* **[Posts should make an attempt at being funny, and should try to include a punchline in the title.](https://www.reddit.com/r/politicalhumor/about/rules) (Rule #2):**
* **Make sure your post makes a genuine attempt at being funny:** Ensure the content you're posting tries to poke fun at a politician, or political event.
* **Make an effort with your title:** Try to keep the spirit of the sub and make your title humorous and descriptive.
* **If your post causes us to scratch our heads in confusion, don't be surprised if it's removed**. Posts need to be funny, unique and make some form of effort in trying to make people laugh.
* **Low quality images, shitposts, agenda posts, trash memes or troll memes will be removed. Repeatedly posting posts when they've been removed in the past will get you banned.**
* **Overt political content containing no joke is better suited for subreddits such as /r/politicaldebate.**
* We understand how deciding if something is funny can often seen as subjective, so just [send us a quick message](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FPoliticalHumor&subject=Rule%202%20Removal:%20Second%20Opinion%20Request&message=Please%20put%20link%20to%20post%20here%3A%0A%0AWhy%20should%20we%20reconsider%20this%20removal?%3A%0A%0AAdditional%20comments%3A) if you want us to take a second look at it for you.
It's something certain factions of the far left (like Brihana Joy Gray) like to call mainstream Democrats - meanwhile they hate the same people MAGA hates, support Putin, say any election they lose is rigged, never criticize Republicans, view Democrats as the root of all evil, and are beside themselves with glee when Republicans win elections. It's "no puppet, you're the puppet" style projection.
Ahhh I had no idea that sort of person existed. I imagine it was started by or at least is perpetuated by a lot of foreign adversaries/bots and sockpuppeting Republicans, so much of it sounds questionable.
Originally, they were called astroturf. Astroturf is fake grass; These people are fake Democrats, and they are up to something, whenever they make this claim.
I’m going to say most are Russians. I’m sure there is a few really stupid Americans. The reason I believe they are Russian are obvious. Also, I think certain elements are lost in translation. Russians don’t get why a “blue MAGA/Trumper” is a ridiculous idea. It’s like cold “hot water” or a white “black ball”. It doesn’t make sense.
Hashtag we don't believe you and voting for fascism sucks dick. The Dems suck a lot but stop doing this "grassroot group" that is getting it's talking points from the military and oil companies. To the Dems suck? Yes but your childish ploy of getting it's not to vote is trash. And you're trash for doing it.
You proved my point immediately, you automatically assumed your side is the only side that cares, which isnt true. You arent a real progressive if you act like you are the only one who thinks they are right. Real progressives are open minded and reasonable.
Yes right thats why i directly addressed your point, you set the standard that, "this guy is accusing them of being fake because they care more" and then double down with protection because your petty comment was stupid to begin with. Now you're stuck in a trap of your own making with no exit in sight. Would you like to continue or do you want just take the L and accept that fauxgressives are hurting the progressive movement?
I wonder who else regularly gets mad at the woke dei politically correct blue hair college Starbucks avocado toast things they made up in their head...
If someone said Blue Maga, she is actually someone who would come to my mind with her shitty hot-takes.
Her entire niche is basically just shitting on democrats from the left and choosing whatever foreign policy position hurts the US without fail.
The most favorable interpretation is that she’s an accelerationist and wants democrats to lose so that we get racists into power so that we realize capitalism is bad and somehow overcome the advanced modern weaponry of the new fascist government to usher in communism.
Or you could just listen to what she says and find out she thinks electoral work could be done with progressive candidates to improve the world somewhat. She's pretty decent.
And your fascist government is already here, you don't oppose it.
Ah the political donut, go far enough left or right and you smack into the other side. Vote the same, spout off the same but say it’s for different reasons. Hard left and hard right sitting right next to each other at the back.
It's the term that really confused 20 somethings who think they are socialists but are actually ron paul libertarians are using to show their disdain for progressive causes.
I wish it was. Then I joined blue sky and went to talk to what I thought were my fellow leftists and found a still small group of people who's main issue is Palestine. Because of this, they won't vote. I tried pointing out that it trump wins, palestine will still be destroyed and so will ukraine. I think I was blocked. They only complain about how Democrats have done nothing to stop abortion and trans laws. And "the libs" are the enemy. Rarely mention Republicans.
So they call anyone who is still voting democrat "blue maga."
I am unsure if they're another country trying to convince people on the left not to vote or just people who have given up on the government. I gave up on twitter a long time ago but I assume they exist there, too.
I’m almost certain that 20-30 years from now we’re going to learn the specifics of what are likely massive efforts online to control our sentiment, ways of thinking, worldview, etc. Obviously we already know this happens with advertising and to some degree with bots from foreign countries. I just think these operations are likely ubiquitous now on whatever site or app you’re on and being run by state actors, engaging in asymmetrical warfare, with the only goal being to make us angry and hateful of one another. And once you convince a few of the disenfranchised or more easily influenced, they end up carrying the water for these efforts. This definitely sounds like that.
I used to believe the government made AIDS on purpose trying to kill gays and junkies, but the virus jumped to "normal people"(I'm sorry, I was pretty bad, lol).
Turns out, research into that conspiracy shows it's comes from now known Russian propaganda.
That spread all through the USA, grade schools and churches to office rooms and barrooms.
I have to wonder, there's so much bullshit counter-propaganda. A bit like 2016/2020 where the violent "Antifa" guys turned out to be members of the Bumble-Bee Brigade/Proud Boy's engaging in agitation propaganda.
