Good to see he’s focusing on real world problems.
So, did he recently spout off about dolls and pencils again? Because this all happened in May:
Trump says U.S. girls ‘could be very happy’ with lots fewer dolls under new tariffs
If he did repeat the same nonsense it would be extra wacko this time.
He did. It’s so weird that he uses the number 37, specifically, because every time I hear it, I think of Clerks, LOL:
Maybe he’s talking about the Shein pedophile dolls.
When his followers have to stand in line for whatever slop Walmart is willing to sell them that week, they’ll blame Democrats.
and Immigrants
They’ll say such ridiculous bullshit as “Immigrant shoplifters are causing the stores to raise prices” even though the prices are set by supply:demand equilibrium in order to maximize profits and therefor theft could not and would not affect prices because raising the price in the assumption of theft results in less sales and therefor less profit.
Well, sort of. When you give one man supreme power to do whatever he wants it kind of turns into a dictatorship.
It goes without saying that Trump, who is friends with that communist Mamdani would want to make America more like the USSR /s
Maybe not the Soviet Union. More like Putin’s Russia, as proxied by Cheeto McPedo.
Barely any difference.
No, it’s the America you lot voted for.
How’s it feel being great again?
the America you lot voted for
Every two years we vote. Every two years things get worse.
Clearly, the problem is with the people doing the voting. Couldn’t possibly be something fundamentally dysfunctional in our democratic model.
I see it as a two part problem. One, the current party setup one party ratchets us towards fascism, the other obstructs attempts to go back for “bi-partianship.” Secondly, I hear most swing voters consider themselves moderates and from experience along with other’s inspection of them, they’re only concerned about order until it affects them. In thusly they’re essentially just a brand of conservatism. Sounds a lot like the typical liberal.
Secondly, I hear most swing voters consider themselves moderates
There’s a joke about the average suburban Wine Mom voting for Pete Buttigieg every two years, while having political opinions consistent with Mao’s Little Red Book. “Moderate” is such a moving target, precisely because its hedged in by who is actually running. I’m sure if you sample the NYC voting pool, you’ll find people who voted for Rudy Giuliani in the '90s, Michael Bloomberg in the '00s/'10s, and Zohran Mamdani in '25, without much cognitive struggle. Hell, there’s no shortage of Obama/Trump swing voters.
In thusly they’re essentially just a brand of conservatism. Sounds a lot like the typical liberal.
Most people don’t care about politics until it affects them. And the art of political discourse is largely trying to get your audience to sympathize with your position by convincing them they are going to benefit from your policies / suffer from your opponents’.
So much of the modern capitalist system is predicated on people believing that they benefit from playing along and contributing their labor/intellect for a share of the spoils. And so much of the socialist system is predicated on people believing their neighbors have their backs in a real material way, so they should reciprocate in kind.
Move a liberal from a system that rewards subservience to a system that rewards solidarity and they’re happy enough to change.
I voted for Kamala Harris. Before that I would have voted for Bernie Sanders.
Kamala Harris targeted Republican women for a good portion of her campaign, and dropped a lot of the very popular Democratic platform, resulting in millions of Democrats sitting this one out.
Do you think this is because they are stupid? Why would they do this if not to take a knee? And I still thought that Trump would lose, I couldn’t believe that he would be re-elected. I’m never cynical enough.
Imagine if she ran on a $15 an hour minimum wage increase, helping many millions of our poorest Americans, with over 60% voter support (not Democrat). Our consumer economy would get millions of new consumers participating.
Ds and Rs are now 30% each, independents are 40% of the voters. Both parties know that they cannot win without a majorly popular independent issue. Why was this ignored?
Oh, almost forget, yes, I know, BoTh SiDeS and so on.
Are there some fundamental differences between Dems and GQP? Sure, some, but as a person who has taken an outside view of politics through expanding my political knowledge and understanding, when it comes down to it they only have surface level differences. When Madami was running for Mayor of New York the Democrat establishment threw every nasty thing they could to STOP him. Get this straight, they would have rather a MAGA win than an avowed Democratic Socialist. THAT tells me what I really need to know about the majority of the Democrats in the party.
BoTh SiDeS and so on.
One might argue the sides are Labor and Capital, but we only have representatives from the Capital Party to choose from every year
Agreed! Our “labor party” sold out a long time ago; our current choices are secular or theocratic capital.
