I voted for Obama because Bush signed off on the Patriot Act. Obama expanded it. How am I supposed to think after that? That’s why there’s all these chilly situations happening.
his best chance was in 2017 right after he got elected. that’s how Obama pulled it off. No way Nobel committee would’ve done that by the end of his second term.
the whole endless needless attempts to “cut a deal” to broker some kind of peace all over the place seem like some very bad political satire but Kissinger got a prize for way less if you think about it (and it messed up the region for decades onwards) - so while demented there is a bit of logic going on.
They frequently give them to gusanos who advocate for bombing their own countries, and they gave one to Kissinger, so I don’t think that matters much to them.
The thoughts of the only Chinese national to win a nobel peace prize. It’s a truly vile institution that spends the majority of its time laundering the horrific histories of some of histories most vile people and institutions.
Interviewer: “Then what conditions would allow a true historic transformation in China?”
Liu Xiaobo: “Three hundred years of colonization. Hong Kong took a hundred years of colonizing to get where it is today, so the mainland, huge as it is, would need three hundred to reach Hong Kong’s level. I don’t even know if three hundred would be enough."
He seemed to have mostly gotten it because he was the first black president of the US. Though, they might have thought it would spur him to get out of the wars in the middle east (it didn’t).
There was a reason even if you don’t agree with it.
It may also partially explain Trump’s drive to do the opposite since Obama is a permanent fixture in Trump’s dementia-stricken brain.
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2009/obama/facts/
Oh, I know this one! Don’t vote next time so Republicans win! Step 2: ???
Seriously though, I understand the frustration. Obama absolutely deserves criticism for continuing and expanding parts of the post-9/11 surveillance state. But the US was fundamentally changed by 9/11, and reversing that political momentum was always going to be difficult. That doesn’t excuse his decisions, but it does help explain the political environment in which they were made.
The same nuance applies to ICE. Democrats have funded immigration enforcement for decades, and their record deserves scrutiny, particularly under Obama. But funding an existing federal agency isn’t the same as endorsing Trump’s use of that agency. Enforcement priorities, oversight, detention policies, and the scale and purpose of operations matter. Treating all ICE funding as equivalent ignores some pretty significant differences between administrations.
And let’s not forget the Affordable Care Act. Obamacare wasn’t universal healthcare, and it certainly wasn’t the single-payer system many progressives wanted, but it wasn’t nothing. It expanded coverage to millions of Americans, protected people with preexisting conditions, and fundamentally changed what Americans could expect from their healthcare system. Those were substantial gains, even if the legislation was compromised from the start. That’s exactly what I mean about political momentum: imperfect progress can establish protections and expectations that future reforms can build upon.
My larger concern is that abandoning Democrats over their failures doesn’t move the country left. If anything, it risks pushing the Overton window even further right. The American electorate hasn’t consistently supported the kind of progressive policies many of us would like to see, and there’s been an enormous, well-funded political and media effort over the past decade to discredit those policies, particularly around civil rights, immigration, and anything labeled “woke.”
I’m 43 now, and one thing I’ve come to appreciate is how much political momentum matters. Progress isn’t linear, and meaningful social change often takes decades to establish. It’s much easier to capitalize on fear, resentment, and existing prejudices than to build lasting public support for expanding rights and changing institutions.
None of that means Democrats should get a free pass. Quite the opposite. They need to be challenged, especially when they compromise on fundamental rights. But there’s a difference between holding a party accountable and allowing its opposition to consolidate even more power.
The Democratic Party is divided, and I don’t know who is going to provide the leadership it needs. But I don’t see the Republican Party advancing civil liberties, economic equality, or a more humane immigration system. And I certainly don’t see how handing Republicans more power helps us get there.
Real change takes time, organization, and political momentum. We have to build on what we have while pushing for something better. Abandoning the imperfect opposition to an increasingly authoritarian right doesn’t strike me as much of a strategy.
I voted for Obama because Bush signed off on the Patriot Act. Obama expanded it. How am I supposed to think after that? That’s why there’s all these chilly situations happening.
funny thing is that he also got Nobel Peace Prize for literally nothing. Because he’s a jam-up dude basically.
I believe this is the main reason Trump believes he deserves one too.
his best chance was in 2017 right after he got elected. that’s how Obama pulled it off. No way Nobel committee would’ve done that by the end of his second term.
