I highly doubt the left will do anything uncivil. How can they win back the country? Is it too late?

  • paddirn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    90
    ·
    1 month ago

    As an American, I expected most Americans to be at least semi-rational and to recognize what a threat to democracy and our way of life that Trump is. I expected most Republicans to just vote for him out of reflex, but otherwise the rest of America would rise up in our hour of need to vote against this and save us all from this idiocy.

    Nope. There was just more people lined up to vote for more idiocy. We failed the world. I’d say I’m sorry, but I don’t think that’ll help. This is America.

    • Illogicalbit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 month ago

      Agree, and sadly he won the popular vote too (so far). It’s really bleak how many people don’t vote at all.

    • Mostly_Gristle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      The frustrating thing is that Trump didn’t even get more votes this election than he did last election. There wasn’t a bunch of new Trump voters that came out of the woodwork and turned the tide. He was absolutely beatable. He only won because 15 million of the people who voted for Biden last election just didn’t bother this time.

      • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        A lot of progressive people also moved out of red states after all of the different nonsense happening in them. We won’t know until the 2030 census if they actually do that accurately unlike the 2020 census.

      • paddirn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Democratic voters just aren’t dependable, or the causes that Democrats tend to champion don’t provide them any benefits. Yes, it’s often the right thing to do to champion their rights or causes, but when the time comes and their help is needed, they’re seemingly nowhere to be found because things apparently weren’t interesting enough.

    • MataVatnik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      They all voted with their wallets. It’s really simple. That’s how these people are able to come into power.

      • alleycat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Pretty dystopic that you post this quote, because it is doctored to include catholics. Niemöller’s wife explicitly stated that he never included them in his poem. Source: https://martin-niemoeller-stiftung.de/martin-niemoeller/was-sagte-niemoeller-wirklich

        Martin Niemöllers zweite Frau (seit 1971), Sibylle von Sell  schreibt dazu am 23.4.2000 in h-holocaust https://www.h-net.org/~holoweb/ :.“ The trouble with Martin Niemoeller’s „famous quotation“ is that he never wrote it down – which enabled  so many hitchhikers  over the years to „put themselves on the waggon“. In his  „Confession of Guilt“  (as he called it himself: Schuldbekenntnis in German) the Communists came first, then the Trade Unionists and then the Socialists and then the Jews. NO ONE ELSE.”

      • Serinus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        Just be grateful if you’re not in one of the first groups. I spoke up as loudly as I could.

    • gramie@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      The problem is that nowhere is safe now. I’m Canadian, and I wish I had somewhere to go. And just imagine how the poor sods in Palestine, Ukraine, and so many other suffering countries, are feeling right now.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if Vladimir Putin’s armies weren’t occupying large swaths of Eastern Europe by the end of this term.

      • TehBamski@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I wouldn’t be surprised if Vladimir Putin’s armies weren’t occupying large swaths of Eastern Europe by the end of this term.

        And Russia will use, what? Tanks from the Cold War?! There have been many reports from professional defense intel groups and countries that report that Russia has been struggling to keep fighting the invasion of Ukraine. They’ve had to resort to asking North Korea to send thousands of troops to fight in Ukraine. With the weapons that the EU, Australia, Britain, and the US have been sending them, Russia is going to have a tremendously difficult time fighting back. Let alone, invading another country.

        There’s a theory going around that China might take action and ‘take back’ what they claim to have been their territory from the early 1800s. Either they capture Serbia as a whole, southern Serbia, or a large portion of Eastern Russia. Which might look like the northern point of Lake Baikal to Uda Gulf or the push further and take Taul Bay. The southern part of the Kamchatka peninsula would be advantageous to them. The US and others would have a harder time “controlling” China’s fleet of ships if they had ports and bases up there as well.

        I can only hold onto fool’s faith for so long, that the world doesn’t experience another major war.

        • Fonzie!@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 days ago

          How about Russia using US military aid?

          Trump has stated he would talk with Russia about solving the Ukraine problem…

  • Myro@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    1 month ago

    I think this is going to be the end of the USA as we know it. After this period, democracy will be significantly impacted.

