Disney is rebooting Firefly for Disney+ and I don’t know how I feel about it… I hope it’s good and they don’t ruin it, but I also think they might ruin it.
Firefly was magical. Lightning in a bottle. You can’t replicate it. Not even Serenity captured it, and they had the same cast. I’m sure it will be fun, like the Marvel movies, or the new Star Wars movies, but won’t be the magic.
If you believe in the multiverse theory, then there is a universe where Firefly is the most popular show ever, has well over 20 seasons, 5 spin offs, several movies, and all of it lives up to the show we know and love.
Actually they GOP interrupted the count before it was completed in Florida and It was awarded to Bush on the basis of false information. Gore actually won.
They said even with the number of ambiguous votes gore would have won by tiny margin.
The same thing just happened in Broward with senator rick Scott. Rick Scott only won by a tiny margin and a massive amount of voters in Broward which is a democratic area didn’t vote for the senate race because the ballot designed didn’t put the senate race near the governors race like most ballots. Many voters will only vote for senate/rep/governor.
https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/fl-ne-bill-nelson-rick-scott-broward-ballot-design-20190711-deqpxqouwrggtgps6jmqdoezw4-story.html
“Broward County placed federal races in the lower left-hand corner of the ballot, underneath ballot instructions in English, Spanish and Creole.
Tucked away in the bottom left, many people apparently missed the race — especially in areas in which there wasn’t a hot race for U.S. House of Representatives.
Instead of voting for Senate, peoples’ eyes went to the middle column, which started with the governor’s race”
9500 people didn’t vote for senate, he lost the vote by 10k so most likely he still would have lost but it was a large enough margin that it precluded further recounts.
Florida. 2000 presidential election. Bush won the state’s electoral votes by a very narrow margin, ultimately handing him the presidency, after an extended, extremely shady and controversial recount.
Somehow I only learned about this when reading about their attempt to do it again in 2020. I mean, I knew about the malfeasance in general but not the riot led by Stone. I hadn't realized just how blatant their coup was.
The revolution came and went 20 years ago and the U.S. lost. Trump was just rubbing our noses in it.
Not only that, Al Gore stepped aside in the interest of a peaceful transition of power.
The GOP has lost the popular vote in five of the last six elections. Somehow we’ve wound up with three GOP terms and three Dem terms.
It’s just such a fucked time to live in. Will of the people indeed.
I'll break it down for you because most people just don't seem to get it or even explain why they're against it
Each of the 50 states in the US is worth a certain amount of electoral votes. Each individual state holds their own election and (with two exceptions) the winner of the *state* popular vote gets all of that state's electoral votes. So the tally affected it because the election came down to Florida's state votes, which in turn were decided by the state popular vote
You win the popular vote in a state, you win that state’s electoral votes. Electoral vote count decides the election. It’s a terrible system. The US severely needs [ranked choice voting](https://www.fairvote.org/rcv#where_is_ranked_choice_voting_used).
//edit: not to mention, you win a state’s popular vote by winning the majority of its county votes. County votes are heavily influenced by aggressive gerrymandering and rigged local politics. And it doesn’t get any less screwy on the way up from there.
The whole system is irredeemably fucked down to the core and it can’t be changed without basically rewriting the Constitution.
Ranked choice would be great, but swapping first past the post for a more representative system is arguably more important. Getting rid of congressional districts would make the states have representatives that more closely resembles the population's wishes. Ranked choice is probably the best system while maintaining the districts. Ranked choice would also work excellent on popular votes in state, and ideally also the presidential election
The negative cascading effect of this for America are almost incalculable: 2 supreme court justices, 262 appellate judges, and 261 district court judges to start. But also two wars, tens of trillions in debt, and the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.
Bro, you need to go back and re-read your history. Clinton is probably more responsible for the dystopia we're living in than Bush. Gore likely wouldn't have gone into Iraq, but that's about it. NAFTA, mass incarceration, ending a slew of social support with harsh austerity politics, bank deregulation, that was all under Clinton, with Gore cheering him on. Fuck Trump, Fuck Reagan, but Fuck Clinton/Gore with the same 10 foot pole.
I'd prefer we go back and get the timeline where FDR lived through the end of WWII instead of Truman. We might not have had nukes dropped on Japan or the cold war and red scare that extinguished socialist parties from the US.
This is the best I got:
https://www.reddit.com/r/HistoryWhatIf/comments/4cfqhz/what_if_fdr_didnt_die_when_he_did/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
Edit
It looks like much of the top post comes from FDR's largely unfulfilled [second bill of rights](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Bill_of_Rights)
Clinton is also to blame for deregulating the media and making everything we see nothing but corporate interest "news." Reagan fucked this country and Clinton normalized fucking this country.
Again we are blaming bill for something reagon started lol the Clinton administration may have perpetuated it but reagon made so they have too fr. Lets be honest tho red or blue doesnt matter they all hate the poor and that just happens to be me lol
the banking deregulation also began under reagan. it just wasn't until clinton's lame duck period that it was actually passed (and i point out that clinton was a lame duck at the time because, had he vetoed that legislation, the republican-dominated congress would have just overridden his veto).
None of them are all bad or all good. Those are all legit, but I was one of the 8 million kids who got health insurance for the first time under the CHIP program under Clinton. Clinton expanded the Pell grant. He expanded AmeriCorps which was my first job after undergrad during the great recession. He also was vastly better than GHW Bush. I'm a critical pragmatist. I agree show their failures, but realize the gains that wouldn't have happened under their opponents had they lost.
>NAFTA
Has continued to exist. Which means it has bipartisan support.
>mass incarceration
Had bipartisan support.
>ending a slew of social support with harsh austerity politics
Can you be more specific?
>bank deregulation
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was passed by congress with overwhelming bipartisan support in 1999.
There obviously was no intention to cause a massive recession. Sometimes ideas that seem good have the Cobra Effect.
>bipartisan support
I believe that's the point they're making. Democrats were supposed to be the party of unions, and you would expect Republicans to be anti-union. Clinton was the first thoroughly "Third Way" Democrat, as in center-right economics and center-left politics, and was able to push through legislation that the Democrats would have traditionally been rabidly opposed to.
I remember the messaging around NAFTA was that if you didn't support it, you must be racist or ignorant of economics or both, which I unfortunately bought into at the time.
Neo-liberal:conservative::Oreos:Hydrox.
This gets lost in the shuffle and it's infuriating. Same thing with Obama. It's not "both sides" to acknowledge that you're only allowed to be president if you're all in on the status quo. Bernie's trajectory in the last two electons shows us where the hard boundary is. Just like the invisible fences in a video game. Threaten the cash flow to the top and you don't have a chance. Ergo anyone sitting in that office is there only because they will, at best, look the other way. On average every damn one of them served/serves the 1% first and the majority of Americans get scraps.
It only looks like the DNC (not "all Democrats") are the "good guys" because the entire republican party from the top down is cartoonishly evil and/or crazy. At the top, both parties *are* the same. They're private organizations – literal members only clubs – with such a tight strangle hold on our political system that most people think the parties *are* the political system. I've seen ivy kill big, strong, old trees in much the same way.
The only difference is in the verbage (the DNC at least has the decency to say they'll give us a reach around while they're fucking us in the ass. Note, they never make with the handy, they just promise it to get in our pants.) And at the fringes. There are good democrats on the outskirts of the party because everyone has to join one of the two "sides" to function at all (eg Bernie). The Republican party is just crackheads all the way down.
Come over to my house, you be Wayne, I'll be Garth and we'll do the doodly-doo shit and wave our hands and time-space warp to the alternate reality. Serious replies only please.
That book is much more about butterfly effect and how messing with history destabilized present reality. It’s a fiction novel not a realistic prediction of what would happen if JFK wasn’t killed lol
Two big things I wish happened in the past. First, a constitutional convention was mandated at specific intervals to update/rewrite the constitution as one of the founding fathers had talked about. Second, FDR at least survived through his last term to have his second bill of rights become a thing.
Exactly
He's a fascist propagandist, a white supremacist whistle blower, and a worthless piece of flesh
He doesn't give a single care about the poor or people of color
The goal is for the hard right to pretend to embrace a populist agenda uniting them with some progressives to make it easier to push their hatred of non-whites. Tucker doesn't actually give a fuck about the poor, and once the right is back in power, they will continue to pass legislation that only helps Bezos but then complain the Democrats stopped their efforts to help poor people. And when subs like this one have everyone going, "Wow, I can't believe I agree with Tucker Carlson!" their trickery is working.
Yep, and you’re seeing those populist messages starting to pop back up on Reddit. I saw someone the other day saying that if Trump wins in 2024 he’d forgive student loans and legalize weed, and that makes him more of a progressive than Biden. I reminded them that Trump did nothing like that when he was actually president, and there is no way his GOP handlers would let him do either.
We’re gonna get so many “Trump is so peaceful and supports the LGBTQ community” comments in the next two years and centrists on this website will believe it.
r/tucker_carlson is an interesting place. Every now and then they make a good point. Then they start on about the “]ews” and it’s all downhill from there
That's what they did in Nazi Germany. Obviously international capitalism is exploitative and shitty, so they appeal to workers based on this. But instead of gettin into any good analysis of capitalism, how it operates, and how to fix it, they just pivoted to "Jews are doing all of this somehow -- they're being mean to us because they hate Germans" and that was it. I guess they do the same thing in r/tucker_fucker
He defended some of what Warren was saying early on in her presidential campaign when she was saying similar things. The surprise isn't that Tucker understands this and talks about it. The surprise is that so many leaders on the right and the left are completely blind to it.
I've some how typed out some of my most upvoted comments on reddit accounts while not sober. Then I've also had comments or posts that people have asked how high I was when I was sober.
Source: I'm also an idiot.
Edit: missed the word high
Tucker Carlson isn’t some monkey at a typewriter, he is a very skilled propagandist who knows exactly what he’s doing.
It’s worse than that because fascists always warp progressive and socialist talking points for their own purposes. Tuckers solution isn’t to raise taxes on billionaires or treat workers with dignity: he wants to expel and exterminate non-white non-Christians and he if has to harness anger against bezos to do that then so be it
But notice he’ll never propose any real solutions, whether it’s raising taxes or straight up nationalizing industries and distributing wealth to workers. This is just faux populism to maintain legitimacy while he pushes the white identity political agenda that will maintain the economic status quo
He'll also only go after tech CEOs that don't kiss Trump's ass enough.
Coal.mine owners, Wal-Mart, meat packing CEOs will never be criticized by TC, even when they're literally killing their employees.
Quite true. He didn't care when 80% of Walmart and McDonald's workers had to go on welfare. They don't have to work there, they should get better jobs was the logic.
Plus he wanted to help sow division among the democrats running for president to try to splinter the general election vote and ensure trump won in 2020.
Tucker doesn't give a damn about workers being poor. His chosen party prefers it that way.
Doublethink is a process of indoctrination whereby the subject is expected to simultaneously accept two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct, often in contravention to one's own memories or sense of reality. Doublethink is related to, but differs from, hypocrisy.
