What era in time do these people think R’s are trying to conserve to, after or before civil rights?
doing this will only push me and other people like me out!
That’s the point. Next, to the camps for you.
In german we have a word for it: Tja
Which is hard to acuratly translate. Something like:
Well, i told you/them / that was obvious, but nothing you/they can do about it now.
You mean “oh well”
yeah maybe, not sure if it hits the exact conotation
I guess it does
They voted for HATE.
That HATE applies to all vulnerable groups including them.
Staggering that Maga voters didn’t understand that and are now surprised that they are the targets.
I wonder if any Jews thought Hitler was worth supporting.
deleted by creator
My partner just said “it sounds like it was written by Joe Exotic” and not a truer statement has ever been said.
Jordon Ramsay
IT’S FUCKING R!
“It’s not the same republican party it used to be, get over it!”
It has always been that party, idiot.
I wonder if Jordan Ramsey is good at cooking.
im glad the republican party stuck to it’s roots-punishing the slavers, going for racial equality, and being lead by a bisexual wrestler who flirts and jokes with karl marx in his free time. the past 160 or so years could’ve been pretty rough if they hadn’t.
White gay man doesn’t believe he’s part of the LGBTQ+ community anymore because he sees people like him on TV… He’s just now realizing that his buddies would rather not see people like him on TV.
He does not seem to be realizing it. He makes it sound like a new trend of only a few people
Sucks to suck bro.
Sucking your bro is the point, bro.
But sucking bros sucks bro if you suck the R instead of the D bro.
If you want to suck the R instead of the D, are you even gay?
No, you’re just a sub.
This whole thread was ducking scary LMAO
Conservatism has become quite the unfitting term. Retrogressivism might be more suitable.
I’ve been using Regressive for a while.
Take America Back … to the Stone Age
A gay republican; or, as they’re more commonly known as in the LGBT community, a “bitch-ass traitor”.
I feel little pity for anyone who has so little knowledge of history that they don’t know the Republican Party has run on anti-out groups since before I was born.
I think Jordan Ramsey needs some more critical thinking skills and a quick look at what the republican agenda always was, and will continue to be (under Project 2025) before he decides that he will “never be a Democrat”
This is what you get when you have such a polarised electoral system. People treat the parties like sport teams and support them no matter what. So they vote against their own interests because they believe they should never vote for the other side.
1/3 of people dont even vote in the US because there is no real choice.
Its amazing how often you see people aggressively defending the democrats purely on the basis that they’re not the republicans. Even criticising the dems is framed as being pro Republican which is crazy. Both parties are shit, both have sewn up the US electoral system between them and keep everyone else out at all levels.
And during elections that opinion gets shut down and people become complicit with the system. “Voting for a 3rd party is a wasted vote” etc.
The idea that voters should be registered as democrat PR Republican is also crazy - it’s like supporting a party is part of someone identity which is weird.
The only way out is wholesale reform of the system and I don’t see either party offering that. A 3rd party could try and build from the bottom up and dismantle the two parties powerbase but it doesn’t seem to be happening.
So maybe it’ll be revolution when a party pushes people too far? Though Americans seem willing to tolerate an awful lot of shit without doing anything at all.
A 3rd party could try and build from the bottom up and dismantle the two parties powerbase but it doesn’t seem to be happening.
Not really. The FPTP system makes that incredibly difficult. You can’t get votes without taking some amount away from the closest party.
So existing parties are encouraged to shut down and absorb new parties. And new parties will struggle to get a majority of the old party, let alone a majority of the entire election.
We need a system that doesn’t have these nonstarter problems, and that’s star + approval voting.
There are several countries that have FPTP voting, but they’re not as entrenched at everywhere into two parties the way the US is. The UK, for example, has several regions where one of the two major parties is mostly fighting against a regional party, and the other major party has little to no voting base there.
Not only that, but several southern states have used instant runoff voting since the end of Reconstruction (or not long after). If you look at the makeup of their legislatures over the past 100+ years, you’ll see that they are just as filled with Democrats and Republicans as everywhere else.
Point is, FPTP is not the only thing at play.
There are several countries that have FPTP voting, but they’re not as entrenched at everywhere into two parties the way the US is.
Sure, that’s because there are other factors at play. But FPTP is one of the biggest factors, and in other countries with FPTP it is always the case where there are two dominant parties. Your own example, the UK, has that problem with the conservative & labour parties being the biggest. They always dominate the seats in parliament.
regional party, and the other major party has little to no voting base there.
Sure, but a part of why FPTP is so bad is because it gets worse the bigger the election. A small regional election may only have two candidates to begin with, which means any system of voting is esentially equal.
National elections are almost guaranteed to have at least 3 candidates running for a seat, often 4 or 5 if its a seat like the presidency. And that’s where you see third parties suffering most.
The fewer the seats there are, and the more national the election is, the worse FPTP gets.
you look at the makeup of their legislatures over the past 100+ years, you’ll see that they are just as filled with Democrats and Republicans as everywhere else.
That’s because the two parties are so entrenched everywhere else. It’s in their interest to dominate and push out 3rd parties in those elections as well.
Point is, FPTP is not the only thing at play.
Agreed, though it is clearly one of the biggest factors in 3rd parties failing. We need reprentational government, and this ain’t it.
Sure, that’s because there are other factors at play. But FPTP is one of the biggest factors, a
I don’t agree Australia has “ranked choice” and we have two big parties dominant. It’s not a FPTP, it’s voters.
Paraphrasing Susan Sontag, 10% of voters are good, 10% evil and 80% can be swayed either way, of that 80% many of us are stupid (in the Cippola sense).
Ranked choice is basically FPTP with simulated rounds. It’s not much better than FPTP. Switching from one bad voting system to a marginally better one isn’t going to fix things.
1/3 of people dont even vote in the US because there is no real choice.
If you’re not conviced by the last . . . eight weeks . . . that that’s absolutely not true, I don’t know what to tell you. If you’re under 24 then that’s because the adulting hasn’t kicked in full-time, but other than that, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Exactly. People who genuinely say there is no difference are either so privileged that they genuinely feel no difference, or are too young to experience the differences.
This being said I suspect that a good amount of people who say there is no difference are accelerationist bad actors who just have no empathy.
South Park centrism is definitely something I had to grow out of, but it took a lot of additional reading and growing on my part that I’m guessing most people don’t bother with. Why try to figure out the better of two imperfect options when it’s easier to just say both suck?
