this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2025
1267 points (97.6% liked)

Political Memes

8697 readers
3165 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 5) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Sounds like the other side's strategy is to make it easier to arrest, imprison, and deport, plus cheat while throwing accusations. I fully expect them to use this strategy to try and "win" the next election so be on guard.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Remember to vote in new blood that's not afraid to impeach a fascist. Refer to this list for the Dems you need to vote out: Fascist-Enabler Democrats Vote Against Impeachment

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

That's good, but instead of a list of who not to vote for, howabout a list of who to vote for?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

“I once knew a man who swallowed a fly…”

[–] [email protected] 42 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Remember folks, every vote counts. We did this to ourselves.

I've said it before elsewhere but it needs to be heard...

It's just wild to me continually seeing posts not understanding how this all works, and how it would play out. It's like the people who thought China paid the tariffs...

The house is almost tied. That's who passes bills, handles impeachments, some of the most powerful committees are, and who impeaches Presidents...

218 Republicans, 213 Democrats.

Let's see, take New York for example.

26 representatives total, 19 Democrat and 7 Republican.

5 of those were within 2 points last time their seat was up.

People who think that New York is blue, their vote doesn't matter, skips the votes for the House and Senate and end up losing a Blue house seat but later complain that nothing changes are literally the fucking problem.

Every. Fucking. State. Is. Like. This.

Apathetic morons who don't realize that the president is only held accountable by the other branch of government then wave their hands around when they did jack shit to help put people in place to, are the fucking problem.

District 3 of California was lost by 24,000 votes. District 22 was lost by 3,000.

Those two seats in the house, along with the close ones in New York, Jersey, Michigan, Illinois, Washington, hell every state... Are what makes the House of Representatives or breaks it.

So, if you think that your vote for president doesn't matter, so you skip voting and let these other seats slip, yes, you're a fucking moron who can't grasp basic concepts of government that are taught in 4th grade.

And don't get me started on the State House/Senates, how they define voting laws and voting zones and engage in gerrymandering.

Every fucking vote counts.

And until the country realizes it, and starts acting on it, we'll keep getting the shit we deserve.

House needs a simple majority, and two thirds of the Senate.

Democrats would need ~18 seats.

First, that won't happen in 2026.

Even the best cases make it hard to win enough by 2028. Which is why impeachment is just not something we can hold out for.

Gerrymandering is part of why this is a problem, which is done at the local level, and again why every vote counts.

How could it play out? Assuming some absurdly weird upside down world just opposite of what we're living in, this is the only path just looking at the numbers...

Again, Democrats would need to gain 18 net seats. Seats Potentially in Play (Republican Incumbents): This requires looking at seats up in upcoming cycles.

  • Class 1 Seats (Up in 2026):
    • Highly Competitive Targets: These would be the first priority. States where Democrats have won statewide recently or that lean only slightly Republican. Examples based on recent political history might include:
      • North Carolina (Budd-R)
      • Alaska (Sullivan-R) - Unique dynamics with ranked-choice voting.
    • Stretch Targets: States that are more Republican but could potentially flip under exceptionally favorable conditions (like the hypothetical turnout).
      • Iowa (Ernst-R)
      • Montana (Daines-R) - Depends heavily on candidate matchups.
      • Kentucky (McConnell-R's seat - potential retirement changes dynamics)
      • Kansas (Marshall-R)
      • South Carolina (Graham-R)
    • Very Difficult Targets: Solidly Republican states requiring overwhelming Democratic turnout and significant shifts among other voters.
      • Texas (Cornyn-R)
      • Mississippi (Wicker-R)
      • Alabama (Tuberville-R)
      • West Virginia (Capito-R)
      • Oklahoma (Mullin-R - Special election winner)
      • Wyoming (Lummis-R)
      • Idaho (Risch-R)
      • Arkansas (Cotton-R)
      • Nebraska (Ricketts-R)
      • South Dakota (Rounds-R)
      • Louisiana (Cassidy-R) - Jungle primary system.
  • Class 2 Seats (Up in 2028): (Looking further ahead)
    • Highly Competitive Targets:
      • Maine (Collins-R) - Often competitive, depends on matchup.
      • Georgia (Perdue/Ossoff dynamic showed competitiveness, depends who holds it after '26 potentially) - Assuming GOP holds a seat here.
    • Stretch Targets:
      • Michigan (Peters-D currently, but listing potential GOP flips back if one happened hypothetically before 2028) - Generally leans D, but could be contested.
      • New Hampshire (Shaheen-D currently) - Generally leans D, but listing potential GOP flips back.
    • Very Difficult Targets: (Many solidly Republican states)
      • Tennessee (Hagerty-R)
      • Alaska (Murkowski-R historically, depends on dynamics)
      • North Carolina (Tillis-R)
      • Iowa (Grassley-R seat potentially)
      • Texas (Cruz-R)
      • Kentucky (Paul-R)
      • And many others similar to the 2026 list (SC, AL, MS, WY, ID, NE, SD, KS, WV, OK).