I was going to reply to your prior comment with, “Wrong, he got elected!”
the whole endless needless attempts to “cut a deal” to broker some kind of peace all over the place seem like some very bad political satire but Kissinger got a prize for way less if you think about it (and it messed up the region for decades onwards) - so while demented there is a bit of logic going on.
Fair. He could broker a lot of peace by refusing to meddle but that ego…
the size of Unicron at least
They frequently give them to gusanos who advocate for bombing their own countries, and they gave one to Kissinger, so I don’t think that matters much to them.
The thoughts of the only Chinese national to win a nobel peace prize. It’s a truly vile institution that spends the majority of its time laundering the horrific histories of some of histories most vile people and institutions.
Interviewer: “Then what conditions would allow a true historic transformation in China?”
Liu Xiaobo: “Three hundred years of colonization. Hong Kong took a hundred years of colonizing to get where it is today, so the mainland, huge as it is, would need three hundred to reach Hong Kong’s level. I don’t even know if three hundred would be enough."
That’s appalling, and very relevant.
weren’t there a guy who got the prize and then did 180 and committed a bunch of war crimes?
Yeah, Obama.
nah, there is another one - Abiy Ahmed.
And Kissenger
He seemed to have mostly gotten it because he was the first black president of the US. Though, they might have thought it would spur him to get out of the wars in the middle east (it didn’t).
he got that? never know that before
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Nobel_Peace_Prize
There was a reason even if you don’t agree with it. It may also partially explain Trump’s drive to do the opposite since Obama is a permanent fixture in Trump’s dementia-stricken brain. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2009/obama/facts/
still a poor choice in hindsight.
There is always a reason…
Oh, I know this one! Don’t vote next time so Republicans win! Step 2: ???
Seriously though, I understand the frustration. Obama absolutely deserves criticism for continuing and expanding parts of the post-9/11 surveillance state. But the US was fundamentally changed by 9/11, and reversing that political momentum was always going to be difficult. That doesn’t excuse his decisions, but it does help explain the political environment in which they were made.
The same nuance applies to ICE. Democrats have funded immigration enforcement for decades, and their record deserves scrutiny, particularly under Obama. But funding an existing federal agency isn’t the same as endorsing Trump’s use of that agency. Enforcement priorities, oversight, detention policies, and the scale and purpose of operations matter. Treating all ICE funding as equivalent ignores some pretty significant differences between administrations.
And let’s not forget the Affordable Care Act. Obamacare wasn’t universal healthcare, and it certainly wasn’t the single-payer system many progressives wanted, but it wasn’t nothing. It expanded coverage to millions of Americans, protected people with preexisting conditions, and fundamentally changed what Americans could expect from their healthcare system. Those were substantial gains, even if the legislation was compromised from the start. That’s exactly what I mean about political momentum: imperfect progress can establish protections and expectations that future reforms can build upon.
My larger concern is that abandoning Democrats over their failures doesn’t move the country left. If anything, it risks pushing the Overton window even further right. The American electorate hasn’t consistently supported the kind of progressive policies many of us would like to see, and there’s been an enormous, well-funded political and media effort over the past decade to discredit those policies, particularly around civil rights, immigration, and anything labeled “woke.”
I’m 43 now, and one thing I’ve come to appreciate is how much political momentum matters. Progress isn’t linear, and meaningful social change often takes decades to establish. It’s much easier to capitalize on fear, resentment, and existing prejudices than to build lasting public support for expanding rights and changing institutions.
None of that means Democrats should get a free pass. Quite the opposite. They need to be challenged, especially when they compromise on fundamental rights. But there’s a difference between holding a party accountable and allowing its opposition to consolidate even more power.
The Democratic Party is divided, and I don’t know who is going to provide the leadership it needs. But I don’t see the Republican Party advancing civil liberties, economic equality, or a more humane immigration system. And I certainly don’t see how handing Republicans more power helps us get there.
Real change takes time, organization, and political momentum. We have to build on what we have while pushing for something better. Abandoning the imperfect opposition to an increasingly authoritarian right doesn’t strike me as much of a strategy.
Liberals do not consider Palestinians fully human.
Removed by mod
Democrats are conservative.
Funny to talk about groupthink when you’re the one freaking out about people daring to critique your blue team fascists.
Removed by mod
This just in: Wiping your ass and washing your hands is russian propaganda.
Who cares! Seriously, all you shitlibs care about is your made up holy war against those damn ruskies.
Removed by mod
“Everyone who disagrees with me is a non-human foreigner”
Emphasis mine, fucking crazy that you embrace the accusation. And leave it to a nazi to make everything about iq