this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2025

310 points (98.4% liked)

Political Memes

9854 readers

1625 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civil

Jokes 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.

No misinformation

Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memes

Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotion

Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

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

Rooki@lemmy.world

automodbeta@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

JonsJava@lemmy.world

Lasherz12@lemmy.world

FauxPseudo@lemmy.world

310

Things are going swell in some alternate universe where he didn’t miss (lemmy.world)

submitted 2 months ago by dlb@lemmy.world to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 18 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago

Single shot through the engine block!

[–] kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Nah, things still suck in that alternate universe. Not as badly as they do here, but Harris wasn't going to fix much of anything. She was just going to break fewer things.

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 42 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Still, that could mean many, many, many less lives lost.

[–] kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago

Certainly, but less bad isn't the same thing as good.

[+] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io -15 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Fewer lives lost now, but probably more in the long run. Democrats simply had no answer for the problems plaguing American society, so Trump's death would've just led to the rise of a new fascist demagogue, probably a younger and smarter one.

[–] Rolder@reddthat.com 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And Trump doesn’t have any answers either and is in fact just making things worse.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 1 points 2 months ago

Did you only read until the comma?

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

... do you think there's not going to be another fascist demagogue after Trump dies now?

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There absolutely will be, but Trump built his movement on some not-very-solid ground, like protectionism, interventionism abroad+America first and pro-Russianism. These will be inherited by any future fascist leader, who won't be easily able to undo all of them. It'd be worse if from the start you had a competent fascist leader who'd build a competent and more resilient fascist movement.

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There absolutely will be, but Trump built his movement on some not-very-solid ground, like protectionism, interventionism abroad+America first and pro-Russianism.

The only one of those that isn't inherent to fascism is the pro-Russian orientation.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Fascists like protectionism and empires, but the exact form of the protectionism and empire could've been much better tailored to the realities of American society. Tne exact same MAGAts cheering on Trump's stance towards Canada and Greenland then chafing under his Middle East policy shows that a clever fascist would only do one of these.

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I think you overestimate the latitude fascists have to make policy, given the context of fascism. Any fascist coming to power in the US was naturally going to gravitate away from alignment with our traditional allies - even those as close and cooperative as Canada - and seek bombastic attacks on both traditional allies (showing 'strength') and traditional enemies. Since Russia and Israel are supportive of US fascism, and China is economically powerful, that leaves only a handful of targets.

Not only that, but where do you get the idea that MAGA chafes under his Middle Eastern policy? The only MAGA that are chafing under his Middle Eastern policy are the actual neonazis who hate Israel for being Jewish, which are a small proportion compared to the Christian nationalists who want Israel to be supported unconditionally to trigger the end times. And don't get me started on what they think about bombing Middle-Eastern countries.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Any fascist coming to power in the US was naturally going to gravitate away from alignment with our traditional allies - even those as close and cooperative as Canada - and seek bombastic attacks on both traditional allies (showing 'strength') and traditional enemies.

Sure to an extent, but bombastic doesn't have to mean something with immediate material consequences. Attacks that actually and immediately hurt Americans could've easily waited until the fascists consolidated more power. It's telling that project 2025 says almost nothing about tariffs. Shitty rhetoric and threats to annex Greenland and Canada could've come without the tariffs, that last bit was just Trump being delusional. Hell, tariffs against Canada could've come without tariffs against the EU, and both of these could've come without tariffs against China. A more clever fascist would've manages to tick this box without rocking the boat during their consolidation of power.

The only MAGA that are chafing under his Middle Eastern policy are the actual neonazis who hate Israel for being Jewish, which are a small proportion compared to the Christian nationalists who want Israel to be supported unconditionally to trigger the end times.

I remember the Iran thing pissing quite a few MAGAs off. That's what I eas referring to, drastic American action in places MAGAts don't really care about is not a popular proposition among MAGA because those guys actually believe in America First.

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 3 points 2 months ago

Sure to an extent, but bombastic doesn't have to mean something with immediate material consequences. Attacks that actually and immediately hurt Americans could've easily waited until the fascists consolidated more power. It's telling that project 2025 says almost nothing about tariffs. Shitty rhetoric and threats to annex Greenland and Canada could've come without the tariffs, that last bit was just Trump being delusional. Hell, tariffs against Canada could've come without tariffs against the EU, and both of these could've come without tariffs against China. A more clever fascist would've manages to tick this box without rocking the boat during their consolidation of power.

I dunno, man. I feel like the material consequences don't really matter. Fascism is an anti-materialist ideology. Suffering will be blamed on 'the libs' for as long as it takes. Hell, I've seen prices of some consumer goods increase 25% this year alone, directly related to the tariffs, and still know people (family, unfortunately) who will swear up and down that the economy and prices have improved. Not even hardcore MAGAts (I know at least one despises Trump, specifically, to the point of not voting for him, despite being otherwise horrifically conservative), just your usual, run-of-the-mill rural or semirural Americans.

People who are trained to do so will almost always prioritize their beliefs over facts.

I remember the Iran thing pissing quite a few MAGAs off. That's what I eas referring to, drastic American action in places MAGAts don't really care about is not a popular proposition among MAGA because those guys actually believe in America First.

I promise you, they would all enthusiastically become supporters of war with Iran if it ever became a serious possibility. The "NO FOREIGN WARS" bit is tossed out as soon as the groupthink starts up. I've watched even non-MAGA conservatives do 180s on issues as soon as the propaganda spins up. I've seen people who were seriously considering volunteering in Ukraine at the start of the war, and vocal supporters of Ukrainian aid, turn into total opponents of Ukrainian military aid (despite still supporting Israeli aid).

Propaganda and community consensus are powerful things, and more powerful amongst conservatives than most.

[–] Soulg@ani.social 21 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Harris wouldn't have driven the country into the challenge deep and completely destroyed or standing across the entire globe while also alienating virtually all of our trading partners while simultaneously erecting concentration camps

But yeah no she wouldn't have done enough good things so basically not much different

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 10 points 2 months ago

There's nothing quite like being told that the worsening of the lives of millions of people, both in America and abroad, isn't a big deal because the other choice wouldn't have radically improved our shitty society.

[–] kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 months ago

I never said they were similar. I said that things wouldn't go well under Harris, just less badly. Those are not the same statement.

[–] WhatGodIsMadeOf@feddit.org 1 points 2 months ago

Plot twist they were both played out by feds to do what they did.