This is the way, at least until we get rid of First Past the Post and other Ordinal voting systems.
Score, STAR, or Approval would all make primaries unnecessary, and also reward people for honestly voting their preferences. Which is sort of why there's so much pushback against them.
But since the people benefitting from the current setup are the ones who'll have to agree to change it and create the new system, there is absolutely no hope of ever peacefully ending the current status quo.
The violence in the street is already happening. The violence in the courtrooms is already happening. The violence in universities is already happening. The violence in the legislative chambers is already happening. The violence at the homes of resistant politicians is already happening. Roll over, if you must.
You sweet summer child, you think you know what violence is. You most certainly do not.
No revolution has ever succeeded without the aid of the military. If the left kicks of the violent resistance too early, the military will not side with us, and in fact will join in the hunting us down part of things.
That's why we have to follow specific steps. First is peaceful protest. Second is voting.
Third is violence. And if we get steps one and two right, we might not have our homes bombed as we sleep.
Gentlemen may cry, "Peace, peace" - but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
And the people who actually control the party, decide what legislation gets a vote, and punish members who go against leadership will never allow it to happen, nor will they allow any of those progressive politicians to succeed them in their positions of power. Progressives are allowed on the party bcs they help keep the left flank in line, but they will never be allowed to hold any real power. That might threaten the Wall St donation gravy train, and the Third Way Foundation assholes who have a death grip on the power structures of the party will kill everyone on Earth before they give up that money.
Did you vote for progressives in the primaries? Actually I don't care, the primaries are over, you fuck with the dick you've got, not the one you wish you had.
Lol, the people insisting that continuing to do the exact thing that got is here is the only viable way to change things accusing others of defeatism will never stop being hilarious.
Now do the one where you pretend Democrats have passed a bill that helped the working class more than it helped Wall St any time in the last forty fucking years, that's always a riot!
No? you just want to feel superior by representing the very meme at the top of the page? Sure. Just shut the fuck up until after the election because the rest of us need to be the adult in the room. The simple reality is that thanks to First Past the Post you have exactly two choices.
Pro-fascism or anti-fascism. If you refuse to make a choice, well guess what, thanks to FPtP, you've chosen pro-fascism. That's the hell we live in.
If you tell others to not vote, then you've again chosen the pro-fascism side and are a piece of shit on top of it.
i get called a tankie all the time and i vote in every election from the municipal up.
the democrats are not a serious opposition party, many democrats in blue states are essentially just republicans who learned how to not openly say slurs in college (think people like seth moulton)
they squat on power and are not credible opponents to fascism, only to thier left do they actually put up a fight.
why would they? they have unlimited money and legions of people willing to debase themselves defending any incompetence out of pure team loyalty.
Nope. I spent a decade working my ass off to do that and worked my way up to being a paid campaign staffer for progressive candidates.
I suggest you do the same so that you can learn what I did: the people who control the levers of power in the party will allow progressives to be elected, it helps keep the left flank in line, but they will never allow progressives to have enough power to change the fundamental nature of the party as a machine that turns bribes into Wall St friendly legislation.
The time to argue and complain about candidates is during the primaries. When a candidate for a party has been chosen you vote with the party. Out system is the way it is and no amount of protest votes are going to fix it. Do not vote 3rd party in the general election.
I would show you, but mods deleted all my comments! Just criticize Putin, Stalin or Kim Jogn Un in the socialism.ml or memes.ml instance and you'll instantly have -10 downvotes and probably a ban
Could we please not resort to ad hominem attacks and insults, "Nonconfrontational"? This isn't Reddit.
Logically, I don't follow where that was specifically asked, but here's a comment calling Putin's Russia progressive: https://lemmy.ml/comment/27815508
Its awesome how these people can just make up bullshit and never get punished on their instance.
