• wampus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    I’m not sure the intention of this sort of note.

    Yes, Harris may’ve made those predictions. People heard em. They still preferred Trump, compared to Harris. It’s not like people, outside of the potentially fringe / outlier cases highlighted in some left-leaning media sources, are all that surprised. People didn’t vote for Trump because he was promising to treat immigrants with respect and dignity.

    I wouldn’t be at all surprised if many of the red-voters are looking at LA, and thinking things like “Look at how bad that immigration invasion got, they’re literally destroying the city and disrupting government. Even the governor of the State is part of the problem at this point, making noise about defending the public disorder. Tut tut. Send in more marines”.

  • UncleGrandPa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    I said he would eventually place armed soldiers on every street corner

    I will stand by that prediction

    • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      Any attempt by the Democrats to forestall this would have allowed Trump to paint them as anti-American traitors. So the Democrats did nothing and Trump painted them as anti-American traitors.

      • Lemminary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        And he’s painting them as anti-American traitors to this day as he makes Nazi poses around the WH.

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

      Hey now! He was convicted of all 34 indictments he was charged with!

      And sure, those charges were delayed for years. And they were a fraction of the 91 indictments he could have been tried for. And they had to be brought in a municipal court, by a local DA, because nobody above Alvin Brag was willing to bring a case to trial.

      And then the court never bothered to issue a sentence, because it would have been rude to punish a newly elected President.

      But they did something!

  • DominusOfMegadeus@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    The President deploying Marines inside the U.S. without invoking the Insurrection Act, declaring an emergency, or getting local/state approval — especially just to respond to peaceful protests — is unlawful on multiple levels:

    • 🔹 Violates DoD Directive 3025.18 – Active-duty military (including Marines) can’t engage in domestic law enforcement unless explicitly authorized.
    • 🔹 Violates the First Amendment – Peaceful protest is protected. Military suppression = unconstitutional. (NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886).
    • 🔹 Violates the Fourth Amendment – Military detentions/searches are illegal without cause. (Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32).
    • 🔹 Ignores Posse Comitatus limits – PCA (18 U.S.C. § 1385) applies to Army/Air Force, but DoD extends it to all branches.
    • 🔹 Unlawful military orders – Troops must disobey unconstitutional orders (UCMJ Art. 92; U.S. v. Calley, 48 C.M.R. 19).
    • 🔹 Impeachable abuse of power – Violates Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.

    This isn’t just controversial — it’s flat-out illegal.

      • rumba@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        Smells like AI, but that doesn’t mean it’s just slop. You can look up each of the cited laws—they’re not long or particularly difficult reads. They are all arguably accurate citations.

        1. Iffy “explicitly authorized” is a loaded phrase for this use case. He controls enough DoD leadership to make it happen legally without much resistance.

        2. Legit.

        3. It depends on the framing. If rocks were being thrown at ICE, the argument likely wouldn’t hold up.

        4. Likely legit.

        5. Legit, but remember that this simply means the military can be held accountable for their actions. If they assault or kill someone, they can face legal consequences. It’s just precedence. Essentially, this is the point in law where you can’t say you were just following orders.

        6. Legit.

        However, within this framework, prosecution depends on willingness—someone has to actively push for it, and the government has to be stable enough to recognize these violations as valid. For the most part, these are pardonable offenses.

        TL;DR: Until there’s a regime change, none of this will carry much weight.

      • callouscomic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        14 days ago

        It was. I keep seeing this at work. ChatGPT especially loves to add the unnecessary icons.

          • DominusOfMegadeus@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            13 days ago

            No, the information is correct from what I can determine. But it would have taken me a lot longer to find the relevant sections of law and precedent and sift through them on my own.

            • rumba@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              13 days ago

              They’re all mercifully short reads (at least enough to get the idea if they apply) and famous enough to be easy to find. I just went through them in a higher-level post. They’re all right-ish. 3 are solid, the other 3 are technically accurate, but there’s enough wiggle room to get out of it.

        • CoffeeJunkie@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          13 days ago

          Definitely needs fact checking, but yeah I do the same thing when I have some good points to be made on a popular topic that is being discussed in various threads. Not everyone needs a super special unique response when copy-paste is a thing. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

          I don’t think I’m a bot or AI…🤖

      • DominusOfMegadeus@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        You’re not wrong, but it’s important to call it out. And to CONSTANTLY call out the message to our troops that it is incumbent upon them to refuse to follow illegal orders.