    • Stovetop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      52
      ·
      1 month ago

      The western world as a whole should be terrified. There has been a sharp dip towards conservatism that will only accelerate with Trump back at the helm in the US. Brexit didn’t occur in a vacuum.

  • Sgt_choke_n_stroke@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    1 month ago

    Facism is capitalism in decay. America just proved that the decay is rapid.

    Liberal institutions just paved the way for facism to take root.

    • M600@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’d like to learn more about

      Facism is capitalism in decay.

      Is that just a think people say or are their studies or books about this?

      • Sgt_choke_n_stroke@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 month ago

        Facism is a reaction to the institutional failures of capitalism brought about by many scholars. Mainly brought about by the working class left behind looking for a change to the system.

        Places in history where it happened

        italy (1920’s) voters wanted a stronger economy with trains to run on time germany (1920’s) voters wanted a stronger economy without a destabilization of currency

  • ashok36@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    1 month ago

    What do you mean? Trump won decisively. Electoral, popular, in the senate, etc…

    You’re really asking, “how does a minority continue to exist in the face of a fascist majority?”

    The answer is, generally, they don’t.

    • orcrist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      I think that is an oversimplification. He won the popular vote, but that’s the majority of voters, not the majority of people, right? So we cannot accurately say that the majority is fascist. We can only say that the voting majority is fascist.

      And then we need to look at who was conned, and how. Of course people who got conned need to work harder to avoid that in the future. We all agree on that. At the same time, the con artists and the people who enable the con, we also need to identify them and figure out what’s making them successful. If we talk about major newspapers and TV networks failing to cover how bad Trump actually was, or putting Harris on unrealistic pedestal, newspaper owners refusing to allow newspaper editors to endorse a candidate, the way Fox News preys on people who grew up trusting TV news and now have only watched Fox for the last two decades, open lies about who’s eating cats and dogs, a DNC that pushes centrist candidates even after 2016 when the weakness was exposed, and it’s clear that many left-wing voters are wildly unhappy, those are all things that smaller groups have done to help create the situation that we saw yesterday. And that’s just a short list.

      So what I hope we can do, is I hope we can avoid saying something trite like, this is what the American people wanted, full stop. If you want to make that a conversation starter, go for it. But it shouldn’t be a dismissive conversation ender, because it ignores what actually happened and What will continue to happen in the future.

      • AndrewZabar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 month ago

        He won the popular vote, but that’s the majority of voters, not the majority of people, right?

        Right, the rest are just so lazy and consumed by apathy that they could not be bothered to vote when THESE were the stakes. I think we can confidently rule them out for any advocacy for our freedom.

  • Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    This isn’t sides anymore.

    Until America wants to be tolerant of more than intolerance, it seems it will vote with its penises, wallets, and weapons.

    Edit: unnecessary apostrophe

  • Fester@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 month ago

    Hope there will be a legitimate election in 2028, and show up to the fucking primary before it and in 2026.

    I think Trump won because of the economy. Yes, he has a rabid base that really does want his fascism, but the voters who pushed him over the edge are ones suffering because inflation and the wealth gap that has just been allowed to increase unimpeded. Those voters don’t want fascism - they’re just dumb AF and don’t pay attention. They just voted for “change.”

    These problems will only increase over the next 4 years, so there will be another opportunity defy the status quo in 2028. We had a chance and failed to do in 2016. We came closer in 2020. We didn’t have a real primary in 2024. When we get to 2028, it’s time to fucking do it.

      • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 month ago

        Here’s the thing… He said he would bring change. Biden, and Harris after, both said that things would basically stay the same. For a lot of people, that’s an active issue they’re dealing with everyday.

        The politicians just don’t understand because they haven’t lived like normal people for decades, if ever given the history and family of many of them.

  • EnderMB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 month ago

    Go to your Democratic party and demand change.

    Find a candidate that will stand on the basis of free healthcare, equal rights, the right to union, enforcing a higher minimum wage, enforcing paid sick leave and a minimum of 20 days holiday a year, and committing to lowering the cost of living.