Imagine if she ran on a $15 an hour minimum wage increase
To be extremely clear. THAT WAS ONE OF HER POLICIES
THAT WAS ONE OF HER POLICIES
Democrats run on $15/hr, win in a landslide (2020), and throw up their hands because they don’t have Joe Manchin’s permission to raise wages in the US Senate.
Republicans run on ending abortions and now abortions are fully illegal in a slew of states, with a national ban on the horizon.
I didn’t watch her every appearance, but I did watch quite a lot, and minimum wage seriously got very little time compared to her pursuit of Republicans. Reporters and politicos who did watch everything agree. Abortion was in the forefront regarding their D platform, which has about as much support as higher minimum wage (over 60%).
If she had replaced her R outreach with campaigning for higher wages, and continued as she did with the abortion issue, she would have received many more D and independent voters. She needed them both to win, the “R strategy” was weird and stupid and in my opinion I think she was paid to do exactly what she did.
Her campaign undeniably made a fortune from somebody (over a billion dollars). Not only did she make more than anybody ever, she did it in just a few months. It’s a radical and preposterous increase, right in the open, in public.
She immediately knew reaching out to Rs was a massive waste of precious time and that she would lose if she did so. It’s a mathematical certainty, bOtH pArTiEs know that they need to court independents instead of their opponents to win a fed election.
I voted for her, this is not a Trump defense, he also is paid to do exactly what he does by “donors” (like Saudi Arabia and Musk and Bezos and Walmart and Russia and that guy from the Hercules sitcom).
And you’re every so politely ignoring the states run by dems having higher min wages, to pretend that it’s only Republicans getting shit done. Notably just like there isn’t a $15 min national wage, there’s also not a national abortion ban. Your comparison is poorly cherry picked.
I can’t speak for everyone, but I thought thoroughness would be pedantic. I could have gone into much more detail, or at least typed out “FEDERAL minimum wage”, but I had thought this was taken for granted in any FEDERAL election. So what do you do? Accuse me of “pretending” and “cherry picking”, that’s not nice.
So, for future reference, a President can only sign a federal minimum wage increase, they are unable to raise state, city, etc. minimum wages. I’ll be sure to type that out into great detail next time. Ha, I’m kidding, ain’t nobody got time for that.
You know my post would have had to be pages long for the wage increase if I went into detail, you could easily write a fat book about it.
Remember, 40% of voters are independent, Ds and Rs are at 30% each. It’s to your advantage to be cordial, whatever party you are; hostility will NOT win elections. Not an accusation, just sharing a factoid (hint hint)
For the comment higher towards you I really did mean that as a general clarification. I would’ve worded it more strongly otherwise. I wasn’t entirely sure if you realized it or not given your wording, so I wanted to make sure less familiar people reading on that were more clear.
The cherry picking comment was not to you, it was to their person it’s replied to. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just misread the comment chain
ignoring the states run by dems having higher min wages
Which states have a living wage?
$15 isn’t a living wage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_minimum_wage
No shit.
To be extremely clear. THAT WAS ONE OF HER POLICIES
Of course, this is well known in politics circles. That is why I said, “a good portion of her campaign was targeting Republican women voters.” (bold added for emphasis)
To be totally transparent, SERIOUSLY, THIS Is NOT A JOKE OR SOME KIND OF WORD TRICKERY OR CONSPIRACY, WITH NO CLAIMS MADE OF A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OR EXCLUSIVITY OF POLICIES.
I think the 2 of your’s disconnect is over what ‘ran on’ means. Most people would take that to be the main emphasis of the campign messaging,
Not the total platform and all its contents.
Yes, my opinion is she “ran on” abortion and R outreach primarily.
Abortion was a good issue, but any “R outreach” time spent was wasted. Spend that time on Democrats and independents instead.
I have been an Unafilliated Independent since I registered to vote in 1977. Neither party can win without me, but they can’t count on my vote. If they want my vote, they have to EARN it, and they even seldom try.
I’ve always been curio, what does that mean in the US ? When someone says they’re a registered democrat or republican. It seems to be different to party membership in Australia
Pretty sure it means you get to vote in the primaries, aka the election to choose who’s in the election
You don’t have to vote for the party you’re registered for.
This is coming from a non-American, but that’s how I understand it
Me too, and have been since I turned 18 in the late 80s. No exceptions, always registered Independent, I have a strong dislike for BoTh PaRtIes. I’m an issue voter first and anti-incumbent voter second.
Good to meet a fellow member of the majority!|
In the 50s, we were only 20% of the voters, so Independents have doubled in the last 70+ years.
