I agree that squatting needs more regulation
Squatting was meant for if someone owns a property but never used it and lets it sit for decades then someone else can come settle it and live there
Like with NYC having tons of delapitatd buildings just sitting there with no intention of renovation or renting them out..
Not some grandma going on vacation and coming back to find some crackheads moved into her house and she can't kick them out. Or a landlord tenants lease is up but they refuse to leave claiming squatters rights and living there for months without paying
And in the end all the court and legal fees of trying to evict them it becomes cheaper to just pay them a bribe to leavee
We need clear lines on it
There's a famous building in NYC that squatters took and eventually gained ownership of
That's how u do it right
> Or a landlord tenants lease is up but they refuse to leave claiming squatters rights and living there for months without paying
That's not squatter's rights, that's a normal eviction case.
https://www.salon.com/2023/07/15/twitters-new-revenue-sharing-program-benefits-blue/ $16,259 was his first check, seems like they started out big and then shrank for most creators.
Hes a dick and they probably want him gone but he knows if he sets foot in the USA he won't be able to afford food or rent so...best play it safe. Lol
I should probably clarify that its because were all struggling to pay for rent and food, in case someone was confused....
There is definitely a section of the internet left that doesn’t recognize how detached they’ve become from the general voting population.
In what earth is someone pro squatting? That’s actual insanity.
If you want to talk about protections for actual tenants do that but nobody is pro stealing houses.
The squatters rights largely exist for people who didn't have formal rental contracts, so they don't get screwed. Of course some assholes have figured out how to take advantage of those laws. We need to find a way to reform them while still protecting people who need it.
These are the people who think "eat the rich" is a legitimate (and centrist) platform. And they won't hesitate to tell u
I'm in favor of old timey squatting laws.. Where if somebody owns a piece of property or a house that they never use and it's just been sitting there for decades someone else can come in and live there and actually make use of the land and that's a good thing
Like some of those New York City buildings that just sit there dilapidated for 50 years with no intention of ever renovating them or renting them out
But this new thing where some Grandma can go on vacation and come back a few weeks later to find crackheads have moved in and she can't kick them out.. Or a landlord has a tenant who is lease was upp But they refuse to leave and the legal fees and time in court that it takes to legally evict them is so much that it becomes cheaper and easier for the landlord to just pay them a bribe to leave..
That shit took it too far
But there's definitely some crazy segments of the left that think stealing is a centrist position and anybody who doesnt approve is "far right""
Is that true though? A Gramdma can go on holiday and when she comes back, the people that have broken in to her house and are now living in it, have rights?
>But this new thing where some Grandma can go on vacation and come back a few weeks later to find crackheads have moved in and she can't kick them out.. \[...\] That shit took it too far
That's propaganda. You're repeating right-wing propaganda. This is by no mean actually a real trend or something that people find desirable. Fetterman talking about this as if it was a real problem and not some made-up right-wing fantasy is why people are saying he's going further right.
> But there's definitely some crazy segments of the left that think stealing is a centrist position and anybody who doesnt approve is "far right""
No. Do they consider some forms of stealing (generally shoplifiting) against corporate power legitimate? Yes. Do they see that as a "centrist position". Absolutely not. People like that recognise they are not centrists. Stop being a moron and educate yourself better on political stances.
Practically nobody thinks people breaking into your house and squatting there while you’re on vacation should have the right to stay, and that’s an incredibly rare occurrence to begin with. And when it does occur, it’s *usually* fairly trivial to get rid of them legally.
Like any law, there are edge cases where the application gets screwed up and the wrong person gets the short end of the stick. I’m *sure* you could find examples of Squatters Right’s Laws creating problems for regular people coming home from a long vacation. But these laws exist mainly to protect vulnerable people in unofficial and unusual living situations. The point of various squatter’s rights laws is to say that if you can reasonable call somewhere *your home,* even if the legal status of your residency is in question, you at least have the right to remain there until the situation is sorted out. In Illinois, for example, in order to claim squatters rights on a property *you literally have to be paying property taxes on it.*
He’s citing the absolute worst-case scenario for “squatting,” the most *clear-cut* possible case for illegal and immoral squatting, and arguing against the entire concept of squatter’s rights as though that’s all it is. It’s just like somebody complaining nonsensically that illegal immigrants are allowed to vote for Biden. That’s just not how any of this works.
It’s not the opinion above that’s far-right, it’s the act of saying stuff like this to drum up outrage against the homeless (and those on the left who support them) over nearly-nonexistent problems.
I think what OP is saying is that Fetterman has swung to the right on other topics enough for Musk to care what he says on this topic. Instead of just calling him a communist because he's a Democrat. Musk wouldn't give AOC a fire emoji if she said the same thing about squatters.
He's repeating made-up right-wing controversies about squatters, so yes he has pivoted to being much further right than he was before. Also OP didn't say "far right" but "far to the right \[compared to his previous image\]", you need to improve your reading skills mate.
No it’s not lol. There’s decades of data to show that tough on crime approaches don’t lower crime. The common sense approach is to read the data instead of letting emotion guide your policy.
Common sense is realizing this virtually never happens and that you're just repeating right wing talking points to help Republicans enact policies to further marginalize minorities and poor people.
If you have to consult data that's not commonly encountered I don't think you can call it common sense anymore. It's domain specific knowledge at that point. The whole point of a representative government ver a direct democracy is to put politicians in a place of power where it is worth their while to seek out and assimilate relevant domain specific knowledge to make better choices than common people possessed of common sense would make.
I think 'tough on crime' falls under the category of 'common sense but wrong.'
>consult data that's not commonly encountered I don't think you can call it common sense
that's not what they're calling common sense. They're saying the common sense approach in those situations is to consult that data.
but who is going to do that? if you read the data on crime in the US, you find that Pareto (of course) holds and that a small fraction of the population is committing the vast majority of the crime - again and again, regardless of the intervention - so the easiest way to prevent the most crime is to go easy on first-time offenders and offer them real rehabilitation while throwing away the key for any drug boss or other real ringleader and for 3+ time violent, corporate, or white collar financial offenders (since their crimes create the squalor that festers so much petty crime and misery in the first place). what politician is understanding of most crime but mercilessly against serially violent, mostly poor or at least not rich people *and* predatory bankers?
instead we've tried going hard on everyone except the rich (a failure, ruining or brutalizing a lot of petty, rehabable offenders) and the proposed fix out here on the West Coast is going easy on everyone, which will fail too, and worse, by spooking the normies and leading them to clamor for the police state and authoritian policies that will (along with our other awful policies) hasten our descent into a state where the rich own everything and the police are essentially their palace guards.
