this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2024
498 points (97.5% liked)

Political Memes

9437 readers
3116 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes 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 misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow 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

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] can@sh.itjust.works 69 points 10 months ago (4 children)

This was really well written but I fear the people it needs to reach aren't going to read far enough to get the point.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 23 points 10 months ago

It misses the part where Jill Stein is completely full of shit. She's in bed with Trump and Putin.

At least Nader was genuine.

[–] Snowpix@lemmy.ca 15 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Nah, they were never interested in being convinced otherwise in the first place. Feeling smug and superior because their hands are clean (or so they delusionally believe) is far more important than facing the harsh reality that their third party vote is doing more harm than good and that a perfect candidate has not and will never exist.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 4 points 10 months ago

I don't think they even open images, they just reply to inbox messages

[–] Hikermick@lemmy.world 62 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I too voted for Ralph Nader in 2000 but for different reasons. I too regretted it. If you are waiting for the ideal candidate that 100% aligns with your beliefs you're going to be waiting a long time.

[–] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

I wasn't paying attention back then so much-- what was Nader offering as a green that gore wasn't? Didn't gore make environmental policies part of his campaign? He just didn't go far enough or something?

[–] Hikermick@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

For the record it was before Gore's Inconvenient Truth book and not much was being said about global warming. The reason I voted for Nader was a last minute decision out of frustration. My wife and I both registered Democrats went to our polling place where we had voted in every election only to find out we were no longer on the registered voters list. We were eventually given provisional ballots and because I was frustrated voted for Nader. I mistakenly thought the federal government ran the elections. Later after the shenanigans in Florida I found out the states ran their own for the most part. The economy was so good at the time I didn't think there was a chance Bush would ever get elected

[–] frezik@midwest.social 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

In many ways, the Clinton Administration is when Democrats started giving up the Overton Window to Republicans. The trend of "self-regulating industries" went into full swing with things like the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Not Reagan or the first Bush. Clinton.

FISA, the court that rubber stamps warrents for wire tapping, became a rubber stamping operation under Clinton. I'd have to dig it up, but there's actually an ancient freerepublic.org thread where they hope Bush undoes this. Instead, Bush ignored it completely while freerepublic.org cheered him on.

This is all to say that when Nader said both sides are the same, there were a lot of people on the left who agreed.

Bush then takes less then a year to show how utterly wrong that was, and it didn't even start with 9/11.

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Tale as old as time.

Democrat makes moves to the center.

Leftists become disillusioned

Say both parties are the same

Republican gets elected

Leftists learn that what they though was "right wing" was only the tip of the iceberg

when put in power, actual Republicans do things far worse things than Leftists even imagined were possible

[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 51 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Dare you to post this on lemmy.ml

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 47 points 10 months ago (1 children)

"Removed: misinformation, imperialism, racism"

[–] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 16 points 10 months ago

"removed: rule 1"

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Oof... Al Gore, of An Inconvenient Truth (2006 so he was late to the 2000 party) didn't care about the environment enough...

My head.... :(

[–] RunawayFixer@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

Al Gore had already made climate change a political topic in 1981. He also had a major part in the roll out the early internet. The guy was a visionary and way ahead of his time in so many ways. Thinking about what could have been, hurts indeed.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] ramenshaman@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Old internet lingo for "quoted for truth"

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Hell, I never vote for. Only against.

-- W. C. Fields

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 5 points 10 months ago

SCOTUS: Yeah... the votes mattered there!

[–] BartyDeCanter@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 10 months ago

If I was a much better writer, I could have written this. Which is to say, I too regret voting for Nader in that election and will never make that mistake again. My only redeeming thought is that while my state was close, it did go for Gore.

I guarantee there were enough voters in Florida with the same regrets to easily have put Gore in office if they could redo it. Do you think there are any who wish they could have voted Green instead?

[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Well it likely wouldn't have changed anything on stem cell research. Induced stem cells are a thing and despite plenty of research we're still quite far away from really being able to grow them into whatever we want.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago (2 children)

And yet research was blocked for quite a few years for religious reasons. You may be comfortable with where we are now but what if we were ten years ahead of that

[–] frezik@midwest.social 2 points 10 months ago

And from what I understand, the methods had to work around the ban. We'd still prefer to use the more straightforward methods if there was federal funding for it.

[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Me being comfortable with the state of research and the fact that having more cell lines would've likely done nothing for our current understanding are two different things. The frank truth is, we're far from even understanding how epigenetics factor in differentiation between induced pluripotent stem cells and embryonic ones and which one is better for getting the results you want. The expense of the medium to grow the cells and the fact that it takes a month to see results of what you're doing, the economics, is far more impactful on why we haven't seen progress than the availability of cell lines.

[–] BallsandBayonets 1 points 10 months ago

Oh, so this is the person who paid the Supreme Court to give the Presidency to the losing candidate in 2000! At last we have the culprit!