this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2024
1228 points (99.2% liked)

Political Memes

5347 readers
2465 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.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 52 points 1 week ago (7 children)

I still find the fact that the ultra auth-left instance hexbear.net is the most republican instance on the entire fediverse extremely amusing

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (6 children)

I believe we need to abolish the presidency in the near future and distribute the powers to the House and Senate. Powers of government to the House and Powers of State to the Senate, with some fudging for checks and balances, like house passes laws and Senate has to intervene to veto them with some qualified majority rules like the EU has.

I believe this has to be done because it's pretty clear that a system with a single powerful leader inherently puts all the strain and division of the nation into that leader, especially when there's no recourse when public sentiment turns against that leader except for voting them out, if that's even an option to begin with.

A dual-parliamentary system with some restructuring of the House and Senate would go a LONG way in venting a significant amount of the pressure that has built up under our elected leaders as of late.

Also replace the singular supreme court with a sortitionate bench that's drawn randomly for each case that rises to federal jurisdiction to shoot jurisdiction shopping dead.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (11 children)

Saying this is a no-brainer is essentially in and of itself, a no-brainer. But yet, here we are, frustratingly attempting to educate leftists and undecided people on the dangers of “protest voting” and how cataclysmically dangerous it is to assume that you know better without ever seeming to possess the ability to simply just prove it.

We have the receipts. We know damn well what is going to happen if Trump is allowed to win.

And if you think you’re teaching someone a lesson with your withheld vote, I’ve got news for you-

A LOT of people are going to be hurt. And the ones you think it will be, the ones you’d want it to be- won’t be counted among them.

I promise you this.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Sadly, both will resonate equally with their bases. Although I think they Walz had a better performance, I don’t think this debate changed anything.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

According to the numbers, it didn’t.

[–] [email protected] 59 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I wish Walz did better at calling out ALL of Vance’s bullshit. Vance said, “we as republicans need to do better to earn your trust on bodily autonomy.”

It doesn’t take much effort to say bullshit. If you want to have more trust, then don’t get rid of the only thing protecting women’s bodies!

[–] [email protected] 31 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Honestly to me Walz looked so exasperated/disappointed that he was dealing with such a dumbass and his followers.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago

I got that feeling too. He was in shock a few times.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 weeks ago

This needs to be a billboard.

EEEEEEVERYWHEEEERE!

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I’m no fan of Vance, but if you’re going to put Walz’s office in there, you have to include it for both of them.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 weeks ago

Couchfucker Jeffery Dahmer Vance

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 weeks ago

Everyone look out, it's the fucking meme police lmao. 🚨

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't know that owning Vance Refrigeration comes with a title.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago

What line of work are you in, Bob?

[–] [email protected] 44 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Is it just my imagination, or did that weasely fuck spend the entire time Walz was talking trying to do a Jim Halpert look at the camera?

[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Probably because it played so well for Harris.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 2 weeks ago

That's because she was genuinely baffled. Vance was just faking.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

To be fair, if we think about the bigger picture and not just abortion, unless US States disappear then people's rights will continue to vary quite a bit depending on their geographical location in the same country, including their body autonomy...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

It's helpful to have a sort of pyramid in government for the sake of balancing the workload (someone managing foreign policy shouldn't be bothered to give a shit about a pothole in Utah) but what we could do is not burden states with these kinds of things and kick it up to the federal level. For a while it was, and it was stable and consistent, but now it's not and that's the mess

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

So long as States are allowed to provide more than the Federal minimum you're still opening the door to having people with different rights based on their geographical location though...

Let's say healthcare is now 100% public and managed or forced on States by the federal government but medication isn't covered, you could have one State saying "alright, that's dumb, we will handle medication coverage then" and now living right across the State border means that you're paying for insulin or private coverage while your friend in the next town over doesn't know how much either of those things cost because it's all paid by taxes...

I'm using that example because something similar happened in Canada (one province decided to create its own medication insurance policy while it was an handled by the private sector in the other provinces).u

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

States rights have always been about allowing one group of people to have the power to oppress another group within a state and without federal intervention. It’s why Democrats tend to focus on federal policy and Republicans are obsessed with things like states or parental rights.

Picking up your point, I believe that reform should extend to the point of dissolving states and creating provinces instead, all under central government like nearly every country on earth.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Look at Canada, provinces don't solve that issue either

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

But the federal government is allowed to say "Alright, this is the baseline for rights. Go from there."

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

That's a minimum though, some States will offer just the minimum, others will offer much more

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