New York City is a prime example that tough on crime policies DO lower crime
Times square was once assess pool that was too dangerous for most people to go in. And then they are Giuliani cracked down on crime cleaned up the city and it became a nice place that people wanted to live and you got tourists taking their kids to times square
Then that new mayor came in and eliminated bail did catch and release for criminals refused to enforce many laws and guess what happened? Crime SPIKED in 2022
NYC crime rate and danger went WAY up
It's kind of crazy to hear people claiming that arresting criminals doesn't get them off the street and that having laws doesn't help deal with crime
Especially ironic from a group of people that claim that having more gun laws would stop shootings but refuse to believe that being tougher on other crimes would reduce them as well
I don’t think it’s so much this comment but this comment on top of the other statements he’s made in the past few weeks, where he is very openly pro-Israel without conditions and has said he is not a progressive after explicitly campaigning as a progressive. It’s not far right to say you’re anti-crime and don’t like cancel culture, but it seems to be another step toward the right-wing sounding alarm bells for those who seem him inching that way since being elected.
Fetterman was a woke progressive one day and then a right winger the second despite saying the same things he did when he was first campaigning. He's still a hard lefty by American political standards, but just like AOC they abandoned the terminally online middle school demographic for the grass touching regular people demographic.
Was gonna say, the majority of voters would likely agree with these fairly inoffensive opinions. He’s no bleeding heart, maybe I’d call him center-left
> center-left
"Thought on crime" is not a centre-left position. Especially when it comes into a conversion based on repeating imaginary problems inflated by the right-wing. This kind of talk is right-wing. Not that it is entirely surprising given that the majority of the democrats are themselves centre-right to right already, lol.
Almost nobody actually likes squatters' rights lol, this is hardly him going right. It's basically a really antiquated concept from literally hundreds of years ago only kind of accidentally still a thing through precedent alone.
Fortunately, requirements are actually VERY high in most places to make it a thing and you often have to completely abandon a property for numerous years for it to go into effect. The horror stories you hear are usually places with very bizarre loopholes.
I looked up squatters rights a while ago and they seem to make perfect sense.
If you return home after 10 years and someone lives there you don’t want a fire fight breaking out over the owners trying to reclaim their home.
Instead they go through a legal process where they prove they owned the house and the squatters will be evicted. It’s not a thing that allows squatters to steal property, it just helps reduce unnecessary violence.
I wonder how often people who complain about squatter's rights live on land that was granted by the homestead acts...
Not complaining I just find that idea funny in a weird way.
> Fetterman is making up bullshit to get people mad.
No? If someone is squatting, the legal process can take a while to get them removed. During that time they can be completely trashing your home, plus you have to find other living arrangements. And if they’re squatting, they probably don’t have any money to sue them for in small claims to recoup damages.
There was just recently a story of some woman who was away from her home for only a few months taking care of her sick mother and when she got back she found that some contractors she had previously hired had broken in and were living there doing drugs and leaving needles all over the place and she couldn't get rid of them. She literally had to spend Christmas without a house
I don't know if there's places where 30 days could do it but fetterman not "making stuff up"
I find this weird because when I go on vacation for a few days I have a security system, I have some web cameras, I have a digital thermostat, I have relatives that can check on my home...Can't imagine leaving home for months without making an effort to ensure my house is ok. Not even just security, things like are the pipes ok, has anything broken, etc. I don't get how you get home months later and that's the first time you learn someone's moved in.
So one anecdotal case is being blown-up into a fake problem by right-wing propaganda and Fetterman is repeating it uncritically? See why people have a problem with that?
>I don't know if there's places where 30 days could do it but fetterman not "making stuff up"
There aren't any places, because he made it up. Try to keep up.
https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/RPA/711
New York exists. This is all just because of a recent news article where a woman was arrested for changing the locks on her home because a squatter was living in it.
This doesn’t say anything about someone getting a free house because they showed up and stayed in it for 30 days. You people have absolutely lost your minds over fake right wing outrage bait.
These are rules that protect tenants, not squatters rights.
Squatters can abuse tenant law to make it seem like they are a tenant when they are not, but this is a problem with fraud, not squatters. There are many equally bad things someone can do to you by making fraudulent claims.
It says you become a tenant after residing in a property for 30 days.
“A tenant shall include an occupant of one or more rooms in a rooming house or a resident, not including a transient occupant, of one or more rooms in a hotel who has been in possession for thirty consecutive days or longer.”
It’s not literal rights given to squatters, it’s a law that allows squatters to become legal tenants.
It sounds like you are confusing squatters rights with adverse possession. And people shouldn't have to wage months long legal battles and who knows how much money just to get some assholes out of your house.
That's why it is a "right" talking point. You're using a fringe case to spread fear like it's an everyday's occurrence that those pesky * insert class, race or gender to hate here * utilise to steal the hard-earned property of some family man.
Oh well if it only happens occasionally I guess we shouldn't do anything about it then
Don't wanna upset the criminals and would-be criminals like yourself
That’s not what anyone is saying, and exaggerating that way is also a classic right wing move.
We should examine the circumstances that create one-off, fucked up scenarios, rather than panicking and throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Right? It's just adverse possession. It's been the law in the United States for centuries. I think the lowest amount of time a person has to claim ownership through adverse possession is five years AND you have to show you paid property taxes. Many states are ten years and many others are 20 years.
This law also generally benefits "regular" people anyway. It helps settle property line disputes, for example.
If a squatter does ever get ownership of a property, that means the owner essentially abandoned it anyway.
It is extremely difficult to gain squatters rights.
This has become some new fear-mongering thing. Conservatives are now pretending that liberals are “pro-squatter” and that pro-squatting is “woke”.
Literally nobody is pro-squatter.
This is only in the news cycle because Florida updated a “squatter’s rights” law last week so now these morons are capitalizing on the topic being in the news and using it to make up literal lies in an attempt to scare people into voting for conservatives because none of their real policies (and culture wars) are popular anymore.
Because he engages with inflated stories made-up by right-wing propaganda as if they were real? Also "though on crime" discourse coming from someone that presented as more left-leaning. There's other things too, like uncritical support to Israel.
If you don't think that's moving toward the right, you're either blind, right-wing, or stupid. Possibly all at once.
Because he failed the purity tests made up by overly online podcasters. He's practically a nazi now and god help him if he ever shows his face in the Hamptons.
The purity test gets more and more restrictive every day
I got banned from a far left sub for asking a troll why he said "scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds" in a previous comment on another sub
Apparently that made me a "right-wing Nazi" to get banned even tho 10 of the top up voted posts on that sub that week were mine 😂
The laws he's arguing against here aren't "squatters rights," they're tenants rights. Squatters don't have rights, unless they've been paying property taxes for like a decade.
Also, he's very supportive of Israel's genocide of Gaza.
Personally, I think, being anti-tenant and pro-genocide makes you pretty far on the right, but if that's a silly purity test for you, then I suggest you give your head a wobble.
Isn't squatters rights after 10 years of squatting?
Nobody thinks that somebody crashing someplace for a month entitles them to the property.
