I'd take some less evil, please.
this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2025
418 points (79.4% liked)
Memes
48702 readers
1772 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
This meme made sense in 2012, not when the Republican Party has decided to be the Anti-Democratic Party.
load more comments
(21 replies)
Obama's legacy:
- After winning the Nobel peace prize, he dropped an average of 30k bombs / year (80 per day) during his presidency, mostly on Muslim countries, 2, 3. In 2016 alone, dropped 26,171 bombs in the Middle East and North Africa, up 3000 from the previous year. The countries bombed include Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, and Somalia.
- Began a campaign of drone assassinations in the Middle East and Africa, in which 90% of those killed were not the intended targets, but innocent civilian bystanders, including women, children, and US citizens. 1. Drone strikes are used by the military and the CIA to hunt down and kill people the Obama administration has deemed — through secretive processes, without indictment or trial — worthy of execution. He authorized 10 times more drone strikes than George W Bush, 2. The Obama assassination program is detailed in the drone papers.
Biden's legacy:
The democrats are a brutal, vicious, genocidal party.
load more comments
(15 replies)
The Ratchet effect.
With this current trump slop, the democrats can shift farther right than they've ever been and gain tons of moderates and even conservatives who just feel sour on trump, and obviously they get the liberal moderates, because trump slop.
Republicans shift right by 10, dems shift right by 6 and seem progressive in comparison.
Billionaires continue getting richer, and we all get fucked. Eat, sleep, repeat.
I don't understand why people who think this don't advocate for ranked choice voting. Seems like it would solve this issue, right?
Even if it would, how would it ever get passed when the people who would need to pass it are the ones who are only in office because the system works the way it currently does?
This is just a recurring theme I've found when talking with liberals. They like to think about and suggest all sorts of policy ideas as though all we're missing are some smart ideas nobody has thought of. It's one thing to say we should have this, but it's another to have any idea of how it'd be possible to do. Since they have no actual analysis of the system, they'll just turn around and tell you to vote or call your representative. "We should get money out of politics!" "Yeah, well we checked with the people giving us money and they said no. So..."
load more comments
(1 replies)
It doesn't. There are plenty of bourgeois democracies that don't use FPTP for all their voting: Japan, Australia, South Korea for some of their elections. Doesn't make a difference (except it might make the bribery a bit more expensive, since you have to buy off more political parties than just two).
The fundamental problem is capital standing above political power. If it does so, then no amount of alternative voting systems can fix the issue. Socialism is the only answer.
You have a few options for enacting ranked choice voting at the national level:
-
Win hundreds, possibly thousands, of state-level House and Senate seats with the largest grass roots voter mobilization ever seen in the US to, a) enact legislation in all 50 states or b) ratify an amendment to the constitution, that mandates it.
-
Kill enough republicans in a national civil war to make sure that when elections happen, there aren't enough republicans left to win an election, then enact the above.
-
Overthrow the entire US government in a much bloodier national coup and set up whatever government you want.
Kill enough republicans in a national civil war
And democrats, too. Don't pretend they're not just as responsible for keeping fptp voting, their party depends on it. If you don't believe me, look into how coordinated the GOP and Democrats were when suing PSL and the Green party to keep them off several state ballots (and severely whittle down their grassroots funds with corporate-money lawfare). Spoiler: there was no overlap.
It's one party, two wings.
load more comments
(2 replies)
No, RCV wouldn't. The fundamental problem of electoral politics being a game between factions pre-approved by the bourgeoisie won't change, there are even safeguards preventing unwanted change that losing parties and government branches can pull in the rare event a worker party won.
It's the perfect carrot, it won't get passed nor would it change much.
load more comments
(2 replies)
They won't allow it because they'll lose power with ranked choice.
load more comments
(2 replies)
People from the global south watching american fighting over who is less evil never gets old.
I’m honestly looking for work in the EU. If I can land a job, I’ll get established and then bring my family over.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›