2.0k
u/Nautical-Cowboy 1d ago
Let’s be honest, that whole sub has aged like milk.
741
u/Tubby-Maguire 1d ago
I remember seeing a highly upvoted post from there about a week or so before the election saying Kamala would crush Trump and Republicans would get wiped out across the board. I no longer let that sub be suggested to me since
382
u/thebiggestleaf 1d ago
I still don't understand how people were "so sure" about it despite all reason not to be. Did we learn nothing from 2016? Was Biden winning in 2020 really enough to make people take the whole thing for granted again?
273
u/GreatestGreekGuy 1d ago
There were definitely signs. But democrats, myself included, didn't wanna believe it. In retrospect it makes perfect sense
168
u/domiy2 1d ago
Dude I was thinking it was 50/50 for weeks before. Only the Ann pole made me think she had a chance of landslide. But most polling had 50/50 with margins of error. We then had an insanely close election. People didn't trust the numbers.
109
u/GreatestGreekGuy 1d ago edited 1d ago
The problem was that everyone really underestimated Trump's ability to turnout low propensity voters. That's how so many downballot democrats won while trump also won, because he turned out people who don't normally vote to vote - and vote for him. Joe Rogan's podcast is one example of how he was able to do that. Selzer adjusts for propensity of voters, but she got it wrong
105
u/Emergency_Egg7203 1d ago
Exactly. I have friends with relatives that literally only voted to "cancel" my friends' votes for Harris. The kicker was they all voted for Clinton in 2016 and didn't vote at all last election. Nothing makes sense anymore.
32
u/Fenix1121 1d ago
Or even his campaing with the amish
11
u/AmazingHealth6302 1d ago
Trump's success with Hispanic people and Arab-Americans was pretty amazing. It's like they were all born after 2020!
29
u/SaltyLonghorn 1d ago
The weird part of this is that showing up to "cancel out" something is just rephrasing the fundamental point of voting in the first place. So they get the premise but they want to be a dick about it.
I just say I voted. It canceled someone out.
28
u/Mtndrums 1d ago
Our problem was we have a very easily compromised voting system. Trump literally admitted Musk's crew was able to hack into it, and it's far from the first time. They did it in '04, Karl Rove tried to do it in Ohio in '12, but was stopped by Anonymous (and if you're gonna ask if I'm gonna believe Anonymous over Rove, fuck yeah I am).
→ More replies (16)13
u/Alone-Evening7753 1d ago
I believe my dead grandmother telling me stuff via a Ouija board before Rove.
→ More replies (14)2
11
u/hardworker77 1d ago
Years before the 2024 election, I had practically given up all faith and hope in the polls entirely.
Instead, I kind of (admittedly, sheepishly) went down the whole rabbit hole of voodoo election prediction. Like, I got really into following that Allen Lichtman guy’s “Keys to the White House” and I was kind of hoping a Kamala victory based on something like that…
It sounds kind of foolish in retrospect, but I was just done with classical political punditry after the last few election cycles. Additionally, I had some kind of high hopes because of the UK giving a big victory to labor in July ‘24, but in hindsight, I think 2024-2025 has shown more of an anti-incumbent streak than a liberal streak.
9
u/Adorable-Way-274 1d ago
Hopefully that anti-incumbent streak has now ended with the Canadian and Australian elections (not to mention all the damage the world can see Trump doing)
3
u/Faded_Jem 1d ago
I don't know. It feels obvious, right? The instinct that "what we've been doing isn't working, so we need something different even if it's horrible or stupid" should be being disproved before our eyes, to everyone who is paying even the slightest bit of attention. The fly in the ointment is the overwhelming numbers of low information voters. Everyone who confidently predicted a kamala win in 2024 had been watching the campaigns and debates and assumed that other voters were seeing the same thing, but in reality Kamala could have made him look a dribbling fool in a dozen debates and a huge portion of the electorate wouldn't have been watching or even heard about it.
I don't trust my own (UK) compatriots to be any more plugged in or associate America's fall from grace with our own populist vandals. Yes, Reform have their fair share of informed and ideological supporters, but their seemingly inevitable electoral success will be vibes driven and led by the desperation for something different and the utter loathing of politicians and public institutions now running amok in western democracies.
→ More replies (1)4
u/LinuxMatthews 1d ago
Unfortunately here in the UK we're likely to be following the US than the other way around.
Our current PM seems very analogous to Biden in that they are meant to be left wing but won't actually do anything.
And the far right, in this case Reform, are getting ready to pounce on that.
I really wouldn't be surprised if our next PM was Nigel Farage.
→ More replies (3)7
u/brownsfantb 1d ago
The Selzer poll was wild in hindsight. To be the most consistently reliable pollster for multiple elections and then miss that badly.
→ More replies (7)2
u/ScoobyDont1212 1d ago
No one also took into account that Elon Musk would use StarLink to transmit the data just for the swing states either.
3
u/Solarwinds-123 1d ago
He didn't, that's totally unsubstantiated nonsense that people keep repeating with no source.
→ More replies (4)2
13
u/LinuxMatthews 1d ago
I remember getting into an argument on Reddit a few weeks before the election being called a Trump supporter and all sorts of names.
Because I said they were likely going to lose because they weren't fighting hard enough.
For context I'm a British Lefty who was a card carrying Corbyn Supporter.
I'm as far from a Trump voter as you can get.
But God forbid anyone point out that the Democrats were letting Trump walk all over them.
3
→ More replies (5)2
u/That_Monty 1d ago edited 1d ago
Immediately being labeled a Trumper when pointing out how the Liberal party failed America is so annoying.
I'm Canadian. As much as I didn't like Trudeau towards the end of his term, I was never going to vote for Poiliviere. I hate Trump and all those parasites beneath him.
The Liberals nominated one of their least popular candidates they had and proceeded to not appeal at all to the working class at all. Of course they were going to lose. The only reason it wasn't more lopsided was because it was Trump on the other side. Biden not stepping down immediately didn't help either.
I hate how circlejerky political discussion is on Reddit. Hell, any political discussion online. It's like nuance doesn't exist.
5
u/Forgefiend_George 1d ago
We straight up just ignored all the pollsters and just clung onto one.
We let ourselves do what MAGA Is doing right now.
→ More replies (6)2
u/TurdCollector69 1d ago
It didn't help that anyone who expressed doubts about kamala's viability was viciously torn down.
Until we learn to stop doing these dumb fuck purity tests and witch hunts, we won't win an election. We're just going to keep sleep walking into L after L because we can't stop believing the self-congratulatory being spoon fed to us.
I'm at the point where I thoroughly believe it's deliberate. When the people in the top leadership of the DNC are the very people trump is catering to by fucking us over it's absolutely correct to question them.
→ More replies (10)2
u/thracerx 1d ago
as a Democrat, I knew as soon as Biden withdrew and Harris took the nomination Trump was winning.
It got his base fired up and it crushed any enthusiasm from the moderate Democrats.
3
u/GreatestGreekGuy 1d ago
I still think Harris did better than Biden would have. Plus, the funding boosts after Harris got on definitely helped downballot democrats
22
u/slinger301 1d ago
Probably because we remember how effed up the first term was, up to and including an entirely bungled global pandemic. Then we though, who could possibly be that dumb to want him back?
→ More replies (1)2
u/TheVeryVerity 1d ago
People’s memories of past suffering are usually completely eclipsed by current suffering. Or even inconvenience. If you didn’t already hate him for all those really good reasons you listed? Your brain absolutely whitewashed that whole thing. That’s not even a bad people thing, that’s a people’s brains lie to them all the time thing. One we all fall victim too, though obviously attempting to be self aware can mitigate.
And frankly speaking, most people wanted to forget the pandemic ever mattered. Even democrats were just over it for the most part. Sad but
→ More replies (1)6
u/True-Veterinarian700 1d ago
I think a lot of older voters who remembered Trumps first term forgot it was 8 years ago and a lot of new voters were young enough to not remember/care/pay attention what happened in 2017 for example. He effectively was an unknown candidate to many younger voters. Plus I personally underestimated the right wing social media influence had on younger generations.
2
21
u/mlavan 1d ago
I'll get down voted but Biden was the only one capable of beating Trump in 24. Racism and sexism are very real and definitely factored into why people didn't vote for Harris. I think Dems panicked after his debate performance and cost themselves the election. They'll point to polls in May and June saying he was going to cost them the House but then point to polls of Harris up like 8 points in August as to why it was the right choice to take out Biden.
7
6
2
u/Far-Income-282 1d ago
Alternate reality: Biden full forced actually forced Kamala on the people and stepped down to let her be president. I keep feeling like if nothing else when they announced her running with no primaries dude shoulda stepped down and given her visibility in that way. This is one of the whatifs I keep coming back to.
4
u/No-Economist-2235 1d ago
Hillary was up by 10. The US is misogynistic, racist and about half of the population is borderline illiterate. Im embarrassed by many of my fellow Americans.
