Unless the candidate is a progressive, then the establishment Dems won't endorse them (unless the progressive wins, then suddenly they totally supported the progressive all along)
(no, I'm not saying don't vote, just frustrated by the fucking hypocrisy)
Ya that's a problem I have in my neck of the words. Everyone complains about who is on the General Election ticket and they just shrug their shoulders about voting in the Primary.
If voting day was a holiday, only people who get federal holidays off would get the day off. But it would be a great excuse to get rid of early voting.
Exactly. This times a million. We don't vote in primaries and then get all surprised that the Democratic candidates resemble the folks who voted in the primaries.
When the party runs primaries at all, they interfere with them every chance they get. Saying "jUsT vOtE iN tHe PrImArIeS" without acknowledging this paints the results of the party's corruption as the will of the people.
I figured that bit was obvious, I was speaking more towards the Dem leadership's hypocrisy. Again, absolutely not saying "don't vote both sides reeeeee"
Gang, this isn't complicated. You fight the Democratic establishment 364 days a year. On election day you pick the lesser evil, which hopefully all that fighting you did made much less evil. We have an archaic election system, and until that changes (work to change it), that's the best path forward.
In other words, voting isn't enough: it's merely the first step. After "your guys" are in power, you should bully them into keeping their promises and doing more
You only do that at the booth, and then you are vocal about the issues that matter to you. From social media to marching in the streets and everything in between
Civics education is bad to nonexistent so they do not learn about the spoiler effect, let alone the inevitable math behind first past the post elections. People vote based on how they think the system ought to function instead of how it actually functions.
Gang, this isn't complicated. You make demands, but declare ahead of time you will not take any action to harm the Dems by not voting for them, and this give up all leverage. Then they continue to lock in GOP policies, that's tye best path forward.
He explicitly said that by declaring ahead of time that you will vote for whatever candidate they have no reason to change their establishment or respond to your "fighting" it. The only point of leverage that you have over them is not voting for them, which deprives them of the power and wealth that they're trying to seek by being elected. So, if you surrender that single point of leverage, then what does your fighting consist of?
Oh yeah, cause the main point of politics to American liberals isn't to weild power or alter policy. It's to demonstrate that they, personally, are better people. And leftists not accepting their VBNMW failed nonsense is an unacceptable contradiction to that self image.
Yeah, but here we are with you replying to a snippet of my original point for some reason. That and othering instead of articulating a clear point. It's rough all over.
I cannot stomach voting for someone who sent billions to commit genocide with. That is my voice, and my opinion. What should I do with that on election day, you think?
Good job, the alternative that you and people like you chose by sitting around and doing nothing to prove your superiority is much better! Schoolgirls got bombed! The global markets were disrupted! Elon is a trillionaire! Environmental protections were removed and human lives were valued at 0 by the EPA! Trans people are openly punished and laws are being written to prevent them using public restrooms! Screwworms and measels are returning to the US! The entire planet hates the US (rightfully so and even more than they did before) and historic allies are turning against us! The US openly aligned with Israel and started a war for no reason!
I'm sure glad you couldn't bear the weight of voting, you're an inspirational beacon and the world thanks you for what you didn't do
You misunderstand. Our current situation is exactly what your proposed strategy got us. You are proposing business as usual politics, and that's exactly what we've been doing for decades. And for decades, things have gotten worse. This is not working. You'd have to be pretty fucking naive to stick to the same strategy that got us to where we are today (full blown fascism).
My guy, your point is not a subtle or nuanced as you think. It's literally the default opinion in a liberal democracy. That's not an indictment of the point, but it does mean I've heard it a thousand times before, and it's not hard to understand. Independently of that it is empirically wrong though.
No, I think I will worry about election day, thank you very much. Voting is one of the most important ways to steer politicians toward working for your benefit. So please tell me, in your world view, what should I do with my voice and opinion on election day?
Bonus question: if you guarantee your vote to a party, regardless of what they do (such as commit a genocide, such as expand ICE, such as building the border wall, such as keeping Guantanamo bay open, such as never taxing the rich more, and so on), what incentive do they have to listen to you? And follow up, if your answer is that democrats do still work for the electorate, why are they moving further and further right, away from the interests and opinions of most Americans? (This is measurable, see for examples the 2014 paper Testing theories of American politics which found that policy positions of politicians align perfectly with those of economic elites, and with those of average voters really only ever by accident)
Start with learning the difference between the way things ought to be (they really should- it would be so easy) and the way things actually are. Knowing is half the battle!
So, this is not the alternative though, right? Our current situation and political landscape is exactly where decades of blue no matter who got us. It's time to change strategies, because this isn't working.
Or is it where decades of mostly ignoring anything but presidential elections has gotten us? Where mot participating in most of the process has gotten us and then we want there to be just the choice we want, waiting for us at the end?
Again, you seem to be willingly missing the point. Up until the election, you had an entire year to fight tooth and nail for better. At the election, you only have two choices and no amount of "they both suck I refuse to do anything but sit here and tell everyone else they fucked up by letting it get to this point" will change that. You had two choices only and refused to make a single one, letting the worst happen.
Are you aware of the world around you enough to know how it got here? They voted red every single time and pulled things slightly more to the right every time they could. They didn't like their candidates, but they understood they won't get where they want to immediately. You have to incrementally get there because people are awful and scared of change so they kept working at it election by election. Meanwhile, people like you said "well this is not the perfect choice so I'm going to sit around and pout about it" and do nothing to even slow their progress.
No I understand your point. I just strongly disagree with it, mainly because reality just doesn't line up with what you're saying. What signs do you have that your current strategy is working? Like, actually. What signs are you getting from reality make you think "well geeze, we've got this down pat."
Get the fuck over yourself. It's not "because they disagreed with your opinion" it's because there was a choice to make between openly bombing children and giving ICE more funding than the military or keeping the status quo, which is an embarassing choice for sure and it's goddamn disgusting those were the only options, but keeping the status quo would have been easier to come back from than coming back from whatever the fuck is happening now. Grow the fuck up and learn to make adult decisions
fight the Democratic establishment 364 days a year
just to be accused of supporting teh republicans? i mean i'll do it, but lets be honest: the democrat supporters aren't trying to have a good faith discussion about the shortcomings of the party.
You gotta fight from within. "I've voted Democrat and will continue to support the party, but [insert list of grievances]" plays a lot better than "I do not understand how US election work so I helped get Trump elected, now give me what I want".
Centrists interpret all criticism as “I do not understand how US election work so I helped get Trump elected, now give me what I want” and have never given a shit about how anyone actually voted.
Condescension will never be a substitute for policies people want, charismatic candidates, and a willingness to keep campaign promises. But since centrists don't have any of those, they go with what they have.
I hate to break it to you, but I'm left of Sanders. Understanding how our election system (poorly) functions is essential if we are ever going to fix it. Knowing is half the battle!
We have an archaic election system, and until that changes (work to change it), that’s the best path forward.
Classic thread. People have jumped from putting words in my mouth to tell me those words are wrong to pre-emptively doing it. I guess Lemmy suffers from the same weekend awfulness of other sites.
What would appease you? You can view my comment history and scroll past many left posts. Maybe you'll find something in there that fits your narrative? Would you like me to post a Political Compass, PEW Political Topology, or some other test? A note from my doctor?
Or is it simply, "hey, this guy who openly acknowledged our system is outdated and bad is trying to explain how coalitions work within it- what a [insert othering words of choice]" and that's where we live now?
When has the USA ever not been murdering people? You think not voting against the guy who murders more people is sending a message? Now we're into full on magic-based thinking.
When does it become wrong? Doing the only thing you like is no longer a winning position. Your electorate are better people than you're trying to force them to be.
Fun story, my second-to-last straw with Reddit was being banned from r/democrats for saying Biden should not seek a second term (too old) and they need to hold a primary. I said this repeatedly starting about a year before the election and was called all manner of terrible things while accumulating loads of up and downvotes. When the time for a primary passed I pivoted my message to: Biden should retire (play up a medical issue) so we have the first female president and she has the incumbent bump for the election. I was banned with the message "Shut up, Biden is going to get a second term. Deal with it [inappropriate language]." twelve days before Biden dropped out.
Trump won because the billionaires who own this country saw an unprecedented opportunity, and in no small part because of the "pied piper" strategy that Hillary and the corporate dems thought would ensure an easy win
4 is deduced from 1,2,3 the deduction is just using definition and the fact both parties lead to the same outcome to come to a contradiction
Both parties have been elected (1), both led to (2), both aren't representative (3), You can't blame voters if they have no power over the outcome, there's no democracy in US
If the point you're trying to make is that outcome is irrelevant and only voting itself is what constitutes a democracy then this needs to be applied to other countries as well, North Korea is a democracy
Both parties definitely don’t lead to the same outcome. One party supports cutting welfare for the poor and the other party doesn’t.
This statement is inherently contradictory. So one party is for cutting welfare. If they win, welfare gets cut. If the other pary wins, welfare stays the same, or gets cut only a little (good ol across the aisle compromise). Next cycle the other party wins, welfare gets cut. Same outcome.
Now, if the other party was for increased welfare, or for stopping fracking, or for naturalizing more undocumented immigrants, or for reducing military spending, then you'd have a point. But in selling the democratic party as the alternative to vote for, you can't even bring yourself to say they stand for something positive. Best we get is that they're not actively harmful on purpose.
