this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2025
953 points (98.1% liked)

Leopards Ate My Face

5158 readers
1034 users here now

Rules:

Also feel free to check out [email protected] (also active).

Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

What era in time do these people think R's are trying to conserve to, after or before civil rights?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 hours ago

That Jordan guy is a real idiot

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 hours ago

I can't believe face eating leopards eat faces...

[–] [email protected] 18 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I don't understand how he missed the part that Republicans are largely anti-lgbtq.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Everyone who supports authoritarianism thinks they're going to be the exception. They can see other people who their politics denigrates as outsiders easily, but they could never be outsiders because they're them and they buy into the bullying. They think signalling that they're on board with mistreating other people will protect them from being mistreated, but all it does in reality is create a society where no one is safe.

Even the powerful people who buy into this thinking will find that it bites them in the ass eventually. They may be late on the list, but they're still on the list. Eventually either the ever-shrinking circle of "insiders" will exclude them, or they'll be in the last in-group once they've alienated the rest of society and put their own safety at risk. Every dictator is terrified of this, because they've seen how it plays out. They're just gambling that it won't happen to them, but eventually the mob will come. The best they can hope for is to delay it as long as possible.

But queer Republicans? Republicans of color? Disabled Republicans? Republican women even? They're on the chopping block from the start and are only surrounding themselves with the people who want to diminish them while alienating anyone who might genuinely want to help.

All the more reason they can't look directly at it. They think if they don't make eye contact or try to fight back or run, the predator won't come for them. They couldn't be more wrong.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 11 hours ago (5 children)

People need to stop treating this like team sports. If a party does not represent you then don't vote for them. It's really that simple.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 11 hours ago (4 children)

The Democrats don't represent most of the people who vote for them, either. They're just not nearly as bad as Republicans.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

Which is why, while I do vote democrat, I am not a democrat. Their interests are more aligned with mine than the republicans, even though they might as well both be on the god damn moon.

People identifying so strongly with some political party like this is so weird and disgusting, regardless of party.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 hours ago

Yup. We need to move theoverton window back

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 hours ago

It’s everywhere. Portuguese here and I tell you, I can’t remember the last election I voted for who I actually wanted. Now is just the neo nazis pushing and people like me voting for the lesser evil because if we don’t we are screwed.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

In Europe, where there's typically way more choice, the candidate I usually end up voting for isn't necessarily the greatest. It's the least bad realistic choice available. Because that's how democracy works, there aren't great candidates anyway. Just vaguely better choices.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 hours ago

At least Europe has actual left-wing parties. Here it's right-wing or full-on nazi.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 hours ago

That's the next level. First we need to get people to stop voting against themselves.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 hours ago

Vote your interests not your pride.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

That’s… that’s kinda a damning statement on the democrats as well. But double so in this case

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago

Yeah. The only reason politicians get away with not actually representing us is because we don't demand it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 hours ago

He's not even part of their tribe lol

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

You're making way to hard for most people out there.

/s <<just incase

[–] [email protected] 16 points 10 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 hours ago

First they came for the communists and I didnt complain because I wasnt a communist...

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 hours ago

So, a married gay man who is conservative, a gay man who I presume to be a cis man, who call himself pro life… I’m not an expert or anything of sorts but I don’t think he should be having an opinion of abortion, because let’s say, his opinion of abortion is so well informed and backed by science as his voting choices… everyone capable of getting pregnant is seriously screwed.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

doing this will only push me and other people like me out!

That's the point. Next, to the camps for you.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 hours ago

I find it interesting that the basic premise of his argument is that all current legislature is correct and good. He just wants any future rules about unlegislated concepts to be reactionary.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 hours ago

Just use the word republicans, it pisses everyone off

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 10 points 12 hours ago

This asshole will be trying to explain to the guards that he voted for Trump and not like these groomers as he's loaded onto the next bus headed for the camps.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (2 children)

They voted for HATE.

That HATE applies to all vulnerable groups including them.