I suppose thats a universal issue, but its still egregious.
literally every time someone is like 'woe is me the tankies got me, all i did was speak truth to power' i look at the modlog and it's them insulting people or being a reactionary
It really weakens your position too. Because people who aren't familiar with the issue will see one side blatantly strawmanning and when they see the other side not mentioning that at all, they'll just awesome the first side is full of shit. Even if their positions are corrects.
Lmao, do you actually think that "Uyghur genocide" means that China is carpet bombing Xinjiang 🤣
"Genocide" in China's case means cultural genocide. It stands in for forced assimilation. China isn't bombing every single school and hospital in Xinjiang and massacring hundreds of thousands of Uyghur people dumbass. And I don't support the treatment of Uyghurs in China, nor do I support Ukraine's invasion.
And this comment was really eye-opening. You American libs have made the word 'genocide' so fucking meaningless that you just throw it around for every single thing, including regular invasions. You didn't watch the video I sent you of an actual genocide, did you?
Issue with that tactic is that it's actively being used to justify Chuck Schumer's "for every big city liberal we alienate, we will gain 3 to 4 hillbillies from the rural area" schtick, which is costing democrats elections and us (the world) the real progressive movement.
No, do NOT do this. This just gives a boundary to the left and none to the right of the Democratic Party.
Always vote for "progressives" (or ideally socialists) in the primary. If you're in a red state, consider even voting and running in the GOP primary instead.
If your candidate loses the primary, VOTE AGAINST THE PARTY IN THE GENERAL. Make it apparent that they either move to the left, or they lose.
And - crucially - join and form organizations that publicly state they will do exactly this.
Not in near as great a volume as during the presidential years, but there's the usual drum beat of 'Dems bad so don't bother cause it's all useless' type posts. Might be that I see less though having defederated the triad when I switched from Lemmy to Piefed.
Everyone knows that in a democracy the only two options are voting and firebombing Walmart. You can't do both, and anyone who suggests otherwise is blue MAGA.
God that's become such a hot term here lately. Particularly among the type of people who will go into repeating the same phrase over and over when they get shut down in an argument.
People on lemmy be like "your strategy of doing literally anything else pales in comparison to mine of voting for genocidal geriatrics" and then they go on and lose the election anyway
In the real world there's plenty of marxist-leninist organisations in the west that do take action. One might wonder why these groups are cracked down on viciously as soon as they get any traction, while this "just vote for progressives" idealism has been allowed to flourish for decades now.
"MLs don't do anything!"
Actually they do.
"Well they don't do enough!"
Because whenever an ML group gets political traction, it gets targeted harshly by the state
"Defeatist! Russian propagandist"
The fact that you are allowed to run your mouth about your little idealistic strategy of "changing the democrats from the inside", while any actual vector of progress gets shut down, should give you a hint on how viable your idea is. Either that or, you know, look at the many many many many times you've tried this so far, to no success.
You people keep acting as if you're being told to do nothing, when all you're told is this one thing that you keep doing does not work. I suppose acting as if you're told to do nothing is easier than actually engaging with the people disagreeing with you
Isn't it possible to ask some Dems to do better and maybe get rid of the geriatrics? It's hard to include all that when pointing out to someone why "vote blue no matter who" or "vote left straight down the ballot" are not the best choices.
After all... We have "vote blue no matter who" and "vote left straight down the ballot" a few times resulting in Dems controlling the exec and leg branches which didn't turn out so hot for a vast majority of folks.
Sure, get rid of the progressive ones as well as the centrist/establishment ones and then wonder why it doesn't help when you still have the younger progressive ones and younger centrist/establishment ones.
why “vote blue no matter who” or “vote left straight down the ballot” are not the best choices.
The time to get who you want is BEFORE the general election. When it comes to the general election, a centrist/establishment Dem is still better than a fascist. So in the general, "vote blue no matter who", but in the PRIMARY is where you support a candidate - not just with your vote, but money if you can, canvassing if you can, online discussion if you can.
people do not want to hear this but if you want to have legitimate change in 2032 it's time to start working toward it. 2028 is not going to be the year you want.
The purpose of Vote Blue No Matter Who is just that.
Dems suck, don't get me wrong, but there is no path to anything good through the GOP, and 3rd parties are essentially a waste.
The general idea is basically, push the Dems to a super majority for a few cycles so the GOP dies off, then split the Dems into a new Conservative (current Dems) and proper Progressive (Probably Dem Socs) parties.
Because too many people don't have the patience or attention span to suck it up for an decade and "protest not vote" over stupid shit like Palestine/Israel being eternally at war or because a candidate didn't campaign EXCLUSIVELY on giving trans people all the candy.
These issues are important, but maybe a bigger, more important issue is not letting the fucking Nazis take over. Because no one wins under the Nazis, not Palestine, not trans people, not women, not Hispanic people, not even white CIS asshole dudes in the end.
Probably not, since Obama had a supermajority and yet your promised land never came to be. All we got was drone-strikes on Afghan wedding-venues, slave-trade in Libya, bailouts for stockbrokers, more deportations than under Bush and the slow deterioration of conditions that fascilitated Trumps first election victory.
Somehow this is the lefts fault, a movement that is both powerful enough to hamstring the democrats from... implementing health care? And also not powerful enough to actually listen to.
Personally I think its the fault of that dastardly parlamentarian and [insert designated villain of the week democrat]!
You know this talk of yours has been around since the 1800's, right? All it has amounted to is running Democrats that would make Reagan look like a pinko.
That's why you vote in the democratic primaries, to do that thing you just said. Then you prevent republicans from getting power in the general. It's not hard, but leftists would have to actually vote instead of just bitching online. You wonder why democrats don't cater to leftists? Leftists don't fuckin vote.
In twenty years Dems have only held a supermajority for like two months and they passed the ACA. Fuck outta here with your bullshit.
The aca improved the quality of life of the average American. The aca slowed down the rapidly increasing premiums insurance companies were rolling out. The aca prevented those insurance companies from denying or gouging for preexisting conditions or removing people from insurance for developing chronic conditions. The aca was a mess and far from perfect but it absolutely was a significant improvement to the status quo and a net benefit to every citizen. And always remember that it wasn't better due to the policy of republican obstructionism. Don't be a fuckin idiot.
Do that after you have power. Not during an election, in ways which amplify information warfare. Like, just activate a single strategic brain cell for like three months every 4 years.
Republicans have figured this out. How long will it take progressives?
Nah, this is the standard pattern. The usual election information warfare strategy simply doesn't scale as well for hundreds of races because it can't be orchestrated from a top down structure, so they don't put in the same effort. It's meant to rely on useful idiots, teenagers, malcontents and cynics amplifying a single narrative on the Internet, which just doesn't work when the issues are sufficiently local.
It's honestly amazing people still fall for this though, but the evidence that it works is that they keep doing it, and gestures broadly. And also that they don't really bother for the midterms.
Who lumped anything all into one? A young account who calls others cowards for not starting a violent uprising doesn't suggest serious discussion material.
It's not complicated, primaries to make progress, generals you deal with to at least reduce harm.
Well, if you're not gonna vote, then your political opinions ain't really worth listening to, are they? I mean, not like you could even be bothered to do the bare minimum political speech.
Bahahaha I was planning on lurking, but calling someone “lil man” in an attempt to be condescending gives off such a tiny dog syndrome vibe I just had to comment.
Read what, exactly? You decided to be a condescending asshole because he got in your head, what more context is needed? Even missing any context other than you trying to unironically use “lil man”, my comment still stands.
As is so often the case, the details matter. How blue is your city? Did your DSA candidate run as a third party, or as a Democrat after winning the democratic primary?
Good on them, but when the long shot nobody had heard of on a national stage is barely an afterthought telling people to not vote for the less evil blue person running 49/49 with the very evil red person is helping the red person.