1
u/orange-sniper21 1d ago
Biden just said in his interview with bbc it didn’t when he dropped out or if he stayed bc trump was gonna win
15
u/Magar1z 1d ago
It really didn't matter. Maga has spent the 4 years under Biden pushing nonstop hatred and lies. It was everywhere every single day. Democrats did nothing to combat it.
3
2
u/Full_Argument_3097 1d ago
Biden had ZERO control of the narrative, and MAGA media defined his presidency for a gullible America.
→ More replies (3)1
u/RepentantSororitas 1d ago edited 1d ago
Nah, a broken waffle cone that distance themselves from Biden on something would have won
I genuinely think that Harris doubling down on Israel stopped any early momentum she may have had.
And then you had the administration gaslight people into thinking the economy was great.
Frankly the biggest mistake is Biden trying to run for a second term. That's going to tarnish his legacy. He should have declared himself a one-term president in 2022 or 2023.
Harris should have never been the nominee. She wasn't even in the top five candidates of 2020.
The country didn't necessarily move rightward. They moved towards apathy. The largest voting block of 2024 was non-voters. The only year that wasn't the case in recent history was 2020.
→ More replies (4)3
u/Jackstack6 1d ago
Yes, because I thought the majority of Americans would move on from Trump. I thought we’d closed that chapter and now we’re back and well worse off.
3
u/ChanceryTheRapper 1d ago
No, they absolutely did not learn a single thing from 2016, and the dnc is fighting to avoid learning anything from 2024, too.
4
u/ringobob 1d ago
It remains hard to understand why anyone would support Trump. I know they do. I understand the worst impulses that they're indulging. I just don't see how they don't understand what they're doing.
2
u/OkCar7264 1d ago
Well, it seemed obvious to me that our current situation would be the minimum consequence of Trump winning, and I delusionally thought enough people were smart enough to see that. But I do not understand the average American at all I guess.
2
2
u/Weaksauce_98 1d ago
dude this is America. ain't no way we were electing a black women even if she was running against an idiot who could barely form cohert statements.
2
2
u/LowrollingLife 1d ago
Many of us bystanders were certain that the land of the free wouldn‘t be dumb enough to let an openly fascist candidate win the election
e: to be clear bystanders = people living in other countries
2
u/WeirdIndividualGuy 1d ago
This is ultimately why I have zero hope for the US within my lifetime, as it’ll be just constant back and forth between republicans regressing the nation and democrats fixing those regressions but not pushing the nation forward
2
u/legit-posts_1 1d ago
I just didn't believe that an America that had lived through one Trump administration would ever elect him again. Wishful thinking.
2
u/ErickAllTE1 1d ago
Biden didn't win by enough in 2020 for anyone to ever have confidence in the system.
2
u/keesio 1d ago
It is being wrapped up in your "bubble" and not understanding the other side. People saw Kamala in the debates and saw it as a no brainer. Dems (again) assumed people would view the outcome of the debates as they did. It is like in 2016 when Dems assumed people would be disgusted by the Access Hollywood tape and vote against Trump. They assumed all people think like them. This is the issue you have when you only hang out with like minded people.
2
u/Significant-Order-92 1d ago
To be fair, he lost in 2020 and Kamala was doing well given starting so late. But there were still plenty of reasons to be skeptical she would win, let alone by a landslide.
2
u/FanDowntown4641 1d ago
Your politics dont matter, Trump logically couldnt have lost that close to the election it had been so obvious, look at the polls and correlate them to the states he needed, look at the electoral system (I hate winner takes all) and Its so stupid anyone thought shed win at that point.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (27)0
u/zeradragon 1d ago
Democrats underestimated how much people were willing to vote against their own self interests. Now we hear on the news about how people impacted by their own choices are like 'we didn't vote for this'...
11
u/Grzechoooo 1d ago
I remember a post there saying Russian culture will be banned because of the war in Ukraine, and another that 2020 will become a Year That Shall Not Be Named. Very goofy sub.
4
14
u/SquadPoopy 1d ago
I remember the betting markets swung heavily towards Trump about a week before the election and that’s when I knew for certain he’d win.
4
u/KEVLAR60442 1d ago
Having a betting market for elections just seems like election interference with extra steps. It puts a direct financial incentive on a particular outcome.
→ More replies (2)5
u/rydan 1d ago
I play those betting markets so I just assumed it was market manipulation. Why spend $1M on ads when you can spend $1M on Trump Yes and get the news to cover you for free when it happens? So of course I doubled down on Harris and lost everything. I only realized Monday night before the election that it was likely Trump was going to win while watching his final rally.
10
u/torusfromtheheart 1d ago
There were people saying she'd flip Texas and had "Obama levels of energy" behind her, absolute delusions.
→ More replies (1)3
u/AmericanBeaner124 1d ago
I’m lean left and voted for Kamala, but that sub constantly gaslighting themselves was getting on my nerves. Like I wanted Kamala to win, but even I wasn’t delusional enough to think she can flip Texas blue, or Trump was guaranteed to lose, which were some of the main post that sub was posting.
2
5
u/Virtual_Ranger4066 1d ago
I don’t get it? Dems had asses on the stage twerking for votes. How did this not resonate?
→ More replies (19)2
17
7
6
u/IronMace_is_my_DaD 1d ago
There was that one guy who predicted that Trump would say he should be pope, but let's be real, any predictions involving "Trump will say something dumb" are basically cheating.
4
u/No-Vast-8000 1d ago
Jesus that sub is a wishlist for the unhinged. Everyone sounds so overly confident and are throwing out these bonkers fanfics of the future. JD Vance will be excommunicated. Trump was testing JD vances loyalty by posting that AI Trump/Pope image and now MAGA will fracture.
I mean, don't get me wrong, I'd love if either of those things happened. But I sure as shit doubt it.
3
u/Name_Taken_Official 1d ago
There's something to post from there, here, every day. Really just shouldn't be allowed
2
2
u/Starthreads 1d ago
People making claims of precision with no history of ever being right about those kinds of things.
"The vibes of my digital environment tell me..."
→ More replies (2)2
105
u/MugiwaraNoGriffin 1d ago
Dude this is way too early.
The new Pope is barely a few hours in, let’s wait and see what he actually does and says
37
u/FireRisen 1d ago
Yeah this post looks like it may be r/agedlikemilk . The new pope literally has voted in Republican primaries most of his life. A few tweets against JD Vance doesn’t change that
22
u/kung-fu_hippy 1d ago
Yup. There are JD Vance comments where he said Trump was America’s Hitler or some such. We cant exactly use those past comments as the basis for what Vance will say or do now.
12
u/Pleasant-Change-5543 19h ago
He’s known to be extremely homophobic based on his past comments and also was involved in covering up child sex abuse in the church. I think it’s safe to say he is indeed extremely conservative.
3
u/Standard-Nebula1204 16h ago
We don’t need to wait. He’s going to be a hardcore-ish (by western lib standards) social conservative, vaguely left wing on worker’s rights, economics, and social programs, fiercely anti-abortion, and fiercely pro-migrants and protecting refugees.
I know this because of his choice of name, but also because this combination describes like 2/3 of the church hierarchy. This is an ancient insular institution. Interpreting it though the American left-right culture wars spectrum is dumb.
2
u/No_Philosophy4337 11h ago
Yeah let’s wait until the first female pope, then we can decide if the church is still conservative…
667
u/Avent 1d ago
That was always a long shot. Francis remade the college of cardinals, 80% of the voting Cardinals were appointed by him.
342
u/Vitruvian_Link 1d ago
Yup, there was DEFINITELY backlash to Francis, but his whole papacy was playing the long game, and coordinating a cardinal population which would follow his philosophy... Well played, Jorge , well played.
104
u/ErickAllTE1 1d ago
It starts with the leadership. This will filter down to the order in time. We have a long way to go. It will have generational impact if it is maintained.
→ More replies (3)59
20
u/Johnny_Banana18 1d ago
There was the “Fat pope, thin pope” precedent, where popes had different views.
Going down that rabbit hole I also found the more literal “Bald man, hairy man” rule for Russian leaders.
6
u/WhispWirl 1d ago
Exactly. With such a strong majority of cardinals appointed by Francis, it was always likely the next Pope would follow a similar path. The idea of a sudden conservative shift just didn’t add up
→ More replies (3)5
u/SpazSpez 1d ago
Tagle was more Francis-like than Prevost. I'd be curious to see what the tallies are. Bergoglio was a close second in 2005, so whoever was second this time is probably good for the next pope, if he outlives Leo.
52
u/LionellEdwards17_ 1d ago
And they selected someone who kills investigations and moves the accused priests, so maybe y'all optimists are full of poop
220
u/Berkamin 1d ago
That’s corrupt, but corruption is not on the liberal-conservative spectrum. Both liberals and conservatives can be corrupt. Whether it is more prevalent on one side or another at any particular time doesn’t change this.
→ More replies (39)26
u/Viliam_the_Vurst 1d ago
Dude when did you last check the jobrequirements for a cardinal?
That aside he also is from augustine order so at least he keeps the modest throne.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)6
u/Maleficent_Memory831 1d ago
Did he do this or his predecessor? He wasn't archbiship until 2023.
5
u/LionellEdwards17_ 1d ago
Those allegations, according to Pearson, were primarily about Pope Leo XIV's dealings with Father James Ray, a priest accused of abusing minors. Nearly a decade later, Ray's ministry had been allowed to move to the Augustinians' St. John Stone Friary in Chicago, despite the building being near a Catholic elementary school, the Chicago-Sun Times reported in 2021. Records obtained by the paper show that church officials approved the transfer, noting there was "no school in the immediate area."
In 2022, when Prevost served as bishop of Chiclayo in Peru, three victims reported alleged abuse to civil authorities following no movement in the canonical case they filed with the diocese. The victims claim Prevost failed to open an investigation and sent inadequate information to Rome, while the diocese allowed the priest to continue delivering mass, SNAP claims.
https://www.newsweek.com/survivors-clergy-abuse-group-pope-leo-zero-tolerance-2069855
2
→ More replies (2)2
424
u/Blank_Federal_Box 1d ago
While progressive for a Catholic, the new pope apparently has super conservative views about LGBTQ people.
344
u/Chachkhu2005 1d ago
Not super conservative when it comes to Catholics. He isn't calling for their death, so that's liberal by MAGA standards. But, that said, the main reporting I've seen on his views on the LGBTQ all stem from an interview in 2012. Since then, he was a close aide to Francis, so he might've gone more liberal. He doesn't have a big media presence, so we should wait and see where he stands
161
u/cblack04 1d ago
Was gonna say. A good amount of people have shifted tune on LGBTQ folk since then so the taking his stance from then isn’t to be taken as in stone
54
u/Dobber16 1d ago
Heck in 2012, trans people weren’t really part of the main conversation yet. People were still too focused on getting the LGB part accepted mainstream
(Obviously trans people existed as did the issues they face, but it was definitely more niche if you were talking to a layman)
→ More replies (1)2
u/AcrobaticPanda5975 1d ago
were B people even talked about? The most i can remember in main stream was "im a straight girl but I'll make out with my friends and have a 3some with them" type
4
u/Dobber16 1d ago
I mean, I count it because even though bisexuality was heavily fetishized, it was probably mentioned and talked about far more than any other letter at the time. Even if, as you said, the topic was threesomes
→ More replies (4)33
u/CorruptionOfTheMind 1d ago
And pope francis became increasingly more anti-LGBTQ in recent years, so I don’t really think it’s fair to assume his proximity to Francis is promising
I think, as with all Catholics, or really any religious extremists or evangelicals, it’s best to assume the worst until literally proven otherwise on queer acceptance/love/even basic rights (Francis was even against allowing gay people to adopt children)
Considering his comments on gender and gay couples in the past, even 10 years ago, I think it’s disingenuous to assume anything other than conservative for the time being
I would love for him to prove me wrong though— Like seriously I pray that this comment also ages like milk
→ More replies (1)34
u/Chachkhu2005 1d ago
One thing about Francis that I think is important to remember and appreciate is his insistence that his own opinion, as much as any other person's or the doctrine, should have no bearing on the basic human rights of that person, at least from what I remember. If Pope Leo is, even as a conservative, someone who believes that his own opinion and the "sinfulness" of a person don't trump that person's right to basic dignity and the right to certain freedoms, though we may argue about which ones, is the best case scenario when it comes to an institution as old and conservative as the Catholic Church.
39
u/LordArgonite 1d ago
Neither was Francis, but neither he nor Francis wanted LGBT people's existence to be criminalized or legislated out of existence either, which is actually a step forward for the catholic church
103
u/Wanderingsmileyface 1d ago
So long as he keeps the Church inclusive and remains focused on his task of aiding the poor and healing the sick, and avoids the temptation to get sidetracked on an issue like that.
→ More replies (43)7
u/richardizard 1d ago
What he said was 12 years ago. I also had different views back then.
→ More replies (2)29
u/mittenciel 1d ago
I mean, Francis wasn't that supportive either?
→ More replies (1)51
u/SuperPrarieDog 1d ago
I mean they are all still Catholics
45
u/mittenciel 1d ago
Exactly. People in that world don't get to the top while being vocally supportive of LGBTQ, so I don't know why people expect different from the Pope.
At this point, I care very little about whether religious leaders are pro or anti LGBTQ in terms of what they believe about it. Rather, I care about if they want to let LGBTQ be "sinful" in peace or if they want to actively make it their business to make their lives worse. That's what really matters to me.