    Once someone stands up for this, push them to the moon for the next four years. Tell anyone else NOT on this platform to fuck off.

    Essentially, America needs a Project 2029.

    • skysurfer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 month ago

      I like the sentiment, but that is predicated on there being another election under the same rule set which would allow either party to win. If things come to pass with the unitary executive theory outlined in Project 2025 and the dictatorship desires that have already been declared, makes it unlikely votes will work to change political parties going forward…

      • Snapz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        And the “deep state”, meaning actual subject matter experts doing their jobs throughout government for years, regardless of current administration, are all going to be replaced by kid rock and vaping young republicans fresh from dropping out of their second semester in at The University of Southern Alabama State.

        That’s who’s going to be the dude inspecting your meat for e.coli and signing off on the clinical trials for you’ve perception meds - Gunner, Hunter and Ryder.

        Really don’t think anyone is considering the reality of how deeply fucked we’re going to be looking at the front door for obvious signs of trouble, while they leaf the crawlspace with fertilizer and gasoline and kick in the backdoor with flamethrowers in hand.

      • Murkbeard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Some of this outcome will depend on how effectively they execute. But let’s say they do. Then. in the paraphrased words of JFK:

        “He who makes reform impossible. makes revolution inevitable.”

        Now that isn’t a pretty future, or a nice future. But that’s what happens when a people resigns itself to performing democracy instead of protecting it.

    • pjwestin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’ll also add that you need to primary basically anyone that has been in politics for more than 15 years. There is just too much, “common sense,” in this party that is just wrong. In 2016, it was smart to run a centrist campaign that tried to move moderates away from Trump, and it failed. In 2024, they ran the same fucking campaign, and it failed.

      There are well intentioned people that somehow still think that the 1992, third-way strategy will deliver gains through incrementalism, and it’s just not going to happen. Primary them, so that they at least have to contend with the new political realities. Trump picked up working class voters across across all demographics, not just the white working class. Everyone wants change; offer real change.

  • Willie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    1 month ago

    Wait 2 years, and hopefully put people who will mitigate the damage into the positions listed on your ballot. All you can do now as a law abiding citizen is wait.

    • intelisense@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      1 month ago

      I fear that the next election will be more ceremony than democracy once they have finished rigging it. At this point, I expect a third term for Trump - if he lives that long.

      • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 month ago

        He won’t. The goal was to get Vance in all along. He’s a docile pet for Thiel and co to implement their fascist agenda.

      • Willie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 month ago

        Your fear of a 3rd term makes it all the more important to vote in your future elections. As the two term limit is imposed through a constitutional amendment, they’d need to create another constitutional amendment to reverse it. They need 2/3rds of both the house and the senate to agree to even get the ball rolling, as such, it is vital that you do what you can to prevent them from acquiring those numbers to avoid that situation.

        If it did happen, I wonder if the democrats would run Obama again.

        • intelisense@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 month ago

          I don’t think they need a constitutional amendment, just Scotus ruling that it only applies to consecutive terms, for example.

          • Cubes@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            I know the supreme Court is heavily biased at the moment, but what possible logic could they use to get out of the 22nd amendment saying “no person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice”? They can’t just add words there, and it isn’t ambiguous at all

        • Spraynard Kruger@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 month ago

          If Republicans remove term limits, it would be amazing to see Obama instantly get reelected for a third term in 2028.

          That being said, the USA may not get another legitimate election (help us).

          If it did happen, I wonder if the democrats would run Obama again.

  • linearchaos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m not sure that we do. Not in our lifetimes anyway.

    With a functional justice department we’d have a chance. There’s nothing to stop them from tweaking the electoral lines. There’s nothing to stop them from not certifying an election. We’re about to have the scotus filled with young like-minded Republicans. We’re about to have every federal judge biased for them.

    Even having both sides of Congress the best thing we could do would be to status quo because every time a veto is overturned the scotus could just stamp it down as unconstitutional.

    The president has God King status, he can have opponents jail for executed.