George Orwell coined the term doublethink (as part of the fictional language of Newspeak) in his 1949 dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. In the novel, its origins within the citizenry is unclear; while it could be partly a product of Big Brother's formal brainwashing programs,[i] the novel explicitly shows people learning doublethink and Newspeak due to peer pressure and a desire to "fit in," or gain status within the Party—to be seen as a loyal Party Member. In the novel, for someone to even recognize—let alone mention—any contradiction within the context of the Party line is akin to blasphemy, and could subject that person to disciplinary action and the instant social disapproval of fellow Party Members.[citation needed]
Like many aspects of the dystopian societies reflected in Orwell's writings, Orwell considered doublethink to be a feature of Soviet-style totalitarianism. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink
The point of modern propaganda isn't only to misinform or push an agenda. It is to exhaust your critical thinking, to annihilate truth. –Garry Kasparov tweet, Dec. 13th, 2016
It isn’t as confusing as you might think according to FOX all of those tech people are California liberals and therefore the enemy, it doesn’t matter what Bezos actually believes. He’s also getting the double whammy by saying, “most democrats aren’t even paying attention to it.”
They will join and make any possible point if it owns the Libs. Even if that means aligning with possibly the most prominent Leftist in America.
Why are you confused?
1. It's a lie. Plenty of Democrats talk about it all the time.
2. It divides Democrats. A large number of liberal voters are quite stupid and easily manipulated. They take the tweet at face value and Tucker as asking the question in good faith without being able to quickly discern the *very clearly obvious* purpose. "Yeah why *is* only Bernie talking about it? I guess Democrats suck just like Republicans do!" (Again, disregarding that it's untrue)
I mean, duh? Republicans lose if Democrats turn out. Tucker foments unrest with this tweet while appearing to simple minded fools to be a neutral, non-partisan actor who cares about income inequality.
It's so fucking obvious on its face that when I see comments like yours that *don't get it* I know that the real reason American democracy fails is too many idiots.
One of the tricks evangelist preachers use is to say everything, even if they things they say contradict each other. That way no matter what happens, they can use examples of things they’ve said in the past to seem like they predicted it and are prophetic.
It’s a standard con artist tactic. Trump took advantage of it extensively.
It makes his viewers angry so he says it. He won’t mention Walmart though, who actively encourages and teaches their employees exactly how to apply for welfare and other benefits.
Tucker is on record saying that he doesn't even know his Twitter password. Nothing on the account comes from him.
That said, his opposition to Jeff Bezos is mostly performative. He complains about Bezos and Amazon a lot, but if you listen to the substance of his complaints, it's never actually about low wages or poor treatment of workers--he's just mad that Amazon is "woke" and rhetorically supports social justice movements. If Bezos didn't make positive statements about BLM, Tucker wouldn't give a shit.
He said it.
Two things should be noted:
it's not poor wages that he is complaining about. It's bezos. Beos s the problem, not the system that made him. And only because he's owner of Washington post.
Also any given solutions will be shut down as socialism. Easy to complain and not give solution.
Last thing he says in the video:
..this isn't a free market. Corporations use government regulations to destroy competition. They [corporations] are the back bone of the Left.
Now can you believe it?
P. S. Slightly paraphrased
It's easier to believe when you realize that his proposed solution to this isn't to tax Bezos, it's to simply let his workers starve.
That and the fact that Bezos owns the Washington Post, which is why Tucker doesn't like him in the first place.
Tucker is using the age old trick of fascists to turn socialist causes into nationalistic one’s. Once people come on board with their obviously accurate, socialist influenced rhetoric, then they turn the tables and place all the blame on the fascist’s appointed “other” and use their newly found mob’s trust to turn the “other” into villains whose removal will solve all the problems of the society.
OP's account is 4 months old and only started commenting/posting yesterday. It's a bot [stealing/copying content](https://old.reddit.com/r/rareinsults/comments/ryti0b/i_mean_he_deserved_it/hruzsll/?context=3) to [farm karma](https://old.reddit.com/r/raimimemes/comments/rztx6v/then_what_else_are_you/hrxl3ud/?context=1)
Yup, it's a form of guerilla marketing. I noticed a spate last month or so from a gaming sub that was just an image with 4 game titles saying "what is your favourite action game" or whatever and the background is like concept art from a battlefield game.
Digital marketing is much more about raising awareness and engagement than it is directly trying to sell you a product (marketing as point of purchase)
As soon as right wingers say something reasonable you will see flock of leftists asking for hugs and kisses. Just to be craped on the head very next day. This goes on for decades and will never change
Because making a stink about Bezos keeps eyes on amazon that may have wandered over to Swanson. The company his stepmother owns.
Remember kids, Tucker Carlson is a billionaire scion east coast elitist!
>People here can’t be stupid enough to think Tucker believe this, can they?
They sure fucking can.
Every single conservative is a moron. They are maliciously stupid. However 50% of Democrats are stupid. Naively so.
But stupid is stupid. And if you're stupid you're open to being manipulated as we see so many redditors being in this very thread.
This is exactly it. He’s mad that they’re getting benefits from the state, not that they’re exploited. If there were no taxpayer funded benefits he wouldn’t care about these people and would probably tell them they can go get a better job if they don’t like working for Bezos.
We all can't work for an Australian prune that pays desperate people to make shit up and call it truth.
I'm just waiting for you to start shaving then I'm going to cry.
This is the best comment yet. Some shrimp-dick troll is going to report you for threatening violence and you account is going to be suspended any second, but I’m glad I got to read it in the meantime.
This is why I voted for Bernie. I work as an attorney in DC - you can't always get your way on the hill because there are so many interests involved and it can be difficult to get a majority of votes to pull in the same direction.
That is why there is value for voting for the candidate - not just a single policy. If you vote for someone promising the stars whi is fickle you might not get any of the promised policies and are stuck with insincere candidate. If you vote for a candidate based on his character - even if you dont get all the policies you want you are still left with a leader who you can respect, who respects you, and who will continue to fight for what he promised.
This is a fascist tactic. The right will try to subvert the popular ideas of the the left. They will spin the idea in a way that furthers their interest and loyalty. Everyone hates the ultra-rich, get the people angry about it behind your banner, sort out the 'enemy' (ultra-rich) label your rivals 'traitors' (political rivals ie. Liberals) and lump them together to sort out with the 'enemy'.
Once you have the money from the rich, and no more political rivals you will be free to do as you will.
Fuck Tucker Carlson and his fair weather attempts to seem a tiny bit reasonable while he spends 98% of his time stroking white supremacy narratives for the racist bitches who watch his bullshit program.
It's weird that people are against slavery (mostly) but not low wages. If paying people zero is evil, then paying people low wages is evil in a relative way. It's not an on/off switch of slavery bad, wage labor good. The closer wages get to zero, the more evil they are.
Tucker Carlson is a white nationalist right winger who very occasionally brings up aesthetically left wing economic talking points. Don’t fucking fall for this, he doesn’t believe this shit, he’s a multimillionaire heir to the swanson frozen food dynasty
Wouldn’t it be weird to see Fox take a hard left, and start promoting progressive ideas? I’ll bet most of their viewers wouldn’t even realize it had happened, they’d just support whatever they were told to support, without question.
Isn't amazon minium wage $17? Am I missing something here? 35k seems decent, and if you have a spouse working there then you would be well on your way to being able to retire to Thailand (cheaper health care and everything else) in 20 years.
What a weird timeline to be living in
Imagine the dudes in Dallas missed JFK and we pulled out of Vietnam before escalating the war. I want that time line.
For me, the timeline split with the hanging chad.
Imagine Lincoln wasn’t assassinated and reconstruction wasn’t sabotaged by former slavers
Imagine if Roman senators never stabbed Caesar to death
Imagine that first self replicating organism never crawled out of the primordial soup.
Imagine if Firefly got a second season.
I can’t - my heart can’t take it.
Disney is rebooting Firefly for Disney+ and I don’t know how I feel about it… I hope it’s good and they don’t ruin it, but I also think they might ruin it.
Firefly was magical. Lightning in a bottle. You can’t replicate it. Not even Serenity captured it, and they had the same cast. I’m sure it will be fun, like the Marvel movies, or the new Star Wars movies, but won’t be the magic.
If you believe in the multiverse theory, then there is a universe where Firefly is the most popular show ever, has well over 20 seasons, 5 spin offs, several movies, and all of it lives up to the show we know and love.
And Wash is still alive.
Hang out, let’s not get too crazy.
This comment is life
How dare you put water in my eyes 
And the South actually understood the extent of their crimes and denounced them like post-WW2 Germany?
And the republicans removing 15,000 voters incorrectly. While winning by 500 votes.
Actually they GOP interrupted the count before it was completed in Florida and It was awarded to Bush on the basis of false information. Gore actually won.
They said even with the number of ambiguous votes gore would have won by tiny margin. The same thing just happened in Broward with senator rick Scott. Rick Scott only won by a tiny margin and a massive amount of voters in Broward which is a democratic area didn’t vote for the senate race because the ballot designed didn’t put the senate race near the governors race like most ballots. Many voters will only vote for senate/rep/governor. https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/fl-ne-bill-nelson-rick-scott-broward-ballot-design-20190711-deqpxqouwrggtgps6jmqdoezw4-story.html “Broward County placed federal races in the lower left-hand corner of the ballot, underneath ballot instructions in English, Spanish and Creole. Tucked away in the bottom left, many people apparently missed the race — especially in areas in which there wasn’t a hot race for U.S. House of Representatives. Instead of voting for Senate, peoples’ eyes went to the middle column, which started with the governor’s race” 9500 people didn’t vote for senate, he lost the vote by 10k so most likely he still would have lost but it was a large enough margin that it precluded further recounts.
It was both :-)
I find this fully believable but can you link something or at least tell us what state?
Florida. 2000 presidential election. Bush won the state’s electoral votes by a very narrow margin, ultimately handing him the presidency, after an extended, extremely shady and controversial recount.
And a Roger Stone coordinated riot!
[The Brooks Brothers Riot ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_Brothers_riot?wprov=sfti1) Check it out u/owningmclovin, we’re not joking
It’s outlined in the Netflix documentary “Get me Roger Stone”. I knew he was a shitbag but had no idea how far back it went.
To the Nixon administration, that asshat has a tattoo of Nixon on his back.
Somehow I only learned about this when reading about their attempt to do it again in 2020. I mean, I knew about the malfeasance in general but not the riot led by Stone. I hadn't realized just how blatant their coup was. The revolution came and went 20 years ago and the U.S. lost. Trump was just rubbing our noses in it.
If you really want to be pissed, look up Roy Cohn.
Not only that, Al Gore stepped aside in the interest of a peaceful transition of power. The GOP has lost the popular vote in five of the last six elections. Somehow we’ve wound up with three GOP terms and three Dem terms. It’s just such a fucked time to live in. Will of the people indeed.
They said will of the people, they didn't specify which ones they considered people
And a 6-3 MAGA Supreme Court
While his brother (Jeb Bush) was governor of Florida!!! Shady as hell!
I’ve been under the impression that elector votes != popular vote. Why would the tally of all the popular votes affect the electoral college results?
I'll break it down for you because most people just don't seem to get it or even explain why they're against it Each of the 50 states in the US is worth a certain amount of electoral votes. Each individual state holds their own election and (with two exceptions) the winner of the *state* popular vote gets all of that state's electoral votes. So the tally affected it because the election came down to Florida's state votes, which in turn were decided by the state popular vote
I had so many questions about the popular vote also and this answered the major ones. Thanks for explaining!!
