We won't be in this mess under Biden or Harris.
Under sleepy Biden, I can sleep better at night.
16
PixelatedFrogDotGifMar 31, 2026
+5
I actually wonder if we wouldn’t have gotten dragged in another way by Israel anyway.
She was not a super hard objector of the genocide in Gaza or Netanyahu, put Iran under scrutiny, argued for military might, and Walz outright spoke about the importance of the greater expansion of Israel.
I don’t think she would have done it stupid or even necessarily willingly like Trump. I think it would have been “We have to have Israel’s back” if Israel lead the attack and was planning anywho.
I wonder if US involvement was inevitable by way of Israel’s own demented behavior mixed with our blind allegiance to it. The way the US + Israel cross pollinate steps far beyond Trump.
5
r4inbowgravityMar 31, 2026
+4
No need to use this as an opportunity to try to raise back up the exact people who handed us Trumps second term.
How about we wouldn’t be in this mess if AOC or Bernie were president?
4
IllustriousRange226Mar 31, 2026
+5
100% miss Biden. Easily the most progressive president in our lifetime.
5
accuratebofferMar 31, 2026
-16
President “autopen?”
Jeez, Biden didn’t know where he was most of the time.
-16
kanstMar 31, 2026
+12
Whether he did or didn't, he appointed brilliant progressives to cabinet positions who went out and worked to improve the lives of every day Americans.
His term was one of the most successful and progressive terms in more than 50 years.
12
vegaszombietroyApr 1, 2026
-2
Puhleez.
-2
blazesquallMar 31, 2026
+2
Brunch was Better under Biden.. I wonder if I can create a rebus puzzle out of that for the next No Kings protest.. it's good sign fodder.
2
commy2Mar 31, 2026
-8
Harris is the front runner for democratic presidential candidate according to polls. Did she commit to ending this war yet?
-8
blazesquallMar 31, 2026
+5
Entertainingly, yes. She was pretty early (though she was also the first the line up and call them our greatest adversary during her campaign).
The beauty of not having an elected office.
5
Rock_mageMar 31, 2026
+3
Hasn't every single Democrat come out against the war? [Fox admitted this, why are you worse than Fox. ](https://youtu.be/u4MS9IapK2k?si=MZM7-d-Wfp44lwls)
3
blazesquallMar 31, 2026
+4
The party not in power is usually against military interventions..
..the telling part is in 2022, when Sanders withdrew his Yemen War Powers resolution right before a scheduled Senate floor vote due to heavy opposition from the Biden White House, sparing the President from having to issue a highly publicized veto. They were more than happy to force Trump to veto the same thing a could years earlier...
4
MoccusMar 31, 2026
+1
> sparing the President from having to issue a highly publicized veto.
Biden wouldn't have had to veto it because it wasn't going to pass. Sanders pulled it because he didn't think he had enough votes to get it through the Senate.
1
blazesquallMar 31, 2026
+5
If that's supposed to be a counter argument, it's just a corollary to the original premise.. Congress won't actually stop the imperial presidency and that these votes are just partisan theatrics.
Why wasn't it going to pass? Because the Biden White House aggressively lobbied Democrats against it and threatened a veto. Democrats gladly passed the exact same Yemen War Powers resolution when Trump was in office in 2019.. but three years later, for the exact same conflict, they suddenly abandoned it to protect their own president.
5
commy2Apr 1, 2026
+1
So where does she say that she as a president would end it? This waffling reminds me about how Biden said he'd be some 'transitional president' and that surely meant that he wouldn't run again in 24, until - surprise - the defense here was: "he never said that!". Got anything better than a four week old video, with more substance or at least some form of promise?
1
kaptainkrim5onApr 1, 2026
-1
It wouldn't have happened though. If Harris and Dems had won that night, armed goon forces and MAGA militias would have completely taken over DC, proclaimed Trump as dictator and we'd be fighting Civil War 2. Or exactly how it's going to happen in 2028.
-1
dollhouss1Apr 1, 2026
+3
Kamala: ““Iran has American blood on their hands – this attack on Israel, 200 ballistic missiles…What we need to do [is] to ensure that Iran never achieves the ability to be a nuclear power. That is one of my highest priorities.”
