I’m voting Democrat like I always do. I remember being the only non-right wing senior citizen looking person at my polling place for Hilary Clinton when no one showed up. Not with any hope, just so I can say I voted against gleeful hatred.
I’m just pissed that I will never, ever get a vote against market capitalism, as it controls both parties on economic policy and we only get a vote on how to manage the social issue symptoms it causes.
If you keep the left in power your can steer them left, if the right gets in power you reset your progress to 0
Resetting to 0 is a best case scenario for Republicans regaining control
0 what? 0 A.D.?
Could you walk me through steering them left when they’re in power? Over the years the democrats seem to only get more right wing. The thing is, I always thought that you steer politicians through your vote, and if I guarantee my vote to you regardless of what you have done in the past or are currently doing, what incentive do you have to change course in a way that I like?
It works the same way the Republicans have been steered further right while not in power. When Democrats have to worry about moderates, they move to the right. If they only have to worry about liberals, they can support and back more progressive positions. If they don’t, they are more likely to be primaried.
See also: the Tea Party takeover of the GOP which pushed them further down the path to the current fascism.
The Dems seek out the people who actually vote.
If the Left stays home every election, the Dems have no reason to listen to them.
Clearly they’ll just voter shame and we’ll end up exactly where we are. I’d argue the reason we are where we are is exactly that reason.
I was never his biggest fan, but New York Mayor Ed Koch did say something I liked.
“If you agree with me 51% then you should vote for me. If you agree with me 100% you should see a psychiatrist.”
The Dems need all 3 of presidency, house of reps, and Senate to do anything. And they’ve only had that for 4 of the last 24 years. Or 6 of the last 32 years. Or 6 of the last 44 years. That’s why they keep going to the center to find voters, because they need all 3 and basically never get it. So how do you get them to go left? By giving them consistent and overwhelming victories.
The thing is, I always thought that you steer politicians through your vote
To some extent, yes. However the amount of steering you can do this way is rather limited, since a vote only indicates a preference of one candidate over the other.
For example, if you decide to vote Republican out of protest, Democrats might conclude that you like republican policies, and to win your vote back, they need to move even further right. If you decide to stay home and not vote, you don’t really give any information to democrats what they actually need to do. They may decide that you are an unlikely voter in any case, and focus towards those folks most likely to turn out (that’s generally older white conservative folks).
One option is to vote for some leftist third party. This sends a pretty clear message about what policies you like. The problem is that, apart from the messaging, your vote is almost certainly wasted. You are in effect helping your enemy win in the short term.
The other option is to engage politically outside of just voting. Most people have been convinced by establishment politicians that your only influence is your vote. This is not true. Protests, activism, grassroots movements, local politics are all effective ways to steer your preferred party in your preferred direction. This does require substantially more effort.
When the Republicans win, the Democrats hear “move right”. It’s as simple as that.
And also when the democrats win, if you look at the way policy has evolved during the clinton years, during the obama years, and also now during the biden years.
The actual incentive that they have should ideally be actual political activism that exercises some real and material form of leverage against their power. Seeing as these movements have all been totally deconstructed, mostly by the federal government, instead, you’ll find that the way you’re supposed to change the party is just by voting harder for them, and then just kind of hoping that they somehow naturally decide to swing left, after you’ve already handed them the keys to the kingdom. It’s pure cope, basically.
Early voted today in AZ. Straight blue! I was the first person in line in my county in one of the 3 precincts opening early today. 💪
The real MVP right here! You’re the best!
Thanks. It is everyone’s responsibility.
Big Sausage Energy fr
Thanks BigFatNips
Forgive my ignorance please, I’m not an american. I see these posts often on reddit and lemmy, but shouldn’t these posts be displayed on tiktok, billboards, or anywhere that those poeple who don’t vote frequent? Is there any stat at all to show whether such posts work?
I think it’s actually mostly a product of the overton window kind of being split, but, not really split in the ways that you might think. It’s not so much that each party is getting more extreme in what their actual beliefs are, it’s just that people are getting more extreme in their rhetoric, more extreme in their isolation. This, if anything, encourages people they disagree with not to vote. You need only look beneath these kinds of posts to see the sheer amount of people that chirp up, disagree at any time, and then totally fail to be convinced.
