After winning the Nobel peace prize, he dropped an average of 30k bombs / year (80 per day) during his presidency, mostly on Muslim countries, 2, 3. In 2016 alone, dropped 26,171 bombs in the Middle East and North Africa, up 3000 from the previous year. The countries bombed include Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, and Somalia.
Began a campaign of drone assassinations in the Middle East and Africa, in which 90% of those killed were not the intended targets, but innocent civilian bystanders, including women, children, and US citizens. 1. Drone strikes are used by the military and the CIA to hunt down and kill people the Obama administration has deemed — through secretive processes, without indictment or trial — worthy of execution. He authorized 10 times more drone strikes than George W Bush, 2. The Obama assassination program is detailed in the drone papers.

Biden's legacy:

The democrats are a brutal, vicious, genocidal party.

[–] bennieandthez@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 1 hour ago

People from the global south watching american fighting over who is less evil never gets old.

[+] belastend@slrpnk.net 28 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (5 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] dessalines@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

The democrats (just like US republicans) are a party of genocide:

[–] bennieandthez@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

weakening the US state is a good thing in my book. The less organized the imperial core is the more breathing room there is for the rest of the world.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

it's not weakening; it's reshuffling resources to prioritize china.

[–] bennieandthez@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 49 minutes ago* (last edited 43 minutes ago)

It does weakening it temporarily, institutions take time to get properly organized and function efficiently. Think of USAID, while not perfectly efficient it already functioned like an oiled machine, dismantling it to set up a new one will require more work to get it started than just keeping USAID going, with the added risk that the newer thing is not guaranteed to succeed.

[–] AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee 8 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Im not sure if you actually looked at the words on the meme or not, but it doesn't say they're "exactly the same" it says they're less evil. Democrats teamed up with war criminal Dick Cheney for fucks sake, it's like they are actively trying to make people not vote for them.

[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world -2 points 2 hours ago

If someone I don't like or interact with says they support me, that is not me "teaming up" with them.

[–] Dengalicious@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 4 hours ago

Dishonest to say only the things Trump has done but not look at the situation equally. Why not mentioned Biden’s reversal of Trump’s plan to withdraw US troops from Somalia?

Secondly, when was the first time you had heard of USAID? I find all these people love to say how many “lives it saves” while they also had only learned about it very recently. USAID was a tool of US neocolonialism designed to prevent countries in the global south from gaining sovereignty.

They are both the same and the last two months has only further confirmed that.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 13 points 8 hours ago

hey only 86 million people didn't vote

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 46 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (6 children)

This meme made sense in 2012, not when the Republican Party has decided to be the Anti-Democratic Party.

[–] AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee 6 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

If anything Democrats have moved further to the right recently

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] Pilferjinx@lemmy.world 57 points 12 hours ago

I'd take some less evil, please.

[–] Sibshops@lemm.ee 22 points 12 hours ago (9 children)

I don't understand why people who think this don't advocate for ranked choice voting. Seems like it would solve this issue, right?

[–] dessalines@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

It doesn't. There are plenty of bourgeois democracies that don't use FPTP for all their voting: Japan, Australia, South Korea for some of their elections. Doesn't make a difference (except it might make the bribery a bit more expensive, since you have to buy off more political parties than just two).

The fundamental problem is capital standing above political power. If it does so, then no amount of alternative voting systems can fix the issue. Socialism is the only answer.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

No, RCV wouldn't. The fundamental problem of electoral politics being a game between factions pre-approved by the bourgeoisie won't change, there are even safeguards preventing unwanted change that losing parties and government branches can pull in the rare event a worker party won.

It's the perfect carrot, it won't get passed nor would it change much.

load more comments (7 replies)

load more comments