I think we’re growing, too. A lot of people had been giving the Dems the benefit of the doubt, until they just folded up and let MAGA take everything right back, and didn’t put up a fight at all. It was a disgusting, shameful performance, and all those MAGA appeasers need to go. There’s a small handful that can stay, but the rest need to be replaced by new Democratic Warriors who will actually do their jobs, and fight for us.
The vast majority of Americans didn’t vote for this. Two thirds of us didnt vote for this. If you think this is the voters’ fault, you dont understand the world very well, my friend.
1/3 of them didn’t vote, which is very much a vote in and of itself and don’t dare absolve them by letting them continue their “I didn’t vote for this” narrative. You fucking did the moment you chose not to vote.
A great Canadian philosopher once noted, “If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!”
Wise words. He also said “I will choose the path that’s clear,” and I feel like none of the people who didn’t vote were paying attention. It’s been pretty clear, to anyone who’s actually paying attention, what’s been going on for a long time now.
Well a whole lotta Ken Bones seem to think the parties need to offer them a pretty, pretty pony.
And then…they’ll still think about voting. If they aren’t washing their hair that day or if there isn’t some compelling reality TV show on or something.
Lol thanks, now that song is gonna be stuck in my head all day D=
Tom Sawyer is one that I have more often get stuck in my head…
There’s worse songs.
Indeed, it could be Two Princes.
[Now That’s What I Call Songs Sung To The Tune Of “Two Princes” By The Spin Doctors 5]
The majority didn’t vote because there are flaws in the voting systems we have. They are disenfranchised, not at fault. I dont blame a poor person for being poor, but I mean, if you want to blame people for being subjugated, thats your prerogative.
I voted for Harris. What else was I supposed to do?
Work on shifting USA culture from alienating individualism, which says “I did a thing, so don’t blame me”, to a collectivist understanding that society requires mutuality of action and responsibilities.
If my co-citizens fail to vote, or actively vote against our interests, then that’s on me, to the extent of my abilities to contribute.
TL;DR: talk to people about civics
In the average Lemmy twat’s view, try to overthrow the government at the cost of your life and possibly your family’s while they pontificate on the internet about Americans not doing enough.
I mean, you’re not wrong. They are full of brave, anonymous invective.
^ This.
Lol, I remember when yankistanis would ask people on other countries to start a revolution and they’d crowdfund and send them guns and weapons like revolution was flipping a switch.
Isn’t that what they tried to do in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, and countless other countries.
Now that they’re the one being buttfucked, oh ones, “my guns staying where it is.”
Get fucked bitches. We’ll crowd fund some lube to send it your way.
Since you so clearly speak for the planet, I’ll remind my fellow citizens that we’re hated because we, average people, apparently told people in other countries to “start a revolution, crowdfunded, and sent them guns”, in your words.
Not that many millions of people would ever remember wanting or doing that, but in your enlightened wisdom, clearly, we should all get fucked. I’ll be sure to tell my family and fellow citizens. They’ll love this compassionate sentiment from a reasonable and balanced international perspective.
Anyway, have a happy new year, wherever you are.
Thank you for doing that. Others went above and beyond by canvassing and volunteering too and/or donating. I tried to make an impact by just getting people to vote period. If they needed a ride to the polls I was willing to help. But you at least did something
I’m out in the country (appalachian mountains) so kind of low population density for this, but if I’m ever living back in the city I’ll try and reach out to people.
Me too, man. Stay vigilant.
Im watching to news, ready to do what makes sense. If ICE comes to town, I’m there baby.
If you didn’t donate your life savings to Harris, really, you donated to Trump.
awfully bold to assume most Americans have any savings lol
I’m confused by your comment. Are you saying two thirds didn’t want this specifically, or are you counting non-voters as opponents of Trump?
My guess is that most of the non-voters, if forced to vote, would have voted Trump. He had name recognition. These types of citizens couldn’t name the current Vice President any more than they could find the USA on a world map.
Unlikely voters, as opposed to likely voters which are the pollsters darlings, are low information, “just trying to pay the rent” kind of people. Why a low information voter with no reason to believe their life would change with either result would by default be a Trump voter speaks to your personal prejudices.
Personal prejudices? I explained why in my comment. Name recognition.
You called them “low information.” If your comment wasn’t prejudiced, then neither was mine.
Why would you assume that? Statistically that’s not the case.