No, much like underpantsweevil said, this is purely something that’s for the in-group, to make them feel good, to make them feel like they’re doing something productive, and more than any of that, it’s a way for them to work out ideological insecurities and reinforce pre-existing beliefs. Which further feeds into that rhetorical isolation. Keep that running for 30 years online (maybe more like 10 if you’re just considering web 2.0), and you shake out to about where we are now. Continue this for another 10 or 20 years and you’re probably directly headed for some absolutely heinous shit as the gulf gets wider and wider.
shouldn’t these posts be displayed on tiktok, billboards, or anywhere that those poeple who don’t vote frequent?
No. This is all just preaching to the choir for karma.
There is no karma on Lemmy
Yes there is. It’s just more self gratifying and less purposeful though.
People still vote based on “in-group” logic and moral opinions whether comments add to discussions or not. People still act superior on here for feeling they have support when getting upvotes.
Pay no attention to them, they want people to vote for someone who supports genocide. They know they’re losing so they’re doing everything and anything they can right now, just tune them out.
Love seeing bullshit like this downvoted. It goes to show how common sense and an adherence to reality can effectively stand up against propagandist bullshit.
A LOT of the time spent being an adult is about making choices where only bad ones are available. You don’t have to like one or the other but you have to be grown enough to recognize the difference between an orange hippo flinging shit around and someone who you can trust won’t be taking an actual shit at the table during a meeting with heads of state
Both support genocide, it’s not just the democrats.
Dude there are 2 options in the us both support genocide just one of them wants to deport every immigrant and put in a ton of awful policies And genuinely is a threat to democracy pick the better option and vote
There’s no point arguing with MAGA about who to vote for. Just point, laugh, and move on. It’s the 11th hour. They’re not going to stop now.
True
one of them wants to deport every immigrant
They both deport the same amounts of immigrants: https://ohss.dhs.gov/topics/immigration/yearbook/2019/table39 Obama deported more than Trump
a threat to democracy
You just admitted that you don’t have democracy two seconds ago. You can’t say “I have no choice but to let my rulers commit genocide in my name” and two seconds later say “We have a democracy worth defending”
Have you not heard their new plans for deportation its going to be wayyy worse than he was when he was in office.
At least there are 2 shitty options versus none
The democrats have also drifted rightward on deportation in this election, saying that they’ll be harder on the border than trump was in 2016, which, again, they already had been doing. The cost benefit here is an argument over whether or not one or the other will be like, 5% worse, and some of us, like you’ve just been sent evidence for in the previous comment, aren’t even convinced that the democrats will be any better.
Perhaps there is a third approach here, yes? Perhaps there is something in the specifics of this lack of actual, tangible democracy that exists for people, that means your specific vote is mostly meaningless anyways, which means it’s freed up to be thrown at some third party candidate, yes? Do you live in a swing state? Do you live in a gerrymandered swing district in one of said swing states? Do you live in a state where your electoral college candidate has to obey your vote? If the answer to any of those was no, then congrats, you basically have free reign to vote for whoever actually aligns closest to your beliefs, because your vote doesn’t actually matter.
Bullshit. Your vote matters. It might not impact you local election but the more obviously backward the electoral college looks the more likely someone will throw it in the trash like they should have decades ago.
Do you have any actual argument other than just saying “Bullshit. your vote matters.” though? Anything more to back that up, with a basis in how the system actually functions? Do you think the democrats will legitimately provide a challenge to FPTP voting? To the electoral college? Do you think the republicans will? How would that get overturned, what would that actually look like?
So your solution is to let Trump win and make everyone but the rich pay for that genocide, probably destroy us democracy, while all this will change nothing for Palestine ?
God, I hate fighting people just to get them to vote in a way that makes mathematic and strategic sense.
I have a really hard time staying cool and collected when I discuss politics with people who hold right-wing positions. As a result, I never do volunteer work for political campaigns, because it seems like the only positions available are phone-banking and door-knocking. It’s frustrating; I want to help, but I feel strongly that I’d do more harm than good, doing either of those things.
How about putting up signs?
To be fair, you’re looking at either getting shot at, going to jail for assault of a nazi, or at best, suffer a heart attack from the sheer blood pressure one gets dealing with those insufferable people. I think not volunteering is probably for the best, haha.
What I don’t understand is what harm is being reduced by doing “harm reduction”? I get maybe one or two election cycles the candidate isn’t ideal but after decades of horrible candidates that increasingly become more right wing over time it seems that no real harm is being reduced. Working class people are are still starving under Biden and likely will under Kamala, simultaneously the Capitalist class continues to aquire obscene amounts of wealth. Meanwhile we’re all supposed to go along with the idea that Neoliberalism is the only option while so called “radical leftists” (social democrats and social liberals) are too extreme for government. This election cycle we’re offered a candidate that has promised to encourage fracking, likley will not offer any federal protections for women and other minorities, openly supports Israel, and is overall a spineless corrupt career politican that for some reason we’re all supposed to nod our heads to and say “yup shes the face of the American left”. If we keep doing “harm reduction” soon we will all be reduced to nothing.
It’s not about harm reduction, it’s a slow boil towards fascism. We’re all just frogs in a pot of slowly heating water, except frogs actually will jump out before they boil to death; humans aren’t that smart.
Every four years the centrists say “vote for us, because the Other Guy is worse!” And they’re not wrong, especially since 2016. But they’re also not even pretending to be on our side anymore. Everyone says the Republicans have taken the mask off and aren’t hiding their evil, but it is the Democrats running a candidate who is openly working with members of the party of greater fascism, it’s the Democratic candidate who is pro
fuckingfracking the earth, and it’s the Democrats (as well as the Repubs) who aren’t even bothering to lie to us about wanting to stop the genocide that our tax dollars are directly funding.However, I have to say that I’ll be voting for the party of lesser (or at least slower) fascism come November. Not because I agree with a single thing they’re doing (since their platform is still “We’re not as bad as the Other Guy”), but because they threw us exactly two bones in dropping Biden and giving the VP to one of the few Ds who actually looks progressive (where he can do the least damage, of course).
This is assuming that the dems are anything but Captialist lapdogs, and willing to do any of this. They will not I am sorry to tell you that
This is assuming that the dems are anything but Captialist lapdogs
It assumes Dems are in the majority at a uniform distribution. As though an extra 10M Californians voting for Harris will bend the needle on a race in Ohio or North Carolina or Texas.
Nevermind the “You get a supermajority and can pass anything you want!” is a scenario we already had in 2009. And what happened? Big bank bailouts. Lukewarm regulations. A bloated Pentagon churning out failed project after failed project to the tune of trillions. No DC statehood. No SCOTUS majority. No gun control. No immigration reform. No Single Payer. No Abortion enshrinement.
Republicans only hold power because you let them hold power
True! But only for the leadership of the party. When grassroot Dems turnout in droves, the senior leadership takes office on a platform of Bipartisanship and Cooperation. When grassroot Dems collapse in exhaustion and despair, suddenly you’ve got a Unitary Executive and a Simple Majority in the House and Senate and a SCOTUS that can tear up the Social Contract at its leisure all stacked in the favor of Republicans.
What does happen if Harris wins big in November? Do Democrats get anything they were promised over the last 30 years? Or do we get a Democratic President more fixated on going to war with Iran and “balancing the budget” on the backs of SS/Medicare than offering an improved quality of life for American residents?
no matter what time it is going to be the second, agian the Democrats are not beholden to the people, they know who’s intrests they serve and they lerch farther to the right each election
They only held a supermajority in the Senate for 72 days. The Minnesota seat was disputed and another democrat died of a tumor. Plus, enshrinement was not important back then as RvW wasn’t considered to be in danger.
Your opinion is not welcome on Lemmy!
Get out of here! Downvoted.
#VoteKamala
1 what lemmy lemmy.ml lemmy.world lemm.ee lemmygrad please specify [email protected] I need you to be more specific
Second Oh no your down vote hurt me so much how will I ever recover that someone on the internet disagreed with me.
80% of Americans don’t support gun control. American Political parties are coalitions among themselves. Even if Ds won by 20 points they won’t have the support to do things like implement nationalized healthcare or overturning the 2nd Amendment.
“80% of Americans don’t support gun control” is pretty laughably wrong, considering the numbers actually paint a much different picture. According to Pew and APMRL, 58% of Americans want stricter gun laws, and nearly everyone—86%—supports universal background checks. 86%. Not exactly a fringe opinion, is it?
Also, the idea that no one’s on board with any gun control measures conveniently ignores the fact that a majority of Republicans even support some restrictions like keeping guns out of the hands of people with mental illnesses. It’s almost like you made this number up.