When the "good" party eschews primaries because they cannot abide giving the people an opportunity to vote against genocide, that's only democracy to people who like genocide.
It's a gradient. Did you get to decide who you're allowed to vote for? Do they represent your actual interests? Do you have a say over what happens in your city or your workplace?
I believe in the liberatory power of what would probably be termed anarcho-syndicalism and I would have voted for Bernie. I own a sweater with his name on it.
I'mma vote for the lesser of two evils. What I won't do is fist bump a republican liteᵗᵐ like they didn't torpedo every fucking progressive they could. I remember south carolina, biden was dead in the water and suddenly "centrists consolidated" and he was a fucking front runner.
The thing about this that really makes me ashamed of the democratic establishment is the depiction of the girl on the right vs on the left. This post is literally trying to marginalize progressives. Just look at lemmy, half the progressives here are cishet conputer programmers and Linux nerds in their 40s. This post is trying to enforce a harmful stereotype to make progressives seem like a smaller, less influencial, more radicalized group. It's already playing into bigotry: the progressive is shown as younger (ageism), with darker skin (racism), more "radical" views, as a drug addict., etc; enforcing the bias that progressives are somehow irresponsible young'uns with unrealistic world-views. Fuck this shit. Never thought I'd see something so obviously bigoted on Lemmy.
No its, vote blue no matter who*
only applicable if the said blue candidate is not progressive
and the whole fucking time we are voting in primaries, it’s all “progressive candidates can’t win the election” and astroturfed lies and slander using democratic funds to hurt itself in its own confusion. want my vote? field candidates that i would vote for.
More dem slop, they still don't understand why they can't win elections. I'd point it out for them, but they'd just scream 'blue no matter who' instead of listening.
By repeating, accepting, endorsing, or being shamed into the phrase “Any Blue Will Do,” you agree to the following Terms and Conditions.
1. Binding Obligation of the Voter
You agree that “Any Blue Will Do” creates a total, unconditional, irrevocable, morally compulsory obligation to support any candidate designated by the Democratic Party, its consultants, donors, cable news surrogates, or random accounts with flag emojis.
Support may include voting, donating, volunteering, defending the candidate online, pretending the platform is “actually pretty progressive,” and explaining to younger voters why asking for healthcare is helping fascism.
2. Definition of “Blue”
For purposes of this Agreement, “Blue” means any candidate, officeholder, nominee, former Republican, ex-CIA analyst, prosecutor, donor-friendly mayor, or person who has appeared on a Democratic ballot line.
Notwithstanding the above, “Blue” shall not include leftists, socialists, labor candidates, anti-war candidates, or anyone who causes donors to say “deeply concerning.”
3. Institutional Discretion
The Democratic Party reserves the sole, exclusive, perpetual, and non-reviewable right to decide when “Any Blue Will Do” applies.
This determination may be made before, during, or after the election; in a closed-door meeting; through a leaked memo; or retroactively after the wrong kind of Democrat wins.
4. Primary Election Exceptions
Although “Any Blue Will Do” may appear to imply neutrality among Democrats, nothing shall prevent the Party from promoting, funding, endorsing, defending, or quietly coordinating for any candidate deemed sufficiently Normal.
The Party may intervene against left-wing candidates through endorsements, donor pressure, debate exclusion, ballot challenges, super PACs, whisper campaigns, consultant networks, or sudden concerns about electability.
Such actions shall not violate “Any Blue Will Do,” because leftists should have known what the phrase meant.
5. Electability Clause
You agree that “electability” means whatever the Party needs it to mean at the time.
A moderate losing by six points proves the country is center-right.
A leftist losing by six points proves progressive politics are permanently toxic.
A moderate winning narrowly is a mandate for bipartisan austerity.
A leftist winning decisively is a local anomaly.
6. Vote-Shaming Rights Reserved
The Party, its affiliates, surrogates, influencers, and emotionally exhausted liberals reserve the right to shame, scold, guilt, condescend to, or morally indict you for any failure to provide enthusiastic support.
This right survives all prior mistreatment, broken promises, ignored policy demands, abandoned constituencies, donor triangulation, union-busting, war funding, anti-immigrant pivoting, or sabotage of your preferred candidate.
Your obligation to vote blue remains in full force regardless of whether the Party has made any effort to earn your vote.
7. No Reciprocal Duty
Nothing in this Agreement creates any reciprocal obligation on the part of the Democratic Party to support candidates, policies, platforms, movements, voters, unions, tenants, students, debtors, the uninsured, the unhoused, the anti-war left, or anyone who has ever said the word “material.”
The voter’s duty is mandatory.
The Party’s duty is aspirational, symbolic, non-binding, means-tested, subject to committee review, and likely dead on arrival in the Senate.
8. Platform Disclaimer
Any platform, promise, slogan, campaign speech, town hall answer, website bullet point, or “we hear you” statement is non-binding promotional material.
The Party may abandon, dilute, reframe, study, means-test, postpone, sunset, privatize, or blame the parliamentarian for any stated policy objective.
No voter shall infer from campaign rhetoric the existence of an actual commitment.
9. Leftist Candidate Contingency
In the event that a leftist wins a Democratic primary, “Any Blue Will Do” may be suspended, modified, inverted, or replaced with:
“We need a serious candidate.”
“This district is more moderate than people think.”
“We have concerns about temperament.”
“They haven’t built relationships.”
“The tweets are problematic.”
“This is not the right time.”
“We need someone who can win.”
The Party may further reserve the right to remain neutral, quietly assist the opponent, withhold funding, or discover a sudden principled objection to party loyalty.
10. Consultant Protection Clause
No provision of this Agreement shall endanger the sacred right of consultants to be paid millions of dollars to lose winnable races while advising candidates to say nothing, offend no donors, avoid popular economic policies, and appear in diners wearing rolled-up sleeves.
Consultant compensation shall not be contingent on winning elections.
11. Donor Supremacy Clause
In the event of a conflict between voters and donors, donors shall prevail.
In the event of a conflict between the platform and donors, donors shall prevail.
In the event of a conflict between democracy and donors, a task force shall be convened after the election.
12. Unity
You agree that “unity” means left-wing voters supporting the nominee chosen by the Party.
You further agree that “division” means left-wing voters asking for anything in return.
Calls for unity may be issued immediately after the Party has spent months calling your candidate unelectable, dangerous, unserious, divisive, unrealistic, toxic, radical, online, or insufficiently grateful.
13. Harm Reduction
You acknowledge that harm reduction is extremely important and shall be invoked whenever the Party requires your vote.
You further acknowledge that harm reduction shall not require the Party to reduce harm when doing so would inconvenience donors, police unions, defense contractors, pharmaceutical companies, fossil fuel interests, private insurers, landlords, or anyone described as a “stakeholder.”
14. Democracy Preservation Clause
You agree that democracy is on the ballot in every election.
You further agree that democracy may be preserved through ballot access litigation, superdelegate influence, donor consolidation, debate manipulation, primary interference, and stern editorials about the dangers of populism.
Any contradiction shall be resolved in favor of the Party.
15. Waiver of Expectations
By accepting these Terms, you waive any expectation that your vote, organizing, small-dollar donations, canvassing, or repeated emergency mobilization shall entitle you to policy concessions, appointments, accountability, respect, or basic recognition as part of the coalition.
You may be thanked in fundraising emails.
16. Amendment Rights
The Democratic Party reserves the right to amend these Terms at any time without notice.
Amendments may be announced by think tank memo, anonymous senior aide quote, cable news panel consensus, donor retreat, consultant Substack, or sudden redefinition of what “realistic” means.
Continued existence under Republican threat shall constitute acceptance of all amended Terms.
17. Enforcement
This Agreement shall be enforced exclusively against voters to the left of the nominee.
No enforcement mechanism shall apply to conservative Democrats, corporate Democrats, swing-district moderates, billionaire donors, retired generals, anti-choice incumbents, oil-state senators, police-union candidates, or anyone who says “kitchen table issues” while opposing the policies that would help people afford kitchens or tables.
18. Remedies
If you violate this Agreement by withholding support, criticizing the nominee, supporting a primary challenger, asking for concessions, mentioning Gaza, saying “universal healthcare,” objecting to means-testing, or pointing out that the Party did the opposite of what it demanded from you, remedies may include:
vote-shaming, accusations of privilege, accusations of Russian influence, lectures about 2016, screenshots of Supreme Court decisions, demands that you “grow up,” comparisons to Republicans, and fundraising emails addressed to “Friend.”
These remedies apply regardless of whether your criticism is accurate.
19. Entire Agreement
These Terms constitute the entire agreement between the Democratic Party and the voter, superseding all prior hopes, movements, promises, platforms, speeches, donations, canvassing shifts, and moments when you briefly believed this relationship might become less abusive.
By proceeding, you acknowledge that “Any Blue Will Do” means any blue will do for you, not for them.
20. Acceptance
By voting, not voting, considering voting, discussing voting, posting, lurking, donating, organizing, complaining, or failing to clap loudly enough, you agree to be bound by these Terms and Conditions.
