President Donald Trump flubbed the introduction of Finnish President Alexander Stubb on Monday during the meeting with European leaders who support Ukraine. Trump was announcing each leader, who then would make a comment or thank him for the invitation. He gave each official a little compliment. As ...
    • BigMacHole@sopuli.xyz
      29·
      2 months ago

      I CANT believe you DIDNT vote Blue No Matter Who!

      -People voting for INDEPENDENT CUOMO over Democrat MAMDANI!

      • prole
        4·
        2 months ago

        -People voting for INDEPENDENT CUOMO over Democrat MAMDANI!

        Who are you even talking to? Do you know what website you’re on?

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      16·
      2 months ago

      Keeps’ blaming the base for the candidate staying pro-genocide. Precisely what mechanism should be be used to “move” 6 million voters on their anti-genocide position?

      Pretty bad look. Makes you look like a genocide apologist. You should just stop.

        • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
          13·
          2 months ago

          You keep trying to blame the voters. Harris was the problem. Blaming the voters (which you did in real time in 2024) handed the election to Trump. You can’t, nor should you “move” 6 million people onto the wrong side of history by asking them to support a genocide. You might be able to move a candidate. Blaming voters is a total and complete distraction.

          You (and those who adopt the same strategy as you) are the reason we ended up with Trump. And this toxic, destructive mindset of yours needs to be buried so we can actually have a chance of stopping Trump in the future.

          • Zeke@fedia.io
            38·
            2 months ago

            Voting red or not voting is still the reason Trump got into office. He supports the genocide, but ok, HaRriS BaD. Note I don’t like Democrats either, but I don’t agree with throwing votes away because of one issue that was worse on the other side. The people who didn’t vote or voted the other way supported genocide by letting Trump win.

            • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
              9·
              2 months ago

              But this is entirely the point. Blaming the voters gives you the opportunity to wash your hands and absolve blame, but it doesn’t get us any closer to winning the election in 2024. Not now, and not then, in 2024, when it was happening in real time.

              There was one way to beat Trump in 2024: Get more votes than him. Its obvious now that the argument “less bad” wasn’t good enough to convince 6 million people to show up. We ran the experiment. We got the data. We know the outcomes.

              If you, or SatansMaggotyCumFart, or anyone else wants to keep defending this approach, the onus is on you to provide a mechanism for how this argument gets Harris 6 million more votes.

              Satan’ thinks they have an axe to grind because they were couching their rhetoric with the expectation of failure from the onset. The argument that “less bad” should be good enough is bad politics and doesn’t work because it doesn’t convince any new voter who didn’t already accept that argument to show up. The more that argument shows up, the more people think that this failed approach to electoralism has legs, the further we get from actually being able to beat the Trumps of the world.

              Harris offered voters nothing, and we were quite literally begging her to throw a fucking crumb of rhetoric saying she would stop arms to Israel, because it was obvious to anyone with eyes that she was going to lose the election if she didn’t move on this issue in August. And Satans approach to that point was to push those who were critical of kamala FURTHER out of the party; basically the same treatment the DNC gave to Palestinians at the convention.

              Don’t be like Satan. We need to actually win, and Satan’s approach will lose us another election. Criticize candidates, intensely. FORCE them into positions that can actually get them elected. Demand that candidates move to where their voters are, because there is quite literally no mechanism to move 6 million voters into supporting genocide, and if you promote that, you are a bad person.

            • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
              6·
              2 months ago

              Good. Maybe go away from ever commenting again too.

              {What do you think the point of reposting hard evidence of your toxicity is?}

          • prole
            2·
            2 months ago

            It really must be difficult to do the mental gymnastics required to absolve yourself from the key role that you played in the rise of American fascism… I mean, I get why. It must feel awful to know the truth.

            So blame everyone but yourself.

            • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
              1·
              2 months ago

              So what exactly is it you think you are accusing me of? Not voting sufficiently hard enough for Kamala? That I argued too strongly that Kamala wasn’t winning based on the data I had available and what analysis and inference I could develop?

              Or that I argued that she needed to do something different in her campaign to win based on where the electorate was at?

              Do you genuinely believe that because people pointed out that Kamala was running a disastrous campaign, that this was why she lost?

        • piefood@feddit.onlineEnglish
          4·
          2 months ago

          She wasn’t the only other choice. I had 4 choices, and a write in option. If you wanted the Democrats to continue to move to the right, you can just say that instead of making up excuses.

            • piefood@feddit.onlineEnglish
              4·
              2 months ago

              How many did Harris lose by? Was it enough that 3rd party votes mattered?

              I didn’t vote against Genocide and The War Machine because I thought we would win. I voted against them because they are evil.

              • SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.worldEnglish
                10·
                2 months ago

                I’m just wondering if they had a chance.

                If they lost by a couple percentage points it’s a lot different then if they only got a couple tenths of a point but I can tell by your dodging of the question what the answer is.

                • piefood@feddit.onlineEnglish
                  2·
                  2 months ago

                  Of course they never had a chance to win. Americans care more about their team winning, then they care about stopping things like Genocide or War. Always have, and probably always will.

              • prole
                3·
                2 months ago

                I didn’t vote against Genocide and The War Machine

                Keep desperately trying to convince yourself of that.

        • Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          2·
          2 months ago

          These idiot’s solution to the trolley problem is to complain about the lever and how there should be better level so it’s not their fault for not pulling the lever that was available.

      • piefood@feddit.onlineEnglish
        4·
        2 months ago

        I always find it telling when people blame the voters that couldn’t stomach voting for genocide, rather than blaming their candidates for chosing genocide.

        • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
          3·
          2 months ago

          Its extremely telling; but its also like, brainlet level stupid:

          Their argument is that 6 million voters needed to vote differently, on their own. Like think the process through. How the fuck do you make that happen? What is the mechanism that changes 6 million voters minds?

          There is no mechanism that changes the mind of 6 million people. That’s not how elections work. Period. And keeping insisting that the voters “just needed to vote differently”, ok, but how? How does SatansMaggotyCumFart change 6 million minds on the matter by just repeating “Trump worse”?

          You can change the mind of one person (the candidate, Harris). We could have moved Harris if she knew she didn’t have enough of the bases support on this issue. But Blue MAGA/ BNMW through the entire country to the wolves so they could wash their hands of responsibility.

          • piefood@feddit.onlineEnglish
            4·
            2 months ago

            I agree with you mostly, except for this part:

            We could have moved Harris if she knew she didn’t have enough of the bases support on this issue.

            I’m pretty sure the polling was out already, and she knew that she didn’t have support. But she cared more about money and building out the War Machine, than she cared about winning the election.

            • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
              2·
              2 months ago

              than she cared about winning the election.

              Like, I want to believe she wanted to win, but because of the BNMW/ Blue MAGA, and the censorship across media that resulted of this (I mean we saw it here, directly), she didn’t think she needed to earn the bases support.

    • Gates9@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      5·
      2 months ago

      I’m not putting my mark next to the name of someone who supports genocide, and Harris made it clear that her position was the same as Biden (“No daylight, kid”). It would be an act of tacit approval, and I would be complicit.

  • you_are_dust@lemmy.world
    73·
    2 months ago

    I love having an Alzheimer’s patient as president. We have a minimum age for president and there should be a maximum age too.

    • Lembot_0004@discuss.online
      38·
      2 months ago

      Age is a bad criterium. Some people become degenerates at 50. Others are degenerates during all their lives.

      But I know a secret question to detect geniuses: What is bigger, bela or covfefe?

    • Herbie@lemmy.world
      14·
      2 months ago

      I think whatever the average life expectancy is at the time of elections, the maximum age you can be president would be 10 years less. That way they have a decade to sit in the garbage world they created

      • felbane@lemmy.world
        9·
        2 months ago

        I think the maximum age for any federal office should be tied to the average national life expectancy in some way, so that if these fucks want to keep their office they have a vested interest in passing policy that makes life expectancy go up.

        • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.worldEnglish
          7·
          2 months ago

          This is the first time I’ve seen a comment about upper limits on age I could see making some amount of sense. Most of the other stuff boils down to bUt tEh gErOnTaCrAcY which is just so tiresome.

          This is something that this futurist can get behind, for sure. I am watching these current asshats working directly against increasing the average life expectancy right when I think we are right on the cusp of making massive breakthroughs.

  • zzx@lemmy.world
    1·
    2 months ago

    Okay then NVM lol sorry. To be fair you are still coming off as if you didn’t, and as if people SHOULDN’T vote with harm reduction in mind