this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2026
766 points (98.7% liked)
NonCredibleDiplomacy
752 readers
3 users here now
Shitposting about geopolitics, diplomacy, and current events for shits and giggles
Rules
1. Be nice
Do not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.
2. Explain bad diplomacy takes
If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong elsewhere.
3. Content must be relevant
Posts must be about international diplomacy. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or talk about military tactics or equipment. There are other places for that.
4. No racism / hatespeech
No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.
5. No politics
We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Please leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.
6. No seriousposting
We don't want your fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.
7. No classified material
Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.
8. Source artwork
If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.
9. No low-effort posts
No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title.
10. Don't get us banned
No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.
11. No misinformation
NonCredibleDiplomacy exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Because Clinton was a member of the fucking party and Bernie wasn't. Like holy shit, of course they didn't want someone who isn't actually part of the party to be the party nominee. What the fuck are you all smoking that everyone ignores the fact Bernie was never going to win the Democratic nomination because he wasn't in the Democratic party. It's not complicated shit.
Lol, okay so you do understand that the process was rigged and resulted in bad candidates that lost. I accept your apology.
He lost because he wasn't a Democrat, why would Democrats vote for someone not in their party? If you wanted Bernie y'all should have registered and voted in the primary. There was no rigging, the lawsuits were dismissed, Bernie just overwhelmingly lost to Hillary because registered democratic party members voted overwhelmingly for Hillary. Bernie never stood a chance and the process was pretty well the same as it always was but idiots like you have a child's understanding of political processes. Did you even know the DNC is straight up a private non public organization? Because that's how political parties work.
Yeah, Hillary won the old fashioned way: having the right endorsements, spending lots of money, and being a normal Democrat.
If there was rigging it was in the 2020 Iowa Caucus. They wrecked the whole system to hand the win to a loser nobody.
Yep.
"The Democratic party endorses the Democratic party member for the Democratic party nominee instead of the guy that's not even part of our organization"
Democratic party members: votes for Hillary.
Idiots everywhere: "omg rigged"
Cuomo still got tons endorsements despite running as an independent against a Democrat, so it's not as simple as just party loyalism. There's a core of the Democratic party which hates socialism and socialists, and would rather lose than let socialism win. That's not rigging, though. That's just the party leadership (and donors) steering the party.
I fully expect a DSA candidate in 2028, so we'll see how the party reacts.
There was no rigging as long as you ignore the rigging that I already discussed. Just because you say these things doesn't make them true.
It's rigging in the same way that you're a genius, which is to say it isn't.
The difference is, nobody has ever claimed I'm a genius because there isn't evidence for it. Meanwhile there is evidence of the rigging.
What evidence? You can call it a ham sandwich but that won't make it fucking so. It wasn't rigging, it was standard dnc operating procedure. Lawsuits alleging rigging were dismissed as without cause because, and stay with me here, there wasn't rigging.
I think this is coming down to a difference in how we would define rigging. I've already said how it was rigged. You're either going to continue to ignore it, or you just don't think that's rigging. Obviously you're never going to be convinced even with the evidence right in front of you. Enjoy living your life like that.
Enjoy your ham sandwich.