        • freeman@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 days ago

          Thats what I thought about the mocking of the disabled man, the “grab em by the pussy” comment, the Epstein-thing, the impeachement, Jan6, the classified documents, Musks salute, …

          If you have the majority of the voting public, parties, media and judges behind yourself then you are pretty safe doing illegal things, even in a Democracy.

        • D_C@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          14 days ago

          I said that about the stolen top secret documents because of all the obvious treason and the even more obvious° sending/selling of said documents. Yet the american public decided it was a good idea to vote him in once again so he could pardon himself.

          Nothing will happen to him. I see no one over there with the backbone to do anything to bring him to justice. The best you can hope for is death or debilitating stroke.
          The bad news is even if that happens today then Fatboy Tangerine has shown just how easy it is to be a dictator. The next guy will be more organised.

          (°Why obvious? There was a fax machine right there. A fax machine in a toilet. The fact that there was old tech like a fax machine shows what it was being used for, but to move one to a fucking toilet full of the documents is plain damning. Anyone who believes differently is either an idiot, or corrupt. Or both.
          End of, full stop, no further explanation is needed.)

    • Ordinary_Person@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      I have NO idea why the democrats chose Harris as the nominee. The country wouldn’t vote for a white woman last time. You REALLY think they’re going to vote for a woman of colour? REALLY? And then a bunch of them didn’t. As predicted.

      • Triasha@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        Biden made hay about selecting a Black Woman as vise President. That is declaring her heir apparent.

      • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        Maybe the gender or color didn’t really matter to people who had a chance of voting Democrat anyway

      • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        12 days ago

        I have NO idea why the democrats chose Harris as the nominee.

        Well, that’s the thing: they didn’t. She didn’t win the primary, Biden did; and Biden won because there was no opposition. My ballot had two choices: “Joe Biden” and “Uncommitted”. I voted Uncommitted.

      • ultranaut@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        There were a lot of issues with it being anyone else. Since she was already the VP and already “on the ticket”, switching to anyone other than her would have brought with it a whole lot of complications and probably would have tied up all the money the Biden campaign had raised. The whole process of deciding on anyone other than her posed huge risks, especially given the time constraints. Harris was effectively the default option so they took the path that appeared to be easiest and guaranteed that the campaign kept its funding.

      • deaf_fish@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        Harris would have won if the Dem leadership let her run the campaign she wanted to. Instead they enforced civility politics and forced her to be the same as Biden.

    • kreskin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      Lets not pretend the presidential election is all about gender and nothing else. Thats just petulant.

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

        I could understand Hilary not getting elected, but Harris? She’s as blank slate as any presidential candidate could get ( and maybe that was the problem). But the demographics which shifted the most politically, was the Hispanic and black male (whom tend to be less educated) voters towards the right. That could either be populism or misogyny, and considering they were leaning left when elected Biden the previous term, I’m leaning towards the latter reason.

        • Lemminary@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 days ago

          Knowing my paisanos, it was plain old ignorance. I mean, we did elect a woman president this year. 😅

        • sakodak@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 days ago

          She’s a former cop and prosecutor that wasn’t selected through a primary process (not that Dems ever allow anyone not selected by party elites.)

          She’s basically a Republican with zero progressive policies, which isn’t going to appeal to an increasingly radicalized base.

          There were a lot of problems with her that had nothing to do with her being a her.

          Democrats keep chasing votes to the right, abandoning the actual left and the working class.

        • CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 days ago

          If the Dems wanted to stop losing they could have selected Sanders. It’s not about gender, it’s about trust, and nobody trusted Clinton or Harris (nor should they, frankly). Meanwhile Sanders has spoken for the working class the whole time he has been around.

        • acargitz@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 days ago

          Remember how Dukakis got tanked by a goofy helmet? Yea, Harris sank when she couldn’t propose any change from Biden.

        • ThunderclapSasquatch@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 days ago

          She was also a candidate we didn’t vote for, Biden being shoved down our throats again then him dropping out are what gave Trump the election. The focus on her gender and nothing else is to keep you from remembering that the DNC fucked us again and a large number of voters protest voting because “She’ll genocide the Palestinians” like TRUMP wouldn’t.

