this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2026
361 points (98.4% liked)

Political Memes

11610 readers
1965 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

1) Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

2) No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

3) Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

4) No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

5) No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] young_broccoli@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Im not United Statian but, didnt hillary win the popular vote in 2016?

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 44 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yup! So did Al Gore in 2000.

Imagine all the bullshit we'd have been spared if it hadn't been for Roger Stone and the other cheating cunts behind the Brooks Brothers Riot, Jeb Bush, and the already corrupt as fuck SCOTUS 😮‍💨🤬

[–] DandomRude@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago

Don't forget Clarence Thomas. He was also heavily involved at the time, in fact he played a decisive role, and he is just as obviously corrupt today as he was then. No consequences, no accountability whatsoever.

[–] Goretantath@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yup, the electoral college is what ruins everything. Allows gerrymandering to exist and denies the majority of Americans their vote validity.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] TheseusNow@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This is so true. I think I recall the current administration saying that ranked voting is bad for everyone and we need to pass laws banning it. They want every election to be first past the post since it benefits them in addition to gerrymandering and winner take all electoral college voting.

[–] Hapankaali@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Ranked-choice voting in single-member districts is a small improvement over first-past-the-post, but it maintains a two-party system. Proportional representation is a necessary requirement for a functional democracy.

[–] ZombieCyborgFromOuterSpace@piefed.ca 24 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Well that's why they're constantly gerrymandering districts, making mail in voting illegal, and adding impossible requirements to vote in person. Because they know they can't win without changing the rules. 

[–] EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

Voter suppression and a propaganda network for 30-50 years gets traction eventually.

[–] U7826391786239@lemmy.zip 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

this is assuming the voting is fair and not-rigged. who's always accusing dems of voter fraud? GOP. who does it almost always end up being when there's actual voter fraud? also GOP

we know there's rampant gerrymandering and voter suppression going on, and that fascist gestapo thugs will be roving the election sites (which are drastically reduced in number thanks to GOP state boards of elections) in order to intimidate voters. can you thinKKK of another instance of this sort of thing happening in the not-too-distant past? except this time it's the feds doing the intimidating, not inbred hicks. we also know that a number of states have made it so their legislature can just throw away and overturn results they "don't like," so...there's that

i wish i had more optimism for the outcome of this miderm, but i don't. i'm afraid it will be a literal bloodbath

[–] Jordan117@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago (2 children)

This was not true in 2024, according to Pew. The trend may reverse without Trump and/or after touching the hot stove, but recent elections have shown that Republicans made big gains among low-propensity/low-information voters while Democrats have gained among highly engaged voters.

[–] brianary@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 months ago

These voters have already swung the other way by 25% in a more recent poll.

https://www.gelliottmorris.com/p/trump-lost-low-info-voters

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

i haven't been following trends too long, but don't low information voters almost always vote against the incumbent? i know i'm oversimplifying

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

The issue was letting conservatives run the DNC under the label of "neoliberals"...

Like, there are fundamentally different ways a progressive and conservative think, to the point a brain scan can determine political leaning with an ~80% success rate after like five minutes of showing a human what to look for. Which is insanely impressive when you realize we rarely see 80% turnout in elections.

The neoliberals marketed themselves to Dem voters like we were conservatives, because that's what they are and they lack the empathy to realize anyone's different.

You can't run a successful Dem campaign off fear, because if that appealed to Dem voters we'd be voting Republican already.

That's why Obama did so well in 2008 off literally just saying "hope" and "change" over and over...

That's all it fucking takes, and now that the neoliberals aren't running the DNC, that's what will come out of the primary naturally this time.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 months ago

For those of you with MAGA family members, and who might live in states which require ID to vote: most people might pat a pocket to check that they have their wallet but aren't likely to check their driver's license is actually in there. Getting stuck without it at the polls might not completely stop them voting but we all have seen conservatives change their tune when something impacts them. The license could turn up at someplace like their grocery store...

[–] thethrilloftime69@feddit.online 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

We always vote for a slow death instead of a fast one.

[–] doug@lemmy.today 3 points 2 months ago

It’s hard for us to commit to long term gratification on a personal scale, you think were apt for the same task on a national scale?

If I don’t see instant results after I vote, I’m never voting again!… (/s)

…we need whatever the Ozempic equivalent is across the nation.

[–] FauxPseudo@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

I'm doing my part. In Lesser Carolina independents can vote for either party during the primary. I consistently vote in the Republican primary to vote primary out Lindsey Graham.

Zero results so far.

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 months ago

If every American voted in PRIMARIES, BERNIE WOULD'VE WON 2016!

[–] almost1337@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Of course that's the case, why do you think Republicans want to prevent voters from voting?

[–] the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Thats whats is so depressing about this.

[–] wheezy@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago

This is like those physics questions in school were we "assume constant velocity" (zero acceleration) in a frictionless vacuum.

Sure. You could get the right answer and understand something about how physics work. But it's not really something you can directly apply to the real world.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago

Cue Lemleft's "voting is for suckers" chant