Sure, not every gun control proposal gets broad support—take things like an assault weapons ban, which has more partisan splits—but even there, almost three-quarters of Americans are on board with requiring licensing and testing, just like with cars. So, trying to paint gun control as some sort of massively unpopular idea just falls flat.
According to Pew and APMRL, 58% of Americans want stricter gun laws, and nearly everyone—86%—supports universal background checks. 86%. Not exactly a fringe opinion, is it?
They hyper majority of gun sales have background checks involved in them. Universal background checks would either ban the private sale of guns (which SCOTUS would likely overturn) or open up the background check system to private citizens (which will almost certainly be abused from a computer security perspective & will lead to people realizing just how poor the system is).
The point isn’t that 80% don’t support gun control, it’s that each thing on the wishlist isn’t widely popular. And even if the actions would lead to a landslide, Americans wouldn’t be happy about it.
So, you’re concerned about universal background checks affecting private sales? The whole point is to prevent dangerous individuals from using these loopholes to buy guns. Your argument is basically defending a system that lets people bypass regulations using airy justifications even though it’s exactly why universal checks are necessary.
Your claim about potential abuse from a “computer security perspective” is just weak. There’s no concrete evidence that this would be a serious, unsolvable issue. We handle sensitive data in far more complex systems, so throwing out vague concerns isn’t a valid argument. It’s just a way to avoid real engagement.
And your SCOTUS speculation? It’s a distraction. Sure, legal challenges might come up, but that doesn’t erase the fact that 86% of Americans want universal background checks. Hiding behind hypothetical court rulings doesn’t change the overwhelming public support.
Your entire response relies on hypothetical fears, speculative legal scenarios, and flimsy concerns about private sales. It’s laughable that you can be so incredibly far off the mark about actual opinions of Americans on these topics while simultaneously claiming to speak for them. But none of it holds up against the simple fact that most Americans—across party lines—support stronger background checks and more gun control. You’re flailing to avoid engaging with the data, and it’s not working.
The whole point is to prevent dangerous individuals from using these loopholes to buy guns.
Dangerous individuals largely aren’t using this loophole to buy guns. That’s part of the problem.
The only gun control that might have a chance at stopping gun crime is a total civilian ban and that requires an Amendment.
Most Americans are stupid and think gun control means Guntakeaway
80% of Americans don’t support gun control
Lol, seriously? Did your NRA rep tell you that blatant lie? Source please.
You would have to define “gun control”. As I’m sure that more than 20% of Americans would be in favor of incarcerated prisoners not being allowed to carry guns, which is a form of “gun control”.
“I’m not going to vote because democrats aren’t communist which makes them basically republicans” - average Lemmy.ml user
Jk it’s actually something more like “I’m not going to vote because I’m European”
Eastern European specifically.
Even more specific?
As east as you can get in Europe :)
But I thought Russians were voting in us elections? 🤔
For me it’s the genocide.
• Democrats are VERY reluctantly adhering to a trade agreement and trying to negotiate and end to their hostilities.
• Trump said they need to “finish the job.”
bOtH siDeS!
So you’re gonna do nothing about it. Cool.
Both sides support Israel, one side has advocated and has vocal members who advocate against the genocide. The other side is for the genocide and thinks they should go further.
But you’re right, both sides, etc etc, Sit out.
Who says I’m doing nothing about it? All you know about it is that I refuse to vote in favor of genocidal regimes. Besides, refusing to vote for someone who’s actively committing a genocide is doing something. It’s exercising your right to vote in a meaningful way by showing that there are lines you do not cross. I wouldn’t vote for Hitler when that was an option, and I won’t vote for Harris (or Trump) now.
Make sure to pat yourself on the back for doing something when the christofascists take over, applaud Israels “tough” stance on “terrorism”, and kill or chase out every Palestinian that doesn’t lick IDF boots and ask for seconds.
And you are so sure thats not happening now? How exactly could trump accelerate any of that. Israel literally does what it wants. It doesnt give two shits.
At least bring up the right ally we would be screwing over which is Ukraine, but oh look the democrats are fucking them over too. Interesting that.
While it may be said that Trump is not necessarily the most Israel friendly president, he is undoubtedly the most Netanyahu friendly president (the leader of the Israeli regime perpetuating the genocide in Gaza and the West Bank).
