• FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    ·
    3 months ago

    Do it, yah fucking whinny-ass man-child.

    Shut the fucking government down because you’re afraid of fucking democracy.

  • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    3 months ago

    I said it last shutdown but does nobody seem to notice that whenever we have a shutdown it’s because Republicans keep shitting their pants and then screaming about the smell?

    Every govt shutdown in my lifetime has been because of Republicans. These shutdowns impact millions of people yet I never see it brought up.

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      2 months ago

      They have extremely effective propaganda (fox) that just claims the exact opposite every time it happens and slightly more than half of the country’s land (not people) believe it.

      • UristMcHolland@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        People keep talking about fox news like that’s what the diehard rechugulacans are watching. They listened to their Cheeto dusted emperor and now they watch newsmax.

    • actually@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      3 months ago

      I don’t think they are conservatives, although they call themselves that. Democrats are conservatives.

      Classic conservatives conserve: this is a mob who could not individually list one thing they want to keep from changing. They want as much change that makes them the most money

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Preservation of an existing thing and conservative political ideology aren’t actually linked. No matter how much conservatives try to tell you they are. Classic Conservatism was just how 17th and 18th century political philosophers referred to monarchies and top down systems that impose order on the masses. This was in opposition to Classical Liberalism which was a bottom up imposition of order. I.e. by the people, for the people.

        In many ways the South came out of the revolution still subscribed to classical conservatism. They favored a heavy class system, different rules for the elite and workers, and were loathe to expand voting beyond the elite. Even after the civil war they made the antebellum period their golden age. It wasn’t until the post world war 2 era offered Neo-Liberalism that they really gave up trying to go back to the antebellum period. There were even slave-like conditions called peonage right up to the mid 1940s.

        One of the biggest differences in classical conservatism and liberalism was what they called, the state of nature. Liberals saw all men as inherently good, but taught to be evil by oppression and stressful environmental factors. Conservatives saw all men as inherently evil and in need of strong control. Their theories followed pretty well from those base assumptions. Although there was also a healthy dose of Divine Rule in conservatism.

        I’m mentioning this because I hope everyone reading this can realize the Republicans of the cold war, as racist and hateful as they were, were still inside classical liberalism. They still believed in democracy, rule by the people, for the people. Since the end of Bush’s presidency though they’ve increasingly decided classical conservatism is more attractive.

        • Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m mentioning this because I hope everyone reading this can realize the Republicans of the cold war, as racist and hateful as they were, were still inside classical liberalism. They still believed in democracy, rule by the people, for the people.

          Considering the war on drugs I question that. The war on drugs was just the new Jim Crow

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yup. But that was about minorities and leftists. As far as the general disposition of the working class, the Republicans were actually working for their votes. Nixon gave us OSHA as well as the war on drugs.

            Another factor I didn’t mention above is that the Republican party fundamentally changes in the 1960’s because of the Dixie Flip. That’s when they really became the party of the South. Before that the parties were far more mixed around geographically. Which is why I go from talking about the South and conservatives to talking about the Republicans.

      • Fedizen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        republicans are trying to conserve billionaires money, democrats are trying to conserve the larger federal system. Nobody is trying to fix the system atm.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    let the gov shutdown, lets see those stock prices tumble. You’d never get a better chance to let republicans shoot their own donors in the dick. Lets see spacex stop getting checks, stop paying the supreme court. The rule they’re using to “shut down” the government is likely unconstitutional anyway.

  • TrueStoryBob@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    3 months ago

    Please shut the government down… please, please, please… while your party controls a mere one half of one of a branch of the government, please shut the government down during an election cycle. Please, please, please do it.

    • Red_October@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      The problem with that is that Republicans are always saying that Government doesn’t work and the whole system is dysfunctional, so when they turn around and deliberately break it they’ll just tell their idiot constituents that they were obviously right the whole time.

    • beansbeansbeans@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Dems should threaten them with a good time. Say, sure, to vote you have to prove you’re a citizen… by showing your passport. More than half of these clowns haven’t ever left their trailer park towns.

  • rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    RealID for all. Free at point of service. Do it at the post office right next to the Postal Banking window.

    Done and done.

    • MadBigote@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      3 months ago

      I have always thought that the American voting system is… Odd? I read you need to register every now and then in order to be able to vote? In Mexico we all get an ID issued by the federal government as you turn 18, and it is valid for pretty much anything, including voting. It is valid for years, you can vote as long as you have it on your possession. Updating your address or getting a reposition is free, and we even now allow Mexicans living abroad ( undocumented or not) to vote.

      Granted, the system is not perfect, but I believe an important part of a democracy is to make participating in it as convenient as possible.

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        First of all, elections are overseen by each state individually. While there is Federal law involving elections, it’s up to the States to implement them. Due to the Electoral College, the Presidential Election is really a weighted combination of the results of 50 separate State elections (and DC). So ypu can argue that we really don’t have any national elections at all, so each state runs their own.

        Then, there is another complicating factor that there is no one piece of Federal ID that everyone is mandated to have. The closest thing is the Social Security Card, but that isn’t really supposed to be used as ID. Not everyone has a passport, and there is no national ID card. The closest thing we have to a universal ID is the driver’s license, but again that is managed on a state-by-state basis.

        The main argument here is that when someone registers to vote, they must submit proof of residence, but Federal law holds that they do not have to show proof of citizenship. They merely have to attest that they are a citizen, and lying on that form is a crime. Many states object to that. Some go as far as to say that if you do not bring your proof of citizenship whe you register to vote, they will only let you vote in Federal elections, not state ones.

        The fundamental question is: if you know you are a citizen but have lost both your passport and your birth certificate, should you be disenfranchised? Republicans clearly say “yes”.

        • MadBigote@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Here each state organizes their own elections as well, but the same ID is valid for those too.

          Oddly enough, I agree with the Republicans on this one: you should be a citizen in order to vote.

          • TheRealKuni@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 months ago

            Oddly enough, I agree with the Republicans on this one: you should be a citizen in order to vote.

            But you already have to be a citizen in order to vote. They’re arguing you need to prove citizenship to register to vote.

            Registering to vote shouldn’t be like applying for a passport. Declaring you are a citizen and facing criminal charges if you lie about it ought to be sufficient, especially given that we do not have any systemic issues with non-citizens voting.

            But of course, Republicans want their base to believe we have systemic issues with non-citizens voting, despite investigation after investigation finding this isn’t the case. Turns out there’s no good reason to potentially get yourself imprisoned or deported just to cast a ballot, and non-citizens aren’t idiots.

            Republicans want to make voting less accessible, because the more disadvantaged a person is the less likely they are to have the time and capacity to bring proof of citizenship to an office to register to vote, rather than just doing it online (as many states will let you do). And limiting voting access is always a winning strategy for conservatives.

      • Donebrach@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        It’s not odd when you take into account that the United States was founded with slavery of an entire race as a feature and a culture constantly fighting against the rights and privileges of non-white-males at every single juncture.

        This nation is founded on stolen land (just like Mexico) then the English and French and Spaniards systematically ran them off their original land and murderized them, then the English brought in more foreigners to subjugate instead.

        All to say, this country is founded on immense inhumane violence and we give everyone guns as a response.

        But ya know, gotta fly that confederate flag and be simultaneously pro federal oversight and anti federal oversight because brain-rotted-American-racist. (This is rhetorical, not a personal slight at you, op)

    • LordOfTheChia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yup, it’s interesting how so many of these universal ID for voting laws don’t also include an easy, convenient, and free means for all citizens to get IDs.

  • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 months ago

    They probably want to make the minimum age to vote 50 years old. That’s pretty sad.

  • Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    If they put human skin on the ventriloquist dummy from goosebumps, let it age 50 years, had its human son monitor it’s web traffic for porn browsing… What would that dummy look like?