Yeah I need to work shop it. Like the point was to be overly verbose, but I don't think the presentation works. I like the idea though even though maybe I didn't stick the landing. Anything in particular that gave off AI vibes? Most of this is just me regurgitating accusations I've made of you. Actually, now thinking about it, I should have slipped an easter egg in there for you to find later.
Yeah I think the format is wrong too though. Like, its just too much for a copy pasta. I think a gif would be better, they go to click the TOS and the text just starts scrolling past like movie credits.
Maybe with some version of this wojack towards the end reacting to Chuck Schumer chanting "We will win" as the liberals cuckold themselves to fascists.
With patience, you when. If your stance is unchanging, and you just chip away, taking every little bit of power as you can, constantly angling for a best strategic position, you will win.
Fascist will always have a chance, they're not scared of being out voted. They're scared of the working class digging their asses out of their heads and realizing what's up.
The virgin Hillary establishment democrat neolib atheist cishet ally versus the chad vape and xanax addicted poly amorous anarcho-socialist non binary zoomer
Probably, but maybe not as vocally as the cishet ally with a "SCIENCE IS REAL" bumper sticker on her ass.
The chad nonbinary anarcho-socialist knows that science is a real methodology and not a belief system to stand behind, and doesn't need to broadcast it.
Fascists are scared of a lot of things, but this isn't one of them. One camp uses a degree of class analysis, while the other is aggressively identitarian and thinks class politics are the hallmark of a bad person who'll abandon marginalized groups.
Both rely chiefly on electoral wins to get the outcome they want. This alliance is a paper tiger.
If you want to know why lefties lose you need only look at the comments critical of this post.
It's absolutely valid to be displeased by how center or right-leaning the "left-wing" candidates are. But you have to accept that only supporting your perfect candidate is just going to keep pushing all candidates to the right as they lose.
If you keep doing something over and over, for decades, and still everything gets worse, then that something isn't working. Feels like something that doesn't need saying, but apparently it does.
See, Kamala is the 'least harm' candidate because she [checks notes] will literally continue Bidens genocide while pivoting to the right to bring in those mythical undecideds. Slay kween.
The two parts of the mechanism work together, even though the wheel and the spring+lever are not identical they are still cooperating towards a single outcome.
Oh boy, the Republican consultants are here to convince people to vote blue no matter who. That way, some milquetoast Dem candidate will get annihilated by the Republican candidate again.
See how stupid that makes me sound?
Can you people just once actually engage with counter-arguments rather than trying to sweep people's points under the rug by saying, oh you're a bot, oh you're a shill, oh you're Chinese or Russian or Republican or NSA or FBI or you're the deep state, holy fuck. You sound like someone from /pol/. Protip: refusing to address the argument and instead say that junk makes it look like you have no real argument. I'm starting to think you're the real bot here, bot! Haha see I called you a shill, that means your argument is invalid
When we can rely on centrists to vote blue even when the primary winner is one of the progressives they hate almost as much as they hate the idea of a living Palestinian, then they can tell us to vote blue no matter who, and not one fucking second before.
We saw the disgusting racist attacks the centrist wing made against Mamdani. Centrists haven't changed one bit since they formed a PAC to get McCain elected because they didn't want a Black man to be their nominee. Centrists are "vote blue no matter who" only until they don't get 100% of everything they want, then they revert back to "party unity my ass" and campaign for shit like Cuomo.
The message here is the same as always from centrists: Shut up and fall in line because we hate you and always will.
Yeah no. You wanna know why so many progressives are getting nominations this cycle? It's because we didn't "vote blue no matter who" last year and the corpocrats are kind of realizing they're gonna have to budge to actually get people to the polls again. Vote for the person you... want to vote for.
It’s because we didn’t “vote blue no matter who” last year
If you want to draw a line from not voting blue to more progressives getting nominations then you have to skip the inconvenient side effect of having a fascist child rapist felon as president who's not going to allow a free election.
Didn't say it was preferable or even good, but it is the reason the DNC is tepidly allowing outspoken socialists on their ticket when just ten years ago they were collaborating with Trump to take out Sanders. They can sense that corporate support is going away and that their voters wont bother to show up if the candidates are no different than the last guy
Didn’t say it was preferable or even good, but it is the reason the DNC is tepidly allowing outspoken socialists on their ticket when just ten years ago they were collaborating with Trump to take out Sanders.
They're not "allowing" anything. They're still doing everything they can to block progressive candidates. It's just stopped working.
We had a choice between Sherrill and Ciattarelli. I think even in spite of how useless she's been and how she's been handling Delaney Hall, we made the better choice.
Like giving a free pass to those who through corruption and distance from the people enabled republicans to put a monster at the head of the white house?
Changing the majority party means even if there are shit heads, we won't be having votes to make everything worse. The reason Trump gets away with all his shit is because Johnson is there to cover for him in the house and Thune in the Senate. Even Schumer would do a better job than Thune, with a few assholes in the party.
Even if you don't like the shit heads like Fetterman, Manchin or Lieberman, they give the party a majority to put a stop to the rightward ratcheting of our politics. The time to get rid of them is during primaries, that's how you turn the ratchet back.
But they don’t. They don’t give the democrats a majority if they keep voting with republicans.
And we saw how Obama sat on his hands for two years while Dems had a supermajority. Then when republicans had control of congress, gee golly gosh, the mean republicans won’t let us have single payer. Now take this health care plan written by The Heritage Institute and like it.
And NAFTA. And the Biden crime bill. And the Clinton welfare reform.
They’re just republicans with blue ties and pride flag pins.
It doesn't matter how they vote, being in the Dem Caucus gives Dems the majority. It may not allow the Dems to win new policy, but it stops the GoP from making things worse.
It may not allow the Dems to win new policy, but it stops the GoP from making things worse.
Unless you want Palestinians to continue living. Then democrats can get out of their own way to accomplish the only thing they're put on this planet to do.
The people mad at this post, unironically and without any self awareness, also get mad about "both sides ism" and complain that the left isn't a unified front.
Good idea, commenters. Lets keep fighting each other about the perfect candidate for an election that already happened. Surely this will change the situation were in
460 Comments
llamapocalypse@lemmy.world · 131 pts · 76d
Unless the candidate is a progressive, then the establishment Dems won't endorse them (unless the progressive wins, then suddenly they totally supported the progressive all along)
(no, I'm not saying don't vote, just frustrated by the fucking hypocrisy)
sik0fewl@piefed.ca · 125 pts · 76d
Don’t just vote Democrat, vote in the primaries.
tidderuuf@lemmy.world · 48 pts · 76d
Ya that's a problem I have in my neck of the words. Everyone complains about who is on the General Election ticket and they just shrug their shoulders about voting in the Primary.
Blibly@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 76d
"You mean I have to vote, and then vote again? Ugh, I wasnt even planning to show up to the actual vote. Meh...it'll all work out fine."
TachyonTele@piefed.social · 18 pts · 76d
If voting day was a holiday it would less of a problem
SpikesOtherDog@ani.social · 10 pts · 76d
I have worked for companies that would rather pay out unemployment due to wrongful termination than give time off for voting.
Serinus@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 76d
If they don't want you voting isn't that a clue?
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 76d
That's not going to un-fire them.
ChristerMLB@piefed.social · 3 pts · 74d
or just have longer and more convenient early voting? In Norway you can vote for at least a month at local public institutions
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 76d
If voting day was a holiday, only people who get federal holidays off would get the day off. But it would be a great excuse to get rid of early voting.
bufalo1973@piefed.social · 2 pts · 74d
Easy fix (that almost every other country uses): vote on Sunday.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 74d
Good thing no one has to work on Sundays. Easter Sunday is a federal holiday and there's plenty of people who still have to work.
If voting day becomes a federal holiday, states that don't like the idea of poor people voting will do away with early voting.
MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca · 0 pts · 76d
Or it won't and I'll complain online which is even better than voting, right?
edible_funk@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 76d
Yup, drag the fuckin party left.
MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca · 17 pts · 76d
Exactly. This times a million. We don't vote in primaries and then get all surprised that the Democratic candidates resemble the folks who voted in the primaries.
DokPsy@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 76d
Imo if you don't vote in the primaries, you've forfeited your right to bitch about the candidates on the general ticket
msage@programming.dev · 13 pts · 76d
Are we acting again like the DNC cares about people voting in primaries?
Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org · 8 pts · 76d
That would be a nice idea, but what do you do when incumbents run unopposed in the primary
logi@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 75d
Run against them.
(In theory. I wouldn't do that either.)
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 76d
When the party runs primaries at all, they interfere with them every chance they get. Saying "jUsT vOtE iN tHe PrImArIeS" without acknowledging this paints the results of the party's corruption as the will of the people.
llamapocalypse@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 76d
I figured that bit was obvious, I was speaking more towards the Dem leadership's hypocrisy. Again, absolutely not saying "don't vote both sides reeeeee"
sik0fewl@piefed.ca · 2 pts · 76d
I was complementing, not contradicting 🙂. I agree.
Ep1cFac3pa1m@lemmy.world · 23 pts · 76d
Yeah didn’t the Democratic Party take credit for some shit Mamdani got done? Seemed pretty shitty since they tried to stop him from getting elected.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 75d
They sure tried.