Turns out when you vote for that blue person, you're electing them into office where they will go ahead and help the very evil red person on your behalf. Isn't representative democracy grand?
Noooo you dont get it! We have to vote for them, otherwise the other genociders will win! And they're kind of rude!! Besides, now is not the time to critique the party, as we all know, if we don't point out the obvious flaws with our candidate, then the opponents aren't allowed to do it either!
Look you can critique the party after the election (not really, because that's when we have to rally around them and support them) not at the time of the primaries though, that's when you have to advocate for your specific candidate only (and if we ratfuck them, then that's just too bad) and only in a way where you dont critique the party. You also cant do it before elections. And obviously not during them. There's maybe a two-week window where you can critique the democrats, as long as you are polite about it.
The best way to push the party left is to shut up and vote for it no matter what. As you can see, this has been an incredibly succesful strategy. Remember when we didnt get universal healthcare or when we didnt codify Roe v. Wade? Remember when we invaded Libya or when we decided to destroy ACORN? Or the patriot act, boy that was swell. Hey remember Jimmy Carter? He was so nice when he destroyed Cambodia. Or Clinton, good ol' Bill! The saxophone guy who did NAFTA and bombed Yugoslavia so he could have sex with his wife again - in between his visits to Epstein island.
And what about Joe Biden?? The most progressive president since JFK! What with all the Union busting, the complete murder of MeToo, increased police budgets, arbitrary declaration of COVID being over (despite thousands still dying), his unrepentant support for Israel, all the fracking... This thing is just going so well, don't mess it up now! One of these days we might even have a president who deports fewer people than the previous administration.
Look... I know we're doing genocide and only paying lip-service to taking climate change seriously, but if you ever do anything but shut up and vote for Norm Respectable (previously worked at McKinsey and before that had an internship at Guantanamo Bay) then you'll never get a partial reduction in interests on student loans given out to Pell Grant recipients who have operated volunteer institutions for two years in poor neighborhoods. The genocide will continue no matter what though.
You added this reply less than two minutes after your original. I'd recommend looking for the "edit" button next time. It's more polite than expecting people to keep up with the fact that you replied to yourself before anyone else even had a chance to reply to you.
A lot of DSA/progressives won the primaries because taking AIPAC money is now generally considered toxic. Also, there's not currently a national election contest featuring blue-flavored genocide enablers. It's almost like people learned something from the experience last election. Just running as "not as evil" isn't really an effective electoral strategy or something.
There's a big fucking difference between expressing this kind of sentiment before the primaries, when it has the possible outcome of changing the nominee from a neoliberal to a progressive or leftist, and expressing it after the primaries, when the only possible outcome is discouraging turnout for Democrats generally and thus helping the pro-genocide fascists.
By all means, yell from the hilltops about AIPAC-tained candidates etc. during the primary. That's a good thing! But once the primary is over, it's time to STFU about it if the nominee isn't your preferred candidate because at that point there is no longer any better alternative.
This. Between the mid terms in a couple of months and the next primary I absolutely welcome it. We will call establishment Dems names, shit on their neoliberal policies, mock their strongly worded letters, search for their backbone, push everything from the big issues to our pet issues, engage with OUR candidates, and generally be a thorn in the side of the institution. Viva la fuck them guys.
But for the sake of all that is unholy, please vote for harm reduction once the primary is locked.
Which makes sense, but this is all still predicated on side B complying with rules.
The biggest worry I have is that this is pushing the animal of fascism into a corner, as must happen. The rapid buildup of the DoJ into a paramilitary organization at the beginning of Trumps turn indicates to me that he has no plans on relinquishing power, mid-terms be damned.
I live in a state with partially open primaries that goes red 90% of the time. In order to maximize the effectiveness of my vote and thereby maximize my voice, I registered as an independent and generally request a Republican primary ballot.