          • Triasha@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            13 days ago

            “The DNC” does not have the power to force Biden to step aside when he doesn’t want to.

            They aren’t a military or a government. They are a club, and Biden was far and away the senior member.

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

              The fact that when it comes to politics I see Americans nowadays keep repeating over and over and over again “this can’t be done”, “they don’t have the power”, “that will never happen”, is to me astonishing. When I was growing up, America was where things HAPPENED. What happened to you guys? Where did this learned helplessness come from?

              So your party structures are broken and unable to produce good outcomes? Change them. Reform them. Update them. What the fuck is wrong with you people? You made democracy into a fossil that you no longer fit in and you’re despairing. It’s supposed to be a living breathing thing that evolves all the time. WTF.

              • Triasha@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                13 days ago

                40% of the country wants it to be worse in every way imaginable. They want more religion in the halls of power, more impressive law enforcement and mass incarceration, more dictatorial centralization of power, less education more environmental destruction more wealth concentration in fewer elites hands, less protections for workers, and their families, more poverty sickness and death.

                They aren’t the same people either, sixty-70% want one or some of the things on that list.

                If we declared a constitutional convention, I don’t think there would be any agreement whatsoever about what changes to make, and if there were, agreement, I expect they would be disasterous.

      • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        I posted a post-deep-dive take on what gave Trump the presidency here, but I will say that misogyny did did no small amount of heavy lifting.

        What we need to figure out before the GOP finds its next cult leader is how to neutralize the massive far-right propaganda machine that is churning out false information and disinforming the public.

        We’ve decided before that ethically we can’t trust human beings to make sound decisions in some conditions. In the case of gambling, we’ve just invented loopholes (and lootboxes) to circumvent regulation. So I don’t know how we’re going to deprogram massive viewerships of media that promotes hate, including misogyny.

        If we fail then the ice zombie army climate crisis (and running out of water for agriculture) is going to drive us to extinction.

      • Lør@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        12 days ago

        hmmmmm… stats say otherwise. A lot of males did not vote for her because she was female. That said, US is clearly not ready for female president.

      • Tuukka R@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        Were there other problems in Clinton and Harris than the gender, then? (Except them “lying” that Trump would use the army against US civilians, of course)

        • Banana@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 days ago

          Clinton is a fuckin capitalist and Harris is a fucking neoliberal. Neither of them actually care about anything more than upholding the status quo. They are not working class or even for the working class.

          This all being said, status quo is far better than fascism, but we can do better.

          Basically, just like someone being a woman wouldn’t make them a bad president, it would also not make them a good one. Having good policies makes you a good president.

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

          Were there other problems in Clinton and Harris than the gender, then?

          If it was misogyny alone was the cause, then why did harris lose across every single demographic of women? She lost across every single voting demographic except a 1 point gain in college educated white men.

          We have polling data, you could read it. Dems are failing to analyze why we lost, just like they failed to figure out how we could win. So we’re on track to lose again, and comments like the one you made are why.

          • Tuukka R@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            13 days ago

            Uh… If the misogyny was enough to remove enough votes from them to allow the worse candidate to win, then obviously it was a decisive factor. Being a decisive factor does not equal being the only factor.

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

              If the misogyny was enough to remove enough votes from them to allow the worse candidate to win, then obviously it was a decisive factor.

              Sure, but how do we put actual numbers behind that “if”?

            • Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              13 days ago

              No, it wasn’t the decisive factor. The misogynists wouldn’t have voted for Harris either way. The decisive factor was Harris failing to inspire her own base while pandering to the elusive “undecided voter” by propping up Liz Cheney, among other things. Don’t get it twisted, Harris lost because she and her team were too incompetent to read the room.

      • Goldmage263@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        All? No, not all. But it is very evident that most Americans seem to hate women. The right hates on women, the left hates on women, the men and the women hate on women. If you doubt me, look how news articles disparage male senators compared to female ones.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      Americans didn’t vote for Hillary or Harris because apparently they wanted a whiny bitch to be president instead.

  • nthavoc@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    Instead of focusing on what is actually happening with National Guard and Marines being deployed, we see the pattern of pointless arguing in circles about why the candidate lost in the comments below. Analysis Paralysis is the exact intention for articles like this. This helps the current criminal administration continue their behavior.