SailorFuzz@lemmy.world · 20 pts · 76d
*cough*
Mamdani
*cough*
Platner
*coughcough*
llamapocalypse@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 76d
those were two of the big ones I had in mind, yeah
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 75d
BurgerBaron@quokk.au · 1 pts · 74d
sunrisepirate@piefed.social · 4 pts · 76d
Make sure you're pressuring the establishment Democrats in your jurisdiction and the people making campaign contributions.
Folstar@lemmus.org · 76 pts · 76d
Gang, this isn't complicated. You fight the Democratic establishment 364 days a year. On election day you pick the lesser evil, which hopefully all that fighting you did made much less evil. We have an archaic election system, and until that changes (work to change it), that's the best path forward.
thisisbutaname@discuss.tchncs.de · 46 pts · 76d
In other words, voting isn't enough: it's merely the first step. After "your guys" are in power, you should bully them into keeping their promises and doing more
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 12 pts · 75d
Remember when the vote blue no matter who people told us they were gonna move Biden left after he was elected?
Good times.
architect@thelemmy.club · 7 pts · 75d
Now they say he’s the most progressive President we ever had. So progressive he lost us abortion.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 74d
So progressive he broke a strike. So progressive he bragged about record oil production. So progressive he supported a genocide.
darthelmet@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 75d
How do you bully people by guaranteeing your support for them unconditionally?
thisisbutaname@discuss.tchncs.de · -3 pts · 75d
You only do that at the booth, and then you are vocal about the issues that matter to you. From social media to marching in the streets and everything in between
darthelmet@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 75d
Ok then what? You yell from the rooftops “I strongly disapprove of what you are doing! I will still vote for you, but I’m not happy about it!”
Politician: “Ok good, you’re still voting for me. Well, back to the fundraising event.”
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 74d
yeah, I do that and I see the results. Constant abuse and accusations of being a trumper from the genocide wing. No change. Like you want.
asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 74d
How?
LostCarcosan@lemmy.today · 4 pts · 74d
silver13@lemmy.world · 22 pts · 76d
As an non-american, how this is not crystal clear even for the most hardcore communists is an absolute mystery to me.
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 6 pts · 75d
Because the US first past the post system ensures there's only two parties. So unless you can threaten one, you don't have input.
PhoenixDog@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 75d
They don't even have FPTP. They have an electoral college. Basically more states have a larger voting power than others.
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 3 pts · 74d
The US has both. FPTP elections, and the presidency controlled by unequal votes depending on state.
Folstar@lemmus.org · 6 pts · 75d
Civics education is bad to nonexistent so they do not learn about the spoiler effect, let alone the inevitable math behind first past the post elections. People vote based on how they think the system ought to function instead of how it actually functions.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 74d
"If you don't accept genocide like I want, you don't understand how anything works!"
You like the system how it is because you get the results you want.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 75d
As a non-american, you aren't close enough to notice that the people who say this are taking advantage of the situation and have been for decades.
architect@thelemmy.club · 5 pts · 75d
Because it’s logically stupid and ushered in fascism.
plutopos@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 75d
As a non-american, here in my country leftists vote for many different parties, each too small to actually pass the threshold
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 12 pts · 75d
Gang, this isn't complicated. You make demands, but declare ahead of time you will not take any action to harm the Dems by not voting for them, and this give up all leverage. Then they continue to lock in GOP policies, that's tye best path forward.
Folstar@lemmus.org · -1 pts · 74d
So many sick burns from people who do not read well.
mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de · 2 pts · 74d
He explicitly said that by declaring ahead of time that you will vote for whatever candidate they have no reason to change their establishment or respond to your "fighting" it. The only point of leverage that you have over them is not voting for them, which deprives them of the power and wealth that they're trying to seek by being elected. So, if you surrender that single point of leverage, then what does your fighting consist of?
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 74d
Buddy, I read your dumb argument. You're surrendering on the only day that matters and wonder why you never win.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 74d
Centrists love to pretend that people who don't buy their shitty arguments are just too stupid to understand them.
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 3 pts · 74d
Oh yeah, cause the main point of politics to American liberals isn't to weild power or alter policy. It's to demonstrate that they, personally, are better people. And leftists not accepting their VBNMW failed nonsense is an unacceptable contradiction to that self image.
It really is just secular Calvinism.
LostCarcosan@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 74d
I'd expect more than Reddit level comprehension from people on Lemmy
Folstar@lemmus.org · -1 pts · 73d
Yeah, but here we are with you replying to a snippet of my original point for some reason. That and othering instead of articulating a clear point. It's rough all over.
wpb@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 76d
Fellas please, an election is not the time and place to make your voice heard.
Folstar@lemmus.org · -2 pts · 75d
You must have missed this part where you are making your voice heard by picking the least bad option, so here it is again:
Or maybe you're confused about how things ought to be versus how they actually are, that too was covered:
wpb@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 75d
I cannot stomach voting for someone who sent billions to commit genocide with. That is my voice, and my opinion. What should I do with that on election day, you think?
LostCarcosan@lemmy.today · -1 pts · 74d
Good job, the alternative that you and people like you chose by sitting around and doing nothing to prove your superiority is much better! Schoolgirls got bombed! The global markets were disrupted! Elon is a trillionaire! Environmental protections were removed and human lives were valued at 0 by the EPA! Trans people are openly punished and laws are being written to prevent them using public restrooms! Screwworms and measels are returning to the US! The entire planet hates the US (rightfully so and even more than they did before) and historic allies are turning against us! The US openly aligned with Israel and started a war for no reason!
I'm sure glad you couldn't bear the weight of voting, you're an inspirational beacon and the world thanks you for what you didn't do
wpb@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 74d
You misunderstand. Our current situation is exactly what your proposed strategy got us. You are proposing business as usual politics, and that's exactly what we've been doing for decades. And for decades, things have gotten worse. This is not working. You'd have to be pretty fucking naive to stick to the same strategy that got us to where we are today (full blown fascism).
LostCarcosan@lemmy.today · -1 pts · 74d
Wow, it's almost impressive how you are so insanely dedicated to missing the entire point. You obviously are not capable of understanding a damn thing
wpb@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 74d
My guy, your point is not a subtle or nuanced as you think. It's literally the default opinion in a liberal democracy. That's not an indictment of the point, but it does mean I've heard it a thousand times before, and it's not hard to understand. Independently of that it is empirically wrong though.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 74d
What are you whining about? You got the genocide you wanted.
Folstar@lemmus.org · -4 pts · 75d
Worry less about election day and more about those 364 days.
wpb@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 75d
No, I think I will worry about election day, thank you very much. Voting is one of the most important ways to steer politicians toward working for your benefit. So please tell me, in your world view, what should I do with my voice and opinion on election day?
Bonus question: if you guarantee your vote to a party, regardless of what they do (such as commit a genocide, such as expand ICE, such as building the border wall, such as keeping Guantanamo bay open, such as never taxing the rich more, and so on), what incentive do they have to listen to you? And follow up, if your answer is that democrats do still work for the electorate, why are they moving further and further right, away from the interests and opinions of most Americans? (This is measurable, see for examples the 2014 paper Testing theories of American politics which found that policy positions of politicians align perfectly with those of economic elites, and with those of average voters really only ever by accident)
Folstar@lemmus.org · 0 pts · 74d
Start with learning the difference between the way things ought to be (they really should- it would be so easy) and the way things actually are. Knowing is half the battle!
wpb@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 74d
Oh great thanks for the advice! Any chance you have an answer to literally any of the questions I asked?
logi@lemmy.world · -6 pts · 75d
Grow up and do the best thing that the situation allows. To see what the alternative is... [gestures vaguely at the world]
wpb@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 75d
So, this is not the alternative though, right? Our current situation and political landscape is exactly where decades of blue no matter who got us. It's time to change strategies, because this isn't working.
logi@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 74d
Or is it where decades of mostly ignoring anything but presidential elections has gotten us? Where mot participating in most of the process has gotten us and then we want there to be just the choice we want, waiting for us at the end?
LostCarcosan@lemmy.today · -1 pts · 74d
Again, you seem to be willingly missing the point. Up until the election, you had an entire year to fight tooth and nail for better. At the election, you only have two choices and no amount of "they both suck I refuse to do anything but sit here and tell everyone else they fucked up by letting it get to this point" will change that. You had two choices only and refused to make a single one, letting the worst happen.
Are you aware of the world around you enough to know how it got here? They voted red every single time and pulled things slightly more to the right every time they could. They didn't like their candidates, but they understood they won't get where they want to immediately. You have to incrementally get there because people are awful and scared of change so they kept working at it election by election. Meanwhile, people like you said "well this is not the perfect choice so I'm going to sit around and pout about it" and do nothing to even slow their progress.
wpb@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 74d
No I understand your point. I just strongly disagree with it, mainly because reality just doesn't line up with what you're saying. What signs do you have that your current strategy is working? Like, actually. What signs are you getting from reality make you think "well geeze, we've got this down pat."
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 74d
You won the instant we were cheated out of a primary and both candidates were pro-genocide like you.
architect@thelemmy.club · 2 pts · 75d
“Grow up” fuck off with that. Telling other adults they aren’t adult because they don’t agree with your opinion? Fuck right the fuck off.
