Hacker News

Favorites Setup
Comment by swed420 | original | Lutnick Pushed to Weaken Chip Rules That Overlap with His Family Business
[−]swed420 · 2026-11-15 Sun 15:30 UTC · link
So you want to return to the conditions that led to an exponentially worse situation?

That's precisely what a party of controlled opposition would do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniparty

[−]Jcampuzano2 · 2026-11-15 Sun 15:35 UTC · link
To answer the question, no. I don't think the establishment democrats should be running the country either. They're just the MUCH better of two evils though. I'd prefer new age politicians to be the leaders.

But, do you honestly think Trumps administration didn't materially contribute to making those conditions worse themselves? They basically made the hole so deep it will make it difficult to crawl out of in the first place.

[−]swed420 · 2026-11-15 Sun 15:39 UTC · link
> But, do you honestly think Trumps administration didn't materially contribute to making those conditions worse themselves? They basically made the hole so deep it will make it difficult to crawl out of in the first place.

I agree it made conditions worse. I never denied that.

But I'm also looking at the entire chain of events which led to it. "Lesser of two evils" "voting" literally got us to this point. How could it possibly get us out of it?

"Voting" in scare quotes because as the uniparty link explains, in addition to Dems proving they can't run fair primaries etc, democracy is illusory when corrupted by capital interests.

Ignoring the violent revolution option for obvious reasons, the logical thing to do would be to carefully design and build a new party from the ground up so that it can't succumb to the same levels of corruption that Dems and Repubs have, to disrupt the good cop / bad cop hypnosis that everyone is trapped in.

[−]selectodude · 2026-11-15 Sun 15:58 UTC · link
Well the people that do vote will continue to dictate everything and you can keep posting about it.
[−]swed420 · 2026-11-15 Sun 16:02 UTC · link
I'll vote for whoever isn't a corruption enabler.

But I also don't look down on those who are aware of the above and elect to not vote as a result.

Not voting is itself a vote, in this climate.

[−]kakacik · 2026-11-15 Sun 16:30 UTC · link
Yeah that worked flawlessly with trump, didn't it
[−]swed420 · 2026-11-15 Sun 16:42 UTC · link
Looks like you misread the above thread.
[−]nozzlegear · 2026-11-15 Sun 16:00 UTC · link
> "Voting" in scare quotes because as the uniparty link explains, in addition to Dems proving they can't run fair primaries etc, democracy is illusory when corrupted by capital interests.

Good grief, how are Bernie bros still grinding this axe ten years on

[−]swed420 · 2026-11-15 Sun 16:14 UTC · link
> Good grief, how are Bernie bros still grinding this axe ten years on

Good grief, how corrupt/delusional enablers are still denying facts ten years on.

Also, even post-Bernie, why do you think voters were entirely denied a primary the most recent time around?

The best Dems could do was install a proven unpopular pick and act surprised when she lost.

[−]Cyph0n · 2026-11-15 Sun 17:38 UTC · link
Because it’s a legitimate “axe to grind” that has not been addressed?

A vote is earned and not given, regardless of how loudly the “vote blue no matter who” argues (shouts?) otherwise every election cycle.

[−]gregates · 2026-11-15 Sun 17:33 UTC · link
The alternative to lesser of two evils voting is greater of two evils voting.
[−]swed420 · 2026-11-15 Sun 18:25 UTC · link
No, the alternative is already stated above.