• CodexArcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    My high school and early college was during the W. Bush years. I hated him, and around that time is when I got political, active, and told my (Republican) parents that I was a proud Libertarian! (Look, I’ve learned a lot over the years, and Libertarians used to pretend to be a little more progressive.)

    My parents hated that, and constantly gave me the “you may not like him but he’s your president too and you have to respect the office!” The first time he complained about Obama (hours after the election), I broke that one out and turned it around. And they realized their hypocrisy immediately becoming gay communists decided that the rule was stupid, actually, and that it turns out you don’t have to respect the office when you dont want to!

    What bothers me so much more than their stated political views is the realization that they never actually had reasoned, considered views to begin with. They emotionally select things that seem directly beneficial to themselves. And then lie about their beliefs because they know they’re selfish and indefensible.

    They’re still republicans but I’m an anarchist who no longer respects any presidents! Funny where a difference in fundamental values will lead you.

    • Hanrahan@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago

      but I’m an anarchist who no longer respects any presidents!

      Respect has to be earned not demanded.

      We anarchists :)

    • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago

      They emotionally select things that seem directly beneficial to themselves. And then lie about their beliefs because they know they’re selfish and indefensible.

      This is the most infuriating part. We all do it to some extent, but some people really turn it up to 11.

    • BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago

      Libertarianism as a concept has a lot to like on a surface level, I was right there with you. They could do something great with the movement, but looking around now you eventually realize that there are really only 2 sides of mainstream libertarianism, ‘Republican, but weed and gay people might be okay sometimes’ and ‘Completely avoid personal accountability, but still punish others when it suits me’.

      • Anticorp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        20 days ago

        Actually libertarianism has a lot going for it, period. Where it falls short is in recognizing that the power wielded by corporations and wealthy people now far surpasses any level which could be self-regulate, or be controlled by “the free market”. So it’s naive in its view of solutions to major issues facing a modern world, but pretty great regarding its interpretations of liberty, and the role of government in people’s lives.

      • Eldritch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        Actual libertarianism is fine. The problem with modern Libertarianism is them trying to shoehorn capitalism into what was a socialist ideology. Its anathema.

        But go look up Joseph Dejacque. The man who coined the term and was the first libertarian. He would have scared the bejesus out of the modern libertarian larpers. Stood against all the things they are for. Fought in the French revolution.

  • someguy3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    Obama’s thanks for passing the ACA was to lose the House of Reps for years 3 and 4. Then lose it again for years 5 and 6. And then lose the House and Senate for years 7 and 8. Even the left didn’t stand behind Obama.

    • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago

      If the dems wanted the left to stand behind them, they should have gotten rid of the filibuster and passed actual free, universal healthcare instead of the republican plan that just amounted to extra subsidies for insurance companies. Also they shouldn’t have bombed a dozen Middle Eastern and African countries while bailing out the banks that just foreclosed on millions of homes and deporting more people than either Bush or Trump.

      When you betray the voters who elected you by giving republicans half the discretionary budget and adopting their policy even when they’re going to vote against it, you decrease turnout. When you improve people’s immediate material conditions, you increase turnout.

      • someguy3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        20 days ago

        If you want more, then vote in more Senators so Lieberman can’t water it down. That’s how it works.

        Not to mention the oddity of “we didn’t exactly what we wanted in the first months, so we’re just going to give up for the next 6 years and then let Trump in. Surely that will work.”

        • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          20 days ago

          It doesn’t work that way for republicans. When republicans are in power, they don’t handicap themselves with the filibuster or the parliamentarian or PAYGO or let single members block everything without the threat of getting kicked off committee assignments and denied GOP funding/campaign resources.

          They chose to let Lieberman be the villain of the week because they don’t want the same things the left wants.

          You can whine that people won’t vote for politicians who don’t do what they elected them to do, but that’s not how democracy works. Doing things that are unpopular with the base and failing to do the things you were elected to do decreases turnout.

          • someguy3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            20 days ago

            Dems manage to filibuster plenty.

            There’s also the oddity of “we didn’t exactly what we wanted in the first months, so we’re just going to give up for the next 6 years and then let Trump in. Surely that will work!” Want progress? Dems need consistent and overwhelming victories. Not 2 years out of every 16 years (the average of when the Dems have all 3 of presidency, house of reps, and senate).

            Oh ml user. Why do I bother.

            • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              20 days ago

              Dems manage to filibuster plenty.

              As soon as the republicans got into power they removed the filibuster.

              There’s also the oddity of “we didn’t exactly what we wanted in the first months

              Congrats, you understand how elections work. You do what you were elected to do and you don’t do things the base doesn’t want you to do or you decrease turnout.

              • someguy3@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                20 days ago

                Let me know when not voting in protest works! Any time now! [As Trump gleefully dismantles everything.] Ciao.

