For some of us, the 2016 Democratic primary was quite illuminating. I'm glad to see people are catching up finally.
Political Memes
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
It didn't happen overnight (and racist religious world views have been cultivated within this cohort over many years), but the fact that the poorest most easily manipulated people haven't had anybody representing their interests for decades now opened the door to Trump.
The same process is happening in the UK. The UK 'electorate' don't seem to have the wherewithal to see this, instead they often demonise the poor as 'racist' or xenophobic inflaming the situation.
the poorest most easily manipulated people
The people who would benefit the most from Democrat-championed social programs that they now label as "radical" and "socialist" you mean?*
*Which is not some blanket endorsement of Democrats. A lot of them are also out of touch, too conservative, and still trying to run the country like it's 1952. I'm eagerly awaiting the rise of a viable 3rd party (but after all these decades I'm not really holding my breath) or the implosion of the Democrats. I was aghast that Trump somehow pulled them right instead of left, but maybe it will result in an implosion from which Bernie, AOC, Jasmine Crockett and such can bring a phoenix out of the ashes.
'Radical' and 'socialist' in US politics are not only nothing of the sort but are nowhere near, so no I do not mean that in any sense.
Don't put words in my mouth my post was clear.
the Dems are in cahoots with the same elite that are in cahoots with the Reps. the dems and reps pretend to be on opposite ends of a spectrum, but they are both sucking up to capitalists and their corporations
The Democratic Party are not friends to the people. They get rich being the opposition party and will only do the bare minimum necessary to get you to not vote the monsters back in, which is one of the reasons far-right parties are getting a draw world-wide when the alternative is neoliberalism.
We have to force radical change (the no brainer stuff like social safety nets, massive justice reform, and massive election reform).
The Sword of Damocles is twofold: the revolution of the people, and the wrath of rival dictators. And it's not to be blunted, but to keep our officials serving the public rather than their own private interests.
🧵⚔
It is so pleasant to see that people in the US understand that.
This is the extreme example, but if you look at Russia, that separation between the public and the politics had happened a long time ago. Now it is impossible to even convince people that politics has to serve their interests, and not the rich. And we see with the invasion how these lofeviews eventually unfolds.
Wish Americans to be strong in their transformation into the real civil society. And wish you luck and to have required support for this transformation.
we shall destroy the democratic party and rebuild it in our image
It's fun watching you kids realize that the Democratic party isn't the place to go for real change. I was there after Kucinich lost the primary in 2000 and then when Gore gave up fighting for his votes.
Also: You have to vote for them no matter how much you hate them. If Fetterman wins his primary next time I MUST vote for him or I am letting Republicans win.
As opposed to Chuck Schumer who also lets Republicans win.
Helping a Fetterman win means not only does another republican win, but a republican now has power within the democratic party. Every Pelosi will have to lose an election, primary or general if we are to get a party that even desires to stop the Republicans.
I was there after Kucinich lost the primary in 2000 and then when Gore gave up fighting for his votes.
Me too grandpa.🙂
You kids and your Gores and Kuciniches. Pepperidge Farm remembers Mondale/Ferraro. Shit, we remember McGovern.
You got me on McGovern!
Its as if the oligarchs dont like it when a candidate that is not endorsed by them wins
DNC=Divide N Conquer
Don't forget Bernie.
DNC had the same exact response. With the same exact Trump.
Took the DNC ten fucking years to pull their head out of their ass long enough to complain about young men populism being the key to victory, despite literally pissing away all the young men populism voters they had with Bernie Sanders.
Thank fuck it's now blatantly obvious with Zohran.
I'm not confident they will get it this time. Or care
I mean really they don't, I'm pretty sure 180 just voted against the impeachment of Trump. Literally just waiting to see which shill geriatric they'll put up for 2028 and pull the same "vote for us or suffer Republicans" bs for the next election.
I keep saying that if progressives in the DNC are being constantly blocked and cheated out of power, they need to split off and make their own party. They're afraid that if they do, they'll lose a majority against Republicans, but that's already true because even bargain basement protection laws barely pass when the Dems do have a majority in congress, and they actively support bs Republican bills when a minority like right now.
Splitting would render the DNC useless and simultaneously tap into the huge block of nonvoters that would turnout like how Mamdani's voter base was largely a grassroots campaign.
Oh I agree completely. Just to clarify: The DNC absolutely will not get it or care. This is what I was describing as more "apparant" now.
So funny to see in real time the difference between their phony outrage over Trump’s arguably monstrous policies, VS their genuine fear over a socialist winning a mayoral race.
This is why everyone who claims the way to fix Dems is via primaries is wrong. Dems will lie, cheat, or simply not hold primaries altogether, rather than risk an actual leftist winning the nomination.
I still think we should support those that do primary if just to show the flippant double standards.
Plus it’s good if some of them win and pull the party in a reasonable direction. And having decent people in government is always nice.
The structural flaws in our elections that force us into a two-party system are deeply entrenched and they aren’t going to change until this place burns down and starts over. If you aren’t willing to vote for a politician with good priorities because they were nominated by the democratic party, you can still be an influential voice but come election time the system is already designed to ignore your vote.
I've heard the "we should primary them and pull them in a direction"
And after a few cycles of this I realized why the Democratic icon is an ass: Because they're stubborn, ornery, and will refuse to understand.
We are entirely fucked.
Donald Trump is useful to the real power.
getting pretty close to time to just start referring to the DNC as fascist adjacent. playing lame duck to this particular psychopath is way too old and fucking irresponsible a decade later.
especially when they pull this crap at the same time
Nationalism ✔️ imperialism ✔️ mixed economy for the benefit of the bourgeoisie ✔️ labor suppression ✔️ caters to middle class&petty bourgeois ✔️
I hope you never thought these people were there for you. At least after the age of about 22, 23?
you're right, it was exactly 23 for me. how did you know? did we get the same radicalization update from the Clinton family trying to make the Whitehouse a family home like the Bush's did?
Did the DNC say something about Mamdani?
Did hitler murder anybody?
An extreme example, sure, but if you control an apparatus, how much responsibility should you take for their actions?
I was just asking because I literally didn't know what this was referring to.
It's pretty much covered in these articles. There are more, but this should give you an overview.
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/zohran-mamdani-democratic-party-establishment/
https://www.axios.com/2025/06/26/democrats-zohran-mamdani-meltdown-new-york
Well leading up to the election they surely had indicated their pick was Cuomo. I'm not sure if this is about policy as much as the leadership assumes brand recognition from a previously electable candidate is more important than anything else.
In the aftermath the only concrete information was the two representatives that said they still didn't like him. There's reports of some rich dudes thinking about throwing money behind Cuomo or even Adams, but I didn't see concrete outcomes on that.
It's clear they wanted a different outcome, but I'm not so sure I'm seeing this "party melting down" people are declaring. I'll agree when significant Democrats continue to undermine and go so far as to try to make Cuomo happen despite the results, but for now I'll reserve judgement.
If they're not with Zohran, they're against Democracy.
I mean this is kind of obvious at this point that the democrats and the republicans are both anti-democracy, just one covertly and the other overtly. But still. I want more people getting loud and angry at anti-democracy democrats.