• dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    229
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    10 months ago

    “We’re losing a lot of people because of the internet,” Trump said. “We have to go see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what’s happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that Internet up in some way. Somebody will say, ‘Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.’ These are foolish people. We have a lot of foolish people.”

    He said this in 2015, folks. And we still elected him. We’re fucked.

    • squiblet@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      120
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      ‘We’ didn’t elect him. A horde of deluded, ignorant douchebags in just the right states did.

        • squiblet@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          57
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          I can only imagine where the country would be if we reformed the Electoral College and the Senate. It’s absurd to be giving 1 million people in Hickle Dickle the same votes as 30,000,000 in another state. Or even worse, in the EC people in small states get 3-4 times the voting power as citizens of some larger states.

      • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        42
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        Don’t forget the tens of millions of Americans who stayed home because “both parties are the same”

        • squiblet@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          24
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yeah, that’s always the problem. Sometimes it’s just a lack of motivation. Also don’t discount voter suppression, like how voting day still is not a holiday and there’s a significant lack of facilities in urban areas compared to suburban and rural regions. Nobody should have to wait in line for 5 hours (complete with BS like ‘giving them water is a crime’) to vote.

          • EatYouWell@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            19
            ·
            10 months ago

            If the Republicans allowed real democracy to happen, they’d never get elected. They’ve said this pretty openly.

            • squiblet@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              10 months ago

              They used to claim they were the vast majority, silent majority, and so on, but it seems like they changed their tune on that and now it’s “we don’t need a majority! We’re a constitutional republic”

        • Wrench@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          10 months ago

          Even worse. The single issue voters, or hard core progressive voters who voted independent or wrote in names on their ballot because they didn’t get their way. They know who was better for America out of the two real choices, but made the statement of “I’d rather see the country burn than participate”

          • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            The faction of the party that formed a PAC to elect McCain/Palin doesn’t get to lecture people about jumping ship when they don’t get their first choice.

              • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                I’m saying that the same PUMAs who jumped ship and tried to give us VP Palin are hypocrites when they scream at progressives for not voting in accordance with their sense of entitlement.

                • idiomaddict@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  I still don’t understand. Are you saying democrats forced palin through in order to turn republicans off and are now surprised that progressives don’t want to vote for a candidate they don’t like?

        • osarusan@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          A quick browse of this community will show you that a large percentage of the users here fall into that category.

        • iAmTheTot@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          10 months ago

          Weird. I didn’t know not casting a vote meant you were responsible for the person that millions of other people did vote for.

          (for the record, I voted)

          • Zink@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            I think everybody in a democracy-ish country is responsible for their voting choice. Choosing to abstain is a valid option, and should stay that way.

            However, if you have a preference between the candidates, by abstaining you are mathematically helping the other guy. That’s especially true in our two-party FPTP elections in the US.

            Edit to add: it should go without saying that this assumes you have the capability to vote one way or another. You know, since we have a political party that wants it to be difficult to vote.

    • The Picard Maneuver@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      We have to go see Bill Gates

      This line… Lol

      “Hi Bill, you’re the CEO of the internet, right? I’m going to need you to turn it off for me. Thanks.”

    • CarlsIII@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s amazing, he’s said so many terrible things, I’m still learning about stuff like this he said years ago.

    • thesprongler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Ironically he got elected in large part because of his always online meme army. I’m guessing that part of the Internet sticks around.

  • Tedesche@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    78
    ·
    10 months ago

    “He could invoke powers we’ve never heard a President of the United States invoke—potentially to shut down companies or turn off the internet or deploy the U.S. military on U.S. soil,” he added. "We don’t know because the things that are in there, the emergency powers of the president, aren’t widely known to the American people.

    Wow, it’s almost like we’ve consolidated too much power in the Executive Branch and should do something about it before a despotic asswipe gets elected by an unhinged, manipulated populace.

  • nicerdicer@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    10 months ago

    No matter where an election is coming up - people tend to vote against their interests. This meme popped up in my head when I read this thread:

      • nicerdicer@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Regarding your edit: This might be the reason, why people tend to vote against their interests. To weed out competition. For instance, people would happily vote against free school lunch - even if the option of free school lunch would benefit them - just because some different ethnical and/or political group would not receive that benefit either.

        I see a very similar behavior in German politics right now: The right-wing party (AfD) is gaining popularity and the conservative party (CDU) is going to lose voters towards them. In order to appeal to voters they want to (very oversimplified) alter social welfare benefits to the worse and keep minimum wage from rising, all while claiming that immigration (among other things) is the issue. But those who are voting for the right wing party and the conservative party as well are the ones who clearly would benefit from better social welfare an a higher minimum wage. These people would rather decline any improvements regarding social welfare and minimum wage, so that others (immigrants for example) would not benefit from them either.

        Edit: typos

      • AquaTofana@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        More than 50% of white women voted for Trump? Do you have a source for this?!

        I’m genuinely asking here, because that’s gross as fuck if true. I’m a white woman. I couldn’t imagine voting for that POS, however, my mother is suuuuuuper into the “Bible” so I know she did. My parents are unfortunately super fans of his. I didn’t think that there were that many like her though.

        Edit: I was so appalled I looked myself. I did find a bunch of stuff supporting it like truthout andthe guardian, which is absolutely fucking infuriating to me.

        I did see that when it came to women with college, more did vote for Clinton than Trump, but it wasn’t enough to outweigh when combined with those who lacked a college education.

        FFS. This stat actually massively upsets me.