It's going to take an absolutely historic level of pain to both drive enough people to vote MAGA out to make this change though.

The amount that's being excused, sanewashed, and just drowned out with other absurdities...

We're on all on this shit ride until some new wildcard comes into play.

No impeachment, no Supreme Court, no guardrail is going to change that.

Something new and unaccounted for is the only feasible catalyst.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Voting for whomever the Democrats wheel out on a gurney will not achieve this.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

I can’t recognize him without the orange makeup

[–] [email protected] 83 points 3 days ago (6 children)

For all you Americans who like to complain about the democrats candidates, maybe join the party and vote on primaries. Maybe do something other than just wait around until they feed you the candidate they picked without your input. Maybe start changing up the party from within and at the entry level, by voting on primaries and volunteering for the progressive candidates that want to overthrow the party career politicians. Look at what New York did! If they had waited around and not cared about primaries, they would have gotten Cumo and complained. I hear a lot of complaining about the democrats on Lemmy, sometimes you guys blame them more than Republican. But if you don’t vote or register as a democrat then you don’t matter to them. Make yourselves heard before the actual elections

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 days ago (3 children)

The democratic party is literally designed to squelch any kind of true progressivism. They are funnel any movements into "voting blue no matter who" and make people like AOC say bullshit things like "Biden is working tirelessly for a ceasefire" which we know if bullshit after Biden aides admitted they did not.

We need to make ourselves heard, aboslutley. And waiting for the elections is a recipie for failure indeed. But you say all these things about registering for democratic primaries or canvasing or "changing the party" without realizing people who have been paying attention have been trying that for decades. The democratic party is designed to maintain the status quo, and be as big of a roadbump as possible to actual workers demands so that they can keep campaigning on being better than the GOP. We are not reforming the democratic party when its whole goal for decades is to trap people trying to demand actual reform.

We need to make demands, absolutely. But we need to throw off the shackles of thinking the prison guards are going to help us escape. We need a new party, not a new Democrat.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 3 days ago (10 children)

You don’t even have to join the Democratic Party to vote in their primaries.

That being said, they will absolutely move mountains to block anyone remotely socialist from gaining power. The only reason Mamdani won the primary is because NYC has ranked choice voting.

The Dems are not going to save us because their leadership is profiting from this too much. Organized resistance is the only hope we have.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

We've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas! Revolution it is!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

If you live in a closed state primary like Florida, you do have to join to vote in the primaries of your party.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 3 days ago (2 children)

100% - the Dems are a fundraising organization, not a political party.

Sure it will benefit us to be more politically active, but we need to put that energy into a new party. The Dems will not save us.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Please leave a detailed message explaining exactly how you propose to come up with a viable 3rd Party when the 2026 midterms are in sight?

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

One method would be an Article V convention to get rid of money in politics, abolish the electoral college, get rid of FPTP in favor of ranked choice voting, and mandate a fair and impartial redistributing system which must be applied nationally before the midterms.

Essentially, our last shot at a “peaceful revolution”.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Actually, Mamdani would’ve won on first past the post as well (he has 43.5% of voters choosing him as first choice). He needs a 50% threshold to advance, which is where ranked choice will come in, but he would’ve won a first past the post anyways.

So even in a first past the post scheme, people should vote in dem primaries. I think we’re all on board with changing the dem party, and it starts in the primaries.

Go vote, or get oppressed. That’s basically the options and people need to understand that. Voting doesn’t guarantee you won’t be oppressed, but not voting guarantees you will.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Would those people have voted for him in a first past the post race? Or would they have been too afraid that someone worse than Cuomo would win, so they stick with him?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Well since he was selected as their first choice, presumably they would still choose their first choice when only given one choice. Ranked choice plays a role for everyone else down ballot and for automatic runoffs. People don’t put someone as their first choice that they don’t actually want as their first choice. So yes, they would have.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yes they do, all the time. I wanted to vote for Bernie in the 2016 election, but I actually voted for Hillary because I thought that splitting the vote would let Trump win. If we had ranked choice, I could have put Bernie on top while knowing that I wasn’t opening the door tor Trump.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Well, the entire point of ranked choice is that you can do this. You can put unknown candidates up top without having to be afraid to „waste“ your vote, as you would have, with FPTP.

I am pretty confident that this would not have happened were it not for ranked choice. People would have voted the „safe“ candidate instead.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Progressive Democrats are the 3rd party. That's why establishment Dems are trying to suppress them.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Correct. From the inside is the only way to change them. Actual 3rd party just splits the ticket and gives seats to the opposite party who are always worse than the most centrist D.

It's the same way the MAGA Rs shifted that party from within. The old guard neo-cons fought them as long as they could, and now they know if they bad-mouth them, they get primaried by insane people like MTG and Boebert.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago (3 children)

I agree with all of this but take into account that lots of people here don’t even live in the US (like me). And we get fucked by democrats being shit at winning elections too

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago

Arguing a point about something-or-other, when the other person has a limited idea about the context, is really frustrating.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›