• Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    115
    ·
    1 year ago

    How about we don’t let the dictator who is shouting his plans to the world run for president?

    • foggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Props to Colorado for actually having this discussion.

      Shame on the whole rest of the country for not…

  • Telorand@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    87
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    “But what I will say, too, though, is I think everybody should vote for Joe Biden if they want our democracy to survive,” she added.

    Cue the people who want to clutch their pearls like, “BuT I DoN’t WaNt ThIs DeMoCrAcY tO sUrViVe!” as if they have an alternative option that isn’t a Trump-fueled fascist dystopia.

    • Billiam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      49
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think there’s an alarming number of Americans who are realizing the government is the only thing between them and the violent fantasies they desperately want to enact.

      • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        47
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Same people who are afraid to visit New York or Chicago today think that they will thrive in a lawless dystopia.

        • thisisawayoflife@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          They don’t think it will be a lawless utopia, do they? They want strict application of laws on people, just not corporations. Unless those corporations directly harm them, then it’s bad corporation.

          I see it as akin to how Nazis pushed the idea that the Weimar government was soft on crime (liberals just didn’t understand how to apply “justice”), so they opened Dachau to show their fellow Germans how “criminals” should be dealt with. It served as a primer on how they would operate the kz network in Poland and elsewhere.

          • GentlemanLoser@ttrpg.network
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 year ago

            Wilhoit’s Law : Conservatism consists of one principle: there needs to be an in-group whom the law protects but does not bind, and an out-group whom the law binds but does not protect.

  • RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    …what’s the dark reason? Was there something new, or the same “end of democracy” we’ve known very well about for about 8 years now?

    • TheFriar@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I came to the comments to have that question answered. Because fuck this clickbait title. And fuck huffington post generally. If I wanted an article that was just a bunch of snappy white liberals tweeting…I’d go on twitter.

    • samus12345@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      the same “end of democracy” we’ve known very well about for about 8 years now

      It’s that.

      • RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Actually, the article says that she’s personally planning to go to the homes of every person that either doesn’t vote or votes for Trump and snap the necks of their children.

          • DragonTypeWyvern
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I almost think these doom screamers are working for Trump, to make people bored of the idea of the death of American democracy.

            We’ve known for seven years. If you didn’t, you’re just fucking dumb. The lines were drawn on January 6th if nothing else, and tbh if you voted for him after it was proven in court he’s a rapist you’re just a piece of shit regardless.

    • Pratai@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Trump is a corrupt asshole hell-bent on destroying America for his own gain.

    • oxjox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      How is it that people are intelligent enough to type words on a screen to form complete sentences yet incapable of reading the content which they’re commenting on? And how do others choose to support this sort of statement?

      “But what I will say, too, though, is I think everybody should vote for Joe Biden if they want our democracy to survive,”

      For the elementary schoolers, Hutchinson is saying that, “if they want our democracy to survive”, “everybody should vote for Joe Biden”.

      You may not agree with this statement, you may claim that this title is clickbait, you may argue that HuffPost is a shitty outlet for news; but to question “what’s the dark reason?” and have others upvote such a question, while the answer to the question is very clearly written in the article in which you’re commenting on, suggests you and others are simply too lazy or disinterested in giving a shit about the topic and more interested in generating your own rage-bait content for karma.

      • Red_October@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        But it’s just so much more fun to have a sanctimonious blowhard such as yourself summarize it in the most obnoxious way possible!

      • Doc Avid Mornington@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        So, do you just read every article that comes across your feed? How much time per day do you spend reading? Do you ever worry you may be missing out on important information, due to not selecting articles more likely to convey newer information, more relevant information, or more in depth information?

        Personally, I appreciated the question, and the answer, as it saved time that I can use on reading something more valuable to me - or, I guess, on writing this comment. A lot of articles these days use misleading or vague headlines to trick people into reading a long article that says nothing more than could have been conveyed in the headline itself.