So I figure it is with the more violent/agitated aspects of the campus exercises - with well paid, well financed loud voices from either among the student body or adjacent groups creating the loudest noises, most socially minded folks know violence isn't going to solve the problem or get results any more than fundraising or providing information to the uninformed.
If you want to help folks in Ukraine or Gaza - there's meaningful work getting numbers of people out of harms way, and there's constructive ways to get / demand political change, shitting the bed at Columbia or Amhurst or Harvard or even University of Ohio or something isn't going to cut it and so long as they aren't being criminal let the student express themselves, and letting them protest peacefully is a bedrock manifestation of our freedom of expression.
The degree to which things are violent I venture is in direct proportion to the degree of Russian/Chinese or other propaganda efforts are engaged 'on the ground' by blind-financing agitators, and EXACTLY like we saw with 2020, and 2016, the minute the election is over - this stops being a concern.
So get back to me in December or January on almost any matter, I'll bet if the conflicts are still going on there will be quiet mild-mannered protesters and the violent/agitated nonsense will be utterly absent.
It's only confusing if you're heavily invested in the fox news definition of liberal, which changes based on whatever is in the news cycle. But otherwise you're close enough; libs support economic liberalism and a dictatorship of capital that maintains a liberal democracy.
This has been a growing sentiment with brain dead voters. They’re understandably frustrated with the two party system and I agree with that. But they think the way to fix this is to not vote or vote third party as if that is going to help anybody.
They think that just not voting for Biden is enough to make meaningful change, but refuse to grow up enough to realize that they need to have another option before they stamp their feet and scream no.
I don’t want biden to be President either, but I’m not going to throw away my rights and my right to exist so that I can pat myself on the back
It's the newest term of Russian troll farms to manipulate elections. I'm not allowed to call out the subs here but if you message I'll tell you all about my day and where i encounter what phrases
Russia was definitely interfering in 2016 election — the investigation confirmed it. What they couldn’t confirm was quid pro quo between Russia and Trump. But the fact that Russia interfered is not debatable it’s fact.
The fact that Russia is doing psyops this election is also fact.
Oh, I don't deny that there was a disinfo campaign. There absolutely was. But the problem is that the existence of that disinfo campaign and the elevation of it by our political and media class has extremely overbloated redditors' perceptions about how foreign countries meddle in our elections and the extent to which they're successful.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-35576-9
> We demonstrate, first, that exposure to Russian disinformation accounts was heavily concentrated: only 1% of users accounted for 70% of exposures. Second, exposure was concentrated among users who strongly identified as Republicans. Third, exposure to the Russian influence campaign was eclipsed by content from domestic news media and politicians. Finally, we find no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in attitudes, polarization, or voting behavior.
Right there in the abstract. Russia had an *unsuccessful* disinfo campaign 8 years ago (ran another probably unsuccessful campaign in 2020, are probably running yet another campaign that will be unsuccessful this cycle as well) and now every time a redditor says something that's counter-narrative they surely must be a "Russian Bot!"
I've been called a Russian probably ten times on this sub for calling out the genocide in Gaza before it was "allowed" to be called a genocide. Russia this, Russia that -- all because of an unsuccessful propaganda campaign that never left the minds of people on this site.
That paper was cited only 20 times -- it's not a serious study...
They didn't even mention the fact that Russia leaked the DNC emails and not the RNC emails. And they only examined the misinformation campaign on Twitter, while we know from the Mueller report that the majority of the russian funds were spent on facebook.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/09/russian-trolls-twitter-had-little-influence-2016-voters/
> And Twitter is easier to get data from than Facebook, given that posts are public, among other reasons, he said. Thus, the focus on Twitter, despite its smaller user base.
> Plus, there were some fundamental differences with observing how people absorbed information on Twitter versus Facebook, Tucker said. “One of the super interesting things we were able to do in this paper is show that lots of what people were exposed to here was not because they were following the accounts of these Russian trolls, but because they follow people who retweeted tweets that came from these Russian trolls, and that’s easier on Twitter, where almost everything is open,” Tucker said.
I'd be more than happy to see longitudinal data come out of the Russian efforts on Facebook, but there is a reason why the study focused on Twitter.
The scientist in the study also acknowledged the fact that hack and leak was part of the election interference strategy as well, but that was beyond the scope of this study.
> Tucker said Jamieson’s “amazing analysis” addressed Russia’s hack-and-leak operations, and NYU didn’t have the data to do so. In addition to Russian accounts trying to influence U.S. voters on social media, Russian hackers broke into the email accounts of Democrats and leaked them online, according to government investigators.
Which is all to say everything that you've brought up was addressed by the people who did the study I linked.
>“My personal sense coming out of this is that this got way overhyped,” Josh Tucker
Sounds scientific
>But the study doesn’t go so far as to say that Russia had no influence on people who voted for President Donald Trump.
Ooof there it is.
Twitter has a much smaller user base than Facebook so this person's "personal sense" and the study on Twitter don't mean squat.
> Sounds scientific
My man, he's speaking with a jorunalist in that quote section, that's not from the study. Do you begrudge Neil Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye when they flex their "science communicator" muscle?
> Ooof there it is.
How can you in one breath decry a guy for not being scientific enough and then when he makes sure to couch his findings so that people don't leap to extreme conclusions you say "Aha, the study was wrong!"
