#we're doing an evil campaign and yes it was justified

[tvrcerberaspeed12]

lit dnd session we killed multiple kids and their father

[thereallifecath]

"You say a lot of vulnerable people would be devastated under Trump rule as if no one is being devastated now." yeah, like the people getting poisoned by contaminated foods as a result of food safety regulations overturned by trump, and the kids in springfield ohio whose schools keep getting bomb threats because of racist comments made by trump, and the people suffering from long covid because the response team to pandemic threats was dismantled in 2018 by trump, and the people suffering in gaza because israel was emboldened by the american embassy being moved to jerusalem and jerusalem being declared the capitol of israel by trump, and women being denied medical care because roe v wade was overturned by the supreme court members put in place by trump.

did it never occur to you that the impact of a president on our country doesn't end as soon as they leave office? it's a lot easier for a president to do lasting damage than it is for the following president to fix it. America is still STILL suffering because of the actions of reagan, who left office 35 years ago and has been dead for 20 of them. And we're absolutely still suffering because of the last time trump made it into office and will be for a long time to come.

It is so ignorant to use the current suffering of Americans as an justification to increase and prolong our suffering by advocating against voting with your nonsense about how it doesn't matter both sides are basically. Truly spoken like someone from a country where voting is mandatory towards people of a country where a mere 2/3rds of the population voting is a historically high turnout.

You in australia will be safe from the impact of an american election, the people in gaza won't.

You are just continuing to make assumptions and put words in my mouth that I never touched. Please point out to me where I said to not vote, or that Presidents don’t do lasting damage, or where I advocated to prolong Americans suffering justified by current suffering?

THE PEOPLE IN GAZA ARE CURRENTLY DYING WHETHER KAMALA WINS OR NOT. She does not care about them, neither does Trump. If you think you can’t criticise both sides for the damage they’ve both inflicted you’re wrong. Just because Trump has done terrible things doesn’t mean Harris hasn’t.

I didn’t fucking claim that I was going to be unsafe from the American election, all I did was point out that there is a ripple effect and that Australia will most likely follow suit in what America does. I also don’t fucking care what happens to me, I care what happens to the generations of Palestinians never getting to go back home, and the fucking children for christs sake having way more empathy than grown adults, and the Indigenous and First Nations peoples who are hoping that if Palestine can be free, so can they. I don’t see how I’m evil because I told you the American people, and Palestinian people that you all deserve better than the lesser of two evils.

And I’m unsure of what that’s supposed to mean “Truly spoken like someone from a country where voting is mandatory”… ok? Did I encourage people not to vote? No i did no such thing, I said that I don’t see how the system can ever change if people don’t ever try and vote for someone else… my problem isn’t that they started an event to get people to vote, that would be fine - it would even be okay if they did the same event they’re doing now - but with active fundraising and events also to protect and help Palestine. But they aren’t, it’s just a campaign to get people to vote for her, and yes I see the importance of making sure Trump never gets into office again but I fucking long for a world where people don’t have to choose some other shitty person to get away from the shittier one. It isn’t fair.

I can be reasoned with, in the sense that yes 100% vote for her if it means not voting for him, but I will not support or stand by celebs who have done fuck all for Palestine do an event to promote voting for her.

I also hate having discourse with people online, because I can never tell what people’s tone is and I just want to say that I’m not saying any of this with anger towards you, or with any viciousness. I am fucking exhausted, and I really honestly don’t want to see anyone hurt anymore. I guess I’m just a bit delusional in hoping that neither Democratic or Republican/Labour or Liberal have to win… that if you guys can do it then it can happen here, and then people with actual empathy can be in power… I do not wish to anger you or make you mad, I want the world to actually change for the better and I know that despite Albanese being good in certain ways, it gets shit on by how horrendous he is in other ways. NSW has in the past year put through archaic anti protest laws, nationwide parliament have changed the NDIS laws to much worse shitty ones, and have consistently lied about their active involvement in the ongoing genocide in Palestine. And this is under the Labour government aka the good guys - the Democrats. Do I want to vote for Scott Morrison or whatever cunt is on the ballot for Liberal next? No but I can’t stand the thought of voting for Albo again.

Something has to give right? Four more years with Albo or Harris just means four more years of the same government doing fuck all to help those who need help. It’s been almost a whole year since the current wave of genocide in Gaza started and there has been no action for good by either governments despite the protests every single week, and the encampments and the petitions and everything else.

I want people in power who understand that they serve the people not the other way around.

