• III@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 day ago

    She had her husband killed because he wouldn’t back JD and Vance. Many people are saying it.

      • Madison420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        Until. How positive no one makes next election cycle merch 4 years in advance unless they intend to run. Honestly i think he’ll be dead before then which would be nice but not as nice as him in chains before a military tribunal.

    • rayyy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      If only we had a kakistocracy. The current regime is a mixture of a pedophilocracy, felonocracy and kakistocracy, along with a few other unsavory ocracies.

      • SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I’m not gonna lie, I’m unfamiliar with all of those terms and had to look them up.

        Kakistocracy = gov filled with ethically bad people and least qualified

        Couldn’t find pedophil-ocracy, assuming you mean pedophocracy = the unknown elite being pedos to control us

        Felonocracy = gov is run by felons

        So, I’m gonna have to pop your bubble a little bit and say that I’m not sure I believe that. It’s possible, sure, but it’s more likely just a deeply unfortunate coincidence that those people are all those things - or even that extreme wealth turns you into those things - and that this is just plain old capitalism at work.

        Because at the end of the day, we would still not want this level of extreme wealth disparity AND we don’t want such centralized extreme power AND we don’t want money to give rise to power. Which are the real ocracy issues here imo

    • WhatGodIsMadeOf@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      Let’s keep funding it though and keep spending on all of our wants that we don’t need. That way things will get worse!

  • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    121
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Vance is an absolute dud of a candidate but I’m sure the Democrats will manage to come up with someone even more ludicrously unsuited.

    • AmidFuror@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      By unsuited, do you mean for the job or to get the vote of fickle progressives?

      • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        “Dem candidates are never bad, progressives are just fickle!” - you

        • AmidFuror@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          They’re not worse than JD Vance, which was the contention. If the commenter is not coming at it from the disgruntled progressive stance, as so many here are, then that part of my response was off the mark.

          The commenter is being very coy about what was meant.

          • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            You don’t even know who it’s gonna be and you’re already stating they’ll be better than Vance as if it’s a truism. I can absolutely see the DNC fucking up so badly that Vance looks like a better alternative. INB4 we end up with two Peter Thiel acolytes running against each other; “abundance” vs. “Christian” nationalism, a true clash of ideas.

            • AmidFuror@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              You don’t even know who it’s gonna be and you’re already stating they’ll be better than Vance as if it’s a truism.

              This thread has gotten quite derailed. The original commenter made the supposition that the nominee will be even more ludicrously unsuited than Vance. I take issue with that assumption. Like you said, we don’t even know who the nominee is.

              I’m saying that historically the Dem candidates have not been ludicrously unsuited compared to their opponents. If that’s the case, where’s this thought that the next one will be coming from?

              • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                I think we’re on different wavelengths because I’m coming at this from the position that there’s a distinction to be made between who is the better candidate and who is better for the country. Trump, despite being a fascist moron who has and continues to destroy the lives of millions while enriching himself and his donors, was a better candidate than Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Kamala Harris. Any of those three would have been better for the country (marginally) but were absolutely god-awful candidates. The only reason Biden even won by a hair is because of how awful Trump’s first term was, that people were willing to hold their nose and vote for Biden despite hating his guts.

      • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        What job exactly would that be? To do the bidding of the oligarchs or to actually represent the electorate?

        • AmidFuror@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          I’m asking what you mean, so feel free to add details. Let’s just use Kamala Harris as an example.

          Who would be better suited to do the bidding of the oligarchs? Trump or Harris.

          Who would be better suited to actually represent the electorate? Trump or Harris.

          Who would be better suited to get the vote of fickle progressives? Trump or Harris.

          Your answers will help me determine what your comment meant. Let me know if you were thinking of someone other than Harris who that was and if your answers would be any different.

            • AmidFuror@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 days ago

              I was reading into your original comment that you thought in the past Democrats have put forth candidates that are “even more ludicrously unsuited” than their Republican opponents. I assumed, regrettably, that you were basing your remark on historical evidence.

              You can clear this up pretty quickly by just explaining what you meant. Here’s your comment:

              Vance is an absolute dud of a candidate but I’m sure the Democrats will manage to come up with someone even more ludicrously unsuited.

              Why do you think that? Did you find Harris more unsuited than Trump? If so, for what? If not, what do you mean?

              • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 day ago

                Did you find Harris more unsuited than Trump?

                She lost. If the topic is “unsuited as a candidate”, we have our answer.

                • AmidFuror@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  That could be an answer. Unsuited to win. But that’s a little hard to judge ahead of time.