this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2026
1330 points (90.9% liked)

Political Memes

11461 readers
1530 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

1) 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.

2) No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

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

4) No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

5) 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
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Wilco@lemmy.zip 8 points 2 days ago (5 children)

The problem is both sides ARE bad. Both ... two. The two party system is broken, our Constitution was not built to handle political parties and George Washington says he regrets they were not banned in the Constitution. He said that political parties would destroy the USA in his farewell speech to the nation. Independent parties are the only noncorrupt option ... but they are not viable in a two party system.

[–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 1 points 22 hours ago

Yep. That speech is up there with the warnings from Eisenhower and Kennedy.

Imagine mending all those issues. ... What a democracy USA could have...

[–] MerryJaneDoe@lemmy.world 15 points 2 days ago (2 children)

STAAAAP!

Yes, the elections are essentially broken. (I'm surprised that nobody has brought up Citizen's United.)

But that's the point. Make them work to rig the elections, don't just give up. The far right has spent billions (trillions?) to cast doubt on the system, to crush the democratic process.

If they are working that hard to undermine it, then there must be at least a shred of integrity left somewhere in that system. Voting in fair and free elections is the only thing that scares MAGA. If they are that frightened, shouldn't you get your ass out there and vote?

[–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 1 points 22 hours ago

then there must be

agents in that side too.

[–] UPGRAYEDD@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

What about lesser of 2 evils posts? Its seems this way you can still acknowledge the issues on both sides while still promoting voting and that voting still has power.

I dono, just thinking out loud.

[–] MerryJaneDoe@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago

You had me at "UPGRAYEDD".

[–] Neverbeaten@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

By choosing not to participate in the system that we have right now, you’re perpetuating it.

Run in a primary.

Vote in the primaries.

Get or be a better candidate that can help change things for the better.

Action in the only way to change the status quo.

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The problem is both sides ARE bad

One is unbelievably worse than the other.

The two party system is broken

That's the system you live in. That's your reality. No amount of complaining changes that. Voting intelligently over a long period of time is the only way you change that other than organizing a shit ton of people and arming them all and forcibly ending that system. And hoping you already have a new system ready to implement because toppling a government with no plan for afterward usually ends up worse.

Independent parties are the only noncorrupt option

Until they gain a bunch of power and influence.

[–] Wilco@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago

Independents technically could not get as much influence as a real political party. Republicans and Democrats pledge an oath to their political party (technically treason) ... independents do not because they are not a member of a political party.

[–] Triasha@lemmy.world -5 points 2 days ago (4 children)

They designed a system that will only ever result in a 2 party system. If George didn't like that he should have designed a better system.

Now we are stuck with it, not because we want it, or because it works, but because we cannot in any universe agree what should replace it.

[–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

I don't think all options have been seen yet.

I propose config-democracy, where "votes" can be as elaborate as people want, as direct or deferring as they want, updates when they want.

[–] Triasha@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 1 points 47 minutes ago

No upvotes on that yet... so presumably that "would" implies some yet to be revealed conditions yet to be met, that that support is contingent on. ;)

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago (3 children)

We need to do what the Tea Party did to the republicans. Get involved on the local level, take over the underpinnings of the party bit by bit, and become a constant thorn in the side of the conservative democratic leadership.

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

BINGO

People seem to think reforming parties is impossible despite the fact that conservatives literally just did it to the Republican party. The current Republican party is not the same Republican party from 20 years ago, in the worse ways possible. The Tea Party brought their insanity in and spread it around and now you have a way more crazy and way more dangerous Republican party.

That was a bad reform. Good reforms are possible too.

A revolution is simply not going to happen in America. The only path forward is reforming the Democrat party by primarying the shitstains out.

[–] Saprophyte@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The tea party was the origin of the term astroturfing. It was designed by billionaires who pumped money into it to make it look like a grassroots organization.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/oct/25/tea-party-koch-brothers

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

They had to do that because the stuff they were fighting for was monstrous. Still, the blueprint of what they did doesn't require billionaire backing if you're not trying to destroy the country and it was effective. They got everything they wanted.

[–] Triasha@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago
[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

so like i'm older than most of the people who worked on the constitution and i'm just in my mid-40s. you expect a lot out of 20 and 30 year old folk from the 18th century who by our standard are largely uneducated.

we have learned a lot since then. we stand on the shoulders of those who came before. that's why they put in mechanisms for change. like dipshits, we haven't used those mechanisms properly, but they are there.

[–] Wilco@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Incorrect. The two party system was manufactured over time in the USA. Originally the ballots were cast and the guy that got the most votes (EC votes of course) became president, the runner up became vice president. Look it up, that's how the system was built.

[–] Triasha@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The founders were still calling the shots when they made that change. Adams and Jefferson were the president and vice president in question.

They did it, thinking it was better than leaving it as is.

I can't say for sure they are wrong. Can you imagine if you got to be president if you political opponent dies? The guy that beat you to the job?

Pretty tempting situation for the vice president.

[–] Wilco@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

Ok. That is a REALLY good point. There would be serious murder happening. I am dumbfounded I never thought of it.