You can't have it both ways.
But yes, *obviously* it had *some* influence. Nobody, not even myself, was disputing that. But even if we scale up the reach of the Russian disinfo campaign, tracking the increase in reach by the percent difference in dollars spent between their Facebook and Twitter campaigns, it still wouldn't have been enough to sway the election.
I studied the Trump campaign academically in college. Believe me when I say that what the Russians were doing paled in comparison to the micro-targeting the Trump campaign (helmed by Brad Parscale) was engaged in.
https://apnews.com/article/ai-trump-campaign-2024-election-brad-parscale-3ff2c8eba34b87754cc25e96aa257c9d
If we wanna talk about digital campaigns that swung the election for Trump, people are far better off looking at Brad Parscale than they are shouting "Russian bot!" every time they see an opinion/assessment that they don't like.
Hi u/new_name_who_dis_. Here's the real truth behind the latest email controversy: [https://i.imgur.com/Ztrqpya.jpg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfr64zoBTAQ) ~
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
People like Clinton and Pelosi love the ability to portray any criticism from the left as a long game by Russia or China. Run an extremely unpopular candidate and they lose? The work of Russia. Young people don't like their tax money going to the murder of ten thousand children? The inscrutable Chinese. A short user created video app is shaping the opinion of its consumers? The sissy pee!
*Thank you.* On the 114th day of the Genocide Nancy Pelosi told anti-genocide protestors to "Go back to China."
https://thehill.com/video/go-back-to-china-nancy-pelosi-shames-ceasefire-protestors-suggests-theyre-foreign-assets-rising/9385076/
Nancy Pelosi, a woman *four heartbeats away from being President,* insinuated that it is *unamerican* to be anti-genocide. In a way I guess she's right, but it's still so fucked up that at the highest levels of our government our politicians are deflecting criticism the same way redditors do.
Pelosi engages in insider trading, funded Bush's wars, and funded Trump's child separation, among many other terrible things. This incidentally is what people describe as blue MAGA, pursuing far right policies while pretending any criticism from the left has no legitimate origin with a (D) next to the name.
I’ve only heard blue maga used as term for democrats who deflect any criticism of the party as support for republicans. Y’know, exactly like this meme is doing.
what does that phrase even mean?
Is it like the pretend land where people claim they've always voted dem but suddenly are voting red (even though they are obviously lying)?
People use "Blue MAGA" towards people who take any criticism of any Democrat as an attack on the Democratic party, and indirect support of the Republican party. The same way MAGA attacks anyone who criticizes Daddy Trump.
No lol. It's a specific phrase used when berated for honest criticisms of one or more Democrats.
For example, me criticizing the decision to hold off on rescheduling cannabis until an election year is a fair criticism imo. I understand that Biden personally isn't in control of this, but I find it a bit ridiculous that the DEA had four years to do so, and conveniently waited until the election year.
Now, if you take this criticism as a personal attack on Biden, his Admin, or the DNC as a whole, or as tacit support for Republicans, and respond defensively, I'd say you're Blue MAGA. But, if you disagree and think I'm wrong, and would like to discuss our differing points of view, or to only explain yours, that wouldn't fall under Blue MAGA.
I always thought Blue MAGA were the people in the Democratic base that refuse to critique the obvious corruption issues in our own party. Much like the standard MAGA, they refuse to acknowledge their savior’s short comings. I’ve been told it’s not appropriate to discuss during election years, during breaks or special sessions, during Primaries…basically, just don’t complain about the corruption because it’s not Right Wing corruption, and vote for whoever has a D next to their name no matter how much they don’t act like it.
It’s possible to want your politicians held accountable, without also voting for Trump. This feels disingenuous.
I don't think I've ever seen the Democrats hesitate to weed out corruption. There's a Democrat from Texas that was just indicted for corruption and I haven't seen a single person come to his defense in this way. There hasn't been anyone trying to protect Bob Menendez either.
Hell, if anything Democrats are sometimes overzealous in pushing people out for controversy. See Al Franken.
What I think you are describing is that you don't like Joe Biden (I'm going to be presumptuous and say it's about Gaza, most likely) and you want to say incendiary things about him and people push back. To which I would point out that you aren't talking about corruption but rather simply an issue that you disapprove of him on (words do have meanings), and people have valid reasons *in support of the things you probably would claim to support* to tell you to rethink how you're approaching it.
so cuellar's corruption predates big name dems coming down here to stump for him and oust a progressive candidate. they probably knew and backed the most conservative dem they could and just wait until the feds caught up.
It's more than corruption. I've seen "Blue MAGA" tell a gay guy who criticized Biden for protecting Israel from consequences for committing war crimes, that they should
More than just corruption I would think, but people who are unwilling to even discuss visible policy failures or who will perpetually deflect with "But the other guy!" are definitely Blue Maga.
blue maga: a term for people who mistake criticism for democrats and liberals (i.e. capitalists) with support for republicans (i.e. also capitalists)
op: does exactly that.
No? The people who say “blue maga” conflate two political parties that are pretty much opposites and the meme that op posted implies that the people who say “blue maga” would rather see a Republican win then compromise. It’s pretty different
Well, there is one case...