  • Hegar@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    10 months ago

    He’s also promising to go into people’s houses at night and wreck up the place.

    • peopleproblems@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      10 months ago

      Wait until he hears about amatuer radio licensing, unlicensed spectrum, and experimental radio. It will blow his fucking mind.

      I bet he actually thinks that all data is transported by fortune 500 companies that will do as he says “or else.”

  • spider@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    If Trump elected, America has “turned off its brain”, I say

    • Techmaster@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      He’ll just keep hitting the reload button in his browser. Makes it hard for anybody to read anything.

  • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    My thoughts and prayers have started ringing to the tune of "please gods may Trump have a heart attack / stroke at the worst possible time for the Republicans and spare the rest of the world another term of American foreign policy behaving as though it was conceived by racist, classist and eight kinds of phobic Elmer Fudd "

    • misterundercoat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      10 months ago

      Another term? If he gets in again, he ain’t leaving until he’s dead. It’s glaringly obvious that he plans to become a dictator like his friends Putin and Kim.

          • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            That’s why I hope it happens during the election and the ensuing chaos means they can’t consolidate around a candidate. Dems would just reshuffle if Biden bit it mid campaign because so many leftists vote Democrat because it’s the lesser of two evils but the Republicans eat their own.

            • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              🤔 I wonder what would happen if someone assassinated Trump right before the election. Neither you nor I would ever do that, but say someone did. What is the protocol?

              Or Biden, for that matter? Or say the Trumptards attacked enough polling places throughout the U.S. to seriously disrupt the election and possibly even completely fuck it up. Is there a legal protocol in place? Any election clerks in the house?

              • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                Well assassination of a candidate duration an election has some precedent. But it doesn’t happen often for good reason. If you assassinate a political figure you make them essentially a martyr for their campaign or ideals which stops people thinking rationally and doubling down on their emotional reaction to the assassinee’s party or general ideology. People put aside differences to “carry the torch”.

                Honestly killing Trump and pining it on leftist bogeymen would be a move I could see some Republicans doing. They have basically primed their base to accept any shlock they want to pass as news and if they go full authoritarian and get enough support on board to basically ignore democratic checks and balances…

                • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  I really, really think it greatly behooves western states to try to secede from the U.S. next year.

                  Like the right wing is completely intractable at this point and compromising with them will only bring suffering so it would benefit the left if California, Oregon, Washington simply left and formed their own country. They have big enough economies where they could do it and survive on their own.

    • SPRUNT@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      10 months ago

      If thoughts and prayers actually worked, Donald Trump’s head would have exploded like a scene from “Scanners” on one of his countless TV appearances.

    • Telorand@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      10 months ago

      If the Internet goes off, it means most of the US will be pissed off at him. Cellphones would be basically useless.

      His followers wouldn’t be able to access their favorite propaganda and conspiracy theories, either, so maybe they’d sober up a bit. Either way, it would not be good for him.

      • xantoxis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I mean, he can’t. Even if he claims to have the executive power, even if he found a bunch of lackeys willing to try to do it for him, he can’t do it. Whatever he did would be unenforceable. You can’t just turn off the Internet. That’s literally the reason we invented it in the first place, it’s a communication network resilient against nuclear strikes and war and bad-faith governance all at once.

        He could probably make it very hard to use, given a lot of time, but he’d be eaten alive by the angry populace long before it ever reached that point.

        • Max@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          10 months ago

          How many internet service providers would have to go along before the internet was effectively off? 3? 4?

          • MrShankles@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            10 months ago

            You wouldn’t need an ISP to have servers communicate, if push comes to shove. So maybe “effectively off” as we know it, but damn near impossible to stop communication if people need it

          • xantoxis@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            I mean, off for whom? There’s people who think facebook IS the internet and will be forced to go outside if they can’t read their racist memes today. For critical comms, you’d have to shut off way more than 3 or 4 big companies to make a dent. For sensitive, high-bandwidth applications that involve a lot of people being online at once, you would need to hit fewer before the damage is noticeable.

            • Max@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              I agree that the internet is far more than facebook. But if you’re blocked at the edge of the network by your ISP, there’s really not much you can do. You’ll have access to nothing, Facebook or otherwise. Not even something low bandwidth.

              If At&t, Comcast, Charter, Verizon, and T-Mobile suddenly stopped providing service to all their customers, then essentially no-one would be able to use anything on the internet at all. Even if the backbone itself (which I believe is largely owned by those same companies, but not sure) and some large datacenters that are their own isps were able to keep talking to each other, anything business or user facing would stop.

              Some people who run their own mesh networks might be able to stay in contact (and people would try and start some local ones as this disaster unfolds), but that’s so few people.

              • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                But we still haven’t established why. It makes no sense that companies that only make money providing a service would stop providing the service. I wouldn’t even be able to pay my ISP because that happens over the Internet.

                • Max@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  I was assuming this was the government ordering the companies to. They have no incentive to do so on their own. But I believe there was a bill (which thankfully didn’t pass) that would have given the president the power to essentially order the internet turned off.

  • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    It was built to survive a nuclear war.

    It will survive Trump.

    Even if I have to drive a station wagon full of backup tapes myself.

  • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    10 months ago

    The internet has gone to shit. Let’s hear him out. Speaking as a web developer who just sat through a wireframe meeting, I’m not completely averse to the internet disappearing.

  • squiblet@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    10 months ago

    His MAGAlings must be shocked that he said he’d consult Bill Gates. Of course, cognitive dissonance is like water off a duck’s back to them, so that won’t last long.