153
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] frozen@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 53 points 1 year ago

Yesterday they made higher education less accessible to non-whites, today they made it harder for the poor...

I wonder if there's a pattern here.

load more comments (24 replies)
[-] Karate_Jesus420@lemmy.dbzer0.com 51 points 1 year ago

Fuck Trump and his supreme court. We're going to be suffering the effects of Republican stupidity for the next 40 years.

[-] KingSnorky@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It’s Republican moral bankruptcy and cruelty that we will all suffer. If anyone’s stupidity got us here, it’s the Democratic Party’s stupid leadership since AT LEAST 2000, if not earlier. Republicans have telegraphed their intentions for 50 fuckin years and Democrats continued over and over to attempt reaching across the aisle, trying to pass bipartisan wins, “take the high road,” … all the while the Republican party continued putting their racist, xenophobic, mysoginistic, jingoistic, classist platform out year after year, abandoning all sense of decorum and norms, gerrymandering the fuck out of every district possible, blocking every bill that helps anyone aside from billionaires and corporations, and generally lying and cheating their way to what we have today.

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

since AT LEAST 2000

Democrats: It's just a coincidence that two lawyers who worked on the Supreme Court case that handed Bush the election in 2000 happen to be Supreme Court Justices today!

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 1 year ago

I think, if there's independent historians in the future looking back, they'll be mentioned in the same sentence as Neville Chamberlain often.

[-] Pacifist@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago

If you need any reason not to believe in god, it's that Trump got to appoint THREE FUCKING SUPREME COURT JUSTICES

[-] seesaw@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

I don't know enough about US politics, but can't Biden change the court justices? If the answer is no, how did Trump change?

[-] LetsGOikz@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago

Justices need to die or retire in order for there to be a vacancy for a President to appoint a new Justice to. There was a vacancy at the start of Trump's term due to a death during Obama's that the Republicans refused to confirm an appointment for, and then there was a retirement (Kennedy) and death (RBG) during his term as well.

[-] patchymoose@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

For anyone who isn't familiar, RBG was a liberal Supreme Court justice that was getting very old, and a lot of people thought she should have retired during Obama's term, where she could have been replaced by him. Some accuse her of stubbornness/hubris for not stepping down when it was "safe", and point out that her whole legacy is now being undone.

Others point out that common wisdom at the time was that Hillary was going to he a shoe in as the next president, and nobody expected a Republican to win, including RBG.

Anyway, I'm not taking a stance but just fleshing that out for anyone who is interested in the controversy.

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Others point out that common wisdom at the time was that Hillary was going to he a shoe in as the next president

Just to also point out. This "common wisdom" is part of why Hillary lost and why a lot of people argued that RBG should have resigned during her term because the next Democratic President wasn't a shoe-in, and people couldn't just rely on that.

People also seem to forget that both a Bush and a Clinton were running in 2016 and in a way, Trump being elected was a initially a rejection of "political dynasties" as Presidencies (which then immediately turned to his followers wanting him as a forever king, but that's a different issue entirely). I had a Bush or a Clinton as President for twenty years of my life (roughly a third of the average lifespan for a US citizen). From my youth until I was no longer considered a youth, well into adulthood. I remember being frustrated at being faced with both a Bush and a Clinton in the primaries. I know lots of other people, on both sides of the aisle, did too. Nobody wanted more of the same (I know Hillary didn't view herself as "more of the same" of her husband, and for good reason, but that wasn't common opinion).

The entire thing about it being "common wisdom" was spoken from a position of privilege by elite Democrats and ignoring that common people weren't every excited about either Bush or Clinton but Clinton got shoehorned in anyway while Bush had his "please clap" moment. It's not a shoe-in if you have to use a shoehorn, mind you.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] minorsecond@lemmy.ml 40 points 1 year ago

But the forgiven PPP loans are A-OK, right? Fuck this shit.

[-] SENEX@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

On top of that 1.7 trillion in tax breaks for the rich over ten year. Benifits like 600 people. The same 1.7 trillion could wipe out debt 43 million people and that is debt accumulated over 40 years.

[-] Kururin@lemmy.ml 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Unless the dems take back court we would be all living through a nightmare.

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Maybe Hilldawg could have campaigned in Wisconsin or taken seriously that even if she won the popular vote, that the Electoral College actually mattered.

Reminder, she did win the popular vote. The majority did vote for her.

Or maybe Obama could have kept his campaign promise that codifying Roe vs. Wade in law was his first order of business.

[-] BumpingFuglies@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

This has been the Democrat strategy for a long time now: make wonderful promises they don't intend to keep, then blame everyone else when they don't come to fruition. People keep voting for them despite this obvious fact, because Republicans make terrible promises that they actually try to keep.

We're damned if we do and damned if we don't. The only winning move is to ~~not play~~ flip the table and play a different game.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Ado@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

The dem politician's tactic. Pretend like you give a fuck (pretending bc they dont actually do the things to solve the issue), and then hold your constituency hostage during elections. Then continue to pretend like you give a fuck.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Spacebar@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Vote! Encourage those around you to vote. Help drive someone to the polls. If you know a young person who's never voted, get them to vote.

Don't care who they vote for, just get them to the ballot box.

The more people vote, the better things turn out for the majority.

[-] 14specks@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Without a socialist party (as in, completely purged and free of all bourgeois influence), there's isn't a whole lot worth voting for at the federal level. Democrats repeatedly show that they are incapable of resisting the Republicans and take L's constantly (see here).

I encourage everyone to instead organize with local political orgs that can eventually build this power. The DSA being the largest currently available (and just as flawed as the other options one may have, ofc)

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] LeZero@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Dont forget to thank RBG, who refused to retire under Obama for some fucking reason, only to get owned by COVID after officiating a wedding for some dumb liberals (while having an immune system shredded by cancer)

Well it gave us the funniest trump interview imo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knlJWu815C0

[-] Empyreus@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

If there is a minimum age in government, there needs to be a maximum. I'm over these 70 year olds running things.

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Downvoted by people who refuse to look at when Democrats make stupid decisions that fuck us.

I thought Lemmy was supposed to be full of tankies, not milquetoast centrist capitalist apologists....

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] carbonprop@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 year ago

Wow. The SCOTUS is firing through all sorts of shitty changes this week. They’re like the koolaid man on meth.

[-] 14specks@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

Gonna be this way for the foreseeable future

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] JCreazy@midwest.social 9 points 1 year ago

How many were paid off by the student loan companies.

[-] _max@vlemmy.net 7 points 1 year ago

I was under the impression the student loan companies did not care. They were getting paid regardless.

load more comments (2 replies)

My "favorite" part of the majority ruling is how the loan forgiveness was struck down because it would harm the loan servicers. Not the government, not the people, the companies that have been contracted to collect the loans. That's who SCOTUS is most concerned with. Should tell us everything we need to know about who's interests are most important - capitalists

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2023
153 points (98.1% liked)

World News

32054 readers
1004 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS