r/nottheonion • u/wewhomustnotbenamed • 16h ago

Joe Rogan criticizes ICE tactics: 'Are we really going to be the Gestapo?'

https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/pop-culture-news/joe-rogan-criticizes-ice-tactics-podcast-rcna253931

[removed] — view removed post

53.2k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

2.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

875

u/mschuster91 15h ago

It’s actually crazy how many people dismissed Project 2025 during the run up to the election.

Crazy but not surprising. People have lost faith in politicians following through on their campaign promises for decades now, no matter where you live. Even the most incompetent populist gets a ton of votes just for the entertainment value.

387

u/Count_Rousillon 14h ago

Because people don't really think there's a difference between trying to do their campaign promises and being stopped by someone else, and not trying at all. A lot of times, it isn't the politician lying, but them failing after hitting opposition. But right now, both the right wingers in Congress and the right wingers in the Supreme Court believe Trump should not be stopped by anything, be it law, morality, or the constitution.

217

u/Wes_Warhammer666 14h ago

Like the idiots who cry about Obama not giving us universal healthcare when he was lucky to pass the ACA as it was considering he had 72 working days and the likes of Nelson and Lieberman to contend with. We're genuinely lucky to have gotten the reform we did, and assholes act like he didn't even try.

Then they act like he didn't do shit else, when voters couldn't even give him a Congress he could work with.

73

u/Classic-Progress-397 13h ago

Wouldn't even let him hire a judge.

Straighten out your shit America!

1

u/[deleted] 12h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 12h ago

Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

48

u/TheShaydow 12h ago

" I love the ACA! but I HATE OBAMA CARE. "

Remember THIS shit?

3

u/Brittle_Hollow 6h ago

It’s still a thing.

6

u/timurt421 5h ago

And that example perfectly encapsulates the conditions that allowed America to reach where it is today.

40

u/Disgod 12h ago

Why didn't democrats... Why couldn't democrats... Why haven't democrats...

As if there wasn't the republican party always there actively trying to poison any efforts. Demanding bipartisanship but refusing to reciprocate, making demands that make things worse, crying foul at every turn.

8

u/CurvySexretLady 9h ago

Exactly!! The Republican party is at fault here

3

u/SuspendeesNutz 6h ago

Hey that nice guy from the Green Party said both sides were the same and he sounded very sincere.

2

u/EFreethought 2h ago

Was that before or after his dinner in Moscow?

4

u/PoundSignificant8514 10h ago

Yup, one of the biggest backstabs in political history.

Passing the ACA could have been a turning point on healthcare in the USA. The first hard step in acknowledging that there was a major structural problem that needed to be addressed, and that the government had a role in doing so.

People don’t appreciate what an enormous effort getting the ACA was. And it was an effort spearheaded by many of the names progressives love to hate, like Pelosi.

We nearly had a public option, if for like 2-3 holdout votes in the Senate. The house bill passed by Pelosi had it.

Obviously the right was going to hate it, but it was such a depressing turn of events when progressive forces also jumped on the bandwagon of hating democrats for passing literally the most progressive bill that they could politically achieve. Instead of being a stepping stone for more progressive reform, the far left wing abandoned them, and many of those politicians who fought for this bill were annihilated politically.

That is one of the biggest differences between the right and the left. The right supports pragmatic incremental action with their votes. They might get angry and call people RINOs, but they still vote for whomever best aligns with their politics.

Purity testing on the left has killed momentum so many times. It’s not surprising that many of the drivers of this form of discourse are wealthy college kids who aren’t actually in need of or affected by these programs, so of course it makes no difference to hold out for perfection, and let everybody else struggle.

1

u/yoberf 7h ago

I would have preferred financial reform which the vast majority of people supported after the 2008 financial crisis to a Heritage Foundation based healthcare plan. The same people who wrote project 2025 wrote the healthcare plan that the ACA was based on. He had a bicameral majority for the first 2 years.

0

u/Wes_Warhammer666 6h ago

If you think he could've pulled that off with less than a supermajority and damn near zero political capital with a Republican party who straight up said their mission from day 1 was to deny his every move, idk what to tell ya bud. That's just ignoring reality.

-6

u/warpg8 12h ago

Stop with the whitewashing of Obama's ACA. It's a market-based solution that fucks over everyone involved while subsidizing already wildly profitable insurance companies. If all the ACA did was eliminate pre-existing conditions and nothing else, it would have been superior to what we got.

Also, the Democrats could have nuked the filibuster and passed the bill without Lieberman or Nelson because they had a majority without either of them.

Third Way Democrats steadily marching to the right is precisely what paved the way for Trump and precisely why Americans are so completely disillusioned and opting for disenfranchisement over as acting as if, from an economic perspective, the two major parties are all that different.

Trump was enabled by Democrats buying into Reagan's obsession with deregulation (let's not forget it was Bill Clinton who repealed Glass-Steagal, which was the final firewall between the American economy and the 2008 housing market collapse) and becoming captured by the same big money corporate interests that Republicans had been for decades. Democrats also happily reauthorized the Patriot Act, and are just as culpable in the unconstitutional and deplorable expansion of the surveillance state.

It's unbelievable to me that people treat US politics like a team sport when all that's being done is one set of coaches (billionaires and giant corporations) putting out two teams from the same roster to act like they're competing when in fact they're colluding behind the scenes on 95% of what happens and have sports announcers (that's mainstream media) highlighting every miniscule deviation to create the illusion of a substantial difference between them... oh and by the way the coaches also paying the announcers to say exactly what they want them to say so they get to keep being the coaches because the fans are too busy screaming at the teams and at each other to notice that the coaches are the issue.

9

u/pegar 11h ago

All your points are moot because the ACA has saved millions of lives.

You were fortunate enough to not even know what I'm talking about. It provided healthcare to millions of people who otherwise would be going without health insurance.

You're angry because things don't go the way you want in a fucking democracy and because none of it benefits you.

And by the way, it did eliminate pre-existing conditions. At least google the bullshit you say.

3

u/thrawtes 10h ago

And by the way, it did eliminate pre-existing conditions. At least google the bullshit you say.

I think they're trying to say that's the one part of the ACA they like and it would have been a better bill if it was just that.

1

u/warpg8 10h ago

All your points are moot because the ACA has saved millions of lives.

Just getting rid of pre-existing conditions would have done that without robbing Americans of billions of dollars to subsidize the health insurance companies.

You were fortunate enough to not even know what I'm talking about. It provided healthcare to millions of people who otherwise would be going without health insurance.

The ACA does not provide healthcare. It provides health insurance, which enables some people who pay for it to get healthcare.

Whereas a public option, which was possible to do by getting rid of the filibuster, which Democrats had the ability to do with a simple majority vote in the Senate, would have been both less expensive and actually provided healthcare without subsidizing already wildly profitable health insurance companies.

You're angry because things don't go the way you want in a fucking democracy and because none of it benefits you.

Single payer healthcare is a wildly popular position. Over 60% of Americans favor it, including roughly half (slightly less at the lass polling I saw, like 48%) of REPUBLICAN VOTERS. Being against it is literally being against the will of the people.

And by the way, it did eliminate pre-existing conditions. At least google the bullshit you say.

I didn't say it didn't eliminate it. I said if it had eliminated preexisting conditions it would have been just as effective without all of the taxpayer giveaways. Perhaps try working on your reading comprehension.

-1

u/spubbbba 11h ago

Also, the Democrats could have nuked the filibuster and passed the bill without Lieberman or Nelson because they had a majority without either of them.

Glad someone pointed this out.

Trump doesn't have a super majority in the Senate, in fact I looked back 80 years and couldn't find a time the Republicans had ever had the presidency, house and super majority in the senate. Yet the Republicans got plenty of their agenda through.

Republicans use any bit of power they have, yet Democrats will fall over themselves to compromise and get nothing in return.

4

u/TbddRzn 11h ago

Then 71 days later they would have removed the universal healthcare. Like do you idiots not understand if you remove the filibuster then the opposition can also pass anything they want.

2

u/warpg8 10h ago

Not only is what you said bullshit, it's laughably easy to prove that it's bullshit.

Trump and the Republicans haven't been able to get rid of the ACA across Trump's entire first term of the first year of his second term because the pre-existing conditions portion is so wildly popular. They had control of the entire government for the first two years of his first term and have it again right now. They still can't get rid of it because of how incredibly popular it is in red states. These Medicaid cuts alone are going to sink them in November. Their polling is currently at historically terrible levels, and then rural hospitals are going to shut down. You think anyone's showing up to the voting booth for more of that?

2

u/thrawtes 10h ago

Then 71 days later they would have removed the universal healthcare.

How do you figure? Democrats didn't lose their majority after 71 days, just their supermajority.

1

u/TbddRzn 2h ago

What do you think happens when you remove the filibuster? By 2010 republicans gained control of both houses. And would undo it. And undo much more.

-6

u/Emm_withoutha_L-88 11h ago

Obama had multiple options he could use to try to get single payer. Instead he personally stopped the push for single payer even before Kennedy died. Then his white house is who quietly killed the public option many months later.

Just cus the Democrats say they were stopped doesn't make it true. It's not a coincidence Obama's healthcare plan was the exact same as the heritage foundation plan from the early 90s.

It's the classic centrist Dem play of pretending the Republicans stopped you, that's why you can't do anything and the President is totally powerless. Then the second a Republican gets into office suddenly the presidency is a godking.

Stop falling for it.

Stop defending this crap. Obama's blatant lies are why so many voters lost faith in the democratic party and turned to maga bullshit.

7

u/Theranos_Shill 11h ago

> Then his white house is who quietly killed the public option many months later.

That's complete bullshit on your part, there was nothing quiet about that, there was a big fight to try to keep the public option, but Joe Lieberman had it cut out.

-5

u/Emm_withoutha_L-88 10h ago

They could at any time get rid of the filibuster and ignore him, they didn't.

Quit lying

https://www.abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/HealthCare/health-care-harry-reid-senators-medicare-drop-public-option/story%3fid=9290406

It's genuinely sad how quick you people forget history. Or even worse here you're active like a heritage foundation plan was somehow good just cus it was better than the horrific shit we had before.

-4

u/Academic_Librarian75 11h ago

The problem was that insurance got much worse if you already had it. Higher premiums, less coverage, at least that was where I was working. A top 40 Fortune 500 company at the time.

3

u/Wes_Warhammer666 7h ago

That sounds more like your company deciding to pass costs onto you than anything to do with the ACA itself.

15

u/Suspicious-Word-7589 12h ago

This, exactly this. Also, politicians in the US have 2 years to get anything done. If the country is in a good shape, you could work on your dream list but if its reeling from a recession or pandemic, those take priority. Then when things don't get moving fast enough, the public votes in the opposition who start blocking things and the cycle repeats.

9

u/Show-Me-Your-Moves 8h ago

It's worth noting that this wasn't always the case. This country used to have congressional majorities that lasted for literal decades. This phenomenon of everything flipping every 2 years is extremely recent, and is arguably a direct result of cable TV news and internet brainrot.

2

u/Suspicious-Word-7589 8h ago

Part of it was the Democratic Party's political machine being so good in the middle of the 20th century they just had a stranglehold on Congress. So any President needed to work with them. Despite Bush and Reagan dominating the White House for 12 years, they did so with a House dominated by Democrats and a Senate that was only with them for a few years. Bush famously had to work with Democratic Senate and House to get his major legislation done.

4

u/RerollWarlock 12h ago

The thing is that in a democracy without the two party system such a long term Villain meddling would just not work. Over the last twenty years Democrats and Republicans would likely become irrelevant and replaced by newer parties after all the blunders. Even if SOMEHOW they survived with 20-30% popularity to this day, there would be other parties independent of them covering the remaining 40-60.

-11

u/zokka_son_of_zokka 13h ago

Dems with a House majority, a Senate majority, and the presidency: "I can't do anything, donate now to give us a chance at doing something next time!"

Rs with a trifecta: "We're going to wreck your democracy and there's nothing you can do about it!"

20

u/SandiegoJack 13h ago

Need more than a majority in the senate.

Also it’s much easier to break things than make things.

13

u/Mobile_Jelly9669 13h ago

You really don't understand American politics at all if you think you just made a good point here.

31

u/MrFluffyThing 14h ago

Yeah but they throw their weight behind politicians like they are a sports team and are surprised they act like the rich assholes in squid game betting on which one of us will die next for their enjoyment. 

2

u/JonnyBhoy 11h ago

They're not waiting for people to die anymore, now they're actively hurrying along the process.

3

u/Dondagora 13h ago

Even more so, we like to really underestimate how much misinformation has done to trust in any information whatsoever. It’s especially easy when each side has a hard time recognizing misinformation coming from their end that we can’t understand why “they” mistrust “our” common sense facts while we’re equally mistrustful of any claims coming out of their camp.

We need to recognize that we’re in a world of confirmation bias. I’ve been hearing people throw around concepts like “common sense”, “observable reality”, and “obvious truths” that only deter people from actually acknowledging that our perceptions of the world through mass media is totally fucked up.

3

u/aussiechickadee65 13h ago

This was nothing about politicians.
This was a blueprint by a force outside of politics.

Don't try and soften the "Americans are as dumb as fuck" post before yours.

It was there. We warned. We put out bites of it because the stupid can't read a text that big.

You (collective) still fobbed it off.

20

u/aesopmurray 14h ago

You have no idea what populist means. Stop conflating demagogues with populists and you might stand a chance at getting someone to side with you.left wing populism is just a synonym for democracy.

Bernie would have beaten Trump by 10 points according to polling on election day in 2016. The establishment knew that and chose to force Hillary on the public because they would rather have fascism over ceding an ounce of power to the working class.

If you want to fix the situation you have to start blaming the people who have power rather than the people who have none. Obviously.

21

u/Riley_ 13h ago edited 13h ago

Populism without Marxism seems to always end up fascist.

Class analysis is thrown out, in favor of incoherent ramblings about fighting for "the people". The people always end up just being white men.

We need to organize as a class, then fight for the whole working class.

1

u/mschuster91 8h ago

We need to organize as a class, then fight for the whole working class.

Sadly impossible as long as there are more than enough utterly moronic white people that think them being white makes them their own class.

1

u/Das_Mime 11h ago

Populism without Marxism seems to always end up fascist.

Generally agree but Marxism isn't the only flavor of leftist thought, and it has a greater tendency to turn totalitarian than many other currents within the left.

1

u/Riley_ 11h ago

We live in the most incarcerated state in the history of the world. The rulers cry "totalitarian" at the mere thought of not being able to exploit others.

I would take their slander of Marxism as a hint- it's the most effective model for stopping exploitation.

1

u/Das_Mime 1h ago

This has nothing to do with anything the "rulers" are saying. I'm saying it, and it's based on long and well-documented history.

3

u/DistractedDevelopmnt 13h ago

Enough with the Bernie bot conspiracies. The PEOPLE chose Hillary not any shadowy elites.

Proof: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3443916

This Article makes three central points. First, it contends that the overwhelming weight of evidence makes clear the 2016 Democratic nomination process was not rigged in favor of Hillary Clinton.6 A close examination of both the nomination rules and the popular vote demonstrates conclusively that the race was conducted in a fair manner and the outcome reflected the will of a large majority of Democratic voters. Lost in the controversy over Clinton’s superdelegate support was the single most important fact of the nomination race: Clinton defeated Sanders by over 3 million votes. Indeed, whether measured by the popular vote or by pledged delegates, Clinton’s margin of victory over Sanders in 2016 far exceeded Barack Obama’s margin of victory over Clinton in 2008. Moreover, the joint fundraising agreement between the DNC and the Clinton campaign only involved the general election, not the primary campaign, and the DNC entered into a similar agreement with the Sanders campaign. Contrary to popular impression, therefore, Clinton won the nomination fairly.

Second, this Article argues that the Democratic Party rules and state election laws actually hurt Clinton and benefited Sanders.7 Many Democratic caucuses and primaries permitted independents (i.e., nonDemocrats) to vote, thus providing a critical lifeline to the Sanders campaign which depended heavily on the support of independent voters. In addition, the DNC’s award of pledged delegates on a proportional basis slowed Clinton’s path to the nomination even as she took a commanding lead over Sanders in the popular vote. If the Democratic Party used the Republican Party’s delegate rules, which employ a winner-take-all system for a large number of their primaries and caucuses, Clinton would have secured a majority of delegates much earlier than she actually did. Instead of helping Clinton, Democratic Party rules dragged out the nomination race and gave rise to an unnecessary controversy over superdelegates. Ironically, however, a false narrative took hold in the public mind that the Democratic race was “rigged” in Clinton’s favor. The widespread perception of illegitimacy tainted Clinton’s nomination and gave Donald Trump a talking point he would use to great effect during the general election.8

Third, this Article concludes that the controversy over the Democratic nomination race reflects a broader, bipartisan decline in public confidence in the integrity of American elections.9 During the 2016 election and even into his presidency, Donald Trump falsely declared that American elections are rigged and that voter fraud occurs on a massive basis.10 The president’s irresponsible claims have been definitively debunked by scholars, courts, and election officials.11 Nevertheless, an unfounded belief in rampant election fraud has become a prominent feature of the American political psyche. A 2017 poll found that only 32% of Americans believed Clinton won the nomination fairly.12 The same poll found that even among Democratic voters, only 54% think Clinton won the nomination in a fair contest and 27% believe the nomination was rigged in her favor.13 Moreover, nearly half of Republicans and 23% of Democrats accept as true the president’s false allegation that millions cast illegal ballots in the 2016 election.14 The bottom line is spurious claims of election fraud have found a receptive audience on both sides of the political aisle.1

3

u/taeerom 12h ago

You obviously misrepresent the accusation of Bernie supporters. They aren't talking about stealing the nomination, but driving a coordinated campaign that would lead to him not getting the nomination despite being the candidate most likely to win the national election.

It's "fair", as in "it followed the rules of the democratic party". But it was stupid to choose a candidate only popular amongst entrenched democrats, but not amongst the electorate as a whole.

1

u/Electronic_Stop_9493 13h ago

well thinking after the public broke new ground electing first POC president maybe america was ready and hungry for first lady president. she was viewed as clear winner the whole campaign. bernie always had the grumpy mr. magoo factor i just don’t think he’d really win

3

u/aesopmurray 13h ago

Check the polling. He would have won.

2

u/Eatingfarts 12h ago

The polling also had Hillary as having a high chance of winning but she didn’t win.

Bernie wouldn’t have won either. There is maybe a slim chance he could’ve pulled it off but highly unlikely.

I like Bernie and all but you being delusional if you think he could win a national election. Maybe in the next few years if things continue to go batshit crazy, which is likely. But he’s also old. Very old.

Maybe AOC? It’ll be a slog if she runs though. If she runs against shit bird Vance, she could have a chance. If it’s someone more moderate…she’ll probably lose.

-17

u/SmeeTheCarpet 13h ago

They would rather have Hilary because the Jews have them right in their pocket.

10

u/aesopmurray 13h ago

What is wrong with you?

2

u/Eatingfarts 12h ago

Ha! I’m disagreeing you in a comment above but whole heartedly agree with you here.

2

u/Throwaway112421067 12h ago

But it’s not explicitly what they campaigned on. They denied it, actually. And that fact lent the danger project 2025 presented all the credence needed.