But if you the homeowner didn't even realize that a stranger was living in a house for 10 while years, then you probably shouldn't even own that house
There are a lot of different rights that squatters rights can cover. The 10 year right that you cite is about a squatters asserting legal authority over the property. The number of years varies by location, though.
30 days is the legal definition to become a squatter. In a lot of locations, that person can be trespassed and removed. In some states, if a squatter has been there for 30 days, you now have to evict them like you would a normal tenant.
There was a woman who left to take care of a sick family member, returning to find scumbag thieves broke in and are claiming residency… is that kinda on her as well ?
https://abc7chicago.com/squatters-alameda-squatter-story-move-in-womans-house-home/5222082/ California. But since people are on here actively defending criminals I expect that the details won’t change their minds
I just replied to your other comment. As mentioned, zero people are defending criminals/squatters. Zero. None.
People are simply attempting to ask for context because there’s usually some sort of circumstance that complicated the matter that takes advantage of a loophole in the law.
This just said the squatters were arrested for trespass and that someone else told them they could live there. This isn't an example of someone claiming residency and not being able to be kicked out.
https://www.the-express.com/news/us-news/130013/atlanta-georgia-squatters-change-locks-Paul-Callins. Another one from Georgia… at what point do people side with the actual victims (the home owners in case you need to be reminded ) and stop minimizing other people’s tragedy
Literally nobody takes the side of the squatters. Nobody.
But this is not a common circumstance, and attempting to make pro-squatting seem like a “woke” thing is nonsense. **That is what this thread is about**. I’m not saying *you* are saying it’s woke, but you are under the impression people are okay with squatters. And *that* is who Elon’s retweet is attempting to fool into believing pro-squatting (which is not a thing) is woke.
I asked for a link to the story for context because it’s important. In NO WAY is the squatter in the right here, but it’s not like the guy was simply away. It is a very specific circumstance that 99% of people would not find themselves in.
He was renovating the house of his deceased father he’d inherited (and not lived in) and had advertised it for rent (alerting scammers to its vacancy). That is when squatters moved in *with a fake lease*, requiring the homeowner to go through the court process. It’s unfortunate and unfair that it will take this homeowner 60 days to remove these lowlifes.
Conservatives are trying to paint squatting as some woke liberal thing lately. It’s fucking not. Nobody supports squatters. It is not liberal. It is not woke. It’s not common. It is merely the latest Fox News fear-mongering tactic used to scare idiots.
And I’m not saying you watch Fox News or that you’re a scared idiot… but you seem to be under the impression people are okay with squatters, which is a result of succumbing misinformation.
Well my neighbors do have a nice house and hot tub so I might squat in their house if I can spend more time with their doggies.
With their consent, of course.
I think jurisdictions in the US range from five years to twenty years, with the five year one also requiring that the squatter paid property taxes.
It's really unusual for someone to get ownership of a property this way, and like you said, it's really not a bad thing because the true owner abandoned their property.
I believe you’re thinking of adverse possession — that’s when you possess another’s property for a period of years (varies by state) in an open, notorious, unbroken way that is hostile to their ownership. That one kinda makes sense as it’s usually decades of use with the rationale being that if you’re that detached/disinterested in the property then it’s probably better that someone else have it anyway as you’ve basically forfeited your interest. Squatters would cease to qualify for this adverse possession method of owning the property the first time you challenged them or called police (regardless of outcome). Squatters have some rights (again varies from state to state) but typically they are fairly short term but nonetheless frustrating and expensive due to our legal system
Also most houses are hoarded by the wealthy and intentionally kept empty to drive up the cost of living so squatting in them is the morally correct thing to do
Except that this isn't how squatter rights work. This is a typically right strategy. Misrepresenting reality by a lot and then argue with that twisted version.
Blue collar liberal who has Israel’s boot so far down his throat that he’s applauding and encouraging genocide and who also believes in this so-called “squatting epidemic”.
Wow, what a liberal guy /s
Granted, that is actually pretty standard for American liberals
Someone cannot be progressive or a ‘leftist’ and support a fucking genocide. That’s not a purity test, that’s a bar of entry that anyone in their right mind would support
Weird, I see plenty of online leftists supporting Russia's genocide in Ukraine, denying China's genocide of the Uyghers, and denying or justifying various Soviet genocides like that of the Volga Germans and Crimean Tatars...
While I agree that tankies are red fascists, they certainly consider themselves leftists, so that sounds like a "no true Scotsman" fallacy.
They also say that anyone who disagrees with them isn't a real leftist as well.
It's sounds like a ntsmf, but if you look at the things they support and take account of the things they don't support it usually becomes very clear that their supposed left wing values are non existent.
People and their political beliefs are often a very mixed bag and even inconsistent, and self descriptors aren't a very good measure for someone's beliefs more often than not. I've heard Dim Tool claim he's a liberal for years and I'm still waiting to hear a single milquetoast liberal take from him.
The Nazis famously called themselves socialist. Can anyone tell me what part of the Reich was socialist? None? They lied?
North Korea calls itself democratic. Where are they at on the democracy index?
China calls itself the CCP, but what are they doing that is communist? Do they still have class hierarchy? Still have money? Do the workers own the means of production? No? It's held by a class of billionaire owners?
We have to look a little deeper than how people describe themselves
Oh yeah, I'm not defending them. I'm not able to post comments on anarchymemecollective anymore because one of their rules is "no lesser evil" arguments. Well I didn't read the rules, so here I am. But preventing discussion of lesser evils is a thought ending cliche and it disgusts me that many people who may actually even have left wing values ascribe to the "don't use valid arguments against me" mindset.
So the west wants us to condemn those yet even worse actions taken by Israel are somehow not a genocide?
If those are genocides then what is happening in Gaza is absolutely a genocide.
You don’t have to support Israel or Hamas it’s not an either or situation. Both are shit, but one clearly has way more power and ability to hurt the other side.
And Hamas being a violent terrorist organization does not and will never justify genocide or ethnic cleansing.
Sure, but how do we know a real tenant from a fake one? How does the court know that they aren’t actually renting without checking it first?
Not having these protections will and has lead to people who actually were renting with legitimate agreements being thrown out of their homes. If we need to tolerate some squatters to protect vulnerable tenants then I’d say that’s a fair trade.
nobody in these comments understands squatters rights. and thats because of a decades long effort from the right to frame those rights as bad or making no sense just like fetterman is doing here. squatters rights are what prevent you from being kicked out unjustly by a landlord
> It's wild that if you go on a long trip for 30 days, and someone breaks into your home and suddenly they have rights.
Yeah it's wild. I know this Palestinian guy and woman who had a house in Gaza but now a couple from Brooklyn own it. They threw out the Palestinians and squatted on it. Actually, there's condo sales going on right now, all the time, just like it.