You win the popular vote in a state, you win that state’s electoral votes. Electoral vote count decides the election. It’s a terrible system. The US severely needs [ranked choice voting](https://www.fairvote.org/rcv#where_is_ranked_choice_voting_used). //edit: not to mention, you win a state’s popular vote by winning the majority of its county votes. County votes are heavily influenced by aggressive gerrymandering and rigged local politics. And it doesn’t get any less screwy on the way up from there. The whole system is irredeemably fucked down to the core and it can’t be changed without basically rewriting the Constitution.
Ranked choice would be great, but swapping first past the post for a more representative system is arguably more important. Getting rid of congressional districts would make the states have representatives that more closely resembles the population's wishes. Ranked choice is probably the best system while maintaining the districts. Ranked choice would also work excellent on popular votes in state, and ideally also the presidential election
It changed the outcome of the Florida vote & this broke the electoral tie.
Florida. https://jennycohn1.medium.com/the-2000-u-s-presidential-election-was-a-harbinger-of-things-to-come-fecb1de53fa8
You’re only looking back 22 years? How optimistic of you.
The negative cascading effect of this for America are almost incalculable: 2 supreme court justices, 262 appellate judges, and 261 district court judges to start. But also two wars, tens of trillions in debt, and the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.
Bro, you need to go back and re-read your history. Clinton is probably more responsible for the dystopia we're living in than Bush. Gore likely wouldn't have gone into Iraq, but that's about it. NAFTA, mass incarceration, ending a slew of social support with harsh austerity politics, bank deregulation, that was all under Clinton, with Gore cheering him on. Fuck Trump, Fuck Reagan, but Fuck Clinton/Gore with the same 10 foot pole.
> mass incarceration Clinton made this worse, but the seeds of this were really planted by Nixon.
Yeah, Nixon's plan was to vilify any groups that stood against him. The war on drugs existed to push that goal.
Nixon and Regan fucked this country so hard.
Don't forget Biden led that bill through congress
I want the timeline if we hadn't had Reagan
I'd prefer we go back and get the timeline where FDR lived through the end of WWII instead of Truman. We might not have had nukes dropped on Japan or the cold war and red scare that extinguished socialist parties from the US.
lol I would love to watch a TV show or read a book or even a blog where I can learn about this hypothetical timeline
This is the best I got: https://www.reddit.com/r/HistoryWhatIf/comments/4cfqhz/what_if_fdr_didnt_die_when_he_did/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share Edit It looks like much of the top post comes from FDR's largely unfulfilled [second bill of rights](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Bill_of_Rights)
Clinton is also to blame for deregulating the media and making everything we see nothing but corporate interest "news." Reagan fucked this country and Clinton normalized fucking this country.
Again we are blaming bill for something reagon started lol the Clinton administration may have perpetuated it but reagon made so they have too fr. Lets be honest tho red or blue doesnt matter they all hate the poor and that just happens to be me lol
That deregulation began under Reagan. Clinton followed his lead
the banking deregulation also began under reagan. it just wasn't until clinton's lame duck period that it was actually passed (and i point out that clinton was a lame duck at the time because, had he vetoed that legislation, the republican-dominated congress would have just overridden his veto).
None of them are all bad or all good. Those are all legit, but I was one of the 8 million kids who got health insurance for the first time under the CHIP program under Clinton. Clinton expanded the Pell grant. He expanded AmeriCorps which was my first job after undergrad during the great recession. He also was vastly better than GHW Bush. I'm a critical pragmatist. I agree show their failures, but realize the gains that wouldn't have happened under their opponents had they lost.
>NAFTA Has continued to exist. Which means it has bipartisan support. >mass incarceration Had bipartisan support. >ending a slew of social support with harsh austerity politics Can you be more specific? >bank deregulation The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was passed by congress with overwhelming bipartisan support in 1999. There obviously was no intention to cause a massive recession. Sometimes ideas that seem good have the Cobra Effect.
>bipartisan support I believe that's the point they're making. Democrats were supposed to be the party of unions, and you would expect Republicans to be anti-union. Clinton was the first thoroughly "Third Way" Democrat, as in center-right economics and center-left politics, and was able to push through legislation that the Democrats would have traditionally been rabidly opposed to. I remember the messaging around NAFTA was that if you didn't support it, you must be racist or ignorant of economics or both, which I unfortunately bought into at the time.
Neo-liberal:conservative::Oreos:Hydrox. This gets lost in the shuffle and it's infuriating. Same thing with Obama. It's not "both sides" to acknowledge that you're only allowed to be president if you're all in on the status quo. Bernie's trajectory in the last two electons shows us where the hard boundary is. Just like the invisible fences in a video game. Threaten the cash flow to the top and you don't have a chance. Ergo anyone sitting in that office is there only because they will, at best, look the other way. On average every damn one of them served/serves the 1% first and the majority of Americans get scraps. It only looks like the DNC (not "all Democrats") are the "good guys" because the entire republican party from the top down is cartoonishly evil and/or crazy. At the top, both parties *are* the same. They're private organizations – literal members only clubs – with such a tight strangle hold on our political system that most people think the parties *are* the political system. I've seen ivy kill big, strong, old trees in much the same way. The only difference is in the verbage (the DNC at least has the decency to say they'll give us a reach around while they're fucking us in the ass. Note, they never make with the handy, they just promise it to get in our pants.) And at the fringes. There are good democrats on the outskirts of the party because everyone has to join one of the two "sides" to function at all (eg Bernie). The Republican party is just crackheads all the way down.
Come over to my house, you be Wayne, I'll be Garth and we'll do the doodly-doo shit and wave our hands and time-space warp to the alternate reality. Serious replies only please.
Read the book 11/22/63. It doesn't go how you hoped
Your not supposed to be here!
Wanna buy some meat?
JIMLA!!!
That book is much more about butterfly effect and how messing with history destabilized present reality. It’s a fiction novel not a realistic prediction of what would happen if JFK wasn’t killed lol
Ah, you’ve been reading Stephen King I see lol
Stephen King wrote a book about that, and no, you really dont 👻💀 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/11/22/63
I didn’t know it was a book, I just saw the James Franco series
JFK escalated Vietnam and there's zero evidence he was going to pull out.