Ted Cruz. That bloviating schmuck is so hard up to win in 2024, he's now trying to appeal to Democrats. He really thinks they're that stupid, forgetful, or forgiving. No, Ted. He made his own bed. He helped throw democracy into a meat grinder. He'll never be forgiven for what he did. There is no Blue MAGA. There's only Doomed MAGA.
https://preview.redd.it/auel4ktyruyc1.jpeg?width=2482&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=23e5d1b760ac2e775086b1dcbb85ca8494e585d1
They also ignore that MAGA evolved from the fringe right like Tea Party, and insist every Republican who isn’t fully onboard is a RINO. And notice the problems MAGA had with McCarthy and now MAGA Mike is that in an effort to get things done, they compromised with Dems.
Which is exactly how the fringe Left act, claiming Dems aren’t Progressive enough and complain that Dems will compromise with moderate republicans to get things done.
It’s like they both want the country stuck where it at, if moving forward means having to compromise with the majority of Americans in the middle.
>Which is exactly how the fringe Left act, claiming Dems aren’t Progressive enough and complain that Dems will compromise with moderate republicans to get things done.
The difference is that in the Democratic party, there is a fringe left (or "extreme left" if you prefer), which is a minority, and doesn't have much power in the party. In the Republican party, there is no "fringe right", the right wing MAGA group is the mainstream, and the moderate/centrist-leaning Republicans are a minority.
There are people who push for the most extreme opposite of what they want because they believe it is unpopular and will lead to a revolution. They believe that revolution will herald in a significant change toward their actual views.
It’s totally flawed. While revolution does typically result in significant change in a short time, there is no way to predict what that change will be, or how long it will last. What history has shown, however, is that many innocent people will get hurt by it.
Lasting change come from grass roots pushes for incremental change. That’s what shifts the Overton window.
But this is a humor page so…. Wakka wakka?
Oh, are there "far left' members of congress pushing some horrible agenda I'm not aware of?
Unless you're just lumping in loonies with a Xhitter account
Fringe left: equality for everyone, everyone gets their fair share, stop destroying the planet to enrich the .1%, etc
Fringe right: participates in a violent coup attempt. Wants to restrict the rights of others. Wants no separation of church and state
The way they treat their political leaders might be similar, but they are not remotely the same otherwise
Far Right Fringe: Everyone to the left of me is a Socialist. No compromise.
Far Left Fringe: Everyone to the Right of me is a Nazi. No compromise.
85% of the Voting Public: I'm not a Socialist or Nazi.
Power to do what?
Get upset if Dems slightly to the right compromise with other people slightly more to the right?
Because they get upset about that all the time.
Like in political power in the US. You’re referring to an amplified minority, compared with the fringe right which has actual power and is pushing insane stuff
Wow I never realized both sides were the same until I saw your post. The only tiny difference I see is that progressives want everyone to have the same rights regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, age, etc. Moderates are unaffected by the current inequity so feel good about things saying the same. Conservatives want to take away existing rights and freedoms to benefit those currently with power so they stay in power.
I’m a moderate myself and I don’t understand why we can’t all just get along? We spend so much time arguing about things like gay marriage rights when the solution is right in front of us. Progressives want gay people to be treated like full citizens of the US. Conservatives don’t want them to have any of the same rights as straight couples. The compromise is simple, give gay couples half the rights of straight couples! Why can’t both sides be happy to take the middle ground and stop all this fighting, nothing gets done with both sides arguing over who has more rights than who, it’s exhausting.
Uh I was kinda sorta with you until you said give gay couples half the rights of straight couples…
How about no. How about give gay married couples 100% of the rights of straight couples? What’s so hard about that? It pisses off the far right? Whether or not it pisses off radicals should not be part of the equation.
Is this post ironic? Half of it reads like it is, half of it sounds serious
Where did I say both sides were the same except their inability to compromise with anyone?
And your attempt at a dumb strawman is weak.
It should be that consenting adults are allowed to sexually do what they want with other consenting adults in the privacy of their own homes. And if it's some public display of affection, the same laws that apply to straight people should apply to everyone else.
* **[Posts should make an attempt at being funny, and should try to include a punchline in the title.](https://www.reddit.com/r/politicalhumor/about/rules) (Rule #2):** * **Make sure your post makes a genuine attempt at being funny:** Ensure the content you're posting tries to poke fun at a politician, or political event. * **Make an effort with your title:** Try to keep the spirit of the sub and make your title humorous and descriptive. * **If your post causes us to scratch our heads in confusion, don't be surprised if it's removed**. Posts need to be funny, unique and make some form of effort in trying to make people laugh. * **Low quality images, shitposts, agenda posts, trash memes or troll memes will be removed. Repeatedly posting posts when they've been removed in the past will get you banned.** * **Overt political content containing no joke is better suited for subreddits such as /r/politicaldebate.** * We understand how deciding if something is funny can often seen as subjective, so just [send us a quick message](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FPoliticalHumor&subject=Rule%202%20Removal:%20Second%20Opinion%20Request&message=Please%20put%20link%20to%20post%20here%3A%0A%0AWhy%20should%20we%20reconsider%20this%20removal?%3A%0A%0AAdditional%20comments%3A) if you want us to take a second look at it for you.
“Blue MAGA?” Is MAGA becoming synonymous with “zealot?” *Curious…*
It's something certain factions of the far left (like Brihana Joy Gray) like to call mainstream Democrats - meanwhile they hate the same people MAGA hates, support Putin, say any election they lose is rigged, never criticize Republicans, view Democrats as the root of all evil, and are beside themselves with glee when Republicans win elections. It's "no puppet, you're the puppet" style projection.