  • andybytes@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    America is an imperialist empire and fascists are the useful idiots of empire and the do nothing Democrats are just obstructionists that get in the way of the will of the people. But America, because it’s so distracted with its netflix and chill mentality, we are always starting from scratch as we live in a vacuum. History, if you know it well from many perspectives, is literally repeating itself. And what is scary is this is the same plan that was tried before. Only this time they’re succeeding. So you libturds can try to make me the bad guy but I’ll never vote for a fucking Democrat. All is going according to plan. Yankee gets what Yankee deserves, as the imperial boomerang smacks you dumb asses right in the fucking face. Collective suffering is ritious and deserved. NO WAR BUT THE CLASS WAR

    https://youtu.be/3cdqQ2BdgOA

    • sgtgig@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 days ago

      I remember after her DNC speech, NPR put out an article listing all the misleading things in her speech and #1 was that she said Trump will jail journalists, and the article linked to a tweet of Trump saying “dishonest” journalists should be jailed but she’s still being misleading because it wasn’t actually a part of his official campaign platform.

      No similar article existed for his RNC speech. Having preferred NPR for years, that moment made me realize just how hard the media failed the country.

      • sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        14 days ago

        I was a supporter of my local NPR station for decades. It’s crazy how far right the coverage has gone. Slowly over the years, then really hard in recent months. It’s like they’re desperately trying to show that they aren’t left leaning, by going way the other way. I’ve heard long interviews with wackos from things like The Heritage Foundation all the time, with little to no pushback on the BS. I watched a magat congressman interviewed on PBS the other night with zero pushback to his bullshit magat talking points. The list goes on. I stopped watching/listening to them, but I’ve been kind of at a loss as to where to check up on news. AP or Reuters is about it, I guess.

        • pelespirit@sh.itjust.worksM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 days ago

          Not really, since I don’t think he sent anyone for the Air Force.

          The National Guard is a state-based military force that becomes part of the U.S. military’s reserve components of the U.S. Army and the U.S. Air Force when activated for federal missions.[2] It is a military reserve force composed of National Guard military members or units of each state, the territories of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia, for a total of 54 separate organizations. It is officially created under Congress’s Article I, Section 8 enumerated power to “raise and support Armies”.[3] All members of the National Guard are also members of the organized militia of the United States as defined by 10 U.S.C. § 246. National Guard units are under the dual control of U.S. state governments and the U.S. federal government.[2]

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_(United_States)

          • Lucky_777@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            13 days ago

            According to this, its 100% correct. He sent them on a federal mission so they are Army now. The Air Force did show up. It was the National Guard

          • megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            13 days ago

            Yah but they’re only under the army when called up federally, which they are in LA right now, but still, it’s weird.

  • Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    And then Harris completely disappeared as soon as the election was over, failing to challenge his extremely questionable victory in any meaningful way

      • BilboBargains@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        It must be nice to have the billionaire’s hot air to fill your sails as you navigate these rough seas. However, woe betide those that displease the mighty donors, they will immediately find themselves in the doldrums, they no longer have a purpose and the billionaires await the next empty vessel.

        • squaresinger@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 days ago

          It must be nice, it must be niice to have billionaires on your side.

          It must be nice, it must be niice to have billionaires on your side.

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

      She was a weak candidate and had very little political capital, it was a wild shot, but she was just a better choice than Biden. The dem party has almost ZERO strong presidential leadership that the general, liberal or progressive population can connect with, and I’m pretty sure it’s by design.

      AOC might have a chance of rising and gaining prominence but she’s still regarded broadly as “too young” to do more than take a senate seat, which would be great either way. Zhoran Mamdani is going to be a titan on the left if he survives the concerted efforts of zionist liberal America to melt his efforts, but if he succeeds he’s going to be busy in New York for years to come. David Hogg isn’t going to lead the nation, but he IS making worthless old dems literally cry, so there is some marginal hope for a rally by next midterms.

      But we also may not have midterms at this point. We’re edging closer to martial law and general, fascist, authoritarian dictatorship, and the best we’re getting from Dem leadership is “strongly worded letters” from Chuck “Less Than Worthless” Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries likes to reiterate that “Trump has a mandate” and is basically Schumer’s little shadow. Cory Booker gained national attention by doing a publicity stunt to literally promote a book. Bernie Sanders is still a voice of power and influence but he’s definitely past the window of electability, sadly.

