973
submitted 2 weeks ago by spujb@lemmy.cafe to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] spicytuna62@lemmy.world 264 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Sometimes, the best thing they can do is to not say anything. Walz could have said nothing, and pretty well nobody would have been upset about it.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 136 points 2 weeks ago

Politicians have to say a lot of things whether they mean them or not.

I like ex-New York Mayor Ed Koch's take on voting. "If you agree with me 51% of the time, vote for me. If you agree with me 100% of the time, see a psychiatrist."

[-] hate2bme@lemmy.world 35 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Politicians do NOT have to run a dishonest campaign. They just can't help themselves. Inb4 the obligatory BoTh SiDeS comment.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[-] Gork@lemm.ee 196 points 2 weeks ago

Funny how the politicians and the media react with horror, but the entire rest of the Internet has an entirely different reaction. I wonder why.

[-] spujb@lemmy.cafe 83 points 2 weeks ago

i find it’s always helpful to follow the money in these situations. obviously we were all paid off by Big Woke. we’re financially invested in these institutions being seen as murderous. obviously.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] pkill@programming.dev 37 points 2 weeks ago
[-] spujb@lemmy.cafe 15 points 2 weeks ago

idk what that is but sounds an awful lot like the term “woke” .. blocked

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (42 replies)
[-] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 97 points 2 weeks ago

During the campaign I've seen Walz described as down-to-earth, approachable and attractive to the working class voter base.

Fucking yikes.

[-] yuri@pawb.social 67 points 2 weeks ago

at the same time tho, this is legitimately the worst thing i’ve seen/heard about him. i wouldn’t be surprised if he was currently being groomed for a presidential run fucken 4 years from now.

[-] nialv7@lemmy.world 25 points 2 weeks ago

if that's the case they are clearly grooming him to lose again.

[-] can@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 weeks ago

It's all they know

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 93 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Loss? What loss, Tim? Besides the families that have been torn apart and sickened over the years by this man and his board of ghouls? I see none.

[-] NerdInSuspenders@leminal.space 49 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)
[-] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 54 points 2 weeks ago

Whether or not this is accurate about Tim Walz, it is accurate to say politicians, elected and appointed officials regard the ownership class as peers and vice versa.

This is also true regarding the upper management of news agencies, which figures in liberal or left-wing news sources that won't go far enough left to jeopardize a status quo in which the agency and its owners thrive. And yet, they will underestimate the right wing and its willingness to let the leopards eat their faces once they are in power. The recent nods to the Trump transition by WaPo and the Los Angeles Times will not save either agency from Trump's wrath against press once he is in power.

The Democratic Party is far right, just slightly more left-wing than the Republican party, and they are still beholden to the ownership class when it comes to campaign contributions, which is how we don't have four-day work weeks, universal healthcare, social safety nets or any of the features that most developed nations enjoy, because it's plutocrats that decide what our elected officials are allowed to do, not the public.

It's also why communist and socialist are bad words, even though that means the only thing else you can be is a monarchist which is about as anti-American as one can get (at least if you believe the preamble to the Constitution of the United States). We've literally been indoctrinated against public-serving government.

But then it's time to ask, what is the point of recognizing or serving the state at all if it isn't to serve the public?

[-] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 18 points 2 weeks ago

Along those lines, monarchist is bad, too. The wealthy in the U.S. are notoriously touchy about being called aristocracy, and I maintain that it's because nobility not only punctures the meritocracy myth, but also carries with it the idea of noblesse oblige. They don't want any obligations to the peasants. (Won't be lauded as a great philanthropist for the dribs and drabs they give to charity, if it's expected!)

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Socialism is not immune to monarchist or capitalist takeover, and the Democrats are not far right in this backwards ass country. They're the big tent of liberalism, which is right wing, but not as right wing as I wish it was. It's a distortion to believe that this country will democratically choose socialism. They're too invested in selfishness for egalitarianism.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] AgentGrimstone@lemmy.world 52 points 2 weeks ago

Read the room, Tim.

[-] merthyr1831@lemmy.ml 33 points 2 weeks ago

remember when everyone thought this guy was gonna secretly turn bernie-bro the Kamala campaign into being good

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 31 points 2 weeks ago
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] pkill@programming.dev 26 points 2 weeks ago

Bourgeois parties support bourgeois fat cats? Nihil novi. A proletarian mass party must be built urgently. Revolutionary Communists of America do a lot of laudable effort in that direction.

[-] spujb@lemmy.cafe 17 points 2 weeks ago

google translates from latin

so true!

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 21 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

the billionaire surveillance guy wants us all to start wearing glasses that record everything.

that is to protect the billionaire surveillance guy not to protect the rest of us just like cops wearing body cams is not to protect non-cops. they would even build in a way to remotely disable the bodycams if they could.

surprise surprise.

that said seeing United Health's stock drop more than 25% since open this morning does feel like xmas. I'm all in on them losing money and status and access to protection. but without them having to live in the fear that the rest of us have for decades is a bit of a .... i don't have a word for that.

[-] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago

I made a large collection of screenshots from Facebook of people who had their claims denied by United Healthcare today.

https://imgur.com/a/yczbSDa

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] hOrni@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago

As it was said on Some More News. The democrats should harness the hatred towards the rich elites instead of playing into Trump's anti-immigrant game.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago

So close to being a empathetic human while not being a corporate shill.

[-] _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 2 weeks ago

Democrats never saw a billionaire or war they didn't love.

[-] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 2 weeks ago

Politicians are almost all sociopaths, not even trying to be funny. Sometimes they do things you like and sometimes they dont, but that never has anything to do with the interests and priorities of citizens. They are just people whose job is acting their entire life according to some doctrine, they dont have real personalities.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2024
973 points (97.4% liked)

196

16721 readers
2500 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS