I saved this picture close to 20 years ago, just because it was ridiculous. I’ve always wondered, “What the everloving fuck is going on here?” And I’ve never come up with an answer. But last night, in a state of what I suspect was hypomania, I decided that now is the time for it to shine once again.
While I agree that Mario would be a better choice than what we currently have, he’s basically unelectable. His residence in the Mushroom Kingdom, ethnic accent, and the considerable amount of skeletons in his closet would be a buffet for the corpo media empires.
I mean, I’m not in love with the ex-cop who was chosen to be VP because she was the only Democrat more conservative than Biden, but this has more to do with Trump’s ideological inconsistency than Kamala Harris’s.
she was the only Democrat more conservative than Biden
You can talk a lot of shit about Kamala, but she’s proven time and again to be a standard-issue California liberal Democrat. She’s right in line with Gruesome Newsome, Eric Adams, and Tim Kaine. If you want to see what a conservative dem looks like, check out Joe Manchin as he tries to weasel his way back into the party before the convention. Or Michael Bloomberg, the guy who was hosting the fucking RNC in New York and glad-handing Bush Jr back in 2004. Or Andrew Yang, a man who never saw a crypto-scam he wouldn’t shill for.
If you’ve got beef with Kamala, you’ve got beef with the mainstream liberalism of the Democratic Party. And that’s fine.
Trump’s ideological inconsistency
One of the reasons Trump was able to move so fluidly between mid-'00s New York Democrats and mid-'10s South Carolina Republicans stems from the fact that America is choke full of fascists. I don’t find his ideology to be particularly inconsistent. The dude’s always had a hard-on for Mussolini and a hate-on for anyone browner than milk. What’s benefited him is a mass media that fixates on his wealth and treats him like a celebrity, while providing zero resistence to his endless lying and bullying.
Sorry, I should have been more specific. I meant the only Democratic candidate in the 2020 primaries that was more conservative than Biden. I agree they’re both very mainstream middle of the road liberals. That was me not being careful with my language.
the only Democratic candidate in the 2020 primaries that was more conservative than Biden
Tim Ryan, Steve Bullock, and John Delaney were more conservative in every meaningful respect. You can blame that on their constituencies (although Delaney really has no excuse - the man’s just a corporate freak) but they’re all both more economically and socially to the right on the generic basket of liberal policies. And none of them are going to lose to Copmala in a cop-loving contest. It will, at best, be a photo finish.
That’s before you get to the Bloomberg or Tulsi Gabbard, and they’re not even cops. Just straight up fascists.
Oh god, I had somehow blocked Bloomberg and Tulsi Gabbard out of my brain. Yeah, that was a pretty big oversight on my part. And yeah, I wasn’t counting the other people who dropped out before the primaries got started, which is kind of unfair. Fine. She’s just a Democrat that’s slightly more conservative than Biden. Are you happy now?
She’s just a Democrat that’s slightly more conservative than Biden. Are you happy now?
No. Because her voting history and her time as AG simply don’t reflect that. Whatever you might say about Harris, Biden quite literally wrote the laws and funneled money into the agencies that let her chase around the poor and defenseless. In a different world, where a more Kennedy/LBJ-esque figure was in Biden’s seat, Harris would have been granted a completely different mandate and toolkit and would have looked comparatively progressive as a result.
That’s before you get into the real awful shit Biden passed as Senator that Harris has (without much conviction) opposed. She’s been a vote for de-militarization in Iraq/Afghanistan, for decriminalization of a host of drugs, and for expanded public spending in health care and education in a way Biden simply hasn’t.
She still sucks for a host of reasons. But to claim she’s “more conservative than Biden” ignores Biden’s entire time in the Senate under Bush and Kamala’s entire time in the Senate under Trump.
Pfft. The idea that Kamala Harris wouldn’t have voted the same way as Biden on Iraq and Afganistan if she had been in Congress back in 2001 is so naive that I can’t even take anything else you said seriously. That is hilarious.
The idea that Kamala Harris wouldn’t have voted the same way as Biden on Iraq and Afganistan
The AUMF of 2001 (Afghanistan) passed the Senate 98-0 with two abstentions from Senators Larry Craig, R-ID, and Jesse Helms, R-NC. Every Senate Dem supported it.