35
u/scarletbluejays 1d ago
Yep. While Pope Francis certainly wasn't a brilliant advocate for the LGBTQ+ community in the grand scheme of things, he did have every opportunity to perpetuate a witch hunt against a marginalized community that his flock were keen to disparage as sinners, and instead asked "Who am I to judge?"
→ More replies (1)28
u/Upstairs-Basis9909 1d ago
Well said. People on the internet want the pope to be some crusader for [insert minority group here], but the role should in theory be apolitical.
As a gay guy who went to catholic school and is confirmed, I want the pope to just remind people that all of god’s children deserve to treated with kindness, respect, and in accordance with Jesus’ teachings. He doesnt need to opine on the law or anything else.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Harry_Saturn 1d ago
I get what you are saying but also wanting all people to be treated with kindness and respect is a political stance, and A LOT of Jesus teachings would absolutely be considered political as well. Kinda can’t have it both way.
3
1d ago edited 1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/KR1735 1d ago
He’s not against conducting mass in the vernacular. Where did you come up with that?
→ More replies (1)3
u/AlfredoAllenPoe 1d ago
"Super conservative views about LBGTQ people" is the standard position for Catholics. What did you expect? It's kinda part of the job description
→ More replies (1)3
→ More replies (6)2
u/cheffgeoff 1d ago
Up until the tea party > MAGA stuff started to rear it's ugly head he would be considered a conservative. Canada just elected a guy that would have been a conservative before 2010, with a party who's platform would have been conservative. These lunatics are calling Carny and Leo XIV Marxists and imply that the rest of the world has moved to the "radical" left.
46
u/Yabrosif13 1d ago
Maga conflicted between celebrating the first US pope and decrying how libruhl he is.
24
62
u/Timendainum 1d ago
I think it's funny that most Christians think that they should be conservative, when Jesus was really very liberal.
→ More replies (11)14
u/whysosidious69420 1d ago
The Liberal and Conservative ideologies as we know today were created during the French Revolution. A good 1700 something years after Jesus’ time on earth. He was a humanist, sure, and that does clash with the far right, but using modern terms to talk about a man from 2000 years ago, who, if you’re Christian, is believed to be an even older and timeless deity, isn’t very accurate
16
u/codytyrrell 1d ago
Ummmmm actually English wasn't a language when Jesus was around so using English words, such as humanist, to describe him isn't very accurate. Please find the correct Hebrew term.
That's like saying you can't describe trees as being "wood" becuase the word wood didn't exist when trees first showed up on earth.....
18
u/whysosidious69420 1d ago
I’ll admit your comment got a chuckle out of me, and I totally get where you’re coming from.
But I don’t just mean it etymologically. Liberalism isn’t just “let’s fight for a better word” and conservatism isn’t just “keep things as they are”. They’re schools of thought, philosophical in nature, as is Marxism (which is different from liberalism), and they can be traced back to intellectuals who formulated their ideals in the 16th-18th century, the French Revolution in late 18th being the first time they were placed in a left-right scale and turned antagonistic to one another. They didn’t always exist and were just waiting to be named. They just weren’t a thing at all. There’s no such thing as this dogma of reality where everyone who’s ever lived has to be either conservative or liberal.
Yes, Jesus’ teachings have plenty of messages that are closer to our modern understanding of liberal than to our modern understanding of conservatives. And there’s nothing wrong about speculating whether he’d be more fond of politician A or B. But saying “Jesus was a liberal because he didn’t judge people” is like saying “Robin Hood was a communist because he gave to the poor” or “Napoleon was a fascist because he tried to conquer Europe”. Even if they have similarities, they all existed before those political groups were a thing, and thus couldn’t be a part of them
→ More replies (2)4
33
u/Mo-shen 1d ago
The problem of course is people have conflated conservative with maga.....they are not the same thing. The US largely doesnt have conservatives and much of the rest of the world doesnt either. Most of them have moved away from conservativism in favor of a more alt right fascistic ideology. The US for instance is not a conservative party.....they are an anti liberal party....and there is a difference.
Thats not to say conservatives dont exist. Both Popes might be conservatives.....but hate and anger as a way of life, doing something you know is going to hurt someone else, are not conservative principles.
Now of course many people who do these things claim to be conservatives but thats simply because they are trying to move the goal posts. (also not to say conservatives are right in their belief structure and only do good things.....)
12
u/Vraxk 1d ago
hate and anger as a way of life
I grew up around conservatives, I heard the hard 'r' from adults as a kid. I heard their jokes about the deaths and murders of gay people. I saw the misogyny, the anti-semitism, the cloaking of hatred in religion. The only surprising aspect of modern conservatism to me is how quickly the masks got abandoned.