      We need better representation and that doesn’t spawn from nowhere, we need people on the ground, getting involved in local community, city and county elections so that real people with real passion get national attention. It’s not that they don’t exist, it’s that the left and liberals broadly are sitting on their hands waiting for something to be presented to them.

      We have to get out of the “someone will do something” mindset and get out and DO stuff, even if it’s just joining the protests right now.

      • AlreadyDefederated@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        Instead of AOC (however much I love her and her message) I’m thinking Whitmer would be better and has a great track record. Walz would be stronger than AOC, if they let him hammer 'em with his wit. Andy Beshear would totally freak the GOP out and would be a great choice.

      • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        AOC might have a chance

        We should really stop this.

        I like AOC.

        I also realize we just elected a rapist felon traitor insurrectionist and declined the last 2 females who ran for president, despite being WAY more qualified than a felon rapist traitor insurrectionist.

        This is not the time and not the country to elect a female president, especially one so “green”. If we try to push AOC, we’re going to lose, again.

        This is not how I want things to be. It’s simply an observation of this nation and how extremely unlikely it is to elect a woman president. It’ll be Bernie all over again, but probably even more of a shutout.

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

          You’re like, on the edge of political awareness, but you’re kinda stuck on the wallpaper.

          Setting aside that I also said she’s not the right candidate for the time, I know for a fact that the “woman president will never win” mandate is a manufactured talking point and a lot of otherwise smart people ate that story up because they thought the system was remotely balanced and that democracy wasn’t compromised. (as well as latent, bitter, cynical sexism oozing out of the country’s pores right now.)

          Clinton won the popular vote. It’s not the gender of the candidate, it’s the energy of the electorate and their ability to sidestep very real corruption in politics by people like Elon Musk controlling AI and search engines, and very real KGB tactics being used on our populace.

          Trump’s victories have been hacks. They exploited every angle to make it happen. The people who voted him into power are the minority, they don’t represent the average voter. Our problem is the “average voter” is staying home, because, and I cannot stress this enough, our society has been compromised, hacked, unfairly influenced. In this current climate we won’t see ANYONE the corporate oligarchs don’t want to see on the throne. The Democrat party is in on this. There’s a reason they’re trying to undermine the Dems who don’t take the checks like AOC and Zhoran, people who are basically enemies of their own party.

          We rebuild this a piece at a time from grassroots, and we need to push the “gender” questions out of public discourse and stop falling for the distraction. Every other nation is electing liberal or left-leaning candidates, men and women alike. This isn’t a fair democracy in the USA anymore, we have to get out of this mindset that we “just need our own version of Trump.”

          We need the popular mandate but we also need a way to get around the artificial bumpers the current oligarchy has set up. If you buy the idea that we need to remove women from the ballot, or we need candidates who are more “moderate” (IE: right leaning) you’re falling for the ploy, hook, line and sinker.

        • Krauerking@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 days ago

          Do not blame it on being a woman, statistically they win the same rate as male candidates just run far less often.

          It’s just being sexist for someone else’s sake.

          This is not the time to run status quo and low effort candidates but loud and effective ones which we have a shortage of in the DNC.

          • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            13 days ago

            Do not blame it on being a woman

            I’m not. I’m blaming it on the American electorate, which is what I stated in my comment that you didn’t read thoroughly.

            statistically they win the same rate as male candidates

            Not for president they don’t, and if you read my comment thoroughly, you’d know that’s what I was talking about. Open your eyes bud. It was a woman or a felon rapist traitor who ALREADY FAILED ONCE AS PRESIDENT. We chose the rapist instead of the woman. Welcome to American reality.

            This is not the time to run status quo

            I didn’t say status quo. Did you read my comment at all? You can run all sorts of people that aren’t status quo and also not a woman. I WANT A WOMAN PRESIDENT. Spoiler alert, it ain’t happening anytime soon in America. But if you’d like to ignore reality and lose again…that’s your right as a voter. That kind of behavior is why we are where we are.

            • Krauerking@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              13 days ago

              The American electorate is not who is writing your comments.

              You are distinctly ignoring other critiques to focus on gender as the main component. Do not assign your own bias to everyone else. We do not all think as you do and can’t be blamed for what you think to be true.

              Statistically across the world women win elections at the same rate as men.

              Support a female president you want then instead of telling them all that none of them can win because of their gender. It makes you sound like the sexist.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        13 days ago

        But we also may not have midterms at this point.