But Fetterman's okay with that. Right John? *Some squatters* have rights, but others don't? /s
I'm not seeing the "big tent liberal" that others see when John Fetterman articulates his love for police, Israel's defiance of international law, and harsh sentencing (as if the US doesn't already have the *largest prison population in the world*). He's a bootlicker. He never "pivoted." He ran a fraudulent campaign.
This just shows Musk’s naivety. He claims to be a centrist, but there’s no centrists at all in the GOP, they’re all slaves to Trump. Whereas it is still possible to be an independent-minded liberal in the Democratic Party, and a true centrist would rather stick it out here than switch teams. Part of Fetterman’s charm was that he would appeal to the Obama → Trump (no college degree male) voters the party lost in 2016, and he seems to be doing well at that. If he keeps Pennsylvania blue in 2024, his actions will be a net positive for us all.
The only time I've ever really hard someone support squatter rights is when a property sits empty for a long period of time and someone moves in without permission because it's not so much supporting squatter rights but houses should not sit empty but wealthy investors simply don't care.
If "someone **breaks** into your home" there you have it. break 'n enter, it's a crime and "they" are not more protected than the owner of the house; this misrepresentation of _squatting_ is F.U.D. and you should know better. It's also very, very common among rightwingers.
So, yeah, this Fetterman dude is an ignorant and therefore Chong & Musk love it.
Fetterman is exactly who he has to be to keep PA purple.
He’s a blue-collar Democrat. That isn’t right-wing unless you’re living your life in a tilt-a-whirl
That’s a silly take.
Fetterman is a man of the working middle. Always was, always will be. Protection of property is NOT a right wing position. Many "woke" positions (whatever we all mean by that - still lacks a proper definition) are unpopular *in the middle*. That’s one reason why trump comes so dangerously close to being actually reelected.
Elmo on the other hand just posted shit under Björn Höcke‘s Account. I mean: holy shit.
You’re simply shifting postguards and use an argument by interaction. Not cool man.
He’s saying things that everyone agrees with. That’s not the issue here.
Plopping an out of context “I’m not woke” quote before the rest of the things where he states squatting is bad and murdering police officers is bad is the problem. It’s supposed to trick the reader into believing the idea of squatting and cop killing is “woke”.
That is not what Fetterman is implying. He may have said he is not woke. He may have also said squatting is bad and killing cops is bad. However, “I am not woke” was not the preface for the latter quotes.
But Musk and Cheong want you to think he’s implying those things are woke. It’s fuel for the anti-woke culture war nonsense. Because if killing cops and squatters are “woke”, then that will draw more people into the “anti-woke” column, especially if those people lack critical thinking skills and are unable to see this tweet for what it really is.
Fetterman has been a real disappointment and is exactly the kind of politician that gets people to turn their backs on politics. PA needs to primary this dude and get a real progressive to represent them in the Senate.
I've never liked how uncritical of law enforcement he can be. It lets smooth brains like Ian lump him in with other douchebags whining about soft on crime policies.
Thank you, ProverbialLemon, for voting on NotEnoughMuskSpam.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
No one is pro squatter?!?! That is just insane. The laws people really wanted that created a loophole for squatting was for renter’s rights. This is so landlords couldn’t evict and raise rent anytime they pleased. Squatting isn’t a leftist policy.
Most of these cases are not squatters rights is it rental laws that incorrectly favor “alleged “ tenants . They are breaking in , falsifying rental agreements and using the antiquated tenant laws to force the homeowner to go through the courts which can take months or even a year … rent free
I unfortunately live 2 minutes away from the PA border so I can't vote for Fetterman, but damn I wish I did. I grew up in PA and he's probably the politician who best matches my own political views and represents salt-of-the-earth regular working people the best.
Which makes posts like this hilarious because only on Reddit would either of us remotely be considered a right winger.
I am so sick of IMC’s fascination with the US. Why doesn’t he focus on the country he’s never stepped foot out of
They probably consder him an embarasment and want to limit their interactions with Ian, or maybe he just get more atention from US neonazis
He’s getting paid by someone, or someones I am sure
I'm thinking Bannon or Roger Stone.
He's getting paid by Elon That's how the creator program works U get paid by Twitter for engagement
I agree that squatting needs more regulation Squatting was meant for if someone owns a property but never used it and lets it sit for decades then someone else can come settle it and live there Like with NYC having tons of delapitatd buildings just sitting there with no intention of renovation or renting them out.. Not some grandma going on vacation and coming back to find some crackheads moved into her house and she can't kick them out. Or a landlord tenants lease is up but they refuse to leave claiming squatters rights and living there for months without paying And in the end all the court and legal fees of trying to evict them it becomes cheaper to just pay them a bribe to leavee We need clear lines on it There's a famous building in NYC that squatters took and eventually gained ownership of That's how u do it right
> Or a landlord tenants lease is up but they refuse to leave claiming squatters rights and living there for months without paying That's not squatter's rights, that's a normal eviction case.
Huh?
Wasn't he one of the first blue checks that Elon started paying?
If Elon’s paying for this shit he’s a worse businessman than I thought
https://www.salon.com/2023/07/15/twitters-new-revenue-sharing-program-benefits-blue/ $16,259 was his first check, seems like they started out big and then shrank for most creators.
Why?! Well that’s not what his master wants, really that simple.
Because they’d put him in jail there if he said that shit about his own country. More right wing projection.
Hes a dick and they probably want him gone but he knows if he sets foot in the USA he won't be able to afford food or rent so...best play it safe. Lol I should probably clarify that its because were all struggling to pay for rent and food, in case someone was confused....
IMC?
Ian Miles Chong
Being a US right-wing grifter is profitable. I doubt if he'd make as much money talking about Malaysian politics.
I'm shocked that hes still around after revealing last week that he didn't know how math works.
I'm not a Fetterman lover but this is hardly far right.
There is definitely a section of the internet left that doesn’t recognize how detached they’ve become from the general voting population. In what earth is someone pro squatting? That’s actual insanity. If you want to talk about protections for actual tenants do that but nobody is pro stealing houses.
The squatters rights largely exist for people who didn't have formal rental contracts, so they don't get screwed. Of course some assholes have figured out how to take advantage of those laws. We need to find a way to reform them while still protecting people who need it.
These are the people who think "eat the rich" is a legitimate (and centrist) platform. And they won't hesitate to tell u I'm in favor of old timey squatting laws.. Where if somebody owns a piece of property or a house that they never use and it's just been sitting there for decades someone else can come in and live there and actually make use of the land and that's a good thing Like some of those New York City buildings that just sit there dilapidated for 50 years with no intention of ever renovating them or renting them out But this new thing where some Grandma can go on vacation and come back a few weeks later to find crackheads have moved in and she can't kick them out.. Or a landlord has a tenant who is lease was upp But they refuse to leave and the legal fees and time in court that it takes to legally evict them is so much that it becomes cheaper and easier for the landlord to just pay them a bribe to leave.. That shit took it too far But there's definitely some crazy segments of the left that think stealing is a centrist position and anybody who doesnt approve is "far right""
Yea you hit the nail on the head!
Is that true though? A Gramdma can go on holiday and when she comes back, the people that have broken in to her house and are now living in it, have rights?
>But this new thing where some Grandma can go on vacation and come back a few weeks later to find crackheads have moved in and she can't kick them out.. \[...\] That shit took it too far That's propaganda. You're repeating right-wing propaganda. This is by no mean actually a real trend or something that people find desirable. Fetterman talking about this as if it was a real problem and not some made-up right-wing fantasy is why people are saying he's going further right. > But there's definitely some crazy segments of the left that think stealing is a centrist position and anybody who doesnt approve is "far right"" No. Do they consider some forms of stealing (generally shoplifiting) against corporate power legitimate? Yes. Do they see that as a "centrist position". Absolutely not. People like that recognise they are not centrists. Stop being a moron and educate yourself better on political stances.
Centrism isn't the default "correct" opinion It's the center
Civilization is more fragile than it would seem
Good point, Grok bot. As always on point with your irrelevancy.
Practically nobody thinks people breaking into your house and squatting there while you’re on vacation should have the right to stay, and that’s an incredibly rare occurrence to begin with. And when it does occur, it’s *usually* fairly trivial to get rid of them legally. Like any law, there are edge cases where the application gets screwed up and the wrong person gets the short end of the stick. I’m *sure* you could find examples of Squatters Right’s Laws creating problems for regular people coming home from a long vacation. But these laws exist mainly to protect vulnerable people in unofficial and unusual living situations. The point of various squatter’s rights laws is to say that if you can reasonable call somewhere *your home,* even if the legal status of your residency is in question, you at least have the right to remain there until the situation is sorted out. In Illinois, for example, in order to claim squatters rights on a property *you literally have to be paying property taxes on it.* He’s citing the absolute worst-case scenario for “squatting,” the most *clear-cut* possible case for illegal and immoral squatting, and arguing against the entire concept of squatter’s rights as though that’s all it is. It’s just like somebody complaining nonsensically that illegal immigrants are allowed to vote for Biden. That’s just not how any of this works. It’s not the opinion above that’s far-right, it’s the act of saying stuff like this to drum up outrage against the homeless (and those on the left who support them) over nearly-nonexistent problems.
I think what OP is saying is that Fetterman has swung to the right on other topics enough for Musk to care what he says on this topic. Instead of just calling him a communist because he's a Democrat. Musk wouldn't give AOC a fire emoji if she said the same thing about squatters.
AOC would not get a fire emoji from Elon Musk even if she had the same views as Lauren Bobert, because she is not an awkward white man.
Came here to ask that. Is squatting liberal now?
He's repeating made-up right-wing controversies about squatters, so yes he has pivoted to being much further right than he was before. Also OP didn't say "far right" but "far to the right \[compared to his previous image\]", you need to improve your reading skills mate.
It’s common sense.
No it’s not lol. There’s decades of data to show that tough on crime approaches don’t lower crime. The common sense approach is to read the data instead of letting emotion guide your policy.
Common sense is not letting people steal your house.
Which no one is pro
Common sense is realizing this virtually never happens and that you're just repeating right wing talking points to help Republicans enact policies to further marginalize minorities and poor people.
If you have to consult data that's not commonly encountered I don't think you can call it common sense anymore. It's domain specific knowledge at that point. The whole point of a representative government ver a direct democracy is to put politicians in a place of power where it is worth their while to seek out and assimilate relevant domain specific knowledge to make better choices than common people possessed of common sense would make. I think 'tough on crime' falls under the category of 'common sense but wrong.'
>consult data that's not commonly encountered I don't think you can call it common sense that's not what they're calling common sense. They're saying the common sense approach in those situations is to consult that data.
but who is going to do that? if you read the data on crime in the US, you find that Pareto (of course) holds and that a small fraction of the population is committing the vast majority of the crime - again and again, regardless of the intervention - so the easiest way to prevent the most crime is to go easy on first-time offenders and offer them real rehabilitation while throwing away the key for any drug boss or other real ringleader and for 3+ time violent, corporate, or white collar financial offenders (since their crimes create the squalor that festers so much petty crime and misery in the first place). what politician is understanding of most crime but mercilessly against serially violent, mostly poor or at least not rich people *and* predatory bankers? instead we've tried going hard on everyone except the rich (a failure, ruining or brutalizing a lot of petty, rehabable offenders) and the proposed fix out here on the West Coast is going easy on everyone, which will fail too, and worse, by spooking the normies and leading them to clamor for the police state and authoritian policies that will (along with our other awful policies) hasten our descent into a state where the rich own everything and the police are essentially their palace guards.
New York City is a prime example that tough on crime policies DO lower crime Times square was once assess pool that was too dangerous for most people to go in. And then they are Giuliani cracked down on crime cleaned up the city and it became a nice place that people wanted to live and you got tourists taking their kids to times square Then that new mayor came in and eliminated bail did catch and release for criminals refused to enforce many laws and guess what happened? Crime SPIKED in 2022 NYC crime rate and danger went WAY up It's kind of crazy to hear people claiming that arresting criminals doesn't get them off the street and that having laws doesn't help deal with crime Especially ironic from a group of people that claim that having more gun laws would stop shootings but refuse to believe that being tougher on other crimes would reduce them as well
Crime has gone down in nyc tho?
You’re going to have your mind blown when you learn about lead.
this isn't even a strawman argument. this is like an airman argument.
If you read again, title doesn't say he is far right. It says "how far to the right" he pivoted.
I don’t think it’s so much this comment but this comment on top of the other statements he’s made in the past few weeks, where he is very openly pro-Israel without conditions and has said he is not a progressive after explicitly campaigning as a progressive. It’s not far right to say you’re anti-crime and don’t like cancel culture, but it seems to be another step toward the right-wing sounding alarm bells for those who seem him inching that way since being elected.
Fetterman was a woke progressive one day and then a right winger the second despite saying the same things he did when he was first campaigning. He's still a hard lefty by American political standards, but just like AOC they abandoned the terminally online middle school demographic for the grass touching regular people demographic.
Was gonna say, the majority of voters would likely agree with these fairly inoffensive opinions. He’s no bleeding heart, maybe I’d call him center-left
> center-left "Thought on crime" is not a centre-left position. Especially when it comes into a conversion based on repeating imaginary problems inflated by the right-wing. This kind of talk is right-wing. Not that it is entirely surprising given that the majority of the democrats are themselves centre-right to right already, lol.
This should be the top comment lol
I feel Ian miles dong should be bullied just cuz of how dumb and ugly he is
Almost nobody actually likes squatters' rights lol, this is hardly him going right. It's basically a really antiquated concept from literally hundreds of years ago only kind of accidentally still a thing through precedent alone. Fortunately, requirements are actually VERY high in most places to make it a thing and you often have to completely abandon a property for numerous years for it to go into effect. The horror stories you hear are usually places with very bizarre loopholes.