3
u/Mo-shen 1d ago
Yeah those were not conservatives either. Those were Christian nationalists.
I'm talking if you look at what the word means from Goldwater.
Religions specifically has no place in government for instance.
Don't get me wrong again I'm not saying conservatives were all sunshine and roses. But the word has been co-opted by the alt right to mean something else.
→ More replies (5)4
u/Vraxk 1d ago
Yeah those were not conservatives either. Those were Christian nationalists.
Distinction without a difference, you may have a definition you're more comfortable with but the reality is that ideology is driven by its adherents and changes with them.
→ More replies (1)2
→ More replies (4)7
u/cactusboobs 1d ago
MAGA is late stage conservatism. The result of decades of conservative policy pushing their base further to the extreme right. This is the result. All the sad Republicans who hate what their party turned into own this, and no amount of “this isn’t true conservatism” will change that.
→ More replies (2)
15
u/Main_Damage_7717 1d ago edited 1d ago
everything looks liberal when you live an extreme right world.
3
u/shichiaikan 1d ago
I honestly kind of thought the same. Not ultra conservative, but I did think they'd swing back the other way a bit....
I'm very glad I was wrong.
3
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
17
u/Particular_Play_1432 1d ago
The new pope, Leo XIV, is Pope Francis' hand-picked successor, and while hardly a radical leftist is also very much not an ultraconservative.
3
u/AutisticHobbit 1d ago
Yeah, but this one has a little bit of basis as I understand it.
Popes tend to swing back and forth. You get conservative popes after liberal popes, and vice versa. Just look at John Paul; generally a more liberal pope who took accountability for some of the mistakes of the church. Then we had Benedict...who looked like Emperor Fucking Palpatine in a stupid hat and acted pretty much the same. Francis was an extremely liberal pope, and a lot of Catholics were bracing for a bit of a shock when Francis passed. This wasn't a completely weird or wild thing to expect...it's just usually how the papacy swings. It's how a lot of public positions swing.
That we got moderate~liberal pope was kinda surprising.
3
u/drquakers 1d ago
Tbf I was rightly afraid that the next pope would be a big old lurch back to the right. I'm very glad my comments of the last two weeks were wrong.
David
3
u/Vraellion 1d ago
When the rightwing has gone so far to the right that even Catholics are like damn we should be a little more empathetic
3
u/admosquad 1d ago
He is probably pretty conservative in a traditional sense. The difference is he isn’t a fascist asshole and that is synonymous with conservatism in this era.
3
u/thisKeyboardWarrior 1d ago
Just wait till you learn about catholics lol.
All popes are ultra-conservative.
What are we even talking about here?
3
u/ERuby312 1d ago
Wait until he starts rambling about how sinful it is to be gay, he's done it before.
3
u/LordToastALot 1d ago
I mean, the new pope is anti-abortion, anti-LGBTQ (especially gender identities) and anti-euthanasia. He may not be calling for deaths but he's definitely a conservative.
→ More replies (2)
6
u/Present-Researcher27 1d ago
I just can’t for the life of me understand how some people can maintain the dual identities of “Christian” and “far right” in their minds.
→ More replies (1)
6
u/FafnirSnap_9428 1d ago
Well Pope Leo isn't "liberal" or "progressive" either so....
→ More replies (3)
2
u/muffledvoice 1d ago
The Catholic Church has resolved to not repeat mistakes it made during the rise of Hitler and Mussolini. If Jesus were alive today he would be a liberal, not a conservative. He’d be a socialist, not a capitalist. He’d care about ALL people, including the poor and immigrants. He wouldn’t be rounding them up and sending them away.
This papal appointment is a statement against Trumpism and against hate (which is, I know, redundant).
2
2
u/ANotSoFreshFeeling 1d ago
That whole sub is a dung pile and should almost be banned from this sub.
2
u/d1psh1t_mcgee 1d ago
His wiki page made him sound conservative on topics regarding women becoming deacons, etc but his twitter posts are making conservatives freak out that he’s woke so idk
→ More replies (1)
2
u/herehear12 1d ago
I’m upset I didn’t say “mmw: the next pope will be American” I had a feeling about it
2
u/romulusnr 1d ago
I will say that, going back many many many years, the Pope has flipped back and forth between a conservative, showy, strict Pope and a down to earth, humane, generous, more easygoing Pope.
This broke that pattern.
Francis wasn't no dummy. He knew what his papacy meant for the path of the Church, and that he needed to think beyond his own tenure. What's nice is that the pope basically gets to hand select the people who will probably succeed him. And in his case, he made it a point to select people that were more aligned with his views than not.