The 2002 extension passed 77-23 with the California Senate delegation splitting (Feinstein for, Boxer against). Harder to say what Kamala would have done here, but she had ample room to reject the legislation without fearing it would fail.
Regardless, it has been freely utilized and repeatedly defended by both parties with every new NDAA, excepting a failed repeal effort by the Senate in 2023 which Kamala endorsed to no ultimate effect.
I can’t even take anything else you said seriously
That’s going to require some actual knowledge of history and the state of the party past and present.
If you’re just running on vibes, idk what to tell you.
because she was the only Democrat more conservative than Biden
Biden is a middle of the road Democrat. I could probably come up with 200 or so living Democrats with experience as a state governor or a federal representative more conservative than him. Any member of the Blue Dog Caucus, for instance.
Biden only wasn’t in the Blue Dog caucus because he was a Senator and that caucus was for House Reps. He’s been an annoying “compromise” vote since the Reagan Era, and played a big role in defanging Dem efforts to filibuster GOP SCOTUS nominees during Reagan, Bush Sr, and Bush Jr. He’s also the author of a host of truly awful legislation - the '94 Crime Bill, the '96 Telecom Act, and the '02 Patriot Act just to name a few.
Harris hasn’t been around nearly long enough to get her hands dirty. And where she has voted, she’s been slightly to the left of the center of the pack (of consistently right-leaning Senate Democrats). That puts her conservative relative to the median voting Democrat but progressive relative to the median elected Democrat.
The past months the mood in America has been: not these two old geezers again.
I am honestly optimistic that it’s going to be a landslide for the Democrats without Biden. Americans are just sick of Trump and they didn’t want Biden to run again.
So the Democrats are giving the people what they want, while the Republicans are trying to force feed them something they don’t want.
I’m still a little worried with how racist and sexist even Democrat voters tend to be. Hopefully the excitement of not having an 80 year old as the candidate outweighs subconscious bias.
Obama won by healthy margins in '08 and '12, and Hillary – the least likeable candidate that’s made it to the top of the Democratic ticket since Dukakis – still won the popular vote. I think the people who would vote against a black woman for President were never going to vote for a Democrat in the first place, and given the general aura of relief and enthusiasm I’ve seen in left wing spaces since the announcement I think Harris is going to be riding a wave of support from the left, even if half of it is just from people who are glad they don’t have to hold their noses to support a doddering octogenarian because the alternative is fascism.
I just don’t think that’s a very big demo. Anybody who’s suddenly motivated to keep the White House white and estrogen-free is more than likely a foaming-at-the-mouth MAGAt, who was already motivated to put their guy back in office. There will of course be a few people who fit that description, and probably many more diet racists and sexists who will just stay home if their options are Trump or a “left-coast liberal woman,” but I don’t think they make up a significant-enough proportion of the voting public to outweigh that latter group you mention, who couldn’t muster much enthusiasm for Biden but are amped-up to vote for somebody younger, healthier, and more dynamic.
Are there a lot of people who individually hold chaotic, mutually-incompatible political opinions? Sure! I don’t think you can boil their ultimate decision-making process down to a box-ticking exercise, where if a candidate represents sufficient number of demographics they hold bigoted views about they automatically vote for Default Old White Guy. For example –
I can’t even tell you how many people had both Bernie and Trump as their top two candidates in the 2016 and 2020 elections.
– that’s very clearly low-information voters dissatisfied with the status quo, who would happily glom onto anybody promising to sufficiently shake things up. Sure, Trump and Bernie had wildly-divergent platforms, but Joe Sixpack – who probably doesn’t feel like he has a dog in the fight on any of the particulars like abortion or finance law and assumes anybody sticking it to the broader political class is a net positive for him – doesn’t see much practical difference, and is so little affected by the bigotry of the right that none of it bothers him, so of course the two candidates presenting themselves as outsiders with a plan to shake up Washington are basically interchangeable.
These people couldn’t accept a white mean beating their white man. I look forward to their civil, humble response to their now anointed god being beaten by a black woman.
lemmyshitpost
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.