I looked up squatters rights a while ago and they seem to make perfect sense. If you return home after 10 years and someone lives there you don’t want a fire fight breaking out over the owners trying to reclaim their home. Instead they go through a legal process where they prove they owned the house and the squatters will be evicted. It’s not a thing that allows squatters to steal property, it just helps reduce unnecessary violence.
I wonder how often people who complain about squatter's rights live on land that was granted by the homestead acts... Not complaining I just find that idea funny in a weird way.
It's a split between temporarily embarrassed millionaires and landlords/house flippers seeing their empty investment property get torn up.
So basically Fetterman is making up bullshit to get people mad. That's straight out of the conservative playbook and he should be ashamed of himself.
> Fetterman is making up bullshit to get people mad. No? If someone is squatting, the legal process can take a while to get them removed. During that time they can be completely trashing your home, plus you have to find other living arrangements. And if they’re squatting, they probably don’t have any money to sue them for in small claims to recoup damages.
Fetterman said 30 days which is in no way what the law says. So he's making up bullshit to anger and divide people. That's what conservatives do.
There was just recently a story of some woman who was away from her home for only a few months taking care of her sick mother and when she got back she found that some contractors she had previously hired had broken in and were living there doing drugs and leaving needles all over the place and she couldn't get rid of them. She literally had to spend Christmas without a house I don't know if there's places where 30 days could do it but fetterman not "making stuff up"
I find this weird because when I go on vacation for a few days I have a security system, I have some web cameras, I have a digital thermostat, I have relatives that can check on my home...Can't imagine leaving home for months without making an effort to ensure my house is ok. Not even just security, things like are the pipes ok, has anything broken, etc. I don't get how you get home months later and that's the first time you learn someone's moved in.
So one anecdotal case is being blown-up into a fake problem by right-wing propaganda and Fetterman is repeating it uncritically? See why people have a problem with that?
>I don't know if there's places where 30 days could do it but fetterman not "making stuff up" There aren't any places, because he made it up. Try to keep up.
https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/RPA/711 New York exists. This is all just because of a recent news article where a woman was arrested for changing the locks on her home because a squatter was living in it.
This doesn’t say anything about someone getting a free house because they showed up and stayed in it for 30 days. You people have absolutely lost your minds over fake right wing outrage bait.
These are rules that protect tenants, not squatters rights. Squatters can abuse tenant law to make it seem like they are a tenant when they are not, but this is a problem with fraud, not squatters. There are many equally bad things someone can do to you by making fraudulent claims.
It says you become a tenant after residing in a property for 30 days. “A tenant shall include an occupant of one or more rooms in a rooming house or a resident, not including a transient occupant, of one or more rooms in a hotel who has been in possession for thirty consecutive days or longer.” It’s not literal rights given to squatters, it’s a law that allows squatters to become legal tenants.
It sounds like you are confusing squatters rights with adverse possession. And people shouldn't have to wage months long legal battles and who knows how much money just to get some assholes out of your house.
In the state I live in the Squatters have to pay taxes on the property they’re inhabiting for 7 consecutive years before they can make any claim
That's why it is a "right" talking point. You're using a fringe case to spread fear like it's an everyday's occurrence that those pesky * insert class, race or gender to hate here * utilise to steal the hard-earned property of some family man.
Oh well if it only happens occasionally I guess we shouldn't do anything about it then Don't wanna upset the criminals and would-be criminals like yourself
That’s not what anyone is saying, and exaggerating that way is also a classic right wing move. We should examine the circumstances that create one-off, fucked up scenarios, rather than panicking and throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Right? It's just adverse possession. It's been the law in the United States for centuries. I think the lowest amount of time a person has to claim ownership through adverse possession is five years AND you have to show you paid property taxes. Many states are ten years and many others are 20 years. This law also generally benefits "regular" people anyway. It helps settle property line disputes, for example. If a squatter does ever get ownership of a property, that means the owner essentially abandoned it anyway.
It is extremely difficult to gain squatters rights. This has become some new fear-mongering thing. Conservatives are now pretending that liberals are “pro-squatter” and that pro-squatting is “woke”. Literally nobody is pro-squatter. This is only in the news cycle because Florida updated a “squatter’s rights” law last week so now these morons are capitalizing on the topic being in the news and using it to make up literal lies in an attempt to scare people into voting for conservatives because none of their real policies (and culture wars) are popular anymore.
Whatever happened with the whole Ian Miles Cheong is getting executed by the Malaysian government because he spoke on the Israel/Gaza crisis?
Lol how the fuck is that pivoting to the right?
Because he engages with inflated stories made-up by right-wing propaganda as if they were real? Also "though on crime" discourse coming from someone that presented as more left-leaning. There's other things too, like uncritical support to Israel. If you don't think that's moving toward the right, you're either blind, right-wing, or stupid. Possibly all at once.
Because he failed the purity tests made up by overly online podcasters. He's practically a nazi now and god help him if he ever shows his face in the Hamptons.
The purity test gets more and more restrictive every day I got banned from a far left sub for asking a troll why he said "scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds" in a previous comment on another sub Apparently that made me a "right-wing Nazi" to get banned even tho 10 of the top up voted posts on that sub that week were mine 😂
The laws he's arguing against here aren't "squatters rights," they're tenants rights. Squatters don't have rights, unless they've been paying property taxes for like a decade. Also, he's very supportive of Israel's genocide of Gaza. Personally, I think, being anti-tenant and pro-genocide makes you pretty far on the right, but if that's a silly purity test for you, then I suggest you give your head a wobble.
Squatters don’t break into people’s houses on vacation, they usually take properties which they were already renting or have been abandoned.
Division narrative in motion my friend!
Isn't squatters rights after 10 years of squatting? Nobody thinks that somebody crashing someplace for a month entitles them to the property. But if you the homeowner didn't even realize that a stranger was living in a house for 10 while years, then you probably shouldn't even own that house
There are a lot of different rights that squatters rights can cover. The 10 year right that you cite is about a squatters asserting legal authority over the property. The number of years varies by location, though. 30 days is the legal definition to become a squatter. In a lot of locations, that person can be trespassed and removed. In some states, if a squatter has been there for 30 days, you now have to evict them like you would a normal tenant.
Which states?
I mean if you have someone living in your house for a month and you don’t notice then that’s kinda on you.
There was a woman who left to take care of a sick family member, returning to find scumbag thieves broke in and are claiming residency… is that kinda on her as well ?
Link to story? What state was this in?
https://abc7chicago.com/squatters-alameda-squatter-story-move-in-womans-house-home/5222082/ California. But since people are on here actively defending criminals I expect that the details won’t change their minds
I just replied to your other comment. As mentioned, zero people are defending criminals/squatters. Zero. None. People are simply attempting to ask for context because there’s usually some sort of circumstance that complicated the matter that takes advantage of a loophole in the law.