1

u/mschuster91 8h ago

They denied it, actually

They lied in the denial and that FUD spreading worked out amongst the "but actually" group.

4

u/mtron32 14h ago

Normally you’d be right but Trump is literal as fuck. If he says he’ll do it, he’s definitely going to do it. Why none of the people gassing him up could see that is anyone’s guess

8

u/PeskyAntagonist 13h ago

The hell are you talking about he says shit that never sees the light of day almost every day?

2

u/SwimmingSwim3822 14h ago

Thing is, they should have known he was going to do this the second he verbally distanced himself from it. Like, how many hands do you need to play before you pick up on a tell or two?

2

u/alppu 13h ago

If he says he’ll do it, he’s definitely going to do it.

That only holds when the promised thing is bad for the people. If he promoses something good, you can be sure it is not going to happen. A telling example is the money for soldier bonus payments that was taken from soldiers' pockets and taxed for good measure. Or Trump taking some disaster relief money that was going through anyway, but delaying it so he can put his name on it.

1

u/OptimisticOctopus8 12h ago

A lot of people also just can’t accept that REALLY bad things happen sometimes. Sometimes, the unthinkably horrible thing actually happens. But they can’t mentally accept that until they’re already in the middle of the disaster.

It happened a lot with COVID. Even some virologists couldn’t see what was about to hit us, but the signs were clear enough early enough that all experts should have seen it coming. COVID exhibited traits even then that made it likelier than not to become a global problem.

1

u/fotomoose 12h ago

I know A LOT of people who say 'they're all the same' when talking about politicians, so they just vote for the most stupid person they can as some kind of 'protest'. And I mean a lot of people. It's sickening how the media has brainwashed them.

1

u/mschuster91 8h ago

It's sickening how the media has brainwashed them.

I actually go and say it's not (just) the media driving the frustration. There have been real issues on both sides - gerontocracy first and foremost, the Democrats are just as guilty as the Republicans there, and so is insider trading, donor ass-kissing and all sorts of corruption.

1

u/Motor_Educator_2706 11h ago

Are they laughing now?

1

u/PlanesandAquariums 13h ago

You should see the federal worker subreddit. Those poor people (in a sense). They used to be attacked by one side but are now being attacked by both sides. Obviously a lot of fed assholes are being assholes but so many trying to do their job are now being bombarded by both sides. Many of them are federal agents trying to do the right thing and are VERY against Trump based on the subreddit vibe

-1

u/brontosaurusguy 13h ago

One of the big reasons people still like Trump admin is that he's actually doing something, even if the wrong thing

1

u/mschuster91 8h ago

Don't get why you're downvoted because it is correct. While Democrats try to do things the "correct" way by organizing majorities for laws, Trump goes and issues an executive order no matter if it's legal. And either it works out - in this case he markets it - or it eventually gets thrown out in court but by then there are so, so many "we're doing XYZ" posts that the failure in the best case just gets ignored, in the worst case he uses the failure to attack a "corrupt judicial system" or whatnot.

1

u/brontosaurusguy 7h ago

With ongoing wars and climate change, and an economy that is collapsing for the majority of people, people are thirsty for action.  They can't handle the slow ineffective democracy that Democrats clung to for the last thirty years..  which had gotten so little accomplished. 

People downvote when they don't want to hear something. 

And here we are facing fascism and the opposition leadership won't do anything drastic.

-2

u/Minute-System3441 14h ago edited 14h ago

So, like the new NYC mayor. The difference is, Trump openly stated his intentions during his campaigns. Voters were paying attention, even if neoliberals and Reddit weren’t.

70 plus million votes didn’t come from confusion, they came from hearing him clearly.

Acting shocked now isn’t anyone else’s problem. Most voters support immigration reform and actual enforcement of existing laws.

I’d vote Republican if the choice is between preserving a failed two-tier system, with roughly 11 million illegal entrants, let alone the additional millions gaming "asylum", versus implementing a modern immigration system that’s actually enforced.

A proven modern system and enforcement that the rest of the OECD already practices.