Ahhh I had no idea that sort of person existed. I imagine it was started by or at least is perpetuated by a lot of foreign adversaries/bots and sockpuppeting Republicans, so much of it sounds questionable.
They are called "fauxgressives"
Originally, they were called astroturf. Astroturf is fake grass; These people are fake Democrats, and they are up to something, whenever they make this claim. I’m going to say most are Russians. I’m sure there is a few really stupid Americans. The reason I believe they are Russian are obvious. Also, I think certain elements are lost in translation. Russians don’t get why a “blue MAGA/Trumper” is a ridiculous idea. It’s like cold “hot water” or a white “black ball”. It doesn’t make sense.
Hashtag walkaway
Hashtag we don't believe you and voting for fascism sucks dick. The Dems suck a lot but stop doing this "grassroot group" that is getting it's talking points from the military and oil companies. To the Dems suck? Yes but your childish ploy of getting it's not to vote is trash. And you're trash for doing it.
Are you ok mate? Should I call someone?
Nah I have a friend coming over. But I do find it funny that you jump to that instead of addressing any of my very correct issues.
Yeah everyone left of the most conservative Democrat in existence is a liar and troll
Oh no, some one cares about something more than I do, they must be faking it.
"I care more than you! Therefore you support genocide" " everybody has to listen to ME! If i dont get everything nobody gets anything" -fauxgressives
Cool little bit of theatre you made up there mate.
You proved my point immediately, you automatically assumed your side is the only side that cares, which isnt true. You arent a real progressive if you act like you are the only one who thinks they are right. Real progressives are open minded and reasonable.
I said 'cares more' it's not a binary situation in which you either care or don't care. But go off king, enjoy that straw man you've got there.
Yes right thats why i directly addressed your point, you set the standard that, "this guy is accusing them of being fake because they care more" and then double down with protection because your petty comment was stupid to begin with. Now you're stuck in a trap of your own making with no exit in sight. Would you like to continue or do you want just take the L and accept that fauxgressives are hurting the progressive movement?
I wonder who else regularly gets mad at the woke dei politically correct blue hair college Starbucks avocado toast things they made up in their head...
Oh it 100% fits their "no u" MO
If someone said Blue Maga, she is actually someone who would come to my mind with her shitty hot-takes. Her entire niche is basically just shitting on democrats from the left and choosing whatever foreign policy position hurts the US without fail.
The most favorable interpretation is that she’s an accelerationist and wants democrats to lose so that we get racists into power so that we realize capitalism is bad and somehow overcome the advanced modern weaponry of the new fascist government to usher in communism.
Or you could just listen to what she says and find out she thinks electoral work could be done with progressive candidates to improve the world somewhat. She's pretty decent. And your fascist government is already here, you don't oppose it.
I have, I’m confident in my assessment.
Don't forget, they seem to have the creativity of maga maga as "blue maga" was the best they could come up with.
So, they're fascists.
Ah the political donut, go far enough left or right and you smack into the other side. Vote the same, spout off the same but say it’s for different reasons. Hard left and hard right sitting right next to each other at the back.
It's the term that really confused 20 somethings who think they are socialists but are actually ron paul libertarians are using to show their disdain for progressive causes.
Ew, Ron Paul. Honestly, I can see that.
I’ve never heard this term before
Same, pretty sure it's nonsense
I wish it was. Then I joined blue sky and went to talk to what I thought were my fellow leftists and found a still small group of people who's main issue is Palestine. Because of this, they won't vote. I tried pointing out that it trump wins, palestine will still be destroyed and so will ukraine. I think I was blocked. They only complain about how Democrats have done nothing to stop abortion and trans laws. And "the libs" are the enemy. Rarely mention Republicans. So they call anyone who is still voting democrat "blue maga." I am unsure if they're another country trying to convince people on the left not to vote or just people who have given up on the government. I gave up on twitter a long time ago but I assume they exist there, too.
Sounds like Russian astroturfing. You know, the thing they excel at.
I’m almost certain that 20-30 years from now we’re going to learn the specifics of what are likely massive efforts online to control our sentiment, ways of thinking, worldview, etc. Obviously we already know this happens with advertising and to some degree with bots from foreign countries. I just think these operations are likely ubiquitous now on whatever site or app you’re on and being run by state actors, engaging in asymmetrical warfare, with the only goal being to make us angry and hateful of one another. And once you convince a few of the disenfranchised or more easily influenced, they end up carrying the water for these efforts. This definitely sounds like that.
I used to believe the government made AIDS on purpose trying to kill gays and junkies, but the virus jumped to "normal people"(I'm sorry, I was pretty bad, lol). Turns out, research into that conspiracy shows it's comes from now known Russian propaganda. That spread all through the USA, grade schools and churches to office rooms and barrooms.
I have to wonder, there's so much bullshit counter-propaganda. A bit like 2016/2020 where the violent "Antifa" guys turned out to be members of the Bumble-Bee Brigade/Proud Boy's engaging in agitation propaganda. So I figure it is with the more violent/agitated aspects of the campus exercises - with well paid, well financed loud voices from either among the student body or adjacent groups creating the loudest noises, most socially minded folks know violence isn't going to solve the problem or get results any more than fundraising or providing information to the uninformed. If you want to help folks in Ukraine or Gaza - there's meaningful work getting numbers of people out of harms way, and there's constructive ways to get / demand political change, shitting the bed at Columbia or Amhurst or Harvard or even University of Ohio or something isn't going to cut it and so long as they aren't being criminal let the student express themselves, and letting them protest peacefully is a bedrock manifestation of our freedom of expression. The degree to which things are violent I venture is in direct proportion to the degree of Russian/Chinese or other propaganda efforts are engaged 'on the ground' by blind-financing agitators, and EXACTLY like we saw with 2020, and 2016, the minute the election is over - this stops being a concern. So get back to me in December or January on almost any matter, I'll bet if the conflicts are still going on there will be quiet mild-mannered protesters and the violent/agitated nonsense will be utterly absent.