LostCarcosan@lemmy.today · -1 pts · 74d
Get the fuck over yourself. It's not "because they disagreed with your opinion" it's because there was a choice to make between openly bombing children and giving ICE more funding than the military or keeping the status quo, which is an embarassing choice for sure and it's goddamn disgusting those were the only options, but keeping the status quo would have been easier to come back from than coming back from whatever the fuck is happening now. Grow the fuck up and learn to make adult decisions
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 74d
We tried to tell you that you would lose if you didn't change. You screamed abuse.
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 75d
"Grow up and use your vote to do what's best for me"
Fixed it for you, clown
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 75d
You like the part where the margin between "least bad" and "most bad" keeps narrowing.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 10 pts · 75d
just to be accused of supporting teh republicans? i mean i'll do it, but lets be honest: the democrat supporters aren't trying to have a good faith discussion about the shortcomings of the party.
Folstar@lemmus.org · -3 pts · 75d
You gotta fight from within. "I've voted Democrat and will continue to support the party, but [insert list of grievances]" plays a lot better than "I do not understand how US election work so I helped get Trump elected, now give me what I want".
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 6 pts · 75d
I voted Democrat but they don't get a blank check from me. I'll support them when they are worth it.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 75d
Centrists interpret all criticism as “I do not understand how US election work so I helped get Trump elected, now give me what I want” and have never given a shit about how anyone actually voted.
Condescension will never be a substitute for policies people want, charismatic candidates, and a willingness to keep campaign promises. But since centrists don't have any of those, they go with what they have.
Folstar@lemmus.org · 1 pts · 74d
I hate to break it to you, but I'm left of Sanders. Understanding how our election system (poorly) functions is essential if we are ever going to fix it. Knowing is half the battle!
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 74d
I don't buy it. You will interpret my lack of trust as a lack of understanding.
Folstar@lemmus.org · 0 pts · 73d
Classic thread. People have jumped from putting words in my mouth to tell me those words are wrong to pre-emptively doing it. I guess Lemmy suffers from the same weekend awfulness of other sites.
What would appease you? You can view my comment history and scroll past many left posts. Maybe you'll find something in there that fits your narrative? Would you like me to post a Political Compass, PEW Political Topology, or some other test? A note from my doctor?
Or is it simply, "hey, this guy who openly acknowledged our system is outdated and bad is trying to explain how coalitions work within it- what a [insert othering words of choice]" and that's where we live now?
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 73d
Stop demanding what amounts to unquestioning fealty to the genocide wing of the party. That's what you can do.
Funny how the coalition you tout only moves right.
architect@thelemmy.club · 3 pts · 75d
Have you actually tried to do that? Like seriously tried? It was nepo babies all the way down when I attempted to “fight from within”.
Folstar@lemmus.org · 1 pts · 74d
It seems like the idea is gaining traction. Mamdani's election is a watershed moment.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 73d
Mamdani was elected with the "vote blue as long as they support genocide" wing opposing him after the primaries.
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 75d
Hey, I really don't like how you're murdering people, but I won't stop shopping at your store. I'm going to change it from the inside
Folstar@lemmus.org · 0 pts · 74d
When has the USA ever not been murdering people? You think not voting against the guy who murders more people is sending a message? Now we're into full on magic-based thinking.
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 74d
You ever think that deciding you can't not murder people is part of the problem?
Serious Good German energy here.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 74d
Not once. Centrists consider dead Palestinians to be a solution, not a problem.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 74d
When does it become wrong? Doing the only thing you like is no longer a winning position. Your electorate are better people than you're trying to force them to be.
LostCarcosan@lemmy.today · 0 pts · 74d
"Hey I don't like that guy raping babies and blowing up school girls, but I'll just stand here and do nothing that could have stopped him, either"
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 74d
What exactly did you do that could have stopped him?
You realize Kamala said Iran was the biggest threat to America, supported the Israeli genocide of Gaza, and wanted a more lethal military?
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 74d
Progressives told you that genocide support was a losing issue. You preferred losing to trump over telling netanyahu no.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 76d
Get called a trumper 364 days a year by people who love how much like trump the democratic establishment is constantly trying to become.
Folstar@lemmus.org · 5 pts · 75d
Fun story, my second-to-last straw with Reddit was being banned from r/democrats for saying Biden should not seek a second term (too old) and they need to hold a primary. I said this repeatedly starting about a year before the election and was called all manner of terrible things while accumulating loads of up and downvotes. When the time for a primary passed I pivoted my message to: Biden should retire (play up a medical issue) so we have the first female president and she has the incumbent bump for the election. I was banned with the message "Shut up, Biden is going to get a second term. Deal with it [inappropriate language]." twelve days before Biden dropped out.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 75d
Are they still refusing to admit Mamdani exists?
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 6 pts · 75d
No, now they claim somehow that's proof their VBNMW nonsense works.
Despite Mandami showing it only goes one way
architect@thelemmy.club · 3 pts · 75d
The Dems get worse every cycle.
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · -3 pts · 75d
The best path forward is labor organization leading to a general strike, your vote is as worthless as your opinion
PhoenixDog@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 75d
I love your idea of a labour union while openly telling someone's voice is useless.
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 74d
My idea of a labor union doesn't involve a rigged voting system, fucking duh
PotatoPie@lemmy.zip · -4 pts · 76d
Work to change it, how?
By illegally taking away capital from the people illegally fighting back against that change?
You're not in a democracy, stop solving your problems democratically
Pollo_Jack@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 76d
By backing AOC and other progressives.
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · -2 pts · 75d
Lol fuck off
MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world · -13 pts · 76d
How is the United States not a democracy?
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · 11 pts · 76d
Your vote doesn't fucking matter, that's how
MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world · -5 pts · 76d
Is that why Trump won?
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 8 pts · 75d
Trump actually won a primary, unlike Kamala.
MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 75d
Which goes on to show that votes actually matter. If it didn't, we might have Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley or Vivek Ramaswamy as president.
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 75d
Lol cope
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 75d
Trump won because the billionaires who own this country saw an unprecedented opportunity, and in no small part because of the "pied piper" strategy that Hillary and the corporate dems thought would ensure an easy win
MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world · -5 pts · 75d
Trump won in 2024 because he was the candidate who got the highest number of votes. Votes that mattered btw.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 75d
Harris won the primaries because votes don't matter.
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 75d
Lol electoral votes maybe, unless you're a member of the electoral college your vote did fuck all
PotatoPie@lemmy.zip · 10 pts · 76d
(1)In a democracy the people elect a representative of their ideology to govern them in fair elections
(2)Both parties in the US in the 21st century start wars on foreign countries, lie about policies, submit to corrupt lobbying
(3)Both parties in the US are not representative of the people of the US
(4)The US is not a democracy
Which of these is wrong?
MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world · -7 pts · 76d
(4) because both parties are elected to power by voters
PotatoPie@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 75d
4 is deduced from 1,2,3 the deduction is just using definition and the fact both parties lead to the same outcome to come to a contradiction
Both parties have been elected (1), both led to (2), both aren't representative (3), You can't blame voters if they have no power over the outcome, there's no democracy in US
If the point you're trying to make is that outcome is irrelevant and only voting itself is what constitutes a democracy then this needs to be applied to other countries as well, North Korea is a democracy
MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 75d
Both parties definitely don't lead to the same outcome. One party supports cutting welfare for the poor and the other party doesn't.
The voters absolutely have power over the outcome. They voluntarily chose Trump over Harris in 2024.
North Korea is a one party "democracy". In the United States, you have multiple parties, more than the two that most people voluntarily vote for.
wpb@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 75d
This statement is inherently contradictory. So one party is for cutting welfare. If they win, welfare gets cut. If the other pary wins, welfare stays the same, or gets cut only a little (good ol across the aisle compromise). Next cycle the other party wins, welfare gets cut. Same outcome.
Now, if the other party was for increased welfare, or for stopping fracking, or for naturalizing more undocumented immigrants, or for reducing military spending, then you'd have a point. But in selling the democratic party as the alternative to vote for, you can't even bring yourself to say they stand for something positive. Best we get is that they're not actively harmful on purpose.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 75d
When the "good" party eschews primaries because they cannot abide giving the people an opportunity to vote against genocide, that's only democracy to people who like genocide.
MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 75d
You do realise that there are more than two parties right?
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 74d
Suggest voting for a third and watch what happens.
grrgyle@slrpnk.net · 8 pts · 76d
It's a gradient. Did you get to decide who you're allowed to vote for? Do they represent your actual interests? Do you have a say over what happens in your city or your workplace?
Stuff like that
MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 76d
Congress very much decides what happens in cities and workplaces afaik
InputZero@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 76d
The electoral college.
MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 76d
Well, most electors are honest about which President they vote for
TimeNaan@lemmy.world · 65 pts · 76d
It's so obvious the person who made this is on the left side of this picture.
Only a lib could give the girl on the right both an anarchy patch and a bernie 2020 hat.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 29 pts · 76d
Anyone who says "blue no matter who" is on the left side of this picture. And on the right politically.
Pollo_Jack@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 76d
I've started saying "Vote blue no matter who" to dems that think progressives can't win.
mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de · 2 pts · 74d
Yes, I can't believe this idea has never hit me before. It's fucking beautiful. AOC for the win, vote blue no matter who, right?
MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world · -9 pts · 76d
I'm a socialist and I support the Democratic party
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 76d
Why? They hate you.
MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 76d
Not as much as Republicans would hate me
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 76d
They certainly hide it better.
MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 75d
I don't think Democrats support cuts to welfare spending.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 75d
The centrist wing's current hegemony over the party was built on the legacy of Bill Clinton, who cut welfare spending.
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 4 pts · 75d
Which President "ended welfare as we know it"?
DupaCycki@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 76d
I'm a starving, homeless, gay, trans woman, and I support the republican party.
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 76d
No you're not
MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 76d
You would know
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 75d
I do know
MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 75d
Sure you do
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 75d
Yeah I'm sure
terranoid@lemmy.cafe · 16 pts · 76d
I care about my constituents, even though they're filthy unhoused vape addicted lazy Bernie bros. Fist bump!
Jtotheb@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 76d
I believe in the liberatory power of what would probably be termed anarcho-syndicalism and I would have voted for Bernie. I own a sweater with his name on it.
architect@thelemmy.club · 3 pts · 75d
Meh I loved Bernie.
RumorsOfLove@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 50 pts · 76d
Watch out guy,s, new wave of astroturfing incoming!!!
Zephorah@discuss.online · 22 pts · 76d
Yep. Powered by AI.
Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 76d
Ugh
tidderuuf@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 76d
The establishment does not like your comment.
Ellvix@lemmy.world · 41 pts · 76d
"Would you like to be stabbed or punched in the face? If you don't pick one we'll go for the stabbing."
I hate it, but please vote.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 73d
"Don't punch us in the face"
"YOU WANT STABBING! I totally hate this or whatever by the way, vote facepunch no matter who."
knife@lemmy.world · 40 pts · 76d
I hate this so much
Fedegenerate@fedinsfw.app · 39 pts · 76d
Or, now here me out, Dems could run a platform people want to vote for?
irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 38 pts · 76d
Please tell me this is ironic
ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 75d
It is a bona fide depiction of what right wingers think their opposition is.
krisevol@lemmus.org · 5 pts · 76d
It's not
yakko@feddit.uk · 4 pts · 75d
It would be if I reposted it
binux@sh.itjust.works · 37 pts · 76d
_lilith@lemmy.world · 35 pts · 76d
I'mma vote for the lesser of two evils. What I won't do is fist bump a republican liteᵗᵐ like they didn't torpedo every fucking progressive they could. I remember south carolina, biden was dead in the water and suddenly "centrists consolidated" and he was a fucking front runner.
Uebercomplicated@lemmy.ml · 35 pts · 75d
The thing about this that really makes me ashamed of the democratic establishment is the depiction of the girl on the right vs on the left. This post is literally trying to marginalize progressives. Just look at lemmy, half the progressives here are cishet conputer programmers and Linux nerds in their 40s. This post is trying to enforce a harmful stereotype to make progressives seem like a smaller, less influencial, more radicalized group. It's already playing into bigotry: the progressive is shown as younger (ageism), with darker skin (racism), more "radical" views, as a drug addict., etc; enforcing the bias that progressives are somehow irresponsible young'uns with unrealistic world-views. Fuck this shit. Never thought I'd see something so obviously bigoted on Lemmy.
Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world · 32 pts · 76d
Yay.
Election season.
People telling me to vote blue no matter who like I haven’t been doing that since I was 18.
And I’m fucking old.
Not to mention the arguments. People just mad everywhere.
I love politics and don’t hate this stupid game I’m forced to play and always lose.
What a stupid world.
plutopos@lemmy.zip · 28 pts · 75d
Fascists don't fear blue voters. You know what they fear? Shattered teeth
WraithGear@lemmy.world · 22 pts · 76d
No its, vote blue no matter who* only applicable if the said blue candidate is not progressive
and the whole fucking time we are voting in primaries, it’s all “progressive candidates can’t win the election” and astroturfed lies and slander using democratic funds to hurt itself in its own confusion. want my vote? field candidates that i would vote for.
and no kings is performative at best
forkDestroyer@infosec.pub · 2 pts · 76d
I hope you still go to the polls and write-in if you don't like either candidate.
WraithGear@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 76d
i voted harris for president, but at this point i am so disgusted with how the democrats are acting that i will vote third party if needed.
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 6 pts · 75d
I do. I want it on record that I won't vote for right wing Democrats.
Funniest part is when Del libs tell me that the left won't vote for a woman - because I voted for De La Cruz.
mlg@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 75d
Eww reddit content in my lemmy feed
TheStrongestBoy@sh.itjust.works · 18 pts · 76d
Get infinite Fetterman’s with this one weird trick.
Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 76d
Believing in politicians is a fool’s errand.
Elect people who are scared of you.
king_comrade@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 76d
More dem slop, they still don't understand why they can't win elections. I'd point it out for them, but they'd just scream 'blue no matter who' instead of listening.
wpb@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 76d
Aha! You clearly love Trump!
foxwolf@pawb.social · 16 pts · 76d
This makes me want to throw up
Transform2942@lemmy.ml · 15 pts · 76d
It benefits the security state for a Dem to take the helm and lull the masses back to sleep with sweet words while continuing 99% of Trump's policies
Ryanmiller70@lemmy.zip · 14 pts · 76d
Nah I'm sticking third party. Not like the Dems care about my state anyway or that anyone worth a damn would run in the primaries here.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 76d
"ANY BLUE WILL DO™"^*^
*Terms an conditions apply.
ANY BLUE WILL DO™ — TERMS AND CONDITIONS
By repeating, accepting, endorsing, or being shamed into the phrase “Any Blue Will Do,” you agree to the following Terms and Conditions.
1. Binding Obligation of the Voter
You agree that “Any Blue Will Do” creates a total, unconditional, irrevocable, morally compulsory obligation to support any candidate designated by the Democratic Party, its consultants, donors, cable news surrogates, or random accounts with flag emojis.
Support may include voting, donating, volunteering, defending the candidate online, pretending the platform is “actually pretty progressive,” and explaining to younger voters why asking for healthcare is helping fascism.
2. Definition of “Blue”
For purposes of this Agreement, “Blue” means any candidate, officeholder, nominee, former Republican, ex-CIA analyst, prosecutor, donor-friendly mayor, or person who has appeared on a Democratic ballot line.
Notwithstanding the above, “Blue” shall not include leftists, socialists, labor candidates, anti-war candidates, or anyone who causes donors to say “deeply concerning.”
3. Institutional Discretion
The Democratic Party reserves the sole, exclusive, perpetual, and non-reviewable right to decide when “Any Blue Will Do” applies.
This determination may be made before, during, or after the election; in a closed-door meeting; through a leaked memo; or retroactively after the wrong kind of Democrat wins.
4. Primary Election Exceptions
Although “Any Blue Will Do” may appear to imply neutrality among Democrats, nothing shall prevent the Party from promoting, funding, endorsing, defending, or quietly coordinating for any candidate deemed sufficiently Normal.
The Party may intervene against left-wing candidates through endorsements, donor pressure, debate exclusion, ballot challenges, super PACs, whisper campaigns, consultant networks, or sudden concerns about electability.
Such actions shall not violate “Any Blue Will Do,” because leftists should have known what the phrase meant.
5. Electability Clause
You agree that “electability” means whatever the Party needs it to mean at the time.
A moderate losing by six points proves the country is center-right.
A leftist losing by six points proves progressive politics are permanently toxic.
A moderate winning narrowly is a mandate for bipartisan austerity.
A leftist winning decisively is a local anomaly.
6. Vote-Shaming Rights Reserved
The Party, its affiliates, surrogates, influencers, and emotionally exhausted liberals reserve the right to shame, scold, guilt, condescend to, or morally indict you for any failure to provide enthusiastic support.
This right survives all prior mistreatment, broken promises, ignored policy demands, abandoned constituencies, donor triangulation, union-busting, war funding, anti-immigrant pivoting, or sabotage of your preferred candidate.
Your obligation to vote blue remains in full force regardless of whether the Party has made any effort to earn your vote.
7. No Reciprocal Duty
Nothing in this Agreement creates any reciprocal obligation on the part of the Democratic Party to support candidates, policies, platforms, movements, voters, unions, tenants, students, debtors, the uninsured, the unhoused, the anti-war left, or anyone who has ever said the word “material.”
The voter’s duty is mandatory.
The Party’s duty is aspirational, symbolic, non-binding, means-tested, subject to committee review, and likely dead on arrival in the Senate.
8. Platform Disclaimer
Any platform, promise, slogan, campaign speech, town hall answer, website bullet point, or “we hear you” statement is non-binding promotional material.
The Party may abandon, dilute, reframe, study, means-test, postpone, sunset, privatize, or blame the parliamentarian for any stated policy objective.
No voter shall infer from campaign rhetoric the existence of an actual commitment.
9. Leftist Candidate Contingency
In the event that a leftist wins a Democratic primary, “Any Blue Will Do” may be suspended, modified, inverted, or replaced with:
“We need a serious candidate.”
“This district is more moderate than people think.”
“We have concerns about temperament.”
“They haven’t built relationships.”
“The tweets are problematic.”
“This is not the right time.”
“We need someone who can win.”
The Party may further reserve the right to remain neutral, quietly assist the opponent, withhold funding, or discover a sudden principled objection to party loyalty.
10. Consultant Protection Clause
No provision of this Agreement shall endanger the sacred right of consultants to be paid millions of dollars to lose winnable races while advising candidates to say nothing, offend no donors, avoid popular economic policies, and appear in diners wearing rolled-up sleeves.
