• DragonBallZinn [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Harris literally said she was pro-war, dipshits. The only difference between then and now is you’d probably be calling yourself “apolitical” and the only resistance against Harris would be normies screeching she’s not evil enough.

    • SevenSkalls [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      15 hours ago

      100%. She said the number one enemy to the US is Iran and we’d be the most lethal military in the world under her. They were clearly salivating to do the same thing.

  • SmithrunHills [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Liberals really just agreed to collectively forget that abortion rights were lost under Biden lmao. Literally every single human right that the American working class fought for could be lost under any Democrat president, and they would still go on about how “at least things are peaceful here(for me)!”

    • unknownuserunknownlocation@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Lost under Biden? The lost abortion rights had absolutely nothing to do with the Biden administration and everything to do with the judges the GOP appointed. You do realize that… …right?

      • Goferking0@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        What’s sad/disappointing is he fought harder for student loan forgiveness than keeping abortions rights, or other human rights lost under him or earlier under Trump. Which also isn’t saying much considering how poorly he did the forgiveness attempt.

      • Infamousblt [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        13 hours ago

        You do realize that Trump and the GOP just do whatever they want and ignore the supreme Court via loopholes, executive orders, and actually legislating? Have you ever stopped to consider that if the Dems wanted to do that, they could too? So if abortion rights are so important, why didn’t they? If student loan forgiveness, or Gaza, or healthcare, or inflation were problems too, why didn’t the Dems use every trick in the book to accomplish these things? The GOP is doing it. The Dems could too, right? Why didn’t they? Why won’t they?

        Try examining what’s happening in the world and coming to your own conclusions instead of deepthroating election propaganda

      • Grapho@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        44
        ·
        15 hours ago

        You do realize that… …right?

        I yearn for the day libs learn to write without pulling from the same raggedy bag of cliches and redditisms

      • cosecantphi [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        57
        ·
        16 hours ago

        No attempt to pack the court. No attempt to challenge the authority of the court. No attempt to sidestep the ruling or pressure the GOP and anti-abortion states via executive order. In the end it’s just another piece of evidence that the Democrats are either unwilling or incapable of fighting for our rights.

      • Crucible [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        47
        ·
        17 hours ago

        If they gave a shit they would have codified R v. W, or added more judges to the SC to ‘balance’ the stolen judges the GOP got in by Obama being happy to play ball with them. The Dems value the fundraising they can do when abortion rights are threatened more than your ‘rights’ themselves

        • Lurker123 [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          17 hours ago

          If we’re talking about strictly legal methods, Biden’s only option would be to pack the court to overrule Dobbs and reinstate Roe/Casey (or, ideally a stronger version). This would be done via a new federal law, and given that the dems only held 50 senate seats (which included people such and Manchin and Sinema), this was not something that could actually happen.

          I think Biden should have tried this, used the bully pulpit of the presidency to argue for it, and campaigned against the senators that stood in the way of this. That’s what I would expect a president who actually cared about this issue to do. But it would not have stopped SCOTUS’s rollback of the law.

          Biden could of course have instead triggered a constitutional crisis by directly threatening SCOTUS and forcing them to rule with a (potentially actual) gun to their head. But I’m not sure that’s what you had in mind?

          • SevenSkalls [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            36
            ·
            15 hours ago

            The Supreme Court ruled that the US President could break the law as long as it’s part of an official act during his presidency. That opened up his options quite a bit lol.

          • SmokinStalin [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            42
            ·
            16 hours ago

            You kinda making the point. He didnt even try. People here probably wouldnt be holding him so responsible for things if he had tried AT ALL to stop it even if he still failed.

            • Lurker123 [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 hours ago

              Ye if the point is that he failed to try and that’s why you don’t like him, fair enough, I definitely agree there. I was reading the OP as blaming him for the result, rather than the failure to try, which is what I was responding to.

              • SmokinStalin [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                5 hours ago

                The failure to try makes him complicit. While not directly responsible, he allowed it to happen by doing exactly nothing. Like you said. It’s clear he didn’t actually care.

      • SmithrunHills [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        43
        ·
        18 hours ago

        had absolutely nothing to do with the Biden administration

        Yes I’m well aware of the fact that they did nothing about it. Your point being?

        • unknownuserunknownlocation@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          18 hours ago

          To dumb it down: if someone kills someone and someone else sees it and doesn’t intervene, the person who saw it and didn’t intervene may not be the best person (options of intervening aside), but they’re still a far better person the the person who actually committed the murder.

          • Salem [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            ·
            12 hours ago

            The passive person is considered an accomplice to murder, and usually they are charged with the same penalties of that murder in that manner.

            You’re being facetious and deceitful.

            The Democrats and Biden enabled and empowered Israel’s genocide, breaking several laws of financing and sponsoring such states’ actions; the Center for Constitutuional Rights filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration which the court acknowledged that a genocide was ongoing - that the Biden administration’s breaking of the law was evident - but decided to rule against the CCR based on political doctrine (i.e, the court refused to intervene because it was foreign policy matter to be settled by the executive/legislative, despite the illegality of the executive action.)

            The rule of law does not exist. The state is a means of mediating class conflict and socioeconomic changes. The state therefore selectively applies the law, indicating that it is power and political will that determines state policy rather than legalisms and procedure.

            To dumb it down: you’re not going back to brunch.

          • SmokinStalin [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            45
            ·
            16 hours ago

            What if the person who does nothing is a cop whos literal job it was to stop it? Its one thing to try and fail. It’s another to sit on your ass and watch while planning on how you can use the murder to negotiate a raise.

  • cisco [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Democratic Party is HR, and the GOP is the sex pest that keeps sexually harassing you at work but is never punished because they’re both friends

    • Evilsandwichman [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Honestly Israel would fire the first shot, like they did this time, and then Kamala would enter the war but everyone would be okay with it because it’s blue war; these freaks think we forgot what Obama did to Libya and how they defended (and STILL defend) it

        • Goferking0@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 hours ago

          It was a legal order to kill all those people, they were designated combatants! Yes even the women and children – libs soon as dem president again.

          hell already saw them before Trump did the latest Iran attacks they’d be supportive of him going to war with those Dirty evil IRANIANS, and China

            • Goferking0@ttrpg.network
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 hours ago

              Wdym, they just say it’s entirely Israels fault that the genocide is happening. Can’t be anything related to what cover and munitions the usa supplies. (literally what mod of lemmy.world politics comm things, and why they are happy to remove anything genocide related from that comm)

    • Belly_Beanis [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      19 hours ago

      They’d still invade Iran, but come up with a reason (made completely the fuck up and a blatant lie). They’d probably say Iran killed 100,000 Israeli babies with poison gas attacks.

  • cornishon@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    22 hours ago

    I will grant them one thing: the US would be more respected around the world.

    That’s why I extend critical support to JDPON DON.

    • SevenSkalls [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Yup. She wouldn’t have pissed off the US allies as much beforehand, probably would have gotten Congress to agree to a war through all the proper channels, etc.