• FuzzyRedPanda@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Screw this meme format that perpetuates the normalization and acceptance of christianity. Fixed it.

    • poke@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Would probably flow more naturally and avoid unwanted conversation if you used “on earth” or something else universally experienced instead of “in athieism” which leads to the same problem you were complaining about but from a different group.

        • poke@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Sorry if I’m being unintentionally obtuse, this is a genuine question, what’s not normalized about it? I can’t remember the last time I had a conversation about my faith or lack thereof. Could just be my location and circles I hang out with, but I don’t know many people, especially my age or younger, who really care one way or another.

  • jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Something that really impressed me with Bernie was that in 2015 he gave a speech at Liberty University.

    Liberty is the among the most conservative of conservative “Christian” colleges. As surprised as I was that they allowed him to speak, I was more surprised that Bernie went. I was raised in Christian fundamentalism. I know how hard it is to break down the barriers between you and people who belive you’re going to hell for A.) Being Jewish, and B.) supporting ‘baby murderin’.

    That’s a wide gap but he tried to bridge it anyway and find common ground. I thought he did a damn good job. He showed more backbone than any other major player in the democratic party when everyone else thought it was a waste of time to talk to anyone who isn’t a “swing state” voter.

    It was one of the reasons I voted for him twice. It was clear that Bernie was/is interested in the welfare of all Americans and that he wanted to be president for all Americans. Even ones he might have significant ideological differences with. The Democrats can’t whine about their dwindling support when they’re too chicken shit to go talk to people in Red states. Trump is and will contibue to be a collosal failure as president, but he proved one thing for certain. The days of the “safe” candidate being a winning bet are gone.

  • WolfdadCigarette@threads.net@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    134
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    For anyone considering complaining about the complaining, now is absolutely the time to bitch and moan about the DNC and all of their failures. It’s 4 years until the next presidential election (hopefully) so if ever there were a time to complain, and execute the ultrawealthy, it is now.

  • kibiz0r@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    2008 DNC was oblivious to Obama until the caucuses started, cuz polling (except for one agency) was consistently missing his popularity with first-timers, so they didn’t get much of a chance to stop him.

    This was also before Citizens United, so there’s that too…

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 day ago

    Did you see what happened in 2008?

    A progressive won and if he hadn’t ignored the DNC because they screwed him he could have changed leadership and made lasting change to the party!

    The same people wouldn’t be in charge and they wouldn’t be grifting their cut off billionaire’s bribes.

    For the people running the DNC the only real loss would be a progressive winning, that’s why they keep taking steps since then to ensure there’s no chance of their pick losing again .

    We ain’t fighting the same fight as them. They’re fine with a republican winning, hell, it drives up donations.

    • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      23 hours ago

      The DNC allowed Obama to be the nominee because they were assured he would back off on progressive policy and institute corporate friendly programs like the ACA. For the DNC him being the first black president was a suitable surrogate to progressive change.

        • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Obama chose to oust Dean over the public option, which facilitated Lieberman’s success in that endeavour, so yeah that is accurate to say.

          Howard Dean was the hiccup in the DNC after 2004 when Kerry and Edwards went for the ticket. He got control of the DNC (being 3rd) and got the party to run on healthcare reform and a public option in all 50 states. The moment Obama took control Dean was removed and the signal was given the public option would not be fought for.

        • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          That’s the thing that’s hard to determine: if he gave up because of Lieberman or if Lieberman was the cover for backing off.

          I didn’t think so at the time, but given the track record and actions of the party since then? I kinda do feel Obama wasn’t so all-in for it.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            20 hours ago

            No, it was pretty clear. And if it was a cover then it was the party telling Obama he couldn’t have it. He’d never have proposed it if he didn’t want it on the table.

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    Pretty sure only like 16 Million people voted in the 2024 Primary

    Only like 36 Million in 2020

    Instead of complaining about how unfair it is why dont people actually try organizing for a candidate and voting in primaries?

    Or better yet, just give dems + indie a supermajority and they’ll reform voting.

    • Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      19 hours ago

      The Democrats can reform their primary process any way they want any time they want. They are a private organization.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        And they are. In Kansas and Hawaii since 2020 they’ve used RCV for DNC Primaries. Maine, a blue state, also practices RCV for the general election.

        On the other hand, many Republicans have directly opposed RCV.

        And the majority of these reforms are brought about by Petition, including the ballot measures.

        • Tinidril@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 hours ago

          They are, but not nearly enough. The entire primary system is setup to be easily manipulated by the party leadership and their puppets on cable news.

    • danciestlobster@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      19 hours ago

      Also, this isn’t exactly a fair statement since the primary was declared over before the majority of states even got to participate. Yes there is low turnout sometimes in states that get to participate, but there are many of us who would like to and can’t, hence feeling like it isn’t exactly a fair or representative process

  • Did the DNC not do anything to knee cap Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel in 2008? Was before I was paying any attention to politics, so actually just asking a question rather than trying to insinuate anything.