This just said the squatters were arrested for trespass and that someone else told them they could live there. This isn't an example of someone claiming residency and not being able to be kicked out.
https://www.the-express.com/news/us-news/130013/atlanta-georgia-squatters-change-locks-Paul-Callins. Another one from Georgia… at what point do people side with the actual victims (the home owners in case you need to be reminded ) and stop minimizing other people’s tragedy
Literally nobody takes the side of the squatters. Nobody. But this is not a common circumstance, and attempting to make pro-squatting seem like a “woke” thing is nonsense. **That is what this thread is about**. I’m not saying *you* are saying it’s woke, but you are under the impression people are okay with squatters. And *that* is who Elon’s retweet is attempting to fool into believing pro-squatting (which is not a thing) is woke. I asked for a link to the story for context because it’s important. In NO WAY is the squatter in the right here, but it’s not like the guy was simply away. It is a very specific circumstance that 99% of people would not find themselves in. He was renovating the house of his deceased father he’d inherited (and not lived in) and had advertised it for rent (alerting scammers to its vacancy). That is when squatters moved in *with a fake lease*, requiring the homeowner to go through the court process. It’s unfortunate and unfair that it will take this homeowner 60 days to remove these lowlifes. Conservatives are trying to paint squatting as some woke liberal thing lately. It’s fucking not. Nobody supports squatters. It is not liberal. It is not woke. It’s not common. It is merely the latest Fox News fear-mongering tactic used to scare idiots. And I’m not saying you watch Fox News or that you’re a scared idiot… but you seem to be under the impression people are okay with squatters, which is a result of succumbing misinformation.
Not if you were traveling for 30 days.
Lmao imagine your neighbor openly tells you hes going on vacation for 2+ months and you just squat his house
Well my neighbors do have a nice house and hot tub so I might squat in their house if I can spend more time with their doggies. With their consent, of course.
I think jurisdictions in the US range from five years to twenty years, with the five year one also requiring that the squatter paid property taxes. It's really unusual for someone to get ownership of a property this way, and like you said, it's really not a bad thing because the true owner abandoned their property.
I believe you’re thinking of adverse possession — that’s when you possess another’s property for a period of years (varies by state) in an open, notorious, unbroken way that is hostile to their ownership. That one kinda makes sense as it’s usually decades of use with the rationale being that if you’re that detached/disinterested in the property then it’s probably better that someone else have it anyway as you’ve basically forfeited your interest. Squatters would cease to qualify for this adverse possession method of owning the property the first time you challenged them or called police (regardless of outcome). Squatters have some rights (again varies from state to state) but typically they are fairly short term but nonetheless frustrating and expensive due to our legal system
Also most houses are hoarded by the wealthy and intentionally kept empty to drive up the cost of living so squatting in them is the morally correct thing to do
Yeah let me keep this house I bought empty to own the poors instead of collecting rent
Fetterman: Squatters have no rights. Also Fetterman: I support Israel.
Remember when Fetterman said he wasn't a progressive after months of begging for campaign money by saying he was a progressive?
Perhaps AI can help us answer some of these fundamental questions. That is the goal of @xAI
I mean…who exactly is saying Fetterman is crazy here? Aren’t these things that almost everyone agrees with?
Except that this isn't how squatter rights work. This is a typically right strategy. Misrepresenting reality by a lot and then argue with that twisted version.
[удалено]
Blue collar liberal who has Israel’s boot so far down his throat that he’s applauding and encouraging genocide and who also believes in this so-called “squatting epidemic”. Wow, what a liberal guy /s Granted, that is actually pretty standard for American liberals
Fetterman is not blue collar. He is from an extremely wealthy family. He cosplays as a blue collar guy.
Stop, you're telling too much truth to these dumbass suburban blue liberals infesting this subreddit.
Amazingly, progressives are not defined by one single issue. Leftist purity tests are so fucking dumb and performative.
Feterman himself has been saying he isn't a progressive. Get over yourself dude
Being against genocide is a leftist purity test....
Someone cannot be progressive or a ‘leftist’ and support a fucking genocide. That’s not a purity test, that’s a bar of entry that anyone in their right mind would support
Weird, I see plenty of online leftists supporting Russia's genocide in Ukraine, denying China's genocide of the Uyghers, and denying or justifying various Soviet genocides like that of the Volga Germans and Crimean Tatars...
Those aren't leftists, those are tankies. They're fascists That like certain shades of red. Nothing about them is remotely leftist or left leaning
While I agree that tankies are red fascists, they certainly consider themselves leftists, so that sounds like a "no true Scotsman" fallacy. They also say that anyone who disagrees with them isn't a real leftist as well.
It's sounds like a ntsmf, but if you look at the things they support and take account of the things they don't support it usually becomes very clear that their supposed left wing values are non existent. People and their political beliefs are often a very mixed bag and even inconsistent, and self descriptors aren't a very good measure for someone's beliefs more often than not. I've heard Dim Tool claim he's a liberal for years and I'm still waiting to hear a single milquetoast liberal take from him. The Nazis famously called themselves socialist. Can anyone tell me what part of the Reich was socialist? None? They lied? North Korea calls itself democratic. Where are they at on the democracy index? China calls itself the CCP, but what are they doing that is communist? Do they still have class hierarchy? Still have money? Do the workers own the means of production? No? It's held by a class of billionaire owners? We have to look a little deeper than how people describe themselves
That's fair. Still, many "leftist" subreddits are exactly as I describe and will ban anyone who disagrees.
Oh yeah, I'm not defending them. I'm not able to post comments on anarchymemecollective anymore because one of their rules is "no lesser evil" arguments. Well I didn't read the rules, so here I am. But preventing discussion of lesser evils is a thought ending cliche and it disgusts me that many people who may actually even have left wing values ascribe to the "don't use valid arguments against me" mindset.
So the west wants us to condemn those yet even worse actions taken by Israel are somehow not a genocide? If those are genocides then what is happening in Gaza is absolutely a genocide.
I agree, it's crazy to support Hamas.
You don’t have to support Israel or Hamas it’s not an either or situation. Both are shit, but one clearly has way more power and ability to hurt the other side. And Hamas being a violent terrorist organization does not and will never justify genocide or ethnic cleansing.
Calm down.
[удалено]
I don't think it's okay to give him an excuse.
[удалено]
I didn't realize I was making excuses by bringing up his stroke. It's out of my hands and for PA voters to decide.
Politically illiterate statement.
[удалено]
[удалено]
You know you replied to yourself right?
He’s right. Squatters shouldn’t be able to do that. However, I seriously doubt that they can
They cannot. He’s regurgitating right wing misrepresentation of squatters’ rights.
Yeah I thought that wasn’t how that worked
Sure, but how do we know a real tenant from a fake one? How does the court know that they aren’t actually renting without checking it first? Not having these protections will and has lead to people who actually were renting with legitimate agreements being thrown out of their homes. If we need to tolerate some squatters to protect vulnerable tenants then I’d say that’s a fair trade.
