• Buelldozer
    link
    fedilink
    101 year ago

    This should be in the dictionary under the phrase “Cutting off your nose to spite your face.”

  • DarkGamer
    link
    fedilink
    591 year ago

    The point was never to secure the border, the point was to make it look like Democrats weren’t.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      3
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The point was to elevate their invented crisis by rhetorically placing it on the same level as a genocide in Ukraine.

    • ares35
      link
      fedilink
      361 year ago

      it was a gift, and they tossed it because the democrats might look good for compromising and working across-the-aisle.

    • TWeaK
      link
      fedilink
      English
      291 year ago

      They lack the warmth and depth to be pussies.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    211 year ago

    Just wanted to point out if you’ve got a spare half hour, it’s worth listening to the audio in the article where they interview Michael Bennett. He hits on a lot of nuances about the immigration issue that isn’t often covered in most articles.

  • alliswell33
    link
    fedilink
    91 year ago

    Why am I not surprised everyone in this thread thinks that conservative border bill was good.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      91 year ago

      It wasn’t good. What was good however is conservatives voting against a conservative border bill that they demanded go with Ukraine aid – while also complaining that the two things were tied together.

      It was a political masterstroke. Not only is it impossible for Republicans to say they’re independent of Trump’s demands, but there’s now chaos and rebellion within their ranks.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      211 year ago

      Nobody does. We just laugh at the GOP for killing something that contains three items, and all three are things they would have supported without hesitation 10 years ago.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    881 year ago

    Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to throw this in every Trump voter’s face any time they mention the border or national security ever again. They’ll be back to know-nothing cockroach status again in 2025.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      21 year ago

      I can tell you exactly what they’ll say, actually, “The Bill gave billions to Ukraine and Israel and 20 Million for border defence what a joke” and at that point you should remind them that they instead decided to give $0 to the border defence, delegitimized Abbot’s perimeter for drowning women and children, and the next time the GOP have power they still won’t do anything because they’ll have created another massive deficit like they always do.

    • athos77
      link
      fedilink
      321 year ago

      Yeah, that’ll work about as well as reminding them about the Reagan tax cuts, Bush’s wars, and Trump’s fuckery ballooned the national debt that they’re always so “worried” about.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        111 year ago

        I’ve used similar pressure about Trump’s steel tariffs to shut chuds up about politics. It works.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            21 year ago

            Somebody I know tried to lie and say Trump was good for the economy because the steel trade war with China was somehow a patriotic, protectionist thing to do. Most of the rest of the family is not as educated as we are and don’t really care how something like steel tariffs work. I like to let a lot of bullshit go, but not that time.

            In pretty much any policy field you can find examples of how Trump mechanically goes against the things he says he is.

            Sabotaging the border deal was the worst thing he could have done. Man could have been unofficial speaker of the house and he blew it because of his ego, maybe not thinking straight on account of 91 felony indictments

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1341 year ago

    In two ways. They also killed the chances of further good deals. When they aren’t in power why would democrats ever want to negotiate with them

    • Cyborganism
      link
      fedilink
      531 year ago

      The last time they had a majority (first mandate of Obama if I recall?) they tried to work with the Republicans in good faith and they got nowhere so fast that the public voted them out from dissatisfaction.

      Correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s how I remember it.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Technically, during the Obama Admin the Democrats had a senate supermajority for I think less than 2 months. During that time no substantial bills hit the senate floor that I recall, but I remember they approved a bunch of USPS locations which seemed odd to me. Politics are crazy but they’re even weirder in retrospect.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        241 year ago

        It was a one person majority in the Senate that only lasted for a brief amount of time and was gone once healthcare reform ate up all of the time before Ted Kennedy died. They basically took what Mitt Romney had done at the state level and applied it federally, which is what Republicans claimed to want before they decided to call it Obamacare and pretend they didn’t help craft it.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        191 year ago

        The health care bill contained a series of things that are broadly popular when they were laid out individually. Package them together and call it “Obamacare” in the media and it was suddenly unpopular.

        Tea Party astroturfing can’t be understated, either. The GOP grabbed back power at just the right time to be able to gerrymander districts and then keep them gerrymandered up until now. We’re only beginning to erode that back.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      181 year ago

      Have you ever listened to Democrats? The leadership keeps saying that they believe we need a strong Republican Party for some reason.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        81 year ago

        For better or worse we have a two dominant party system, which totally breaks down when one party decides to go it alone and only advance causes they can win with their votes.

        That is a weak party, so divided internally they don’t dare compromise externally.

        If we don’t have at LEAST two functional parties, it all falls apart.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          71 year ago

          That sounds like an utterly stupid system that is fragile and easily manipulated… Go figure it’s ours…

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            71 year ago

            I’m not arguing with that, but it’s the system we have. We can modify it, improve upon it, or let it completely fall apart and be replaced with One Party Rule.

      • Guy Ingonito
        link
        fedilink
        91 year ago

        Imagine the soundbites if they said they wanted to destroy the opposition party.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          The GOP had a sign that said “we are domestic terrorists.” Can we stop caring what these radicalized disruptors think? Anyone who claims to be a moderate at this point is not welcome in my house none the less would I want to be on the same side as them.

          • Guy Ingonito
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            Lol, it’s not the GOP base that the soundbite would be used against. It’s the dem base, the people who open the new york times homepage on the way to do their wordle every morning that would see the headline 'DEMS SAY GOP DESTRUCTION AT HAND, “TOTAL ONE PARTY DOMINATION IF WE PLAY OUR CARDS RIGHT” ’ that would gasp and be so rattled they forgot the word for Sunday in their Spanish Duolingo lesson.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        51 year ago

        They say this because their lobbyists want nothing to change and if the Republicans are too weak, Democrats may actually have to make peoples lives better or the whole charade falls apart.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      211 year ago

      Because corporate dems are basically republicans. Our whole political system is right of center. With a few outliers.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        61 year ago

        I commented this a while back, and I believe it wholeheartedly -
        The current U.S. system is set up so that only two political parties can exist. In a perfect world, they would be rational, and represent differing facets of the voters values/goals. But in addition to not having a perfect world, through manipulation, degradation of the laws, and just human error/unintended consequences, we’ve wound up with a system where the two parties in power are largely funded by corporations, or those who have the resources to create PACs and launder their money into politics, and those groups represent roughly the same values and political goals.

        So the political ‘game’ now is to acquire money to campaign (so you can get the votes) by appeasing the donors while appearing to do things that attract voters, because voting has not quite been manipulated to the point where money equals votes, yet. (Save for gerrymandering, which renders the voting ‘problem’ moot.)

        I now believe politics is largely theatrical, and the media, also controlled by the interests that fund the political campaigns of politicians that do their bidding, works very hard to keep folks divided and arguing, rather than facing the real problem of their systemic disempowerment.

        I am increasingly disillusioned that a solution to this problem is possible.

        But anyway - I guess I’m saying I agree with you.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        32
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Rolling over for republicans is in their job description?!

        … that explains a few things…

        • Guy Ingonito
          link
          fedilink
          291 year ago

          When politics function correctly, that is what they are supposed to do in order to get concessions on other important things. Compromise leaves everyone unsatisfied.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            191 year ago

            Compromise is supposed to come with consessions from BOTH sides, not just handing one side everything they actually want after they make an unreasonable request…

            That’s capitulation, not negotiation.

            • vortic
              link
              fedilink
              281 year ago

              That’s what the democrats were trying to do. Republicans tied funding for Ukraine and some other things to tightening border security. The democrats called their bluff. They said “Here’s a border security bill that does what you’ve been asking for now let’s get this all done”. Republicans’ made surprised Pikachu face and said “We didn’t want it this way! We want it done by OUR president so he gets credit!” So, even though the Democrats were giving the Republicans what they’ve been asking for in exchange for things the Democrats wanted, the Republicans said “no”.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                71 year ago

                “That’s what they were doing! Republicans made a dishonest and completely unneccessary move, and Democrats compromised with that unreasonable position!”

                Yes… exactly. Democrats GIVE IN TO BAD FAITH DEMANDS. That is NOT negotiating. That is capitulating.

                • vortic
                  link
                  fedilink
                  141 year ago

                  I don’t think you really read my comment. Here’s my summation of how the back and forth went:

                  Dems: We want funding for Ukraine.

                  Reps: We want border security. No funding for Ukraine without border security!

                  Dems: Okay! Let’s do both!

                  Reps: Wait! We didn’t really mean it!

                  The Dems called the Reps bluff and the Reps backed out. The Dems were getting something they wanted in the deal, too. Plus, Dems seem to be warming to the idea of border security more recently so they’re not exactly getting nothing from that part either.

                  That doesn’t sound like giving in to bad faith demands. That sounds like negotiating. It’s just that the Reps aren’t actually interested in negotiating and flipped the table over even though they were getting a pretty good deal. It shows the Reps as the selfish babies that they are while the Dems show willingness to actually get things done.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                51 year ago

                Republicans never argue in good faith, and they always put power and politics over policy.

        • @[email protected]
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          211 year ago

          No, but Republicans convincing you it is, is the primary requirement in a Republican’s job description.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            51 year ago

            Why do the Democrats let Republicans write their job description? They should negotiate, not capitulate. I know that’s a difficult distinction these days given how much of the latter has been going on, but wake up and realize the difference.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              111 year ago

              Did you just learn the word capitulate or something?

              You’re suffocating all the discussion in this thread by making that “point” to anyone who replies.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                51 year ago

                Notice how no one is disagreeing with an actual point that means anything against what I said. Including yours. Good job failing to listen or think.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  51 year ago

                  Nobody is disagreeing because nobody wants to interact with the guy who immediately replies to every comment in the thread, especially when it’s a 12 year old that just learned a new word.

            • @[email protected]
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              131 year ago

              They don’t. You are letting Republicans write it and dismissing reality. You are their tool. A useful idiot. The poorly educated.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                5
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                You are beyond pathetic if you think I support Republicans.

                I’m pointing out that Democrats CONSTANTLY allow the Overton window to move to the right. They do these “compromises” that only offer legitimacy to the OUTRIGHT LIES of Republicans.

                Democrats are the useful idiots, and you morons are here seal-clapping as the Dems give creedence to the Republican version of “border crisis”.

                There is no border crisis. Not a NEW one, anyways… and now you have Democrats screaming, “give me the power, I’ll shut down the border today!”

                You all are pathetic for failing to see who the actual useful idios are.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  81 year ago

                  Please explain your grand strategy for passing meaningful legislation while the GOP controls a house of Congress. How exactly do Democrats pass aid to Ukraine?

                  You know how you move the Overton window back? Remove conservatives from Congress. You do that by winning elections. And you don’t do that by SOLEY denigrating the only party we can actually capture and use to our advantage. You aren’t helping the cause you supposedly support. You’re just doing damage, not offering a single workable alternative solution, and throwing a temper tantrum. Saying “Democrats bad” over and over, while again not offering any real criticism of the GOP or a better solution, is precisely what a Republican would do.

                  Moderates control the party because they made specific strategic decisions to capture, grow, and maintain that power over many elections. We have to do the EXACT. SAME. THING. If you aren’t willing to support that, just admit you’d rather have moderates or conservatives in charge.

        • a lil bee 🐝
          link
          fedilink
          171 year ago

          Oh yeah, they should do what the Republicans are doing and use a scorched earth, no compromise strategy! I mean, geez, look at all these huge legislative wins accomplished by this congress using this strategy. Maybe we can even have a cool purity-test driven speaker role, that’s been working well for them! Anything else we should imitate that I’m forgetting? A demagogic, unrestrained president would definitely tie things up nicely.

          Okay I’ll stop being a sarcastic jerk now, but you get the point. This strategy from Republicans works wonders when it comes to obstructing and shutting things down, but you’re never going to build anything with it. It’s destructive at its core.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            91 year ago

            Notice how I am distinctly not asking for Democrats to become as obstructionist. I’m saying they should act like adults dealing with unreasonable people.

