4 ms·

The uniparty does not want secure, fast, accurate election. Election manipulation is the game... Neither side of the uniparty want to admit that though and bel

by syshum 5y ago

The uniparty does not want secure, fast, accurate election. Election manipulation is the game... Neither side of the uniparty want to admit that though and believe "their side" is the pure and virtuous side, where as the "others" are evil vote stealers or suppressors

hatware 5y ago
I like how this is fading because folks can't process reality. How anyone thinks lifelong politicians are serving us in _any_ way is beyond me.
- sidlls 5y ago
  Tribalism has a very strong presence in the US.
  - hatware 5y ago
    I just call it the Agent Smith effect
SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
I’m struggling to identify what is a uniparty here. I fee that the two parties in the United States have multiple separate issues and behaviors that are mutually incompatible enough to call two different political organizations. For example, when the republicans were in power, very few social programs were passed/rolled out in the 4 years they were in power for. The Democrats in comparison have passed a significant amount of legislation in just 8 months, including new social programs like the child tax credit. Similarly, the removal and reinstatement of protection for Dreamers also seems to be one of those issues the parties broadly are incompatible about. If you would like to educate me, I would welcome it! Maybe my understanding of a party is wrong, or my understanding of policies are wrong. I’m not really into politics so I don’t know much.
- macksd 5y ago
  They may be referring to the fact that the two parties will often join forces to protect the status quo. Where you see support for things like ranked choice voting, or easier ballot access for third parties, you see less support from the established party leaders because the status quo is their best case scenario. It's all about democracy as long as you have the majority. While in actual votes the parties may differ, in principle I often fail to see any clear difference in philosophy. Someone running against the incumbent will slam them for abuse of executive orders and support for the Patriot Act. Then they'll get in office and sign a renewal of the Patriot Act and issue more executive orders than their predecessor. In that way I see them as a uniparty on many issues. In other ways Republicans are just anti-Democrats and Democrats are just anti-Republicans. They seem to use the same arguments on different issues depending on what happens to suit them or what politician they're defending. I've seen Republicans slam Biden for his failure in Afghanistan and failing to get Afghan nationals that helped the US military evacuated. But watch them do a 180 as soon as any of those Afghans arrive here. Which party believes you have absolute autonomy over your own medical decisions and that doctors need to treat you according to your own wishes? Well it depends on the treatment we're discussing. It doesn't depend on any consistent principle. Call it a uniparty or not - I just don't trust either to be sincere about any democratic principles anymore.
- mindslight 5y ago
  Individual candidates have differing policies, but their overall platform is cut from the same cloth - benefiting their corporate sponsors. The main backdrop of agreement is massive money printing to prop up ever growing market bubbles, to the detriment of individuals' finances. The main differentiation comes in how they spin the fallout from corporate welfare - the Democrats want to use some printed money for individual welfare, whereas the Republicans market fake austerity. Having said that, individual candidates do differ and the Republican party is going down a dark path dressed up as libertarianism that almost made me reflexively downvote "uniparty" above.
- syshum 5y ago
  >>I fee that the two parties in the United States have multiple separate issues I suspect that is largely because the issues you care about happen to align with one single party. You primary seem to focus on what government can provide in way of social programs. Do you believe that is the sole role of government or even a proper role of government? To provide things for people? If so it is not surprising you believe there is differences between the parties, because on the issue of social program there does seem to be (even though that is only surface level) a difference, democrats love to give out lots of free money to people they believe will continue to vote for them. I am sure my opinions on those programs you will disagree with. The problem here is that I do not believe those programs are put into place to help anyone, they are just another form of control. The uniparty wants control, they get that via fear, money, and division. The apparent divide on "social programs" is an example of how the uniparty convinces people they are separate, when in reality they are both authoritarian driven by the desire to control people, not help them. Edit: BTW, Follow the money for your democrats... Look at the actual spending bills, look at where the Trillions of Dollars is going. Hint it is not the poor... sure a Few billion is for the headlines, but most of it is plain old corporate welfare just like Republicans do....

by syshum 5y ago

hatware 5y ago

I like how this is fading because folks can't process reality. How anyone thinks lifelong politicians are serving us in _any_ way is beyond me.

sidlls 5y ago
Tribalism has a very strong presence in the US.
- hatware 5y ago
  I just call it the Agent Smith effect

SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago

I’m struggling to identify what is a uniparty here. I fee that the two parties in the United States have multiple separate issues and behaviors that are mutually incompatible enough to call two different political organizations. For example, when the republicans were in power, very few social programs were passed/rolled out in the 4 years they were in power for. The Democrats in comparison have passed a significant amount of legislation in just 8 months, including new social programs like the child tax credit. Similarly, the removal and reinstatement of protection for Dreamers also seems to be one of those issues the parties broadly are incompatible about. If you would like to educate me, I would welcome it! Maybe my understanding of a party is wrong, or my understanding of policies are wrong. I’m not really into politics so I don’t know much.

macksd 5y ago
They may be referring to the fact that the two parties will often join forces to protect the status quo. Where you see support for things like ranked choice voting, or easier ballot access for third parties, you see less support from the established party leaders because the status quo is their best case scenario. It's all about democracy as long as you have the majority. While in actual votes the parties may differ, in principle I often fail to see any clear difference in philosophy. Someone running against the incumbent will slam them for abuse of executive orders and support for the Patriot Act. Then they'll get in office and sign a renewal of the Patriot Act and issue more executive orders than their predecessor. In that way I see them as a uniparty on many issues. In other ways Republicans are just anti-Democrats and Democrats are just anti-Republicans. They seem to use the same arguments on different issues depending on what happens to suit them or what politician they're defending. I've seen Republicans slam Biden for his failure in Afghanistan and failing to get Afghan nationals that helped the US military evacuated. But watch them do a 180 as soon as any of those Afghans arrive here. Which party believes you have absolute autonomy over your own medical decisions and that doctors need to treat you according to your own wishes? Well it depends on the treatment we're discussing. It doesn't depend on any consistent principle. Call it a uniparty or not - I just don't trust either to be sincere about any democratic principles anymore.
mindslight 5y ago
Individual candidates have differing policies, but their overall platform is cut from the same cloth - benefiting their corporate sponsors. The main backdrop of agreement is massive money printing to prop up ever growing market bubbles, to the detriment of individuals' finances. The main differentiation comes in how they spin the fallout from corporate welfare - the Democrats want to use some printed money for individual welfare, whereas the Republicans market fake austerity. Having said that, individual candidates do differ and the Republican party is going down a dark path dressed up as libertarianism that almost made me reflexively downvote "uniparty" above.
syshum 5y ago
>>I fee that the two parties in the United States have multiple separate issues I suspect that is largely because the issues you care about happen to align with one single party. You primary seem to focus on what government can provide in way of social programs. Do you believe that is the sole role of government or even a proper role of government? To provide things for people? If so it is not surprising you believe there is differences between the parties, because on the issue of social program there does seem to be (even though that is only surface level) a difference, democrats love to give out lots of free money to people they believe will continue to vote for them. I am sure my opinions on those programs you will disagree with. The problem here is that I do not believe those programs are put into place to help anyone, they are just another form of control. The uniparty wants control, they get that via fear, money, and division. The apparent divide on "social programs" is an example of how the uniparty convinces people they are separate, when in reality they are both authoritarian driven by the desire to control people, not help them. Edit: BTW, Follow the money for your democrats... Look at the actual spending bills, look at where the Trillions of Dollars is going. Hint it is not the poor... sure a Few billion is for the headlines, but most of it is plain old corporate welfare just like Republicans do....