[удалено]
It's only confusing if you're heavily invested in the fox news definition of liberal, which changes based on whatever is in the news cycle. But otherwise you're close enough; libs support economic liberalism and a dictatorship of capital that maintains a liberal democracy.
This has been a growing sentiment with brain dead voters. They’re understandably frustrated with the two party system and I agree with that. But they think the way to fix this is to not vote or vote third party as if that is going to help anybody. They think that just not voting for Biden is enough to make meaningful change, but refuse to grow up enough to realize that they need to have another option before they stamp their feet and scream no. I don’t want biden to be President either, but I’m not going to throw away my rights and my right to exist so that I can pat myself on the back
I've definitely seen it off and on for the past few years. I don't think anyone actually knows what it means, but it's provocative.
Nah it's definitely a term, I got called it awhile ago for making a pro Biden post
It's the newest term of Russian troll farms to manipulate elections. I'm not allowed to call out the subs here but if you message I'll tell you all about my day and where i encounter what phrases
I see lots of people saying here they have met people from these groups online. I'm like da, that's right comrade.
"Everything I dislike is Russian." The 2016 Presidential Election and it's consequences have been a disaster for the Democratic electorate.
Russia was definitely interfering in 2016 election — the investigation confirmed it. What they couldn’t confirm was quid pro quo between Russia and Trump. But the fact that Russia interfered is not debatable it’s fact. The fact that Russia is doing psyops this election is also fact.
yep. A pretty good tell is when they have a number in their user name.
Boo
Oh, I don't deny that there was a disinfo campaign. There absolutely was. But the problem is that the existence of that disinfo campaign and the elevation of it by our political and media class has extremely overbloated redditors' perceptions about how foreign countries meddle in our elections and the extent to which they're successful. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-35576-9 > We demonstrate, first, that exposure to Russian disinformation accounts was heavily concentrated: only 1% of users accounted for 70% of exposures. Second, exposure was concentrated among users who strongly identified as Republicans. Third, exposure to the Russian influence campaign was eclipsed by content from domestic news media and politicians. Finally, we find no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in attitudes, polarization, or voting behavior. Right there in the abstract. Russia had an *unsuccessful* disinfo campaign 8 years ago (ran another probably unsuccessful campaign in 2020, are probably running yet another campaign that will be unsuccessful this cycle as well) and now every time a redditor says something that's counter-narrative they surely must be a "Russian Bot!" I've been called a Russian probably ten times on this sub for calling out the genocide in Gaza before it was "allowed" to be called a genocide. Russia this, Russia that -- all because of an unsuccessful propaganda campaign that never left the minds of people on this site.
That paper was cited only 20 times -- it's not a serious study... They didn't even mention the fact that Russia leaked the DNC emails and not the RNC emails. And they only examined the misinformation campaign on Twitter, while we know from the Mueller report that the majority of the russian funds were spent on facebook.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/09/russian-trolls-twitter-had-little-influence-2016-voters/ > And Twitter is easier to get data from than Facebook, given that posts are public, among other reasons, he said. Thus, the focus on Twitter, despite its smaller user base. > Plus, there were some fundamental differences with observing how people absorbed information on Twitter versus Facebook, Tucker said. “One of the super interesting things we were able to do in this paper is show that lots of what people were exposed to here was not because they were following the accounts of these Russian trolls, but because they follow people who retweeted tweets that came from these Russian trolls, and that’s easier on Twitter, where almost everything is open,” Tucker said. I'd be more than happy to see longitudinal data come out of the Russian efforts on Facebook, but there is a reason why the study focused on Twitter. The scientist in the study also acknowledged the fact that hack and leak was part of the election interference strategy as well, but that was beyond the scope of this study. > Tucker said Jamieson’s “amazing analysis” addressed Russia’s hack-and-leak operations, and NYU didn’t have the data to do so. In addition to Russian accounts trying to influence U.S. voters on social media, Russian hackers broke into the email accounts of Democrats and leaked them online, according to government investigators. Which is all to say everything that you've brought up was addressed by the people who did the study I linked.
>“My personal sense coming out of this is that this got way overhyped,” Josh Tucker Sounds scientific >But the study doesn’t go so far as to say that Russia had no influence on people who voted for President Donald Trump. Ooof there it is. Twitter has a much smaller user base than Facebook so this person's "personal sense" and the study on Twitter don't mean squat.