        Now, I will admit, thanks to your comment, I did click through and read this article, just so I wouldn’t look like an idiot writing this comment, if it turned out to be much different from what was said above, or to provide more context, or whatever, and yes, I did find it was not so bad. It’s pretty brief, and while the main point could have easily been in the headline, the article does give some additional context (most of which I knew, but it was a good refresher). Whether we choose to read or not to read, we are taking a gamble with our time and opportunity cost, but people in the comments giving at least some information is better than having nothing to go on, or trusting a headline from a source known to use misleading headlines.

        I do agree with her statement.

        • oxjox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not so sure you’ve really learned anything here. You claim to have now taken the time to read the article and you learned something yet you’re still supporting the idea that reading original content over reading the comment section is a waste of time.

          do you just read every article that comes across your feed?

          The ones I find interesting, yes. The ones I choose to comment on, yes, if it’s a top level comment, of course I do.

          Do you ever worry you may be missing out on important information, due to not selecting articles more likely to convey newer information, more relevant information, or more in depth information?

          Whuuut? No… I worry I might miss out on important information by only reading headlines. And, frankly, I worry that the majority of people on “social media” are missing the point of the journalist’s story by only reading the top -often unrelated or diluting- comments. The comment I responded to is a waste of everyone’s time and alters the narrative of both Hutchinson and the author.

          These platforms are great for sharing information, especially in topical areas we find interesting. Yet at the same time, it seems they’re making most of us dumber for participating in them. Headlines are often misleading. A lot of media outlets publish content just for the sake of publishing content and getting clicks while only a tenth of an article is really relevant to the story or offers any new valuable insight. This HuffPost article is trash to begin with. It’s click bait and OP is making it even worse. Which is pretty remarkable.

          I’d argue that you’d have more time to read more, and would be more well informed, if you spent more time reading the articles instead of the headlines and engaging in the peanut gallery (of course I’m guilty here too).

          • Doc Avid Mornington@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I read a lot of articles, friend, and I feel that you are going far out of your way to misinterpret my comment. We can’t read everything, and we have to choose based on some criteria. A comment offering some summary of what is in the article is better criteria than nothing, especially if, as you seem to agree, the headline is worse than useless.

      • RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        …yes. that is the “the end of democracy” that we’ve been aware of now for the entirety of Trump’s political existence. I know this because I did read the article.

        • oxjox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          So, you’re saying you posted a question to something you knew the answer to while paraphrasing the known answer. That’s a great contribution you’ve added to the conversation.

    • Ab_intra@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      61
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Can you please explain to us what you’re talking about? How Is Joe Biden “Genocide Joe”? And I guess you’re a Trump supporter, why don’t you call him “Trump the insurrectionist”? He did in fact try to take power on january 6, but I guess that’s OK.

      • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        65
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s been a concerted push by these dillweeds lately whining about Biden monetarily supporting Israel – something the US and literally every US president has done since Israel existed – which somehow amounts to Biden personally performing any and all atrocities Israel is up to at the moment. Therefore the only logical thing to do must be to not vote for Biden or any other Democrats (unspoken subtext: and let Trump win instead).

        • Ab_intra@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It’s such a narrow view… Biden and his administration don’t have anything to do with what’s happening on the ground in Gaza, but In my view the US politics for decades have something to do with how it’s become. If they where harder on Israel we might have had a different situation. That is not to say I agree with what this guy said. It’s completely nonsense.

          • Telorand@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s a deceitful presentation of the facts, ultimately. You can determine to vote for Biden in an effort to stave off fascism and not support his stance on Israel. Biden could have and should have not been so glib, and he clearly did not gauge the temperature of his electorate very well (if at all).

            But these “Biden genocide” types often falsely imply there’s a viable alternative that isn’t Trump or Biden, yet they can never say who, and they can never show how that person would overcome the tribal and very reliable Republican voting bloc.

            • WhatTrees@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              To be fair to Biden, the American public as a whole has been very pro-Israel for decades and I don’t think anyone expected the surge in people on our side of this issue. To be honest, I didn’t expect it either. It’s great to see but not surprising he would have preemptively said he supports Israel no matter what before realizing how popular the Palestinian cause actually is.