            • a lil bee 🐝
              link
              fedilink
              71 year ago

              If you act as if you have leverage you don’t and refuse to engage with those who have power, your only choice is obstruction. This is what the Republicans are learning right this moment. Now, lucky for them, obstruction happens to coincide pretty well with their political objectives. For anything “constructive” though, they fail time and time again because none of them know how to compromise.

              Politics is compromising with factions to achieve your goals. I loathe some of the things we have to compromise on, but these people exist and they will have representation in our government for as long as they do.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                21 year ago

                They do not deserve representatives that cannot uphold their oath of office just because they also think that way

                We do not let murderers write the laws on murder, yet people CONSTANTLY excuse Congress for being illegally vile…

                What the fuck is wrong with everyone? Neither party’s behavior is acceptable REGARDLESS of how large the gulf between them is.

                Note how I have never once said to not vote for dems over repubs. I just want people to realize you are not working with quality. You CANNOT expect dems to do the right thing on their own. Ever. They require constant pressure to the left, or they DO get dragged to the right.

                This played out in real time and people EXCUSE the risk. The risk vs reward is pathetically small for gheir gamble. This was NOT a smart move even IF it worked out, and it’s literal insanity to sit here and listen to buffoons defend a terrible decision that moves the Overton window to rhe right.

                Yet again, people are cheering the Dems allowing the Overton window to slip to the right… Pathetic. Beyond pathetic. It will be the death of this country.

                • a lil bee 🐝
                  link
                  fedilink
                  41 year ago

                  You talk about “acceptable” and “deserving” but you have to realize that power is the only thing that matters in the end. They get power, they enact their whims. They don’t, they can’t. Right now, they have it, so you have to negotiate. That’s it, that’s just how it works.

                  People who complain about the Overton window are wasting their time. You don’t get to control that. Focus on winning what is possible with the window you have to work in. Expand that window if and when you can. Refusing to participate until the window looks like what you want it to is just ineffective.

                  And I just don’t agree with your characterization of the dems. I have my problems with their direction or actions at times, but they’ve fought and won for my rights and for the rights of various others in my lifetime. I do consider the more leftist parts of the party to be allies, but I’m not willing to give complete credit for those victories to only that wing of the party. I think it’s really disingenuous to look at the victories won for LGBT rights, climate change, and healthcare in the last 20 years (incomplete as they may be), and just write off the work done by democrats to achieve those.

            • a lil bee 🐝
              link
              fedilink
              01 year ago

              Sometimes, yep. A small handful of decades ago, “the people” would have wanted gay marriage banned forever. Before that, interracial marriage. Before that, women’s suffrage. I want a system that enacts good, just law in a stable manner and while I always think democracy should be a part of any system I would be a part of, pure democracy has no effective way of ensuring minority rights.

              That’s answering your question in the abstract. For this situation specifically, of course I want democratic, progressive legislation passed. In fact, I want to maximize the amount of democratic progress over the longest period of time, to the point where I’m willing to take losses on smaller items for the bigger picture.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        91 year ago

        And here I thought Democrats even participating in a BS, “bipartisan” bill that only served to validate the xenophobia being put forth by the opposing party was appalling and a clear example of the utter failure they represent.

        Then again, illegals is common vernacular now, so what the fuck do I even know, really.

        I’ve voted for Dems my entire life, but you’ll never catch me saying they “do their jobs”. The party embarrasses me at nearly every opportunity; any support I have for/give to the party is despite its leadership, not because of it.

      • admiralteal
        link
        fedilink
        281 year ago

        Only until the instant the Senate takes a simple majority vote to lower it to 50.

        While the Senate has historically been a useful bulwark for pushing back against the creeping fascism of the GOP, it’s also a matter of fact that it is an antidemocratic institution that in the longer term we’re better off minimizing or eliminating. It’s the House of Lords and we do not need a House of Lords in the modern era.

        Though I would like to see proper reapportionment in the House of Reps first, including adding significantly more members.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          121 year ago

          While the Senate has historically been a useful bulwark for pushing back against the creeping fascism of the GOP

          Has it?