    The thing is even if none of these things were in play, The popular vote just voted for a dictatorship. He was utterly and absolutely clear and anyone that says he was joking around doesn’t actually believe that they’re just too embarrass socially to announce that they themselves are racist/fascist/misogynist. There is nothing here to win back. We’re better than 50% rotten to the core and those people aren’t going away.

    Even this election wasn’t right versus left it’s right versus more right. If you put a true left candidate in they’re just going to get murdered. (That may or may not be literal)

    • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      There’s nothing to stop them from tweaking the electoral lines.

      Given that the Democrats have known the districts have been gerrymandered to hell and back for decades now, why haven’t they spent any time at all doing their own redistricting, rather than strongly pushing agendas that affect 0.5% of the country?

      • linearchaos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        Oh dems have. But you have to have control of the state to do that. Hogan (R governor) tried his damnest to unwrap central Maryland from Western Maryland.

      • NateNate60@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        The first bill filed in the House of Representatives and Senate after the 2020 election which resulted in the Democratic Party gaining nominal control of Congress and the White House was a bill to ban partisan gerrymandering, require independent redistricting committees, forbid states from imposing onerous voter registration or identification regulations, limit the influence of rich donors and wealthy PACs in federal elections, and generally just make the process of voting better for Americans.

        This bill was called the Freedom to Vote Bill and was numbered H.R. 1 and S. 1 for the House and Senate versions, respectively. It passed the House of Representatives in 3 March 2021 and received unanimous support among the 50 Democratic senators when the Senate held its vote on 22 June 2021. The bill was blocked from advancing due to a Republican filibuster.

        On 3 January 2022, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York announced plans to abolish the filibuster for legislation in order to allow this bill to advance. President Joe Biden had previously indicated he would sign the bill. Schumer made his move on 19 January 2022, moving to change the filibuster rule to require continuous talking, i.e. in order to filibuster a bill, someone must make a speech and keep talking for the duration of the filibuster, with the filibuster ending when they finish talking. Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin, members of the Democratic Party representing Arizona and West Virginia, respectively, got squeamish and voted against the change. All Republican senators voted against the change. This doomed the bill’s passage through Congress as the filibuster could be maintained indefinitely by the Republicans.

        The bill died when Congress was dissolved pending the November 2022 general election, in which Republicans won a narrow majority in the House of Representatives.

        Manchin and Sinema’s terms with both expire when the new Congress is convened on 3 January 2025 following the November 2024 general election. Manchin did not seek re-election in yesterday’s election and will retire at the expiration of his term. Sinema was forced out of the Democratic Party and originally planned to stand as an independent before deciding against it. She will retire at the end of her term.

        Due to the innate malapportionment of the Senate, it is exceedingly unlikely that the Democratic Party will ever regain majority control of the Senate.

        So I point my finger at these two idiots for sinking American democracy as we know it.

        • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Even that doesn’t address the mess that exists today. It’s a great example of why they keep losing. They’re going to make it impossible to gerrymander after the lines have already been redrawn to benefit the Republicans? Why? Why would they do that? They’re essentially committing to always fighting an uphill battle for the rest of their days. I respect the principle, but not the approach. You cant lock a scale while it’s broken and then expect it to measure correctly. They need to pull their heads out of their asses and start playing to win. To start recognizing the strategies which continually defeat them, and start countering with some equally aggressive strategies of their own, or their time is done.

          • NateNate60@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 month ago

            I think I phrased my comment wrong on this. It doesn’t ban the act of gerrymandering, it bans the results of gerrymandering. Gerrymandered maps would need to be redrawn had the bill been enacted.

            This bill was no slouch. It directly abridged several states’ voter suppression laws. Had the bill passed, the next phase would have been people being able to use the federal courts to strike back against these incompatible laws.

            That being said, if you were the leader of the Democratic Party, what would you have done? Not intended as rhetorical snark, I’m just curious as to what other ideas there are.

            • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              Okay, then that sounds reasonable. Regarding your question, I suppose I would have held a primary and put someone on the final ballot who the people voted for. That would have required acknowledging before the primaries that Biden wasn’t fit to continue, which from what I’ve read, they did have full knowledge of, but refused to act upon.