[qqueenofhades]

I would love to know your defense of Democrats supporting anti-abortion dems in their own party over pro-choice progressives. Nancy Pelosi went to campaign for Henry Cuellar, an anti-abortion dem, over a progressive pro-choice challenger! Why do I have to keep supporting a party that only uses Roe and abortion rights as a fundraising tool instead doing the bare minimum of pushing their own members to the party platform the way republicans do.

Republicans are absolutely fantastic as forcing their politicians into line and it's something that establishment Dems will berate you for trying to do. Please take an honest look at the dem party before launching into full throated defenses of them. And before you ask, yes I did vote for Hillary and Biden despite being a "Bernie Bro" and yes all the other Bernie supporters I know also voted for them

Sigh. Look. I'm going to try to answer this honestly and politely, because I recognize that there's a time for snark, rants, and angry rageposting, and there's a time for genuinely reaching out and trying to teach/discuss/find common ground. But if I enter into your ask with an open mind, you're going to have to return the favor, and actually think about what I say, instead of just repeating the favored leftist talking points over and over. And if I sound frustrated, it's because I am. We have been trying to explain this since 2016, while a lot of people remained willfully obtuse and continue, even now when Roe is literally gone, to repeat the same old (false) ideological canards in the name of Twitter/social media clout chasing. So if this is a genuine attempt to learn, okay. I'm happy to oblige. If it's just because you still want to believe what you believe regardless of anything I say, it's not the best use of anyone's time. But I'll do it anyway, since I have a decent amount of followers and it may help someone else. So.

First, why do you assume that I haven't "taken an honest look at the dem party before launching into full throated defenses of them?" Is that really the criteria you want to use, given that certain segments of leftists have utterly abandoned any realistic or honest assessments of the Democratic party in favor of constructing an all-powerful evil anti-progressive boogeyman that they clearly hate far more than the Republicans? I am entirely open to criticism of Democrats on actual grounds for real things that are actually their fault, and are not overheated, rebaked QAnon propaganda that calls Joe Biden a senile old rapist and portrays the entire party as the exact same threat to America that the right wing thinks that they are. That's not progressive; it's just Democrat Derangement Syndrome that makes you sound no different from a ranting fascist on Fox News. If I can't tell the difference between my enemies and my supposed allies, there is something wrong here.

Right now, I am also intensely frustrated with the constant leftist attempts to desperately find a way to still blame the Democrats for a singular political action that is demonstrably and directly the result of Republican bad actors making choices to support obvious Republican policy goals. Why is it so important to you people to Also Blame The Democrats, by relentlessly nitpicking every minor detail and shortcoming of a flawed but generally reasonable political party, rather than consistently and uncompromisingly opposing the open fascists? Why do you feel the need to give Republicans cover for this heinous action and fuel the "Both Sides Are Bad!!!" false equivalence whipped up by the media and constantly reinforced to the active detriment of the well-being of everyone in this country? So if we're talking about taking "honest looks" at things and being open to justified criticism, why don't we start there?

Next, so you're blaming the left's OTHER favorite scapegoat, Nancy Pelosi, for campaigning for one singular House incumbent. ONE Democrat in a conservative-leaning district in goddamn Texas, when it's already going to be an incredible fight for Democrats to hold the House? One of the reasons Obama didn't "codify Roe!!!" during his brief (4-month) period of having an 60-vote supermajority in the Senate was because there simply were not 60 pro-choice Democrats in the Senate in 2009. (Back then, there were Democratic senators from ruby-red states like South Dakota and Nebraska, if you want an illustration of how much things have changed.) Those are seats that a Democrat is not going to win again for at least a generation in the post-Trump political landscape, and red-state Blue Dog Democrats were not going to support it. Besides, as people have pointed out a thousand times, even if Obama had succeeded in passing this law, the Supreme Court could still overturn it! That is literally their job! That is the power that the Constitution grants them! So why are you complaining about a theoretical action that Obama probably couldn't have realistically taken anyway, and still could have been overruled in the exact same way even if he did, rather than the actual action that was taken by a completely identifiable and Republican group of people?

The Democratic party overall is VASTLY more pro-choice than it was in 2009. Joe Manchin is the only anti-choice red state Democratic senator left, and as for Cuellar? Let's take a look at his ratings on abortion for this year (you can find his entire record here and track how his voting pattern has consistently shifted to be more pro-choice):

So... the Christian fundie FRC and National Right to Life anti-abortion advocacy group give Cuellar dismal ratings (9% and 7%, respectively) whereas NARAL Pro-Choice America now gives him a whopping 100%. Planned Parenthood Action also gives him a solid 80%, which is a steady and continued climb from his previous ratings hovering in the 50s. So even the one, ONE personally anti-abortion Democrat you have identified by name, over and against LITERALLY EVERY MEMBER OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, has, for the most part, followed party orthodoxy and voted in a pro-choice fashion, regardless of what his individual beliefs might be. And yet, according to you, Democrats "berate" their party members for falling in line, or actually don’t force them to fall in line, or... something?