        I suspect we will continue to have elections, but they will strategically select specific races throughout the country to tamper with in favor of the GOP, and they’ll increase the number of rigged races with each election until our entire electoral process has been captured and we end up with something akin to Russia or Venezuela. We’ll hold elections, but they’ll be a complete sham. We’ll (officially) be a one-party state with one other party of controlled opposition to give people the illusion of choice.

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

          I think he would have been a strong candidate a few election cycles ago, but likely not a winner in today’s climate. We have a LOT of pent-up rage in our population, as a result of our national “fierce independence” reaching its own “late stage” level.

          Waltz has bite and sharpness that would appeal to a lot of people if he were un-muzzled, but he’s still not going to fit the “WWE theater” spectacle that engages the stupidest people, and which because of systemic sabotage of our elections, is the only segment of the population who votes anymore.

          While I don’t like him at all, I think Newsom fits this role the best and might be the strongest contender if we have elections again. (And he will probably be more likely to cheat in some way.)

    • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      Lol.

      Still blaming Harris as a coup unfolds.

      So productive.

      A challenge would have gone nowhere and given the other side ammunition. Focus on something worth your time.

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

        Still simping for dems while they sit back and watch a fascist coup unfold, you’re as spineless as they are and a thousand times stupider. You have no idea whether a legal challenge would have worked or not, at the very least it would have demonstrated any commitment whatsoever to stopping Trump, but Harris doesn’t actually give a shit and never did, she just wanted money and power. You should focus on developing some dignity.

        • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 days ago

          Still simping for dems while they sit back and watch a fascist coup unfold

          Americans voted for it, dipshit. Americans voted the GOP into TOTAL CONTROL. Americans HANDED THE REIGNS to the GOP.

          you’re as spineless as they are

          Motherfucker, I vote for the Dems because I did my homework and KNOW they regularly vote in favor of the middle and lower classes, don’t threaten rights, and are historically better for our economy. I vote for the Dems because I’m not some dumbfuck like you and I know that we are nowhere near ending the two-party system in America so the INTELLIGENT thing to do is vote Dem to maintain our rights and prevent Republicans from gaining control and doing, oh yeah, exactly what the fuck they’re doing now. But you and the word “intelligent” don’t exist in the same space together.

          You’re just whining like a little bitch about Harris while missing the bigger picture. Who the fuck cares if behind the scenes she was some power hungry asshole that just wanted her name in the history books? She was STILL, BY FAR, the more intelligent option. You aren’t just voting for the candidate you fucking loser, you’re voting for the party and the policies attached to it, which in the Dem’s case, is way better than the policy of fucking fascism.

          You’re just a whiny little bitch. Get the fuck off .ml, that shit is frying what’s left of your brain.

    • Tuukka R@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      You’re not supposed to question the victory of a presidential election when done in free and democratic elections. Doing anything like that would be horribly anti-democratic.

      It would be horrible if Harris had challenged Trump’s victory. That would just make her another Causescu/Trump/Mussolini.

    • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      If she had challenged it, she probably wouldn’t have won the challenge, AND she would have fueled a whole smattering of “SEE, BOTH SIDES ARE THE SAME” bs

      • Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        This is the same flawed logic as the folks saying that violent resistance will give the other side a “justification”, they’re gonna make one up anyway so there’s absolutely no point in abstaining from any given course of action for the sake of not giving them one. Even if it hadn’t worked it would have demonstrated some commitment to actually stopping Trump, but corporate dems don’t actually give a shit what happens as long as they’re still getting paid.

      • barneypiccolo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        Fuck that, the situation wasn’t the same and EVERYONE knows it. The solution isn’t to avoid the whole thing so the accusation isn’t made, the solution is to do the right thing, and when the accusation is made, you slap them down HARD!

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      As bad as his victory was, it wasn’t even vaguely questionable.

      Of the people that turned out, more of them voted for Trump, plain and simple, even by the popular vote without having to complain about the electoral college.

      The only objective fact that gives an asterisk is he didn’t manage to get over 50% of the popular vote, but he still had the most of any candidate.

      I’ve seen the mentions of “inconsistencies” and “Musk manipulated the votes” but a read of them seems about as credible as 2020 election denials.

  • Lemminary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    This reminds me of another woman presidential candidate who was also right about Trump. I’m starting to see a pattern.