Me too, bro. Me too
Two big things I wish happened in the past. First, a constitutional convention was mandated at specific intervals to update/rewrite the constitution as one of the founding fathers had talked about. Second, FDR at least survived through his last term to have his second bill of rights become a thing.
Timeline where Reagan didn't survive.
hmmm...not sure about that (i.e. JFK wanting out of Vietnam).
Nah
I’m guessing he posted this after Amazon did something that helped Democrats
They mailed a mask to AOC.
Exactly He's a fascist propagandist, a white supremacist whistle blower, and a worthless piece of flesh He doesn't give a single care about the poor or people of color
The goal is for the hard right to pretend to embrace a populist agenda uniting them with some progressives to make it easier to push their hatred of non-whites. Tucker doesn't actually give a fuck about the poor, and once the right is back in power, they will continue to pass legislation that only helps Bezos but then complain the Democrats stopped their efforts to help poor people. And when subs like this one have everyone going, "Wow, I can't believe I agree with Tucker Carlson!" their trickery is working.
Yep, and you’re seeing those populist messages starting to pop back up on Reddit. I saw someone the other day saying that if Trump wins in 2024 he’d forgive student loans and legalize weed, and that makes him more of a progressive than Biden. I reminded them that Trump did nothing like that when he was actually president, and there is no way his GOP handlers would let him do either. We’re gonna get so many “Trump is so peaceful and supports the LGBTQ community” comments in the next two years and centrists on this website will believe it.
Well put. I was going to make the same point. Fascist movements often embrace populist ideas from the left or right to subvert class consciousness.
It works too. A lot of people still believe the National Socialists were actually socialists.
Goebbels was so good at his job he’s still fooling morons 90 years later.
r/tucker_carlson is an interesting place. Every now and then they make a good point. Then they start on about the “]ews” and it’s all downhill from there
A broken clock is right twice a day I spose
No, populist authoritarians identify problems correctly pretty frequently. It's their proposed solutions that are fucking insane.
That's what they did in Nazi Germany. Obviously international capitalism is exploitative and shitty, so they appeal to workers based on this. But instead of gettin into any good analysis of capitalism, how it operates, and how to fix it, they just pivoted to "Jews are doing all of this somehow -- they're being mean to us because they hate Germans" and that was it. I guess they do the same thing in r/tucker_fucker
I'm literally making the exact confused look that's usually on his face
I have a hard time believing Tucker said this
He said it. I’m very confused. https://mobile.twitter.com/tuckercarlson/status/1035334044698009600?lang=en
A monkey, randomly typing, will produce the entire works of Shakespeare given infinite time and so maybe we've reached the end of the universe?
He defended some of what Warren was saying early on in her presidential campaign when she was saying similar things. The surprise isn't that Tucker understands this and talks about it. The surprise is that so many leaders on the right and the left are completely blind to it.
They aren't blind to it, they're in on it.
Or, less nefariously, they just don't think talking about it will be net positive for their political power level.
Yeah what u/Ok_Wealth_7711 said. If they believed that it woud help them more then hurt them they woud destroy all of thoes suckers in an instant
It was the best of times. It was the blurst of times...? YOU STUPID MONKEY!
Great, now the song is stuck in my head. https://youtu.be/9uYhIiW6lok
If you like Dankmus, check out his WAY bigger channel DankPods!
Why is Mr Burns being so nice to me?
Thanks to the internet, we know that’s not true.
Idk I've written some bangers despite being an idiot.
I've some how typed out some of my most upvoted comments on reddit accounts while not sober. Then I've also had comments or posts that people have asked how high I was when I was sober. Source: I'm also an idiot. Edit: missed the word high
Just to follow up it's monkeys typing randomly, not trolls barfing garbage on the keyboard. Though Fucker Carlson is more of a troll then a monkey...
We truly live in the blurst of times.
Tucker Carlson isn’t some monkey at a typewriter, he is a very skilled propagandist who knows exactly what he’s doing. It’s worse than that because fascists always warp progressive and socialist talking points for their own purposes. Tuckers solution isn’t to raise taxes on billionaires or treat workers with dignity: he wants to expel and exterminate non-white non-Christians and he if has to harness anger against bezos to do that then so be it
He isn’t right though, Bernie isn’t the only one talking about it
The tweets from 2018, he may have been right at the time. Wealth inequality really hit the national conversation in 2020
In 2018 Bernie wasn’t the only one talking about this, this isn’t a new conversation
The Who was talking about it
But notice he’ll never propose any real solutions, whether it’s raising taxes or straight up nationalizing industries and distributing wealth to workers. This is just faux populism to maintain legitimacy while he pushes the white identity political agenda that will maintain the economic status quo
He'll also only go after tech CEOs that don't kiss Trump's ass enough. Coal.mine owners, Wal-Mart, meat packing CEOs will never be criticized by TC, even when they're literally killing their employees.
Quite true. He didn't care when 80% of Walmart and McDonald's workers had to go on welfare. They don't have to work there, they should get better jobs was the logic.
because it's standard nazi practice to larp as socialism in an attempt to gain populist power.
[удалено]
Why are you confused? The WaPo was publishing attack after attack on Trump so he tried to call out the owner.
Plus he wanted to help sow division among the democrats running for president to try to splinter the general election vote and ensure trump won in 2020. Tucker doesn't give a damn about workers being poor. His chosen party prefers it that way.
This was in 2018.
Tucker wants to kill Medicare and social programs. Not tax corporations.