The Democrats have shifted their policy drastically on abortion over even the last ten years. What exactly is your evidence for the statement that they only use Roe and abortion rights as a "fundraising tool?" For one, they have had to do that because the Republicans would have overturned this much sooner if they could, and had to resort to Mitch McConnell's open evil law breaking to cram the Court after Trump managed to squeak out a win in a heavily interfered-with and non-popular-vote-winning election. For two, Roe was actually overturned THREE DAYS AGO, after the draft opinion was leaked in May. WHY HAVEN'T DEMOCRATS FIXED THIS YET!!! is not a valid critique. Once again, I repeat: why is it so important for you to blame the Democrats for this? Yes, we have gone over a thousand times why they’re flawed and why opportunities were missed and more could have been done. But when you’re faced with unambiguous, unassailable evidence that both parties are NOT the same, you... desperately try to find a way to let Republicans off the hook for it? Why? WHY?

As I said, I am entirely open to criticizing the Democrats for actual things that are actually their fault. Biden needs to take a lot more executive action and not just rely on “vote in November!” as a message, even if we also have to do that. We also have to see Senate and House Democrats making more organized efforts to force the Republicans to completely own an action that 67% of American women strongly disagree with. This could be a generational moment where the Republicans, in finally achieving their cherished dream, finally fly too close to the sun and get their KKK hoods whipped off. Maybe, in that case, we can stop treating them like a valid political party in a representative democratic republic and properly label them as the Christofascist white supremacist domestic terrorists that they are. So why the hell aren’t progressives throwing their weight behind their most significant opportunity to break the power of the right wing that has existed in America since its founding? Taking down the Republican party is vital to our survival in any number of ways, so... I suggest, with all due respect, that you and everyone finally get with the program. You want a revolution? This is fucking it. If you seize the chance.

[ginazmemeoir]

hey look at this stupid ass take

i will admit with the first line. Each community has good and bad people, and pedestalizing or making them a permanent victim is a human folly.

however the rest is absolute bullshit. does she even pay attention to *actually* what is happening?

Nobody is saying anything against Hinduism, and i'm saying that as a hindu. what we're saying is against hindutva.

just the same way people talk about nazism, not christianity

zionism, not jews

the taliban, not islam

AND MANY MORE.

See the thing is, religious politics is not something new in India - it has been practiced for a looong time. Modern day religious politics are derived from the British, who first introduced it to us. Painting the Hindus as "godless heathens" and Muslims as "wanderers", the Britishers accomplished their first mission successfully by pitting the largest religious communities against each other. Next, following the 1857 Rebellion, they started a massive Islamophobic campaign, deliberately destroying India's secular fabric.

Now onto what this user was ranting about. The only threat, the only damage to my religion - is by these politicians and so called "saviours of the sanatan dharma".

first off, to appeal to the conservative mind since y'all are stuck in the 50s - do you think a religion that has lasted for 5000 years needs protection? and do you think that you, a wimp fed on hatred, is the person to do that?

secondly, your religion isn't the one being seen as "supremacist" or "evil". it's a movement started by your leaders that's being compared to nazism. Hindutva =/ Hinduism. The biggest damage, the biggest threat to hinduism, is from the hindutva movement and it's perpetrators and people who spread these fake propagandas - basically the BJP-RSS and their allies. They have transformed hinduism into something rotten, dark and twisted. they are brainwashing people day by day, and are easily getting away with it. just the same way people condemn Nazism, Hitler, and conservative christians who use their religion as a prop to justify genocide and social evils, in the very same way, we condemn Hindutva, Modi, and orthodox hindus who use their religion as a prop to justify genocide and social evils.

thirdly, nobody is denying the fact that hinduphobia exists, nor are we denying the fact that yes, through some points in the history, the religion did face some persecution. however, suggesting that this happens/happened at a large scale and thus will "wipe off hinduism" is propaganda. suggesting that muslims practice "love jihad" to "devour the hindu population" is islamophobic propaganda. suggesting hindus suffer from "inter-generational trauma due to what was faced by them" (i actually saw a white person write this in a screenshot) is again, brainwashed propaganda.

so in fact, no.

we don't have a problem with hinduism, we have a problem with people like you, user who wrote that stupid soggy paragraph. we have a problem with the hindutva movement. we have a problem with those motherfuckers you worship like Modi, Amit Shah, Yogi etc. who justify Islamophobia and incite hateful propaganda.

