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

Political Memes

11461 readers
1964 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
[–] 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 1 day 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 20 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 1 points 2 hours 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.