Trump brags he gave Israel the Golan Heights, part of Syria that Israel has been occupying for decades, by formally recognizing Israeli sovereignty over it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_recognition_of_the_Golan_Heights_as_part_of_Israel
Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital is Israel and moved its embassy there from Tel Aviv. The status of Jerusalem is considered a key part of Israel-Palestine negotiations.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_recognition_of_Jerusalem_as_capital_of_Israel
Trump’s son in law, Jared Kushner, mentions that Israel should remove the civilian population in Gaza and clean it up, stating it would be valuable waterfront property.
Trump killed the “Iran Nuclear Deal”, which was vehemently opposed by Netanyahu. When Netanyahu spoke in front of congress opposing the deal in 2015 he was invited by a Republican and Democrats walked out of his speech in protest.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_withdrawal_from_the_Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Action
Politicians that criticise Israel, or even want conditions on their “military aid”, risk being targeted by the pro-Israel groups. Jamal Bowman had his position more or less publically butchered to set an example and warn others not to oppose Israel. While some others survived massive spending against them by the pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC and other groups are effective in making sure most politicians avoid thr topic of Israel, at least publicly.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/20/nyregion/aipac-bowman-latimer.html
Netanyahu was clearly displeased with his meeting with Harris. His repeated escalation of violence is increasing tensions in the Middle East and angering a large subset of the US Democratic base. More and more people are under the impression that he is trying to harm the Democratic ticket and/or lock the US in conflict so that, of Democrats still win the presidency, they will have no choice but to continue to back Israel and Netanyahu’s regime.
But you haven’t considered the fact that the people you’re talking to are arguing in bad faith
All of these things are happening or heading towards happening now, under Democrat leadership.
Explain to me how either the republicans would make it worse, or the democrats would make it better.
Do you not think genocide is a good reason to not vote for someone else? As far as red lines go, that’s a pretty good one.
it is more like genocide vs genocide + whole bunch of other human rights violations.
if you are not planning to overthrow the government by revolution then there is no way to go from these two options to an “ideologically perfect” (whatever that means) government in just one election cycle, needs to be done in smaller steps.
Withholding your vote until genocide is taken off the table pressures her to give in to their demands, though. There’s no universal constant saying we need to have a genocide. Either she loves genocide, or she’s supporting it because she’s worried she won’t get the votes without it. If it’s the second one, and I hope it is, then the Uncommitted movement is simply doing the same thing to establish their own power, and for a better reason: to save the lives of their friends, family, aid workers, doctors, and journalists.
Nah, holding your vote appears to be you just being another unmotivated democratic voter without regard to why. No one gets polled on why they didn’t vote 4 years prior. At best Harris barely wins and at worst Trump takes office and you get 4 years of genocide + Ukrainian subjugation + subjugation of women, minorities, and immigrants at home.
Kind of a no-brainer that you should vote for Harris here.
Not if it’s withheld as part of a wider movement or given to a third party. That’s why it’s being paired with protests and other campaigns letting them know what they have to do to get their vote back.
Harris barely winning but losing something like Michigan to spook her into actually doing something material to stop supporting Israel is probably my preferred scenario right now, but she already said no arms embargo is on the table and after an election she’s not really beholden to voters anymore, so doubt that will help, either.
“barely winning” is a dangerous game to play when the consequences of losing is getting much much much further away from your stated goals. if anything it is impossible to push Trump to an anti weapon sale stance (since his core supporters don’t care and Trump is where money and strongest lobbies will be) than Kamala whose core supporters actually care but are turning the other way for now due to the fear of losing to Trump.
Supporting a genocide is a dangerous game as well, not only politically but physically, to at this point hundreds of thousands of people. Millions have been displaced from their homes. Not everyone can just ignore it so easily.
No, if it was a no-brainer, the no-brained idiot you’re responding to would already understand this.
Well, with how the country is handling the migrants, they proved that they could have solved homelessness the whole time,
Trans people being put in camps? Nope. Just the gender reassignment for minors is an issue. Just because people disagree doesn’t mean trans people would become ostracized. Maybe if trans women would stop begging for attention because men are always the problem. Never see any issues from trans men. Only skewed views coming from them is their belief of “men can get pregnant”. Let’s not confuse opinions with facts. I don’t have issues with trans people but if society has to revolve around them rather than them assimilating with their preferred gender, then that affects everyone.
Us and gay people would become third class citizens? Are we not all Americans? Why segregate the gays as if they’re special? We’re all Americans. The flag represents us all too. Maybe we should start acting like it.