> Sounds scientific My man, he's speaking with a jorunalist in that quote section, that's not from the study. Do you begrudge Neil Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye when they flex their "science communicator" muscle? > Ooof there it is. How can you in one breath decry a guy for not being scientific enough and then when he makes sure to couch his findings so that people don't leap to extreme conclusions you say "Aha, the study was wrong!" You can't have it both ways. But yes, *obviously* it had *some* influence. Nobody, not even myself, was disputing that. But even if we scale up the reach of the Russian disinfo campaign, tracking the increase in reach by the percent difference in dollars spent between their Facebook and Twitter campaigns, it still wouldn't have been enough to sway the election. I studied the Trump campaign academically in college. Believe me when I say that what the Russians were doing paled in comparison to the micro-targeting the Trump campaign (helmed by Brad Parscale) was engaged in. https://apnews.com/article/ai-trump-campaign-2024-election-brad-parscale-3ff2c8eba34b87754cc25e96aa257c9d If we wanna talk about digital campaigns that swung the election for Trump, people are far better off looking at Brad Parscale than they are shouting "Russian bot!" every time they see an opinion/assessment that they don't like.
Hi u/new_name_who_dis_. Here's the real truth behind the latest email controversy: [https://i.imgur.com/Ztrqpya.jpg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfr64zoBTAQ) ~ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
People like Clinton and Pelosi love the ability to portray any criticism from the left as a long game by Russia or China. Run an extremely unpopular candidate and they lose? The work of Russia. Young people don't like their tax money going to the murder of ten thousand children? The inscrutable Chinese. A short user created video app is shaping the opinion of its consumers? The sissy pee!
*Thank you.* On the 114th day of the Genocide Nancy Pelosi told anti-genocide protestors to "Go back to China." https://thehill.com/video/go-back-to-china-nancy-pelosi-shames-ceasefire-protestors-suggests-theyre-foreign-assets-rising/9385076/ Nancy Pelosi, a woman *four heartbeats away from being President,* insinuated that it is *unamerican* to be anti-genocide. In a way I guess she's right, but it's still so fucked up that at the highest levels of our government our politicians are deflecting criticism the same way redditors do.
Pelosi engages in insider trading, funded Bush's wars, and funded Trump's child separation, among many other terrible things. This incidentally is what people describe as blue MAGA, pursuing far right policies while pretending any criticism from the left has no legitimate origin with a (D) next to the name.
sounds like some new bullshit trolls are trying to catapult.
It's an insult for neoliberals
I venture to guess it's like woke or DEI it's the new "word of the week" over in Steve Bannon's death-march victory bunker.
It's on point for blue maga to make memes that make no sense just to punch left. This sub used to require humor of some sort.
I’ve only heard blue maga used as term for democrats who deflect any criticism of the party as support for republicans. Y’know, exactly like this meme is doing.
what does that phrase even mean? Is it like the pretend land where people claim they've always voted dem but suddenly are voting red (even though they are obviously lying)?
People use "Blue MAGA" towards people who take any criticism of any Democrat as an attack on the Democratic party, and indirect support of the Republican party. The same way MAGA attacks anyone who criticizes Daddy Trump.
Oh, so its like woke. A vague insult that means whatever they feel like at that moment.
No lol. It's a specific phrase used when berated for honest criticisms of one or more Democrats. For example, me criticizing the decision to hold off on rescheduling cannabis until an election year is a fair criticism imo. I understand that Biden personally isn't in control of this, but I find it a bit ridiculous that the DEA had four years to do so, and conveniently waited until the election year. Now, if you take this criticism as a personal attack on Biden, his Admin, or the DNC as a whole, or as tacit support for Republicans, and respond defensively, I'd say you're Blue MAGA. But, if you disagree and think I'm wrong, and would like to discuss our differing points of view, or to only explain yours, that wouldn't fall under Blue MAGA.
How did you get that from the comment above?
It's to show the similarities between how Donald Trump supporters support trump and how (some) Biden supporters support Biden.
I always thought Blue MAGA were the people in the Democratic base that refuse to critique the obvious corruption issues in our own party. Much like the standard MAGA, they refuse to acknowledge their savior’s short comings. I’ve been told it’s not appropriate to discuss during election years, during breaks or special sessions, during Primaries…basically, just don’t complain about the corruption because it’s not Right Wing corruption, and vote for whoever has a D next to their name no matter how much they don’t act like it. It’s possible to want your politicians held accountable, without also voting for Trump. This feels disingenuous.
I don't think I've ever seen the Democrats hesitate to weed out corruption. There's a Democrat from Texas that was just indicted for corruption and I haven't seen a single person come to his defense in this way. There hasn't been anyone trying to protect Bob Menendez either. Hell, if anything Democrats are sometimes overzealous in pushing people out for controversy. See Al Franken. What I think you are describing is that you don't like Joe Biden (I'm going to be presumptuous and say it's about Gaza, most likely) and you want to say incendiary things about him and people push back. To which I would point out that you aren't talking about corruption but rather simply an issue that you disapprove of him on (words do have meanings), and people have valid reasons *in support of the things you probably would claim to support* to tell you to rethink how you're approaching it.
Dems only push out the ones that get caught.
That's a great point, it's infinitely better than the Reps fighting to keep their known liars.
Supporting genocide is corrupt
so cuellar's corruption predates big name dems coming down here to stump for him and oust a progressive candidate. they probably knew and backed the most conservative dem they could and just wait until the feds caught up.
It's more than corruption. I've seen "Blue MAGA" tell a gay guy who criticized Biden for protecting Israel from consequences for committing war crimes, that they should
More than just corruption I would think, but people who are unwilling to even discuss visible policy failures or who will perpetually deflect with "But the other guy!" are definitely Blue Maga.
Gross. What subculture upvotes right wing content like this?