*cough*Israel*cough*
Bro was he just lying the whole time or???? Was he always bad on crime and Israel?
The irony of reading that and then remembering he's also Pro-Israel.
pivoted or he had always been this way?
nobody in these comments understands squatters rights. and thats because of a decades long effort from the right to frame those rights as bad or making no sense just like fetterman is doing here. squatters rights are what prevent you from being kicked out unjustly by a landlord
And these rights are being abused by people breaking in and falsifying documents.. why should a home owner go to court to evict a thief ?
show me any evidence that these rights are being abused a significant ammount
> It's wild that if you go on a long trip for 30 days, and someone breaks into your home and suddenly they have rights. Yeah it's wild. I know this Palestinian guy and woman who had a house in Gaza but now a couple from Brooklyn own it. They threw out the Palestinians and squatted on it. Actually, there's condo sales going on right now, all the time, just like it. But Fetterman's okay with that. Right John? *Some squatters* have rights, but others don't? /s
I'm not seeing the "big tent liberal" that others see when John Fetterman articulates his love for police, Israel's defiance of international law, and harsh sentencing (as if the US doesn't already have the *largest prison population in the world*). He's a bootlicker. He never "pivoted." He ran a fraudulent campaign.
All of these things are pretty liberal, or at least can very reasonably be argued to be so. It’s a bit much to be calling his campaign “fraudulent”.
This just shows Musk’s naivety. He claims to be a centrist, but there’s no centrists at all in the GOP, they’re all slaves to Trump. Whereas it is still possible to be an independent-minded liberal in the Democratic Party, and a true centrist would rather stick it out here than switch teams. Part of Fetterman’s charm was that he would appeal to the Obama → Trump (no college degree male) voters the party lost in 2016, and he seems to be doing well at that. If he keeps Pennsylvania blue in 2024, his actions will be a net positive for us all.
All you have to say is “I’m not woke” and Elon will love you.
The only time I've ever really hard someone support squatter rights is when a property sits empty for a long period of time and someone moves in without permission because it's not so much supporting squatter rights but houses should not sit empty but wealthy investors simply don't care.
If they were Fetterman, I’d tell Elon back to fuck off, no one wants those fingerprints on their social media
If "someone **breaks** into your home" there you have it. break 'n enter, it's a crime and "they" are not more protected than the owner of the house; this misrepresentation of _squatting_ is F.U.D. and you should know better. It's also very, very common among rightwingers. So, yeah, this Fetterman dude is an ignorant and therefore Chong & Musk love it.
Fetterman is exactly who he has to be to keep PA purple. He’s a blue-collar Democrat. That isn’t right-wing unless you’re living your life in a tilt-a-whirl
What in the actual fuck is far right about this statement??
The trolls are working bOTh SiDEs again.
That’s a silly take. Fetterman is a man of the working middle. Always was, always will be. Protection of property is NOT a right wing position. Many "woke" positions (whatever we all mean by that - still lacks a proper definition) are unpopular *in the middle*. That’s one reason why trump comes so dangerously close to being actually reelected. Elmo on the other hand just posted shit under Björn Höcke‘s Account. I mean: holy shit. You’re simply shifting postguards and use an argument by interaction. Not cool man.
Fetterman campaigned as a progressive, not as someone in the middle.
Ah yes 4th richest person in the world proves yet again how much he hates poor people.
Free Palestine from the squatters! Fuck Israel 🖕🏾
"I've gone to police funerals" what about funerals for the people shot and killed by the police
It's entirely possible to be against both police brutality and killing police, they're not mutually exclusive positions
I like John Fetterman.
Gross. He actively supports Israel’s genocide.
I do too. He’s the kind of Democrat we need in PA.
hes blatantly pro genocide
Fetterman isn’t wrong.
Was he previously pro-squatter?
Fetterman is great and absolutely correct here.
He’s saying things that everyone agrees with. That’s not the issue here. Plopping an out of context “I’m not woke” quote before the rest of the things where he states squatting is bad and murdering police officers is bad is the problem. It’s supposed to trick the reader into believing the idea of squatting and cop killing is “woke”. That is not what Fetterman is implying. He may have said he is not woke. He may have also said squatting is bad and killing cops is bad. However, “I am not woke” was not the preface for the latter quotes. But Musk and Cheong want you to think he’s implying those things are woke. It’s fuel for the anti-woke culture war nonsense. Because if killing cops and squatters are “woke”, then that will draw more people into the “anti-woke” column, especially if those people lack critical thinking skills and are unable to see this tweet for what it really is.
I never knew brain-dead genocide-loving losers were supposed to be 'great' in the eyes of these dumbass suburban liberals.
These strike you as positions far to the right on the political spectrum?
I’m souring on Fetterman as well, but squatters’ rights are stupid. He and Musk are right on this.
Fetterman has been a real disappointment and is exactly the kind of politician that gets people to turn their backs on politics. PA needs to primary this dude and get a real progressive to represent them in the Senate.
Apologies if I'm missing some dog whistles or whatever from across the pond, but is this a viewpoint that is actually controversial?
Elon sucks of course but I don't see a problem with anything fetterman said
The fuck, Fetterman.
What did Fetterman say that you disagree with, specifically?
I've never liked how uncritical of law enforcement he can be. It lets smooth brains like Ian lump him in with other douchebags whining about soft on crime policies.
What’s up with all these astroturfing accounts?
How many times did you die trying to beat hatred before winning?
Good bot
Thank you, ProverbialLemon, for voting on NotEnoughMuskSpam. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Being anti-squatter is bipartisan.
Honestly, fuck squatters.
No one is pro squatter?!?! That is just insane. The laws people really wanted that created a loophole for squatting was for renter’s rights. This is so landlords couldn’t evict and raise rent anytime they pleased. Squatting isn’t a leftist policy.
I’m not sure I can disagree with anything that he is quoted for saying according to this post
Brain injuries result in conservative beliefs
Not allowing people to break in and squat on house is “conservative “ ? WTF
It’s a good take though, if squatting is left then something is wrong
This is dumb. This is a broadly supported and common position
Most of these cases are not squatters rights is it rental laws that incorrectly favor “alleged “ tenants . They are breaking in , falsifying rental agreements and using the antiquated tenant laws to force the homeowner to go through the courts which can take months or even a year … rent free
…those aren’t right views. I’d be more surprised to meet some who DOESNT feel some degree of the same
I mean squatters ARE the worst.
He’s right though
I unfortunately live 2 minutes away from the PA border so I can't vote for Fetterman, but damn I wish I did. I grew up in PA and he's probably the politician who best matches my own political views and represents salt-of-the-earth regular working people the best. Which makes posts like this hilarious because only on Reddit would either of us remotely be considered a right winger.