America has a two party system where both parties are controlled by capitalists and the entire system is designed to keep the populous divided and distracted so that the capitalists can continue to extract wealth. In such a system, participation itself is the moral choice, not the choice between one side or the other.
Voters give legitimacy to the false dichotomy that capitalists present us.
deleted by creator
How does it feel to be a smug, unhelpful asshole?
We didn’t all vote for the the orange clown.
It’s just a reminder that the American people are the problem. Even when Trump is gone, the people will remain, so it must remain the top priority of everyone who values democracy and human rights to reduce the power that the United States exercises on the world.
Feels great actually.
I genuinely can’t imagine how this pedophile billionaire could sound more out-of-touch and apathetic. Anyone who still approves of him is a fucking idiot.
That’s the point. He’s not talking about himself or his fellow swampdwellers. He’s talking about the plebs, who will have to get used to having less while working harder - because Trump and his oligarch buddies have taken it all.
Trump and his oligarch buddies have taken it all.
And they demand MORE.
Anyone who still approves of him is a fucking idiot.
🌏 🧑🚀🔫
Always has been.
No, it’s a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Very different plotline, though.
Faulkner’s story is about redemption
Somehow I don’t see that here
I’m not sure what the Faulkner is in reference to. The quote is from Shakespeare’s Macbeth, who, on realizing he has lost everything in his life, is saying that life is meaningless.
The Sound and The Fury is one of Faulkner’s classics. A must-read and you will probably cry.
Yes the line comes from Shakespere So does “Brave new world”, but nobody gets confused over that novel’s authorship
yes good point well made
but if the quote was
‘Oh wonder! How many goodly creatures are there here! How beauteous mankind is! Oh brave new world, That has such people in’t.’
I hope I could be forgiven for not spotting the Huxley reference
The Sound and the Fury is a Faulkner novel? It’s been too long though and IDK if it quotes Macbeth past the title.
I’m pretty sure it’s an episode of Transformers: Animated.
Too many remakes and reboots. Write something novel, Faulkner.
When asked to respond to the president’s call for parents to possibly limit doll purchases when approached while returning to his orifice. Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri, a fellow Republican who has a 5-year-old daughter, quipped that he wished someone would say the same to her.
Appropriately funny typo, but the punctuation is fucked up, too. Does anyone proofread these pieces?
Well at least you know an AI didn’t write it.
Yeah, this seems to me like talk to text. Punctuation usually shit, and orifice office is just an accent problem.
Autocorrect, I’d assume. “Office” doesn’t sound much like “orifice,” but it would be easy to swipe-type it the wrong way.
But either way, yeah.
Bergen County, NJ, likes to put Rs in where they don’t belong, and orifice is absolutely a way I’ve heard people say office. And swiping an article is odd to me, but I’ve written zero articles so I don’t know.
I am also not a journalist, but if you’re filing articles from the field, it could make a lot of sense that you might just do it on your phone from a gaudy bathroom in the White House or something rather than needing to pull out a laptop somewhere. Back in the 70s, reporters on location would call their stories in and have them typed; this could be a pretty good modern analogue, maybe?
Um, Will Smith eating spaghetti would like to have a word.
Chatgpt also gives inane output occasionally. All this means is if they used AI, it wasn’t proofread before posting it. There’s a few LLMs that could be used for writing articles, and all of them are flawed.
AI effectively never makes word substitutions by close spelling. It can be quite stupid, but not in the way I’m describing.
This is the United States of Consumerism gosh darn it and my child deserves at least 30 Chinese made toys.
Only soulless monsters don’t feel the warm embrace of conspicuous and gratuitous consumption
My kids require toys made by Chinese children!
Pencils and dolls, so hot this holiday season of 1934.
He only used one colour when he drew his pervy picture of a young girl for Epstein.
Krasnov swings, back and forth, from fascism to communism.
Watch it, some brickhead will be along soon, claiming the two are the same!
If one disagrees with the fascists or communists, the result is a courtroom and an execution. What is the difference? Mao, Stalin and Hitler lead the pack for murdering people who disagreed.
There are key differences, namely that communism is a socioeconomic system that neither Stalin nor Mao followed, and instead established authoritarian regimes that were communist in name only…
But of course to realise that, one would need to learn actual history. You clearly missed those classes. Fascism is a little bit more than “let’s kill people who disagree with me”.
Communism/lack of capitalism certainly doesn’t address the human problem of greed.
That wasn’t the topic though…
But Kamala laughed funny.