Staggering that Maga voters didn't understand that and are now surprised that they are the targets.

I wonder if any Jews thought Hitler was worth supporting.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

In german we have a word for it: Tja

Which is hard to acuratly translate. Something like:

Well, i told you/them / that was obvious, but nothing you/they can do about it now.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 13 hours ago (4 children)

Its Regression not conservatism. Quit calling it that. There is nothing wrong with a conservative outlook. The maga don't have a conservative outlook. They have a regressive one.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

There is nothing wrong with a conservative outlook.

When you're living in comfort and you benefit from the status quo and you prize stability over the perceived benefits of change, there's an argument for a conservative outlook.

But I've been living under Conservative governance in my home state of Texas for forty years. The pattern of police enforced racial castes, privatization of public institutions, and ecologically unsustainable consumption has been ongoing for my entire life. This is what conservatives are fighting to defend. Misogyny. Supremacy. Homogeneity. A wild imbalance in economic opportunity. Its too late to try and rebrand this as "bad" conservatism.

Trump's policies are more extreme than what came before, but the impulses remain the same. It is the composition of American elites that has changed.

The maga don’t have a conservative outlook.

The Red Hats are the children of Goldwater/Reagan and they are shepherding Paleoconservative Libertarianism to its logical end game. They were raised to believe in Galt's Gulch and Friedman's free market fetishism. They were raised to believe in Evangelical Christianity and Christian Dominionism. They were raised to believe in winning the Cold War at all costs.

And what they're doing has plenty of historic parallels - from Nixon's War on Crime to Eisenhower's Operation Wetback to McKinley's Jim Crow. They're White Nationalists embracing White Nationalism, on the belief that the Peace Dividend they reaped in the 90s was a Heavenly Mandate to Do As Thou Wilt. If you carve off all the QAnon cultism and bigotry, what you've got are a bunch of Gen X and Y folks who are fighting to preserve the segregation and the implicit international hegemony they enjoyed when the Iron Curtain fell and America was the uncontested global superpower.

It is conservatism in root and branch. A philosophy flailing in the face of a diminished empire to preserve the icons of prosperity their elders once enjoyed.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 13 hours ago

They don't know they're the same picture

[–] [email protected] 4 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

Real question, how can someone be conservative while still supporting progress? Doesn't the entire ideology hinge on things never changing?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 15 hours ago

"When i vote R, i didn't think" sums it up nicely.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago

Jordon Ramsay

IT'S FUCKING R!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 hours ago

The One Rule: Be a white, straight man.

If you are part of the One Rule, the conservatives are coming after you and all the civil rights you have.

If you think you're an exception, see the One Rule.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

The thing about tokens, they get spent. First: Roe overturn. Completed Second: Obergefell overturn. In process. Third: Lawrence overturn. In process. Fourth: Griswald overturn. In process. Soon: Loving overturn. Coming.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 hours ago (3 children)

What are those? I only know Roe is for abortion.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 hours ago

Obergefell v. Hodges: Same-sex couples have a fundamental right to marry.

Lawrence v. Texas: Anti-sodomy laws are unconstitutional.

Griswold v. Connecticut: Opposite-sex couples have a Constitutional right to privacy and contraception.

Loving v. Virginia: Bans on interracial marriage are unconstitutional.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Obergefell is same-sex marriage, Lawrence overturned sodomy laws making gay sex legal, Griswold was legalizing contraception, and Loving was interracial marriage.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 hours ago

People like this need to get bit by reality. Hard.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Oh hey I've met these guys. They're not well liked by their fellow gays

[–] [email protected] 20 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

They’re not well liked.

I think that probably would've sufficed. Even the Republicans shun gay Republicans because they don't want them to exist. Gay Republicans are like the most baffling thing to me. Like a Jewish Nazi.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 hours ago

My partner just said “it sounds like it was written by Joe Exotic” and not a truer statement has ever been said.

load more comments
view more: next ›