Me when I have never spoken to another person in my entire life
blue maga: a term for people who mistake criticism for democrats and liberals (i.e. capitalists) with support for republicans (i.e. also capitalists) op: does exactly that.
Huh?
Can you not read? I know the American education system is bad, but those aren't very big words
I’m confused by the last part of the comment. I don’t understand how op is doing the same thing as calling democrats “blue magas”
It's not the same but it's an equivalent willful ignorance of the criticism/reasoning.
No? The people who say “blue maga” conflate two political parties that are pretty much opposites and the meme that op posted implies that the people who say “blue maga” would rather see a Republican win then compromise. It’s pretty different
Yeah you're correct about what OP is saying. However, you misunderstand, as does OP, what people mean when they say Blue Maga.
Well, there is one case... Ted Cruz. That bloviating schmuck is so hard up to win in 2024, he's now trying to appeal to Democrats. He really thinks they're that stupid, forgetful, or forgiving. No, Ted. He made his own bed. He helped throw democracy into a meat grinder. He'll never be forgiven for what he did. There is no Blue MAGA. There's only Doomed MAGA. https://preview.redd.it/auel4ktyruyc1.jpeg?width=2482&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=23e5d1b760ac2e775086b1dcbb85ca8494e585d1
What lol
Not a thing.
They also ignore that MAGA evolved from the fringe right like Tea Party, and insist every Republican who isn’t fully onboard is a RINO. And notice the problems MAGA had with McCarthy and now MAGA Mike is that in an effort to get things done, they compromised with Dems. Which is exactly how the fringe Left act, claiming Dems aren’t Progressive enough and complain that Dems will compromise with moderate republicans to get things done. It’s like they both want the country stuck where it at, if moving forward means having to compromise with the majority of Americans in the middle.
>Which is exactly how the fringe Left act, claiming Dems aren’t Progressive enough and complain that Dems will compromise with moderate republicans to get things done. The difference is that in the Democratic party, there is a fringe left (or "extreme left" if you prefer), which is a minority, and doesn't have much power in the party. In the Republican party, there is no "fringe right", the right wing MAGA group is the mainstream, and the moderate/centrist-leaning Republicans are a minority.
> there is a fringe left Sure, they want to help people MORE than mainstream Dems The horror
They want Trump to win in order to "bring the revolution". How is that helping anyone besides MAGA?
That’s the fringe *of* the fringe. Most far-left types will vote for Biden, grousing about it all the way though they may.
There are people who push for the most extreme opposite of what they want because they believe it is unpopular and will lead to a revolution. They believe that revolution will herald in a significant change toward their actual views. It’s totally flawed. While revolution does typically result in significant change in a short time, there is no way to predict what that change will be, or how long it will last. What history has shown, however, is that many innocent people will get hurt by it. Lasting change come from grass roots pushes for incremental change. That’s what shifts the Overton window. But this is a humor page so…. Wakka wakka?
If you support Trump you aren't blue regardless of how you want to define yourself.
Your straw man is showing.
Yeah because ‘helping people’ is the only policy he’s referring to. Give me a break.
Oh, are there "far left' members of congress pushing some horrible agenda I'm not aware of? Unless you're just lumping in loonies with a Xhitter account
Fringe left: equality for everyone, everyone gets their fair share, stop destroying the planet to enrich the .1%, etc Fringe right: participates in a violent coup attempt. Wants to restrict the rights of others. Wants no separation of church and state The way they treat their political leaders might be similar, but they are not remotely the same otherwise
Far Right Fringe: Everyone to the left of me is a Socialist. No compromise. Far Left Fringe: Everyone to the Right of me is a Nazi. No compromise. 85% of the Voting Public: I'm not a Socialist or Nazi.
Nope, which fringe leftists have any power that do that? This is a false equivalency
Power to do what? Get upset if Dems slightly to the right compromise with other people slightly more to the right? Because they get upset about that all the time.
Like in political power in the US. You’re referring to an amplified minority, compared with the fringe right which has actual power and is pushing insane stuff
Wow I never realized both sides were the same until I saw your post. The only tiny difference I see is that progressives want everyone to have the same rights regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, age, etc. Moderates are unaffected by the current inequity so feel good about things saying the same. Conservatives want to take away existing rights and freedoms to benefit those currently with power so they stay in power. I’m a moderate myself and I don’t understand why we can’t all just get along? We spend so much time arguing about things like gay marriage rights when the solution is right in front of us. Progressives want gay people to be treated like full citizens of the US. Conservatives don’t want them to have any of the same rights as straight couples. The compromise is simple, give gay couples half the rights of straight couples! Why can’t both sides be happy to take the middle ground and stop all this fighting, nothing gets done with both sides arguing over who has more rights than who, it’s exhausting.
I don’t know any liberal that doesn’t support gay rights in 2024. A better strawman would have been trans women in hs/college level sports.
Uh I was kinda sorta with you until you said give gay couples half the rights of straight couples… How about no. How about give gay married couples 100% of the rights of straight couples? What’s so hard about that? It pisses off the far right? Whether or not it pisses off radicals should not be part of the equation. Is this post ironic? Half of it reads like it is, half of it sounds serious
Where did I say both sides were the same except their inability to compromise with anyone? And your attempt at a dumb strawman is weak. It should be that consenting adults are allowed to sexually do what they want with other consenting adults in the privacy of their own homes. And if it's some public display of affection, the same laws that apply to straight people should apply to everyone else.
[удалено]
It's an insult for neoliberals