No one is forcing you to read the Bible. But it’s good to be versed in it. It’s one of the oldest books after all. Even if it is all made up. Religion shouldn’t rule our lives either. I wonder if religion is banned, that sex crimes would slowly drop. Maybe.
The only issue is abortion. But people who want abortions more than any issue resolved is insane. If the government has to intervene, maybe they should make sure parents raise their kids with respect , decency and tolerance and maybe most abortions can be preemptively prevented. Only the medical cases would be necessary.
Abortions can be a useful procedure if used properly. If you constantly get one because you always have unprotected sex, you’re irresponsible. If a man constantly gives a woman a need for one, perhaps that man should get snipped.
IDK. There seems to be a logical solution for these problems, but of course we don’t have time for any of that. Or capable.
I did:
The easiest way to increase turnout is running a young charismatic candidate with a progressive campaign, like 08 Obama…
Unfortunately we don’t have that option this election, probably not 2028 if Harris wins this one, so keep your fingers crossed for 2032 when people might be able to vote for a Dem candidate and not just against the Republican candidate.
Until then we’re doing the same dance as the last decade, holding your nose and hoping shit at least stops getting worse. And praying enough other people do the same.
I’m pretty optimistic about Kamala
Most everyone is. The only ones that aren’t are MAGA and single-issue leftists that weren’t going to vote no matter who is running, but they’re already statistically removed from polling data. So… irrelevant.
Same.
I don’t know if I would say optimistic myself, but I’m willing to give her a chance.
You’re not wrong. Running on progressive policies would mobilize a lot of people to get up and vote. I think people just don’t want to hear it right now the only options presented to the public are Harris and Trump. With Trump being the most overtly fascist candidate we’ve seen in quite a while, those who don’t want Trump see Harris, who is running the same campaign as Biden (aka, business as usual) as the only option, because she is the only other option other than Fascism in this race.
Because of that, I think many people see any criticism of Harris or her position as advocating for Trump during this election cycle. Which I absolutely disagree with. I think everyone should absolutely demand more from our representatives. It is on them to galvanize support and get more people to vote, by advocating for legislation that those people want.
I think this mentality that it is the fault of the people for being apathetic, instead of the fault of the politician for not galvanizing more people to vote via popular policies, is misplaced due to the very real fear of the Republican parties policies and lack of influence over the Democratic party.
Instead of politicians aiming for wider public support through progressive policies, we see more democratic backsliding and a continuation of neoliberal policies. Which I think only makes more people apathetic.
Vote Harris. Even with the most pessimistic view, Fascism now is still much worse than Fascism later.
…
So you understand that Harris being more progressive would get more votes and help beat trump…
But because it’s so important to beat trump…
You think no one should publicly comment that Harris being more progressive would get more votes?
Biden isn’t the candidate anymore, there’s a decent chance Harris might listen and give voters what they want Or are you saying you don’t think she ever will?
No, I myself have advocated repeatedly that Harris should be more progressive. That was just my analysis of why some people don’t like to hear it, even if they are voting for her.
Honestly, I don’t think she will part from Biden on anything from what I’ve seen. I think it’s a big mistake when trying to gain as much votes as possible. She should have pivoted on things Biden is unpopular on.
I was extremely enthusiastic for the Harris ticket once Walz was picked, but after the DNC I got disillusioned. Still voting Harris, but I won’t stop advocating for things I feel like she needs to change on in the meantime. Maybe she’ll pivot after election, assuming she wins, but I kinda doubt that. If there are major national protests that force her to change, maybe. I’m not sure public organizing, including unions, is quite there yet.
Where meme?
I’m sure someone will give you ten vague paragraphs to scroll through, that’s like Star Wars, right?
Is this not a modified star wars opening? You know how Lucas loves politics.
kids are force fed the bible
Well that can’t be true
Republicans are strongly against feeding children after allBuy our new Trump Bible Mk.39! This new edition features pages made out of pork rinds so your constituents can taste the word of our lord!
Then with a supermajority the dems will talk about bipartisanship and you’ll watch the slowest change ever.
just like obama when they could have passed universal healthcare the dems stalled until the next election cycle
I recall they only had like 8 months of a super majority (if you include Manchin) before Ted Kennedy died in office and was replaced by Scott Brown.
Fuck that. Post trump they can GTFO.
It’s crusty as hell but checks out.