              • minnow@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                20 days ago

                Republicans removed the filibuster only on the issue of judicial nominations. That might seem nitpicky but it’s a critical distinction.

                • nomy@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  20 days ago

                  Republicans removed the filibuster only on the issue of judicial nominations.

                  Which, in hindsight it’s obvious why they wanted to do that, and makes it clear they had a coherent strategy the whole time.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    20 days ago

    In the infamous words yelled at Obama by Joe Wilson: " YOU LIE"

    They were behind him with a knife in his back at every opportunity from his first day in office.

    https://www.politico.com/story/2010/10/the-gops-no-compromise-pledge-044311 :

    Here’s John Boehner, the likely speaker if Republicans take the House, offering his plans for Obama’s agenda: “We’re going to do everything — and I mean everything we can do — to kill it, stop it, slow it down, whatever we can.”

    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell summed up his plan to National Journal: “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”

  • shinratdr@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    This is especially hilarious because so much of this rhetoric came from Trump himself! He basically established his political voice by playing peanut gallery through the whole Obama presidency and pushing birther nonsense.

    We all know that this is a bullshit statement that Republicans trot out to try and shame people into not opposing them, that’s a given. But to use that to defend Trump, who spent all of the Obama presidency doing EXACTLY that loudly and vocally is a special level of irony.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    20 days ago

    when Obama won we stood behind Obama

    BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    SURE!

    Show me a SINGLE Fox news or oan clip where they are behind Obama. Doesn’t even need to praise him just… you know… Just one clip where they are not trying to punch him in the nose.

    Just one.

    Show me a single Republican governor or senator who actually supportes Obama…

    Who me one good Obama initiative that wasn’t burned to the ground because Republicans just couldn’t letmovama have a single win because better let Americans suffer than let Democrats have a win. These idiots are petty, small, vengeful and egocentric and have not once given a single fuck about anyone or anything if it wasn’t theirs.

    Fuck these idiots

  • FartsWithAnAccent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    I am an American and I can tell you first hand that:

    1: Donald Trump is my president elect, regardless of how I may

    2: There were certainly some conservatives who, regardless of how they felt, acknowledged Obama as their president.

    3: There were absolutely many who did not accept Obama as president (not that it made a difference, because he was still president, same as Trump).

    That said, I hope Trump does well for all of us and that all of the terrible predictions about what will happen were just silly and wrong.

      • ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        20 days ago

        He’s corrupt and will do things to enrich himself. This is what he did before. That’s bad, especially because some of the things he did jeopardized lives (especially when it comes to COVID, but certainly not exclusively). However, the people handling him this time are much more dangerous. This is what worries me most about this go round.

  • Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    Let’s not forget the unprecedented amount of obstructionism from Republicans under Obama. They set several records for the use of the filibuster and filibustered more of Obama’s nominees than literally all previous presidents’ combined.

  • Hikermick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    Fox News gave Trump the platform to push the “Muslim not born in America BS” do they not remember this?

  • Anticorp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    20 days ago

    I tried to be patriotic and accept him as president in 2016 until it was quickly obvious that he is a traitor to his country.

    “Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official, save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country.”

    –Teddy Roosevelt

    Every true patriot should stand opposed to trump.

  • doingthestuff@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    Our media was more supportive of Obama than Trump, at least the second time around. Maybe it’s because of Trump’s rape trials, Jan 6, and everything that came out of his mouth. But don’t pretend that media was as critical of Obama.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago

      Mainstream media wasn’t critical enough, no. The right wing media was just going after irrelevant bullshit like the birtherism, tan suits and mustard. The entire media failed the country, but then again, that’s been true for decades.

        • jonne@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          20 days ago

          Like, especially the way the Obama administration bailed out banks, while not giving any support to home owners. Banks were allowed to fraudulently foreclose on homes and sell those homes for a profit later. It angered a lot of people and in some ways did lead to Trump’s rise, and it’s only like a decade later that those stories are being told and somewhat being reckoned with (and the democratic party is still deep in denial about that, Obama can not be criticised).

          The way it should’ve been handled would’ve been:

          • nationalise the banks that are too big to fail, fire the executives responsible and prosecute if there’s criminal wrongdoing
          • some temporary financial support for struggling home owners to get through the crash so they could actually stay in their homes

          It would’ve been way cheaper than the throwing money at the failing banks.

          But of course, the right wing media wasn’t interested in substantial criticism, mainstream media didn’t want to criticise wall street because they’re increasingly owned by wall street, so the only place you’ll find this is in ‘fringe’ independent left wing media.

  • peoplebeproblems@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    “We stood behind Obama” and repeatedly came up with racist and hateful statements that you and your friends were using long before I was even born.