Consultant compensation shall not be contingent on winning elections.
11. Donor Supremacy Clause
In the event of a conflict between voters and donors, donors shall prevail.
In the event of a conflict between the platform and donors, donors shall prevail.
In the event of a conflict between democracy and donors, a task force shall be convened after the election.
12. Unity
You agree that “unity” means left-wing voters supporting the nominee chosen by the Party.
You further agree that “division” means left-wing voters asking for anything in return.
Calls for unity may be issued immediately after the Party has spent months calling your candidate unelectable, dangerous, unserious, divisive, unrealistic, toxic, radical, online, or insufficiently grateful.
13. Harm Reduction
You acknowledge that harm reduction is extremely important and shall be invoked whenever the Party requires your vote.
You further acknowledge that harm reduction shall not require the Party to reduce harm when doing so would inconvenience donors, police unions, defense contractors, pharmaceutical companies, fossil fuel interests, private insurers, landlords, or anyone described as a “stakeholder.”
14. Democracy Preservation Clause
You agree that democracy is on the ballot in every election.
You further agree that democracy may be preserved through ballot access litigation, superdelegate influence, donor consolidation, debate manipulation, primary interference, and stern editorials about the dangers of populism.
Any contradiction shall be resolved in favor of the Party.
15. Waiver of Expectations
By accepting these Terms, you waive any expectation that your vote, organizing, small-dollar donations, canvassing, or repeated emergency mobilization shall entitle you to policy concessions, appointments, accountability, respect, or basic recognition as part of the coalition.
You may be thanked in fundraising emails.
16. Amendment Rights
The Democratic Party reserves the right to amend these Terms at any time without notice.
Amendments may be announced by think tank memo, anonymous senior aide quote, cable news panel consensus, donor retreat, consultant Substack, or sudden redefinition of what “realistic” means.
Continued existence under Republican threat shall constitute acceptance of all amended Terms.
17. Enforcement
This Agreement shall be enforced exclusively against voters to the left of the nominee.
No enforcement mechanism shall apply to conservative Democrats, corporate Democrats, swing-district moderates, billionaire donors, retired generals, anti-choice incumbents, oil-state senators, police-union candidates, or anyone who says “kitchen table issues” while opposing the policies that would help people afford kitchens or tables.
18. Remedies
If you violate this Agreement by withholding support, criticizing the nominee, supporting a primary challenger, asking for concessions, mentioning Gaza, saying “universal healthcare,” objecting to means-testing, or pointing out that the Party did the opposite of what it demanded from you, remedies may include:
vote-shaming, accusations of privilege, accusations of Russian influence, lectures about 2016, screenshots of Supreme Court decisions, demands that you “grow up,” comparisons to Republicans, and fundraising emails addressed to “Friend.”
These remedies apply regardless of whether your criticism is accurate.
19. Entire Agreement
These Terms constitute the entire agreement between the Democratic Party and the voter, superseding all prior hopes, movements, promises, platforms, speeches, donations, canvassing shifts, and moments when you briefly believed this relationship might become less abusive.
By proceeding, you acknowledge that “Any Blue Will Do” means any blue will do for you, not for them.
20. Acceptance
By voting, not voting, considering voting, discussing voting, posting, lurking, donating, organizing, complaining, or failing to clap loudly enough, you agree to be bound by these Terms and Conditions.
No purchase necessary.
No refunds.
Void where democracy is practiced.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world · 7 pts · 76d
I’ve seen less verbose comments from cowbee.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 76d
Yeah I probably need a better presentation, but as stock its got legs I think.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world · 1 pts · 76d
I know you wrote this whole thing yourself because that’s just who you are but it gives off massive ai vibes.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 76d
Yeah I need to work shop it. Like the point was to be overly verbose, but I don't think the presentation works. I like the idea though even though maybe I didn't stick the landing. Anything in particular that gave off AI vibes? Most of this is just me regurgitating accusations I've made of you. Actually, now thinking about it, I should have slipped an easter egg in there for you to find later.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world · 1 pts · 76d
I bet if you asked ChatGPT to re-write the Apple ToS as a politically illiterate socialist critiquing liberals you’d end up with very similar text.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 76d
Yeah I think the format is wrong too though. Like, its just too much for a copy pasta. I think a gif would be better, they go to click the TOS and the text just starts scrolling past like movie credits.
Maybe with some version of this wojack towards the end reacting to Chuck Schumer chanting "We will win" as the liberals cuckold themselves to fascists.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world · 0 pts · 76d
Make sure to add a leftist standing around uselessly as the world descends into fascism.
Maybe they can say something about Bernie.
Transform2942@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 76d
This is a hilarious bit if you actually read contracts
0ndead@infosec.pub · 4 pts · 76d
Ain’t nobody got time for that
grimpy@lemmy.myserv.one · 4 pts · 76d
tl
Bohne93@feddit.org · 1 pts · 76d
Thats a lot of words. Too bad i'm not readin 'em.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 76d
Working up a gif version
TORFdot0@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 75d
Fascist fear millennial cringe?
Fascists fear class solidarity
scbasteve@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 76d
Fascists are not scared of being voted out lmao.
With patience, you when. If your stance is unchanging, and you just chip away, taking every little bit of power as you can, constantly angling for a best strategic position, you will win.
Fascist will always have a chance, they're not scared of being out voted. They're scared of the working class digging their asses out of their heads and realizing what's up.
That being said, absolutely still vote.
Hell_nah_brother@thelemmy.club · 13 pts · 76d
at GITMO they refuse to show this pic to inmates because it’s considered torture.
Good job OP, you earned your label.
flandish@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 76d
nope. when blue also supports genocide, blue is clearly part of the problem.
agent_nycto@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 76d
Ok who you gonna vote for?
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 3 pts · 75d
De La Cruz
LodeMike@lemmy.today · -3 pts · 76d
Will you still vote?
flandish@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 76d
yep. for the person who fits my goals. never red. blue when they don't support genocide.
LodeMike@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 76d
Good
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 76d
If the candidate is a progressive, will you?
LodeMike@lemmy.today · -2 pts · 76d
I will vote no matter what. Not necessarily for people listed on the ballot.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 76d
Thank you for admitting that "vote blue no matter who" means "vote only for centrists."
LodeMike@lemmy.today · -2 pts · 76d
No? A lot of Democrats are left leaning. It also means voting for centrists sometimes.
Please read this thread: https://lemmy.today/comment/24627049
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 76d
It only ever means "vote for the genocidal centrist." It becomes "party unity my ass" again when centrists don't get their very first choice.
terranoid@lemmy.cafe · 12 pts · 76d
The virgin Hillary establishment democrat neolib atheist cishet ally versus the chad vape and xanax addicted poly amorous anarcho-socialist non binary zoomer
rumschlumpel@feddit.org · 2 pts · 76d
Implying the zoomer isn't also atheist?
terranoid@lemmy.cafe · 4 pts · 76d
Probably, but maybe not as vocally as the cishet ally with a "SCIENCE IS REAL" bumper sticker on her ass.
The chad nonbinary anarcho-socialist knows that science is a real methodology and not a belief system to stand behind, and doesn't need to broadcast it.
TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 76d
I'm pretty jaded and cynical about the whole thing at this point, but I also don't have a better idea. Idk, just do whatever you think is right.
SailorFuzz@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 76d
Vote "Someone turns off the simulation" 2028
canniest_tod@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 76d
Fascists are scared of a lot of things, but this isn't one of them. One camp uses a degree of class analysis, while the other is aggressively identitarian and thinks class politics are the hallmark of a bad person who'll abandon marginalized groups.
Both rely chiefly on electoral wins to get the outcome they want. This alliance is a paper tiger.
crapwittyname@feddit.uk · 6 pts · 76d
Yeah, one of the few things fascists don't fear is voting blocs, because they're just interested in seizing power by any means necessary.
nullspace@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 75d
If you want to know why lefties lose you need only look at the comments critical of this post.
It's absolutely valid to be displeased by how center or right-leaning the "left-wing" candidates are. But you have to accept that only supporting your perfect candidate is just going to keep pushing all candidates to the right as they lose.
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · 9 pts · 76d
Lol good luck with that
wpb@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 76d
If you keep doing something over and over, for decades, and still everything gets worse, then that something isn't working. Feels like something that doesn't need saying, but apparently it does.
LemmyBruceLeeMarvin@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 76d
Siri define 'the ratchet effect'
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 76d
Downvoted for being right
LemmyBruceLeeMarvin@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 76d
See, Kamala is the 'least harm' candidate because she [checks notes] will literally continue Bidens genocide while pivoting to the right to bring in those mythical undecideds. Slay kween.
plutopos@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 75d
I prefer if the wheel is locked in place than if it goes further (if i understood the reference correctly)
LemmyBruceLeeMarvin@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 75d
plutopos@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 75d
Yeah this. I wish the wheel could be turned to the left, but if it won't, I prefer that it stays still than it moves further to the right
LemmyBruceLeeMarvin@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 75d
So step back and look back 't the last 50 years of American politics and ask yourself: when has it stopped moving to the right
plutopos@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 75d
So it's more like: both republicans and democrats move everything to the right, while both blocking movement to the left?
