• Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    84
    ·
    2 days ago

    Oh good. Bernie is considered a “progressive” now? A millionaire with multiple houses, who’s taken in no homeless people with his megawealth, has only ever donated proceeds from books he had ghostwritten when put under duress is a leading progressive?

    We need to start electing real people.

      • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        1 day ago

        Someone with a net worth at or below US average (~$200,000.00), who actually remembers trying to make ends meet on minimum wage, who owns no more than one home (preferably someone who rents). Oh, and preferably someone whose earnings mostly come from either a full-time W2 job or gig income (Uber, Lyft, etc.), not book sales or capital investment.

        • Blumpkinhead@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          You do you, but personally I’m more focused on a politician’s actions and policies, rather than their financial situation and background.

          Bernie has been consistently on the right side of most issues for his whole political career from where I’m standing. To me, the fact that he’s 84 years old and only worth a couple of million actually sets him apart from many of his rich, corporate owned colleagues.

      • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        I’m sure they are so progressive that they’ve housed a ton of unhoused people and freely give up their own food as well. It’s the only measure of progressive!

        /s because of today’s political climate

        • Hacksaw@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          Oh no, you see they’re “not rich enough to make a difference”, so they’re allowed to do nothing. Since the definition is intrinsic to them they’ll never be “rich enough” to help and they’ll always “help when I’m rich enough to make a difference”. So they can always be good people while doing nothing and they can always chastise the rich for “not doing enough” no matter how much they’re helping because “if they were that rich they’d help more”

          It’s really beautiful actually how perfect the system is.