchs are winning.
The house always wins.
The initials, the carpentry, the advocations for peace and against extreme wealth. You’d think a certain group would like this guy.
They did, but they changed their minds… or they had their minds changed.
While the three leading candidates (Reagan, Anderson and Carter) were religious Christians, Carter had the most support of evangelical Christians according to a Gallup poll. However, in the end, Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority lobbying group is credited with giving Reagan two-thirds of the white evangelical vote. According to Carter: “that autumn [1980] a group headed by Jerry Falwell purchased $10 million in commercials on southern radio and TV to brand me as a traitor to the South and no longer a Christian.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_United_States_presidential_election#Campaign
Jfc I am ashamed of my species
