this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2025
820 points (99.2% liked)

Luigi Mangione

1911 readers
3 users here now

A community to post anything related to Luigi Mangione.

This is not a pro-murder community. Please respect Lemmy.world ToS.

founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 279 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Holy shit can you guys imagine if the jury rules “not guilty, because you got the wrong fucking guy”? Luigi could probably run in 2028 and win.

[–] itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml 87 points 1 month ago (1 children)

He'd never defeat the Democrats' list of very strong candidates.

[–] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 87 points 1 month ago (3 children)

checks list

its just hillary again

[–] 50MYT@lemmy.world 23 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Am I dumb or is AOC not an option

[–] suite403@lemmy.world 44 points 1 month ago (2 children)

She is 100% an option, but not for the current Democrat party. They will push her our like they did Sanders.

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 28 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They'd vote Trump before voting for AOC. At least that's my take from abroad.

[–] MrPoopbutt@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

And mine from not abroad.

The Dems are controlled opposition who are funded by the billionaires just like the Rs.

[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Democratic party needs to split up. Bernie has been calling on more senators and congressmen to go independent, but none have jumped off the rotten DNC ship.

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

We need the infrastructure. The parties are too entrenched in law and election structures...

So the only choice is to tea party them, build a left wing of the party and take over. And I think that's what AOC and Bernie are running around doing, but it's going to take time

In the meantime, we need to resist

[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Bernie has been independent for essentially his entire career. Why is it possible for him, but not others?

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 3 points 1 month ago

And how much control does Bernie and the other independents have? Not much... He generally votes with the Democrats and occasionally speaks out

We don't need another 5 independents. We need a couple dozen in a cohesive voting block. We need enough that Democrats will be forced to negotiate with them (because maga won't)

It's very hard to win as an independent, but it can be done. We need more then that though - we need a party, we need the network of organizers, the infrastructure for donations, and to integrate with 50 slightly different systems for elections

And most importantly, you need name recognition

All these things would take years of maintained effort to establish, but they exist - better to become a key faction of the democratic party than to compete with them directly

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Bernie has been independent for essentially his entire career.

Precisely because he's been in politics since the 80s and is a brand name in Vermont.

And he still caucuses with the Dems. He didn't run for president as an independent. He knows the perils of appearing as a spoiler candidate as well as any Stein or Nader.

[–] laurelraven@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 month ago

This. I've been saying for a bit now that we need our own tea party movement to push the DNC left

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

There's an inherent strategic advantage to claiming the party brand, because so much has been invested in raising its name recognition.

Very hard to get people to throw away a shot at a winnable primary in pursuit of a much more difficult independent run.

[–] ArchmageAzor@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (5 children)

After Kamala there's no way they'll have another female candidate. The American people would rather vote for all the adjectives that describe Trump than a woman.

[–] superniceperson@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

If that's the lesson dems took from the election, dems are going to lose again.

Stop pushing far right republicans as the dem nominees, regardless of their supposed genitals.

[–] frostysauce@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

That's exactly why they would run another woman candidate. You don't think the dems are trying to win, do you?

[–] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Clinton and Harris are just fake smiles on a status quo neoliberal platform. Of course that didn't go anywhere. Elizabeth Warren might have stood a chance. AOC is outright popular now but I don't think she would have won, yet.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Baggie@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It was quite a blow to my "all humans are inherently good" mindset, I'm now going with "all humans probably have some deeply rooted cultural biases".

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

all humans are inherently good

Why the fuck would you have thought this to begin with?

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Maternal instincts, the lived experience of kindness between friends and neighbors, and the last 10,000 years of gradual but undeniable improvements in social equity could argue this point.

I might also argue that humans are fundamentally good, but still highly mutable. So a few bad apples really can spoil the bunch.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

After Kamala there’s no way they’ll have another female candidate.

Which is extra funny given that candidates like Gretchen Witmer, Liz Warren, and AOC are some of their most popular candidates the party still has to offer.

Gruesome Newsom is going to clinch then nomination on a platform of "America is a fundamentally misogynistic nation" and liberals are going to waltz into 2028 screaming "Vote for us! We hate women more than the Republicans!"

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Naw Gavin's career is sunk. That podcast sank him

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'll believe it when I see it. He's still got the Getty fortune and the Lib half of California media firmly behind him

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

True, but he's burned his bridges with the Left via transphobia and trying to court the Right, and with the Right by inviting Right Wingers to the podcast and then calling them Bible Thumpers while trying to court them.

He's got a life raft that'll prevent him from drowning overnight, but he took a swing at the big time and missed.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sdfric88@lemmy.sdf.org 79 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Lmao this guy thinks there will still be elections

[–] oatscoop@midwest.social 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

There will still be elections -- they just won't be fair and legitimate elections.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago

50 States all went to the GOP... crazy how that happens now that Elon Musk counts the vote

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 57 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Not 35 years of age or older enough

[–] knightly@pawb.social 111 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The law clearly doesn't matter anymore.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 67 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It does for the right/"wrong" people.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Only as long as those people keep pretending.

In reality everyone knows we can just do whatever.

So executing the rich and forcefully redistributing their wealth is a valid public policy now

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I mean, we've been trying to do other things, but they won't play nice. I guess we need to exterminate a few, then offer the rest the opt-in to pay higher taxes as an alternative.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The landlords that were holding the Chinese economy hostage were given a chance to relinquish their properties, then they executed the ones who wouldn't.

It's only fair we give them an opportunity to surrender.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 month ago (2 children)

If orangeboi runs, Luigi should run.

[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

More like repeat the same action that happened to the CEO of United Healthcare.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Can you imagine?

Orangeboi:

word salad

Moderator:

trying not to have a stroke Your response, Mr. Mangione?

Luigi:

BAM

And then everyone clapped

[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

*sigh*

A man can dream.

A man can dream.

[–] masta_chief@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

And if he were to run for a house seat, and we get 2/3 of congress to vote for a package to do this, we could make him president by impeaching and removing POTUS, VP, and have him be speaker of the house and succeed into the presidency for a special term.

Wishful thinking but it would technically be constitutional. I've tossed this idea and many others in my head about how to get massive support across the country to accomplish something crazy bold like this but I could go on and on and there's lots of what ifs

[–] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

Per the 1947 succession act if the speaker (or anyone else in the line of succession) fails to qualify, and age is a qualifier, it goes to next in line which would be the Secretary level cabinet positions.

I'd be very worried about Luigis politics outside of Healthcare. The jump to murder also does question whether he'd be able to make the compromises necessary to pass legislation. He grew up fairly rich iirc and I would like a president with a bit more life experience.

[–] Alloi@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] phoenixarise@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Sanders was the compromise choice

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

The oblique implication in my comment is that if orangeboi (illegally) runs for a third term, then it also does not matter if Luigi (illegally) runs when he’s too young

[–] laurelraven@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Why not? He already illegally ran in 2024, and was illegally inaugurated...

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

lol wow uh… you know, I guess you do have a point there 🫠