          • admiralteal
            link
            fedilink
            21 year ago

            Maybe. Maybe not. I won’t come to the defense of that, it was more of a hedge.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              21 year ago

              The argument works for the House of Lords, which has often acted as a moderating force (and loses power every time it does), despite its antidemocratic nature.

              I think it’s a non-starter for the Senate. It was deliberately constructed as a conservative brake on Congress, being heavily weighted to smaller (more rural) states which tend to be more conservative. True conservatism is obviously opposed to fascism but in practice, it isn’t (and neither is liberalism if it is feeling threatened by socialism).

  • snownyte
    link
    fedilink
    61 year ago

    Is this the only good deal that they’ve ever acknowledged? All the other good deals that’d benefit Americans just weren’t good deals in their eyes that they happily shot down, but this one was the exception to them?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      131 year ago

      Yes. This was a wet dream for Republicans who want to dehumanize migrants. This was the only “good” bill in their evil twisted eyes.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    801 year ago

    Imagine overlooking the benefit to your citizens because you want your would be leader to do it instead.

    And people still vote for these pieces of shit

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      51 year ago

      We need to start labeling all politicians that go against the citizens enemies of the state. They should be allowed only a public defender. Life in prison or choice of beheading. Expedited charging of no more than 30 days. No last meals. We want cheap costs and swift resolutions, they fight against citizens they should be relieved of the rights awarded to citizens.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          4
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I know, right?

          You have the 2nd amendment. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”

          Just shoot them.

      • ggppjj
        link
        fedilink
        English
        91 year ago

        Yeah, perpetuate the cycle of dehumanizing violence! That’ll show them what’s what!

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    341 year ago

    Its ALWAYS one vote short. The 60th voter- ONE FUCKING PERSON-fucked the entire voting popukation.

    It is absolutely controlled opposition, every time.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    23
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The only thing that matters to authoritarians is that they win. They do not care if they are king of the shitpile, or if the world burns down around them. As long as other people are kissing their ass while it happens.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1131 year ago

    The year is 2006 and Republicans are killing a compromise deal that they all admitted they actually liked.

    The year is 2014 and Republicans are killing a compromise deal that they all admitted they actually liked.

    The year is 2024 and the GOP is about to win in a landslide on the “Democrats never get anything done” platform, so I guess you can’t argue with their results.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      211 year ago

      I dont think that will fly this time. It’s VERY obvious now that they can’t do ANYTHING in the house. Their ability to govern has been laid bare.

      Meanwhile Biden managed to pass some of the most meaningful and useful legislation in decades with the previous congress. So even if Republicans do nothing, Biden’s done more than the last two presidents to move the needle.

      Also, they got clowned hard. Biden admitted he’d shut down the border–which is what they were clamoring for him to do. Then they killed it. They dont care about the border and its obvious. This isn’t going to be laid at Dems feet.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        121 year ago

        It’s VERY obvious now that they can’t do ANYTHING in the house.

        But it is equally obvious that guys like Abbot and DeSantis have an open hand to act as they please on the border. That’s where this gets dangerous.

        By bogging down the legislative process and allowing Biden to twiddle his thumbs in the White House, we have transferred enormous amounts of power to the border states with the most horrific people in charge. The GOP decision to kill the bill was calculated, as it accrued authority to their allies in the Southwest.

        Also, they got clowned hard.

        They got laughed at by the same group of jokers who were going to point and laugh at them regardless. Meanwhile, right-wing talk radio is spinning this as a victory for the Immigration Absolutists and a rallying cry for the Trump Presidential campaign.

        Democrats have shown their hand on what they will concede. Republicans are in a strong position to advance their majorities in House and Senate into the next cycle. That puts the ball in their court, even if Mike Johnson personally looks like a weak Speaker. Republicans don’t care if he’s weak, because they’ve put all their chips on Trump anyway.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      81 year ago

      So, these elections are basically down to independent voters.

      Not the leftists that hate both parties and say they’re independent voters

      Not the libertarians that hate both parties and say they’re independent

      But the actual independents, especially those in swing states - that vote for either opposing party - is what these elections come down to.