Bernie Sanders: Iran “must never be allowed to attain a nuclear weapon”
Obama:”Many times, in multiple countries, I have decided to use force. And I will never hesitate to do so when it is in our national security interest. I strongly believe that our national security interest now depends upon preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon -- which means that without a diplomatic resolution, either I or a future U.S. President would face a decision about whether or not to allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon or whether to use our military to stop it.
Biden: ““We’re not looking for war… but all options, including military force, are on the table.”
Chuck Schumer: ““A nuclear Iran is a huge threat to the United States… an existential threat to Israel… must be stopped.”
3
NJcovidvaccinetipsMar 31, 2026
+3
Notice how a majority of democrats avoid criticizing the war in Iran directly like Bernie and purely critique the war on the grounds that it is not being run correctly. If a democrat can’t clearly state their opposition to this war they are compromised by national security/blob brain and the military industrial complex
3
MoccusMar 31, 2026
The war "not being run correctly" is the only approach that can actually stop it. Criticizing the war is just performative whining that does nothing.
0
zombiekoalasMar 31, 2026
So, yes the war is bullshit. But what is the realistic out.
What cost are we paying short term and what are we paying longterm to extract ourselves from this cluster f***?
I've yet to see ANYONE offer suggestions on how we get out. Just that we get out.
0
kanstMar 31, 2026
+5
> But what is the realistic out.
Are we saying realistic as "possible" or realistic as "something Trump can stomach"?
Tomorrow we could stop bombing them, remove our carrier groups, remove all the sanctions from Iran, cancel our military funding to Israel, and offer to close some bases/reduce the troop count in the region. That would almost certainly end the war.
But that would involve Trump admitting that Iran won, which he will never do. It is going to take a better deal for Iran than they got out of the JCPOA.
5
vegaszombietroyApr 1, 2026
+1
[ Removed by Listnook ]
1
whateveryousaymydearMar 31, 2026
sadly, the world is bent on destroying itself
0
limaconnect77Mar 31, 2026
-1
There has never been, between the last election and now, anything stoping the Dems walking out of both houses in protest at all this illegal rubbish.
“House divided cannot stand.” and all that, however perhaps that’s what it would take.
‘Cos, at the moment the US electorate just looks weak and having very little grasp on reality.
-1
fred11551Mar 31, 2026
+2
What would that accomplish besides a performative show and allowing republicans to ram through anything they want? The democrats have to have a rotating group in the capitol right now during their recess to make sure the senate doesn’t try to pass the save act without quorum. They already tried to once.
2
limaconnect77Mar 31, 2026
-1
By the same token, the recent anemic protests just added to the farcical nature of things as they stand.
Nobody’s taking the US electorate seriously these days. Lots of bluster and no follow through.
-1
HonoredPeopleMar 31, 2026
I agree.
Except. Now we've got a whole new set of problems.
The first being the idea of rebellion in Iran. The new hardline leaders are going to have to restore order and quell the people. So, all those that considered rebellion are dead.
The second being that Iran wants the war to end. They'll control the oil and the waterway. They can attack it at any point in time. Us moving our navy, could cause much larger issues. Depending. And that's not if, the new "guy" doesn't want to make the world pay some additionally.
The third being all of our allies in the Middle-East. Iran would have to stop attacking everybody else as well. I'm not sure how that would work, but if they' keep firing, others are going to take the hit.
At least with us, they'd have a shield and some interception.
It's a mess. I pure shitshow. I don't know if we can just "end" the war. Unless the new guy gains enough control over all of Iran and puts a stop to that.
0
Immediate_Amoeba5923Mar 31, 2026
-5
I like Bernie Sanders but this is completely stupid. We are just going to allow Iran to control the Strait of Hormuz? There is no off ramp available, that Strait needs to be opened. Sanders is being bad faith, pandering to the uneducated, and manipulating people based on their emotions. Kids and the tik tok crowd are of course going to go crazy over this, this is who Sanders is great at pandering to. The United States cannot just unilaterally accept defeat and give Iran everything they want. Sanders would have been a horrible president because of silly nonsense like this.
28 Comments