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 75d
The two parts of the mechanism work together, even though the wheel and the spring+lever are not identical they are still cooperating towards a single outcome.
plutopos@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 75d
Yeah but I assumed that, in the context of this metaphor, voting for the lever would push the wheel less right than voting for the spring
Leviathan@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 76d
Does she?
Bloomcole@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 76d
This is a shit meme in many ways?
ICastFist@programming.dev · 8 pts · 75d
The funniest thing is how 'muricans look at this and say "yes, we're a free democracy"
Archer@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 76d
Oh boy, the Republican consultants here to depress Dem turnout with primary purity tests and doomscrolling have arrived in the comments
wpb@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 76d
Calling wanting a candidate not to enthusiastically support a genocide a purity test is completely disgusting.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 76d
Centrists will never understand that there are people who don't like genocide.
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml · 7 pts · 76d
Purity testing is a good thing, it keeps shit out of our milk and corrupt assholes out of our elected offices
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 76d
"Purity test" means "I have no standards and I demand you abandon yours."
parrhesia@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 76d
Its like clockwork
mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 74d
Oh boy, the Republican consultants are here to convince people to vote blue no matter who. That way, some milquetoast Dem candidate will get annihilated by the Republican candidate again.
See how stupid that makes me sound?
Can you people just once actually engage with counter-arguments rather than trying to sweep people's points under the rug by saying, oh you're a bot, oh you're a shill, oh you're Chinese or Russian or Republican or NSA or FBI or you're the deep state, holy fuck. You sound like someone from /pol/. Protip: refusing to address the argument and instead say that junk makes it look like you have no real argument. I'm starting to think you're the real bot here, bot! Haha see I called you a shill, that means your argument is invalid
skozzii@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 74d
But maybe , just maybe this time let's not force us to go with establishment democrats, let the people actually decide.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 76d
When we can rely on centrists to vote blue even when the primary winner is one of the progressives they hate almost as much as they hate the idea of a living Palestinian, then they can tell us to vote blue no matter who, and not one fucking second before.
We saw the disgusting racist attacks the centrist wing made against Mamdani. Centrists haven't changed one bit since they formed a PAC to get McCain elected because they didn't want a Black man to be their nominee. Centrists are "vote blue no matter who" only until they don't get 100% of everything they want, then they revert back to "party unity my ass" and campaign for shit like Cuomo.
The message here is the same as always from centrists: Shut up and fall in line because we hate you and always will.
BenchpressMuyDebil@szmer.info · 6 pts · 74d
daannii@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 76d
Yeah so a lot of Israel politicians and Republicans actually run as blue candidates.
That's lazy thinking.
cattywampus@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 76d
PP_BOY_@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 76d
Yeah no. You wanna know why so many progressives are getting nominations this cycle? It's because we didn't "vote blue no matter who" last year and the corpocrats are kind of realizing they're gonna have to budge to actually get people to the polls again. Vote for the person you... want to vote for.
fizzle@quokk.au · 4 pts · 76d
If you want to draw a line from not voting blue to more progressives getting nominations then you have to skip the inconvenient side effect of having a fascist child rapist felon as president who's not going to allow a free election.
Well done.
PP_BOY_@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 76d
Didn't say it was preferable or even good, but it is the reason the DNC is tepidly allowing outspoken socialists on their ticket when just ten years ago they were collaborating with Trump to take out Sanders. They can sense that corporate support is going away and that their voters wont bother to show up if the candidates are no different than the last guy
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 76d
They're not "allowing" anything. They're still doing everything they can to block progressive candidates. It's just stopped working.
fizzle@quokk.au · 1 pts · 76d
That's not my feeling.
If anything I feel like they don't really have any strategy other than being not-trump.
There's no cohesion or brand or message.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 76d
You 100% fucking did. That's why Mikie Sherrill and Abigail Spanberger are governors.
Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org · 4 pts · 76d
We had a choice between Sherrill and Ciattarelli. I think even in spite of how useless she's been and how she's been handling Delaney Hall, we made the better choice.
PP_BOY_@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 76d
Yeah, 2024, my bad. Spanberger is about as liberal as a Dem can be, she is not some ultraleft savior of the commonwealth btw.
T. Virginian
trainsrkool@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 76d
no thnx, thats how you end up with bluemaga and the uniparty
MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca · 6 pts · 76d
Why am I zero percent surprised that the account calling Ukrainians Nazis also wants to put the Republicans in charge?
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 76d
they never endorsed Republicans
liking625@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 74d
Like giving a free pass to those who through corruption and distance from the people enabled republicans to put a monster at the head of the white house?
texture@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 76d
im upset
mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de · 3 pts · 74d
What a dank meme my fellow left wing ally!!
StarvingMartist@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 76d
Get mean vote green
resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe · 2 pts · 76d
Yeah, they’re terrified of Fetterman, Manchin, Schumer, etc.
Skyrmir@lemmy.world · -5 pts · 76d
As opposed to another Cruz, Graham, or McConnell? Yeah Ill even put up with Fetterman.
resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe · 7 pts · 76d
What's the difference?
Skyrmir@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 75d
Changing the majority party means even if there are shit heads, we won't be having votes to make everything worse. The reason Trump gets away with all his shit is because Johnson is there to cover for him in the house and Thune in the Senate. Even Schumer would do a better job than Thune, with a few assholes in the party.
Even if you don't like the shit heads like Fetterman, Manchin or Lieberman, they give the party a majority to put a stop to the rightward ratcheting of our politics. The time to get rid of them is during primaries, that's how you turn the ratchet back.
resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe · 3 pts · 75d
But they don’t. They don’t give the democrats a majority if they keep voting with republicans.
And we saw how Obama sat on his hands for two years while Dems had a supermajority. Then when republicans had control of congress, gee golly gosh, the mean republicans won’t let us have single payer. Now take this health care plan written by The Heritage Institute and like it.
And NAFTA. And the Biden crime bill. And the Clinton welfare reform.
They’re just republicans with blue ties and pride flag pins.
Skyrmir@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 75d
It doesn't matter how they vote, being in the Dem Caucus gives Dems the majority. It may not allow the Dems to win new policy, but it stops the GoP from making things worse.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 73d
Unless you want Palestinians to continue living. Then democrats can get out of their own way to accomplish the only thing they're put on this planet to do.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 76d
As though any centrist wouldn't gleefully vote for any of those as long as they were running against someone who wanted to raise the minimum wage.
sleepycapibara@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 75d
Who's the artist? If anyone knows
BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 75d
Future dictator surely approves!
mech@feddit.org · 2 pts · 76d
Who's the Artist?
king_comrade@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 76d
A totally real human™
mech@feddit.org · 4 pts · 76d
Ah, Vincent Artistman, doing an art.
Bloomcole@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 76d
Some 12 YO
mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 74d
Ain't no way a 12-year-old this artistically gifted would already be drawing something this moronic.
whosepoopisonmybuttocks@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 76d
agent_nycto@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 76d
The people mad at this post, unironically and without any self awareness, also get mad about "both sides ism" and complain that the left isn't a unified front.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 76d
Well, it's slop. I can't blame people for feeling revulsion
mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 74d
You've posted so many comments on here that seem completely out of keeping with the post itself. Did you intend the post ironically?
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 74d
Definitely intended it to agitate.
Danarchy@lemmy.nz · 0 pts · 76d
Vote geeen for jelly beans (they taste the best)
AngryRobot@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 76d
You mean Jill Stein, the lich who shambles oit of her crypto every 4 years to spend Russian money and steal votes away from the Democratic candidate?
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 76d
misinformation: jill stein was investigated by the senate and no ties to russian money were found.
AngryRobot@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 76d
https://www.newsweek.com/jill-stein-ties-vladimir-putin-explained-1842620
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 6 pts · 76d
this doesn't show she's ever taken any money from russia.
AngryRobot@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 76d
It shows that she's aligned with them.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 76d
no, it is just a lot of innuendo and insinuation.
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 76d
You don't mind that half your party is openly aligned with netanyahu.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 76d
she doesn't steal votes, she earns them.
AngryRobot@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 76d
She's a ducking Russian troll, dude.russia pays her.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 76d
i've never been able to find any evidence for such a claim.
Danarchy@lemmy.nz · 1 pts · 73d
No I just like that flavor of jelly bean and skittle
solidheron@sh.itjust.works · -1 pts · 76d
Democrats are alright. Maybe not the national ones but the ones that help out locally
Bloomcole@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 76d
The updated "Hitler did some good things for Germany"
IPeaceInYourFace@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 75d
If voting worked, they wouldn't let you do it.
UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works · -4 pts · 76d
Good idea, commenters. Lets keep fighting each other about the perfect candidate for an election that already happened. Surely this will change the situation were in
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 76d
You got your perfect candidate as soon as no one who opposed genocide was running.
UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works · -2 pts · 76d
So someone who opposes genocide but agrees with racial segregation and removing homosexual rights is a perfect in your book?
You bigot
UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works · -2 pts · 76d
What about someone who opposes genocide but was on the Epstien list? Also perfect by your comment.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 76d
I genuinely wonder what you think a primary involves.
Like, do all the candidates just hug it out?
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 73d
It involves installing a pro-genocide candidate without asking anyone.
UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 76d
Good job just leaving half a sentence out to fit your narrative. Very cool