      And weve already seen how they voted in the midterms, despite a shit economy.

      If it’s Biden versus Trump, I’d wager it’s a Biden win

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        101 year ago

        I hate both parties and I say I’m independent, as I realize they are both beholden to their corporate interests and lobbyists.

        The system isn’t designed for people with good ideas to emerge and change things for the better, but I like to think at some point in the future individuals like that could win outside of party lines. They have us all mixed up in these culture wars while the rich people keep on getting richer at an accelerated pace.

        But you are right, I’m going to vote for my version of less crazy, along with everyone else, and we’ll collectively go nowhere until the current crop of politicians age out or die.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      10
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The year is 2024 and the GOP is about to win in a landslide on the “Democrats never get anything done” platform, so I guess you can’t argue with their results.

      2018 is going to be a red wave

      2020 is going to be a red wave

      2022 is going to be a red wave

      Surely 2024 will be a red wave!

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        You left out 2016, 2014, 2010, 2002, and 1994.

        Surely 2024 will be a red wave!

        The gains Dems have made in the Midwest are heavily predicated on minority voters (particularly Arab Americans) sticking with the party. And it looks like Biden’s getting ready to piss all that away.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      611 year ago

      Idk if I believe that.

      We’re about to see a lot of “unlikely voters” turning out…

      And to think, running the same guy who tried to cling to power with a self coup after losing the last election in a landslide to the guy you lost to 4 years ago who’s supreme court justices “Roe is settled law” brought about headlines of suffering and skyrocketing teen pregnancy…

      Anyway remember that foreign policy is about power, not morality. And if “both sides are the same” no, one side is corporate shills and the other are fascist sycophants.

      Not voting for Biden or Not Voting is a vote for the Christian Caliphate where white is right but only if you’re a straight male. Everyone else can stay in the kitchen or go to the camps. History doesn’t repeat but it rhymes

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          111 year ago

          Amen.

          Never forget that Democrats were supposed to lose the midterms in a landslide and the economy was the top priority, supposedly. They barely lost the House but made gains in the Senate. And I think if you ask Republicans if they feel like winners in the House… Well, we can all see how that’s been going.

        • flicker
          link
          fedilink
          241 year ago

          My uterus is downright furious. I’m so glad it can’t read or it might try arson.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        81 year ago

        We’re about to see a lot of “unlikely voters” turning out…

        I’ll fucking believe that when I see it.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        81 year ago

        We’re about to see a lot of “unlikely voters” turning out…

        If the primary and the off-cycle elections are any indication, we’re going to see a big downturn in participation - particularly among Biden’s left wing base - as enthusiasm for another four years of Republican Lite administration tanks out.

        Anyway remember that foreign policy is about power, not morality.

        Hitler Particles Detected

        Not voting for Biden or Not Voting is a vote for the Christian Caliphate

        Its not the votes that count, but who counts the votes. And in my home state of Texas, the Governor has already made moves to consolidate election authority in the governor’s mansion.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          71 year ago

          If the primary and the off-cycle elections are any indication, we’re going to see a big downturn in participation - particularly among Biden’s left wing base - as enthusiasm for another four years of Republican Lite administration tanks out.

          This 1000%. You can’t keep treating leftists as a bigger enemy than the Republicans and expect them to keep voting for you just so we move 2 inches right instead of 4.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            71 year ago

            Yep go ahead and either not vote or make a protest vote. Just remember your lgbtq friends in the camps.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              3
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              You shoulda thought of that when you kept voting BNMW and never getting of your fucking couches. And when the xamos start filling up you’ll still be on your fucking couches.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            151 year ago

            So you’d rather move 100 yards right in your analogy then by ensuring a Trump victory. Got it.