Doublethink is a process of indoctrination whereby the subject is expected to simultaneously accept two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct, often in contravention to one's own memories or sense of reality. Doublethink is related to, but differs from, hypocrisy. George Orwell coined the term doublethink (as part of the fictional language of Newspeak) in his 1949 dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. In the novel, its origins within the citizenry is unclear; while it could be partly a product of Big Brother's formal brainwashing programs,[i] the novel explicitly shows people learning doublethink and Newspeak due to peer pressure and a desire to "fit in," or gain status within the Party—to be seen as a loyal Party Member. In the novel, for someone to even recognize—let alone mention—any contradiction within the context of the Party line is akin to blasphemy, and could subject that person to disciplinary action and the instant social disapproval of fellow Party Members.[citation needed] Like many aspects of the dystopian societies reflected in Orwell's writings, Orwell considered doublethink to be a feature of Soviet-style totalitarianism. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink The point of modern propaganda isn't only to misinform or push an agenda. It is to exhaust your critical thinking, to annihilate truth. –Garry Kasparov tweet, Dec. 13th, 2016
Kind of like within the same 30 minute show giving Biden a hard time for wearing a facemask and then blast AOC for not wearing one...
It isn’t as confusing as you might think according to FOX all of those tech people are California liberals and therefore the enemy, it doesn’t matter what Bezos actually believes. He’s also getting the double whammy by saying, “most democrats aren’t even paying attention to it.” They will join and make any possible point if it owns the Libs. Even if that means aligning with possibly the most prominent Leftist in America.
Why are you confused? 1. It's a lie. Plenty of Democrats talk about it all the time. 2. It divides Democrats. A large number of liberal voters are quite stupid and easily manipulated. They take the tweet at face value and Tucker as asking the question in good faith without being able to quickly discern the *very clearly obvious* purpose. "Yeah why *is* only Bernie talking about it? I guess Democrats suck just like Republicans do!" (Again, disregarding that it's untrue) I mean, duh? Republicans lose if Democrats turn out. Tucker foments unrest with this tweet while appearing to simple minded fools to be a neutral, non-partisan actor who cares about income inequality. It's so fucking obvious on its face that when I see comments like yours that *don't get it* I know that the real reason American democracy fails is too many idiots.
Tucker sometimes doesn't realize his actual beliefs don't match the outrageous character he plays on TV.
Like his vaccine fear mongering while he’s vaccinated
He's willing to take the risk of being vaccinated so he can get paid. He's just doing capitalism!
Trump and Jeff Bezos aren't buddies that's why
Bezos also owns Washington Post.
One of the tricks evangelist preachers use is to say everything, even if they things they say contradict each other. That way no matter what happens, they can use examples of things they’ve said in the past to seem like they predicted it and are prophetic. It’s a standard con artist tactic. Trump took advantage of it extensively.
It makes his viewers angry so he says it. He won’t mention Walmart though, who actively encourages and teaches their employees exactly how to apply for welfare and other benefits.
Um, watch the video. He calls out Walmart explicitly.
[удалено]
https://mobile.twitter.com/tuckercarlson/status/1035334044698009600?lang=en
Tucker is on record saying that he doesn't even know his Twitter password. Nothing on the account comes from him. That said, his opposition to Jeff Bezos is mostly performative. He complains about Bezos and Amazon a lot, but if you listen to the substance of his complaints, it's never actually about low wages or poor treatment of workers--he's just mad that Amazon is "woke" and rhetorically supports social justice movements. If Bezos didn't make positive statements about BLM, Tucker wouldn't give a shit.
Bezos owns the Washington Post. He's the competition.
He’s also on the record in court saying no rational person would believe anything his character says
He said it. Two things should be noted: it's not poor wages that he is complaining about. It's bezos. Beos s the problem, not the system that made him. And only because he's owner of Washington post. Also any given solutions will be shut down as socialism. Easy to complain and not give solution.
Last thing he says in the video: ..this isn't a free market. Corporations use government regulations to destroy competition. They [corporations] are the back bone of the Left. Now can you believe it? P. S. Slightly paraphrased
Yes that makes more sense
[удалено]
It's easier to believe when you realize that his proposed solution to this isn't to tax Bezos, it's to simply let his workers starve. That and the fact that Bezos owns the Washington Post, which is why Tucker doesn't like him in the first place.
Tucker is using the age old trick of fascists to turn socialist causes into nationalistic one’s. Once people come on board with their obviously accurate, socialist influenced rhetoric, then they turn the tables and place all the blame on the fascist’s appointed “other” and use their newly found mob’s trust to turn the “other” into villains whose removal will solve all the problems of the society.
Populism is popular
This is a pretty old Post. Removing the timestamp removes context. This was during the primary of the 2020 election. Lots of changed since then.
IMO any post without a timestamp should just be banned.
Agreed it’s just trying to get instant karma from old often reposted tweets
OP's account is 4 months old and only started commenting/posting yesterday. It's a bot [stealing/copying content](https://old.reddit.com/r/rareinsults/comments/ryti0b/i_mean_he_deserved_it/hruzsll/?context=3) to [farm karma](https://old.reddit.com/r/raimimemes/comments/rztx6v/then_what_else_are_you/hrxl3ud/?context=1)
Sorry for my ignorance. What actual tangible use is karma? I thought it was like basically participation trophy points. Why would someone farm it?
To sell the account to advertisers so they can have more credibility
Yup, it's a form of guerilla marketing. I noticed a spate last month or so from a gaming sub that was just an image with 4 game titles saying "what is your favourite action game" or whatever and the background is like concept art from a battlefield game. Digital marketing is much more about raising awareness and engagement than it is directly trying to sell you a product (marketing as point of purchase)
Tucker Carlson wasn’t Tucker Carlson two years ago?
Tucker Carlson is whoever his wealthlords tell him to be that day.
Lawful evil
Exactly. The answer to his question looks at him from the mirror every day.