              • Telorand@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Oh, for sure. His support of Israel fits perfectly with the kind of person he is: Catholic, Boomer, old career politician, respects what allyship means. Christianity (the non-fundie kind) has been the dominant religion for most of his life, and they’ve always felt a religious kinship with Israel.

                If he was slower to rally to their aid, that would have been the truly surprising outcome.

          • TylerDurdenJunior@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            lol. Nothing but the billions of dollars and military equipment. Even private US defense contractors over there “mowing the lawn”.

            The ethnic cleansing taking place in Palestine would not be able to take place without the US approval.

            He will loose the election over this. It’s a horrible fact, and I really wish that dæthe democratic party would line up a better candidate, since Trump winning will be a total decline into the fascist abyss.

      • TylerDurdenJunior@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Trump is a straight up fascist. He will literally end what is left of the frail democratic system in the US.

        I just don’t see that as an argument for anything

        • You have two options dude. Moral grandstanding about third parties doesn’t mean shit in a FPTP system. If you want change, vote Biden so we don’t turn literally fascist and then campaign for FPTP advocacy at a local level

    • cerevant@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      So what you are saying is that Donald J Trump is going to come to the rescue of the oppressed Muslim people of Palestine? The same Trump whose Middle East peace plan was formulated by his Jewish son-in-law and basically said “give Israel what they want, and everything will be fine”?

      Gotcha.

    • echo@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because they’d rather not live under a fascist dictator? Did you read the article?

      • TylerDurdenJunior@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It really is peak centrist liberal to be satisfied with the least horrible alternative.

        Democracy is representative. If Noone represents you, why should you support them?

        • Telorand@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Imagine this scenario.

          • There’s 100 people who will decide a winner.
          • 60 of them share the majority on the left and have varied beliefs (communism, socialism, liberalism, progressivism, etc.)
          • 40 share the minority on the right and have largely monolithic beliefs (religion, tradition, control, etc.)
          • Candidate C is a Centrist.
          • Candidate F is a Fascist.
          • There are 10 other candidates, Q-Z, with varying platforms across the political spectrum.

          35 of the minority are guaranteed to vote for F. 1 votes for Q. 2 vote for R. 2 vote for S.

          But that means the 60 have an easy 25 point lead. 3 vote for Q. 2 vote for R. 5 vote for T. 6 vote for X. 10 abstain on moral grounds and don’t vote for anyone.

          • Candidate C gets 34 votes.
          • Candidate F gets 35 votes.
          • Candidate Q gets 1 vote.
          • Candidate R gets 4 votes.
          • Candidate S gets 2 votes.
          • Candidate T gets 5 votes.
          • Candidate X gets 6 votes.

          Congratulations, the fascist won, because you thought you had the privilege to vote for your favorite, or maybe you didn’t vote at all. Either way, the fascist took your human rights away, along with everybody else’s. But you go to sleep at night knowing you stood your ground like a good idealogue.

          • TylerDurdenJunior@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Imagine this scenario.

            You have a representative democratic system that degrades itself completely decade after decade while the culprits stuff their pockets and make careers out no longer representing the people that voted for them.

            After so many decades of automating and accommodating financial interests, to the point where lobbies and corporate interests basically write the laws the politicians sign, the system is now completely broken and is no longer, in any way shape or form something that represents the interests of the people.

            It is not privilege, but necessity to abstain from voting for actors in that system, unless they want to change it.

            And I haven’t even covered how the system you are voting for are using war, death and terror to further, spread the domination of the same financial interests, and even destabilize and meddle in other democratic processes all over the world.

            If there was a candidate that atleast pretended to want real change, I would absolutely encourage everyone to vote. But there isn’t. Not even the slightest.

            • Telorand@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              It is not privilege, but necessity to abstain from voting for actors in that system, unless they want to change it.

              You are advocating for being the 10 who abstain. The scenario I presented is how it works now (minus the political chess that is the Electoral College). What does abstention do to prevent the rise of fascism? How would you convince the other 90 to join you en masse? How would you prevent just one person from keeping such a system alive?

              I know you can’t answer these questions, because none of the people who think like you can. This system sucks. I’m with you on that. But there isn’t another option, therefore choosing not to participate doesn’t do anything but give a leg up to the fascists.