              That’s easier said than done though. Right? Like I’m not directly exposed to the corruption inherent in the system and the demands placed upon them in order to secure enough campaign funds to have a chance at all. Although I don’t think sticking to the actual system as it was designed would cause the loss of donors.

              Oh, and I’d get rid of the super delegates. In short, I’d stop trying to control who gets on the final ballot to push my party agenda, and instead let the people actually elect the leader they want. Again though, that’s probably a lot easier said than done, and I’m an outsider not privy to the dealings that take place behind closed doors.

              • NateNate60@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                I have to agree with you there. I think the Democratic Party was scared of inviting infighting with a primary contest which Harris would probably win anyway, but you’re right—Harris had no mandate from the party membership and even a lightning-round primary conducted online would have been better.

    • The Stoned Hacker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’m not sure that we do. Not in our lifetimes anyway.

      I don’t understand this sentiment as I’m hearing it a lot.

      We’ve elected a fascist into the highest office. We’re cooked. There’s a lot we can do right now, but the most important thing is organizing. Organizing your community, your family, your town/village/city. Organizing mutual aid, direct action, and resistance. How much more do we need until people actually get off their asses and start doing something about it? Like the time for peaceful and democratic means of avoiding fascism was before the election. But a fascist is now in power, so are we going to wait until the troops are rolling down the street to do anything? I’m not saying go out and just commit wanton acts of violence in the name of revolution, but the longer we wait the more difficult it will become to get organized, involved, and yes armed.

      • linearchaos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 month ago

        I don’t understand this sentiment

        There’s a lot we can do right now, but the most important thing is organizing

        Organizing? Resistance? Armed? That’s honestly insane.

        You’re going to organize against half the US? Gonna start a civil war with every last (fully armed) enemy in your own backyard?

        They could blockade cities from food and shut down any movement in 3 days.

        The Civil War worked efficiently because there was a battlefront. This is more of a Republican Soup.

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      He should at least transfer a shitton of military gear to Ukraine in the coming days. Not little stuff either.

      Top-tier tanks, jets, warships, and more. Enough to absolutely crush the Russian war machine. Basically everything shy of nukes and loads of it.

  • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    1 month ago

    They just did. They’ll happily lie in the bed they shat in at first. By the time they realize their mistake, it will be too late.

    • MataVatnik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Yup, progressive politics in the US has been an exception not the rule. After about ~30 years we are just going back to business as usual. People forget segregation and women not being able to have their own bank accounts and abortion being illegal (the first time), is not something from ancient history. And before that the country literally went to war over itself over the idea that they should be able to own other huma s as property

      • angrystego@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        These things are all true. But the history tended to go the progress direction. Slavery was abolished, so was segregation, women got more and more of their rights. Things were gradually and often painfully getting better. Now it regresses.

        • MataVatnik@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          It’s going to take us at least a couple decades to get back on track. At that point I’ll be near retirement age. Yeah history progresses, but for me personally it’s over.

  • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    1 month ago

    Realistically? It’s too late.

    We now have an ultra-conservative SC for the rest of our lives. The Republican party openly stated and ran on making fundamental changes to our government if they won the House/Senate/Presidency and to “defeat the enemy within”.

    It doesn’t even really matter if the suffering that is coming shocks our society into rebounding in 4 years. The locked in SC and fundamental changes to our government will have already been set in place. Government departments will be run by appointees with absolutely no experience. Entire departments could be re-staffed with partisan political appointees if we are to believe the words of some of the people Trump promised to appoint. We have been placed squarely on the path to decline. That decline won’t happen overnight, but in our lifetimes it will become undeniable. We will probably barely recognize this country by the end of our lives.

    This election determined the political order we will live under for the rest of our lives.

    Buy a gun. Try to find happiness within your immediate sphere. And stay safe, if you can. Very, very few people will come out on top in the scenario we now find ourselves in. Give it a few years and you’ll see. They have total control now, so there’s no one else to blame for the decline that’s essentially guaranteed to become apparent in the near future. But I’m sure if they do fail, immigrants will be at the top of the blame list.

    It was a worthy experiment while it lasted.