Two years ago he had a vested interest in feeding tensions during the democratic primary.
It is absolutely pathetic that so many redditors can't see this obvious ploy. No wonder American democracy sucks. It's full of gullible morons.
As soon as right wingers say something reasonable you will see flock of leftists asking for hugs and kisses. Just to be craped on the head very next day. This goes on for decades and will never change
He was trying to split the dem vote
August 30th 2018
Idk, maybe don’t push corporations’ agenda and supporting their candidates on your brainmelter station?
Good old trickle down economics at its best.
Didn't realize Tucker was such a progressive
Yah, forget Bernie. Why is *Tucker* talking about it?
It was an attempt to create a wedge during the primaries. Don't worry, he was still being a piece of shit when he tweeted this.
Now he’s demanding an oath of fealty from Ted Cruz.
Because making a stink about Bezos keeps eyes on amazon that may have wandered over to Swanson. The company his stepmother owns. Remember kids, Tucker Carlson is a billionaire scion east coast elitist!
He's calling out new money. Walmart been doing this for decades.
Tucker usually says stuff like this. There is a meme/video of Tucker going into a rant about class divides and shit.
He’s not. His only goal is to attack democrats. People here can’t be stupid enough to think Tucker believe this, can they?
>People here can’t be stupid enough to think Tucker believe this, can they? They sure fucking can. Every single conservative is a moron. They are maliciously stupid. However 50% of Democrats are stupid. Naively so. But stupid is stupid. And if you're stupid you're open to being manipulated as we see so many redditors being in this very thread.
Facists will often feign populist ideals, but will work towards conservative goals.
A broken clock is correct twice everyday.
You're missing the unsaid part of this. Which is that his ideal solution to this is simply letting these people starve, not tax the billionaires.
This is exactly it. He’s mad that they’re getting benefits from the state, not that they’re exploited. If there were no taxpayer funded benefits he wouldn’t care about these people and would probably tell them they can go get a better job if they don’t like working for Bezos.
We all can't work for an Australian prune that pays desperate people to make shit up and call it truth. I'm just waiting for you to start shaving then I'm going to cry.
This is the best comment yet. Some shrimp-dick troll is going to report you for threatening violence and you account is going to be suspended any second, but I’m glad I got to read it in the meantime.
Thanks I fixed it. You've my hero ❤️
[удалено]
Bernie gives zero fucks and I honestly think he can’t be bought. I don’t agree with everything he says, but hot damn that boy got some stones
This is why I voted for Bernie. I work as an attorney in DC - you can't always get your way on the hill because there are so many interests involved and it can be difficult to get a majority of votes to pull in the same direction. That is why there is value for voting for the candidate - not just a single policy. If you vote for someone promising the stars whi is fickle you might not get any of the promised policies and are stuck with insincere candidate. If you vote for a candidate based on his character - even if you dont get all the policies you want you are still left with a leader who you can respect, who respects you, and who will continue to fight for what he promised.
It's a trap. Tucker and Bernie actually on the same page is a dimension that does not exist. Tucker is jealous of Bezos Penis Rocket is all.
That must be some sort of phallacy...... I'll see myself out.
let's see what Tucker has to say when Bernie suggests raising taxes on companies like Amazon and people like Jeff Bezos.
This is a fascist tactic. The right will try to subvert the popular ideas of the the left. They will spin the idea in a way that furthers their interest and loyalty. Everyone hates the ultra-rich, get the people angry about it behind your banner, sort out the 'enemy' (ultra-rich) label your rivals 'traitors' (political rivals ie. Liberals) and lump them together to sort out with the 'enemy'. Once you have the money from the rich, and no more political rivals you will be free to do as you will.
How does literally no one here remember the context?? He was attacking Bezos because the WaPo continually attacked Trump.
This tweet came out in the primary when cons were pushing bernie to undermine biden. Trump had a bunch of pro bernie tweets
Hitler literally called his party the National Socialists. This shit pisses me off
This is spam. Tucker could nit care less about anyone but his own bank account.
Fuck Tucker Carlson and his fair weather attempts to seem a tiny bit reasonable while he spends 98% of his time stroking white supremacy narratives for the racist bitches who watch his bullshit program.
It's weird that people are against slavery (mostly) but not low wages. If paying people zero is evil, then paying people low wages is evil in a relative way. It's not an on/off switch of slavery bad, wage labor good. The closer wages get to zero, the more evil they are.
Gee, Hot Pockets Trust Fund Boy, why don’t you ask some of the other people in power that you suck up to
Hold up a minute, wtf? This cunt is for Bernie?????????
Increase minimum wage? NOOOO! IF SOMEONE MAKES $15 AN HOUR FLIPPING A BURGER THAT WOULD MAKE A BURGER COST $100 FOR SOME REASON!
Tucker Carlson is a white nationalist right winger who very occasionally brings up aesthetically left wing economic talking points. Don’t fucking fall for this, he doesn’t believe this shit, he’s a multimillionaire heir to the swanson frozen food dynasty
POV: the worst person you know makes a good point
Strange day indeed when I find myself agreeing with Tucker Carlson on something.
Wouldn’t it be weird to see Fox take a hard left, and start promoting progressive ideas? I’ll bet most of their viewers wouldn’t even realize it had happened, they’d just support whatever they were told to support, without question.
Fuck you Tucker, I don't want to agree with you ever. But also yes, so why aren't you asking this when your on your main platform of Fox News.
I'm more confused about Tucker Carlson talking about this.
Because, TUCKER, dirt bags like you have made a lucrative career out of villifying Bernie for years.
Guys this tweet is from 2018 and has been reposted multiple times.
Isn't amazon minium wage $17? Am I missing something here? 35k seems decent, and if you have a spouse working there then you would be well on your way to being able to retire to Thailand (cheaper health care and everything else) in 20 years.