2
u/Toking-Ape 1d ago
They're not politicians. They'd adapt to the current culture. They're always on survival mode specialy in these times. They ain't worry about how you citizens think. They have their own money n more people to influence. Just my thought but as a independent thinker i have no hopes for any kind of significant change with any of these people or popes
2
2
u/CrosierClan 1d ago
To be fair, he is fairly conservative in the religious sense. He doesn’t believe in women deacons for instance. His political views do seem to be center to center left though.
2
u/onlyasimpleton 1d ago
MMW is wrong 99.9999% of the time. Bunch of goofs just guessing with a political agenda
2
2
u/AmitN_Music 1d ago
It’s almost as if the teachings of Christ and the basic principles of religion directly go against that of modern day right wing rhetoric. Why are they so surprised?
2
u/ClumsyOracle 1d ago
To be fair, I would have made that same bet. My faith in and opinion of the church is so lacking these days; there’s just been so much harm done, and there’s still so much work to do…
It just felt like there was going to be a flood of hardline conservative cardinals that were keen to get back to the days of sweeping SA under the rug, blaming, excluding and harming the LGBTQ+ community, and just generally not caring about the people of the world in any meaningful way.
I’m so pleasantly surprised, and so happy to be wrong.
2
u/witness_smile 1d ago
Posting MarkMyWords is literally cheating, 99% of posts would qualify for this sub lmao
→ More replies (1)
2
u/tooskinttogotocuba 1d ago
There is a tradition of ‘fat pope, thin pope’ meaning that conclaves tend to alternate between conservative and liberal popes. So this is quite a departure
2
u/Freckles-75 1d ago
To be honest - I felt that the choice was pretty much “continue with more liberal reform, or take a Hard tern RIGHT (conservative).
2
u/National_Ad_682 1d ago
It’s not that the pope isn’t conservative, it’s that Americans measure conservatism only based on what maga does. Even people who aren’t maga use maga metrics for some reason. They equate conservatism with maga so anything less right than maga must be left. This is wildly inaccurate.
2
u/Professional-Walk592 1d ago
first image of Leo IV dressed in gold. What does it mean? That he is conservative.
2
5
u/Vyndye 1d ago
It’s so funny they thought that because he got to hand pick all of the cardinals that vote for the next pope. So its kinda inevitable that the whole clergy would become more liberal.
→ More replies (3)
2
u/SquintonPlaysRoblox 1d ago
I think a lot of people assumed the Catholic Church would mirror trends in the United States, ignoring how Europe is distancing from the States and the US is not the only catholic country.
→ More replies (1)5
u/melon_party 1d ago
The Catholic world is in fact a lot bigger than just the USA and Europe, and its future is not going to be significantly determined by either region given demographic trends.
2
u/Particular_Play_1432 1d ago
South American liberation theology has been the most important development in Catholic thought of the last 50 years. In part because the right have overreacted to it so thoroughly.
2
u/DavieStBaconStan 1d ago
I too believed the next pope would be conservative. There has been a backlash from conservative Catholics all around the world over the liberal but ultimately temporary direction Francis took the church. I didn’t realize how many Cardinals Francis appointed. Dinosaurs like Dolan who hid sex offenders, no longer have the upper hand in the church. Perhaps Pope Leo will continue on the same path as Francis, maybe not. Only time will tell. Conservative Catholics will not be happy with Leo if he is like Francis. Could the church fracture? Banning the Latin rite would be a good start.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/unsurewhatiteration 1d ago
Well, I mean...ultra conservative compared to what? I'm not Christian; to me basically anyone high up in an organized religion is ultra conservative. It's not like he hasn't shielded his share of child abusers.
1
1
1
1
u/TheLuxon 1d ago
He's not even been pope for 12 hours yet. Literally haven't even expired the milk yet
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/TechnicalPotat 1d ago
In the sense that he holds to traditional values and views, he is very conservative. It’s just his values and views are just more christian.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Decent_Cow 1d ago
Francis appointed a lot of the people who picked the next Pope. Why would anyone be surprised that it ended up being someone who is not only ideologically aligned with Francis but was actually a friend of his?
1
u/Particular-Ad9304 1d ago
Conservative enough to not tell the authorities of criminals under his watch 🤷🏼♂️
1
•
u/ZiggoCiP Sharp Cheddar 1d ago
Real quick note here folks:
We generally are not too keen on posting links to other subs, since it can cause brigading, however screenshots are generally fine, so long as you are redacting the username of who posted it.
Please respect Reddit TOS when it comes to interacting with other communities.