            If you want to be an indignant self-righteous leftist deciding to not vote, don’t be surprised when you don’t get a chance to vote for a leftist candidate four years from now, or ever. You’re acting like a petulant child over an extremely important election just because you can’t get EXACTLY what you want.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              91 year ago

              Hey look, a Democrat treating leftists as a bigger enemy than the Republicans while expecting us to vote for them so we move 60 yards right instead of 100. 🤷

              If leftists are the reason democrats can’t pull a win as yall can’t stop having an aneurysm screaming at us about, maybe it’s time you move your policies left instead of bullying us at every turn as you sprint further right chasing “centrists” we all know will NEVER vote for a dem.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                51 year ago

                You need to watch Beau of the Fifth Column.

                If you want to build a leftist movement it has to start local. Run for the school board. Build a community network

                Don’t let the fascists win because of the Democrats not being left enough.

                You build the coalition from the bottom up, not from the top down.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  4
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I vote against fascism,and I vote against genocide. You give me a Democratic candidate that can do better than “I sidestep congress to fund genocide instead of sidestepping congress to commit genocide” and I’ll vote for them. 🤷

                  I can’t get over the fact that yall claim to be the “good guys” by backing full fascism in 4 years instead of this year. It’s still fascism my guy. Yall keep yelling at us that it’s OUR fault for not backing local antifascism, but SPOILERS - YOU’RE THE ONES BACKING FASCISTS.

                  You keep backing fascism then taking some sort of high ground for doing so. Get the fuck out of here. YOU ARE THE BAD GUYS BECAUSE YOU’RE STILL VOTING FOR FASCISM. You don’t magically become the good guy for voting fascist locally as well as nationally.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    7
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Another $14 billion to Israel

    Another $60 billion to Ukraine

    This bill was shit and we should be glad it’s dead

    War hawks cope and seethe

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      111 year ago

      Ukraine is a bulwark against Russian aggression. If it falls, Russia will be emboldened to bully other countries with impunity. That isn’t being a war hawk - it’s defending the status quo and its benefits.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        How is the status quo benefiting anyone? The lines aren’t moving, soldiers and civilians are dying daily.

        And yes, you are still a war hawk if you support the status quo of war to continue.

        IMO Ukraine should be admitted to NATO after negotiating a peace treaty.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 year ago

        Why should we send 74 billion in aid to Israel and Ukraine when 60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, we are the only OECD nation without some form of universal healthcare, and over 650,000 Americans are homeless (a 12 percent increase during 2023). Do you honestly believe that there is a higher priority to send obscenely large sums of money in the form of aid to other countries rather than focusing on the material issues we face as a nation?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          Unless you want to house people in tanks or feed them RPGs, this money was never going to help them in the first place. We don’t ship over pallets of $100 bills, we send them munitions that are going to expire soon and will need replacing.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            51 year ago

            This is such a low effort response that showcases US apathy for it’s own poverty conditions. Of the $75.4 billion sent to Ukraine alone, only $26.4 billion was financial (loans, funds, other financial support), and on top of that only $2.7 billion is used for humanitarian purposes like food, healthcare, etc). The remaining $46.3 billion is reflected as military spending towards weapons and equipment, security training, grants and loans for weapons, etc, all of which is covered from our $800 billion dollar “defense” budget.

            So now that we’ve addressed your concerns about how tax dollars fund military spending, I ask again, do you honestly believe that there is a higher priority to spend large sums of money in the form of aid to other countries rather than focusing on the material issues we face as a nation?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’d argue they already did and yeah fuck Putin but we should be questioning whether it is morally right to support a stalemate that is killing a whole generation of Ukrainian men. We should absolutely be questioning how it is the American’s responsibility to support that indefinitely with taxes when we are so insanely in debt. How are any of these carve-outs appropriate in an “Immigration” bill?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          Strangely, a lot of the military support we give to other countries is basically free. We maintain a vast stockpile of munitions that all have an expiration date. A lot of these billions going to our allies would just go to a very expensive landfill otherwise. I don’t know to what extent that was true in these cases.

          Furthermore, I think giving Ukrainians the means to defend their country, even dying to do so, is preferable to allowing Russia to slow-genocide them like Israel is doing to Palestinians. It’s not our “responsibility” to get involved, but it is in our best interest to oppose Putin.

          To your last point, it has nothing to do with immigration, but that was the deal Republicans demanded.