[ihopesocomic]

What did you think about Cruella's movie? I didn't watch it because I don't see the fun in people trying to make every existing villain "sympathetic". Sometimes we like villains, and sometimes we just hate them. I didn't understand why they wanted to turn Cruella into an "independent strong woman". But anyway, did the movie really try to give Cruella a "sad story" to try to justify her literally wanting to kill puppies in the original movie? Or was it more of an alternate Universe type?

I like to think, out of all the villains in the Disney canon, Cruella De Vil would be at the very top of the list of 'villains that are evil just because'.

Here's the thing: Cruella De Vil is an animal abuser. She wanted to kill puppies for their fucking fur.

So, why the hell are we getting this "tragick backstorieee" about why she became a villain? Because I don't care. I don't care that her mother died, I don't care that she got knocked off a cliff by Dalmatians and that therefore "explains" why Cruella hates them... except it doesn't.

Allow me to direct you to Glenn Close's Cruella. Yes, I'm sort of biased because Glenn Close is a goddamn queen but hear me out.

Glenn Close's Cruella wanted to kill puppies because... fashion. Fur coats were not an acceptable thing to have by the time the live-action 101 Dalmatians rolled about. Not even a decade before the movie's release (in the late 80's), the fur industry throughout the UK was single-handedly destroyed by effective and powerful campaigns by animal rights activists. Fur became taboo. 102 Dalmatians actually touched upon this in one scene.

This played to Cruella's strengths. To hell with ethics, she was still gonna get her fur coat, blowing thousands of pounds on the way and people were gonna be horrified. Anita warns her that fur is crass and inappropriate to wear at various fashion galas - for reasons I've just stated - but Cruella doesn't care because she's gonna look good. Because fashion.

Glenn Close's Cruella was a villain because... fashion. She LIVED for fashion (is there a woman in this wretched world who doesn't?)

If any of y'all had any idea of how ruthless and confident people in the fashion industry are: this is a simple but brilliant villain. She's a parody of fashion designers but, at the same time, she's scarily accurate. Despite them not really trying and letting Glenn Close have a blast, they made a real villain.

A villain pissed off by the limitations of the fashion industry at the time and who sought to rebel against it.

Fashion comes before everything she does, including having a husband and children. This adds complexity and relatability. When I could fully grasp Cruella expressing her sympathies to Anita when she discovered she was pregnant and had thrown away her successful career because of a game designer who hadn't even made a sale yet, I discovered something rather startling:

I'd grown up to be Cruella De Vil.

This is a great fucking villain. She's the lowest of the low (she wants to hurt puppies) but... I still like her? I relate to her??

And she doesn't even need the wild backstory about how parental death caused her to be the way she is for that to be achieved. Also newsflash: parental death doesn't breed animal abusers. You couldn't have picked a worse excuse if you tried.

Also, the portrayal of mental illness in this film was ridiculous. It's almost like the Disney writers were frantically trying to reach for any sensitive subject for Cruella, smack it onto her and hope that it would resonate with SOMEBODY. With no regard for those who actually live and breathe this kind of reality.

Glenn Close's Cruella handed everything to Disney on a silver platter and they pretty much spat on it and said 'nah, we're gonna do a retcon' and it was terrible and I hated that I was robbed of a prequel to Glenn Close's Cruella and how she rose to the top and allowed the world of fashion to corrupt her. Because that can happen to artists and it's such a great thing to explore.

Villains do not always need tragic backstories to explain their actions. They don't always need tragic backstories PERIOD. Especially Disney villains. They're meant to be fun, they're meant to be loud and they're better off simple. Tragic backstories make them too real and too complex and they don't NEED that. They've terrified and amazed generations without them. They're fine as it is.

Also, giving Cruella, Jasper and Horace these cute lil doggy sidekicks was contradictory as all hell and just made no sense. You don't give characters renowned for wanting to ‘poison them, drown them, bash them on the head' the very things they wanted to hurt. Just... what was even the aim of this movie and its characterisation? Because I don't even know.

What's next? We're gonna have a prequel for Captain Ahab from Moby Dick where a whale consumed his entire family but he has a dolphin sidekick voiced by James Corden?

Just a pointless movie that didn't know its source material at all or, at the very worst, just decided it could do better and throw in the hallmarks of a live Disney production nonsensically (i.e. cute fluffy doggies) and think nobody would notice. - RJ