this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2025
1787 points (98.3% liked)

People Twitter

7382 readers
870 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml 56 points 4 days ago (6 children)

And then Harris completely disappeared as soon as the election was over, failing to challenge his extremely questionable victory in any meaningful way

[–] pigup@lemmy.world 25 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Billionaires: " yes, she's an obedient little soldier πŸ‘"

[–] BilboBargains@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It must be nice to have the billionaire's hot air to fill your sails as you navigate these rough seas. However, woe betide those that displease the mighty donors, they will immediately find themselves in the doldrums, they no longer have a purpose and the billionaires await the next empty vessel.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

It must be nice, it must be niice to have billionaires on your side.

It must be nice, it must be niice to have billionaires on your side.

[–] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 21 points 4 days ago (3 children)

If she had challenged it, she probably wouldn't have won the challenge, AND she would have fueled a whole smattering of "SEE, BOTH SIDES ARE THE SAME" bs

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Well if people were going to say stuff, it's awesome that she didn't do anything! Close call. \s

[–] Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml 8 points 4 days ago

This is the same flawed logic as the folks saying that violent resistance will give the other side a "justification", they're gonna make one up anyway so there's absolutely no point in abstaining from any given course of action for the sake of not giving them one. Even if it hadn't worked it would have demonstrated some commitment to actually stopping Trump, but corporate dems don't actually give a shit what happens as long as they're still getting paid.

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 4 points 4 days ago

Fuck that, the situation wasn't the same and EVERYONE knows it. The solution isn't to avoid the whole thing so the accusation isn't made, the solution is to do the right thing, and when the accusation is made, you slap them down HARD!

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 12 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (4 children)

She was a weak candidate and had very little political capital, it was a wild shot, but she was just a better choice than Biden. The dem party has almost ZERO strong presidential leadership that the general, liberal or progressive population can connect with, and I'm pretty sure it's by design.

AOC might have a chance of rising and gaining prominence but she's still regarded broadly as "too young" to do more than take a senate seat, which would be great either way. Zhoran Mamdani is going to be a titan on the left if he survives the concerted efforts of zionist liberal America to melt his efforts, but if he succeeds he's going to be busy in New York for years to come. David Hogg isn't going to lead the nation, but he IS making worthless old dems literally cry, so there is some marginal hope for a rally by next midterms.

But we also may not have midterms at this point. We're edging closer to martial law and general, fascist, authoritarian dictatorship, and the best we're getting from Dem leadership is "strongly worded letters" from Chuck "Less Than Worthless" Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries likes to reiterate that "Trump has a mandate" and is basically Schumer's little shadow. Cory Booker gained national attention by doing a publicity stunt to literally promote a book. Bernie Sanders is still a voice of power and influence but he's definitely past the window of electability, sadly.

We need better representation and that doesn't spawn from nowhere, we need people on the ground, getting involved in local community, city and county elections so that real people with real passion get national attention. It's not that they don't exist, it's that the left and liberals broadly are sitting on their hands waiting for something to be presented to them.

We have to get out of the "someone will do something" mindset and get out and DO stuff, even if it's just joining the protests right now.

[–] Stamau123@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

After hearing from walz I kinda wished he was the candidate

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I think he would have been a strong candidate a few election cycles ago, but likely not a winner in today's climate. We have a LOT of pent-up rage in our population, as a result of our national "fierce independence" reaching its own "late stage" level.

Waltz has bite and sharpness that would appeal to a lot of people if he were un-muzzled, but he's still not going to fit the "WWE theater" spectacle that engages the stupidest people, and which because of systemic sabotage of our elections, is the only segment of the population who votes anymore.

While I don't like him at all, I think Newsom fits this role the best and might be the strongest contender if we have elections again. (And he will probably be more likely to cheat in some way.)

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

But we also may not have midterms at this point.

I suspect we will continue to have elections, but they will strategically select specific races throughout the country to tamper with in favor of the GOP, and they'll increase the number of rigged races with each election until our entire electoral process has been captured and we end up with something akin to Russia or Venezuela. We'll hold elections, but they'll be a complete sham. We'll (officially) be a one-party state with one other party of controlled opposition to give people the illusion of choice.

[–] AlreadyDefederated@midwest.social 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Instead of AOC (however much I love her and her message) I'm thinking Whitmer would be better and has a great track record. Walz would be stronger than AOC, if they let him hammer 'em with his wit. Andy Beshear would totally freak the GOP out and would be a great choice.

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago

Walz is a zionist. So is Pritzger. A zionist wont win.

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Lol.

Still blaming Harris as a coup unfolds.

So productive.

A challenge would have gone nowhere and given the other side ammunition. Focus on something worth your time.

[–] Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml 0 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Still simping for dems while they sit back and watch a fascist coup unfold, you're as spineless as they are and a thousand times stupider. You have no idea whether a legal challenge would have worked or not, at the very least it would have demonstrated any commitment whatsoever to stopping Trump, but Harris doesn't actually give a shit and never did, she just wanted money and power. You should focus on developing some dignity.

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

Still simping for dems while they sit back and watch a fascist coup unfold

Americans voted for it, dipshit. Americans voted the GOP into TOTAL CONTROL. Americans HANDED THE REIGNS to the GOP.

you’re as spineless as they are

Motherfucker, I vote for the Dems because I did my homework and KNOW they regularly vote in favor of the middle and lower classes, don't threaten rights, and are historically better for our economy. I vote for the Dems because I'm not some dumbfuck like you and I know that we are nowhere near ending the two-party system in America so the INTELLIGENT thing to do is vote Dem to maintain our rights and prevent Republicans from gaining control and doing, oh yeah, exactly what the fuck they're doing now. But you and the word "intelligent" don't exist in the same space together.

You're just whining like a little bitch about Harris while missing the bigger picture. Who the fuck cares if behind the scenes she was some power hungry asshole that just wanted her name in the history books? She was STILL, BY FAR, the more intelligent option. You aren't just voting for the candidate you fucking loser, you're voting for the party and the policies attached to it, which in the Dem's case, is way better than the policy of fucking fascism.

You're just a whiny little bitch. Get the fuck off .ml, that shit is frying what's left of your brain.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

As bad as his victory was, it wasn't even vaguely questionable.

Of the people that turned out, more of them voted for Trump, plain and simple, even by the popular vote without having to complain about the electoral college.

The only objective fact that gives an asterisk is he didn't manage to get over 50% of the popular vote, but he still had the most of any candidate.

I've seen the mentions of "inconsistencies" and "Musk manipulated the votes" but a read of them seems about as credible as 2020 election denials.

[–] Tuuktuuk@sopuli.xyz 2 points 4 days ago

You're not supposed to question the victory of a presidential election when done in free and democratic elections. Doing anything like that would be horribly anti-democratic.

It would be horrible if Harris had challenged Trump's victory. That would just make her another Causescu/Trump/Mussolini.