I then have to sift through each list of candidates looking for someone who doesn't mention Trump and has a stated policy goal that isn't evil. There's usually one candidate who mentions their focus as being healthcare or education. This is a fairly laborious process and there are plenty of races where the least-worst option is still a horrible person. However, given the winner of the Republican primary has a 90% chance of winning the general AND voter turnout for the primary is generally under 10%, I know that this is effective.
Anyway, doing all this because it is the most logical course of action where I live and then seeing people cry about only agreeing with 87% of one candidate's policy goals always annoys the hell out of me.
i live in california. back when we had limited/closed primaries (before the joke that's the top two runoff now) everyone would register democrat because republicans didn't have a chance in hell, and they wanted a say in which democrat got in elected.
I've done similar in the past. In my instance, this doesn't necessarily work:
All of the R candidates mentioned Trump, directly. However, one of them mentioned Trump's name in the context of opposing some of the more extreme and unpopular Trumpnanigans.
The ones who have a focus on healthcare and education have VERY different ideas on what it means to support those. Nearly universally they mean pushing healthcare even further into the private sector, allowing scam plans that cover practically nothing and are "insurance" in name only, or things like that. The ones talking about education want to privatize that that, switch to voucher systems that people can use in private schools, and other nefarious things like forcing Christianity into the schools.
But either way, these folks aren't the ones who ultimately get chosen in the primary because they're never extreme enough.
The crazy part about living in a rural, red district is that even the majority of Democrats on the primary are basically Republican-lite and often "former" Republicans. Go figure.
But either way, these folks aren’t the ones who ultimately get chosen in the primary because they’re never extreme enough.
I think this is primarily due to the fact that the practice hasn't caught on or been promoted effectively in deep red states. If you had a movement to get people voting in the only election that matters in their state to the point where moderates started winning, you'd permanently start to shift the policy positions of candidates. Nikki Haley didn't win the primary but she was only able to hang on as long as she did due to this strategy.
Isn't it always pre-election? Every two years and all.
Meanwhile, the reason that the claim is so prevalent is because it is so true.
bOtH sIdEs are anti-union, anti-labor, pro-corporate, and pro-billionaire.
US workers have lost income and standard of living for over FIFTY YEARS. You will hear this for the rest of your life, because it's an indisputable fact.
The USA needs a labor party, the Democrats are no labor party.
That's an impressively inaccurate read of what I wrote. Why are you wasting time working miracles in interpreting text when you could use your talents elsewhere?
Funny to accuse the other of strawmanning in a comment section under the most ridiculous caricature of what a liberal would like the leftist critique of their favorite color of genociders to be.
I know reading comprehension is abysmal in the US and online, but Jesus christ. If youre going to use fallacies as a rhetorical shield, then at least use them correctly. They're not arguing against a strawman, they are making a conclusion on your beliefs, based on what you have written.
I think you need to read up on what a "conclusion" is, and how you draw one. Its pretty reasonable to assume, from what you wrote, that you think the United States, as a political entity, can be saved. The adjectives are clearly the author indicating their own personal opinion about the United States.
If you wanted to accuse the other of some sort of rhetorical fuckery, then the obvious one is changing the subject.
But if we're doing fallacies then this whole argument is built on the back of a false dilemma.
thanks, i was a little confused as to what they were trying to say my strawman was but decided i couldnt be bothered. glad someone can make my points for me :)
I think the issue is you see the democrats as "lesser" evil, despite them being gleeful participants in genocide, climate change, "tough-on-crime"-prison-slavery, deportation, police states and everything else. The only two practical differences are that Democrats are more competent administrators of empire and they're less rude about bombing brown people.
Whats more dangerous, a nuclear bomb or a nuclear bomb that's kind of rude about doing the same stuff as the other one?
Its like youre bending over backwards to avoid discussing the fact that the two parties are the same, because this gross caricature where there is a measurable difference is easier for you to engage with morally and intellectually.
I've also noticed a significant increase in "the right did something awful and the left's response wasn't good enough, how could the left do that, the left is terrible, I'm not going to support them" type posts and replies.
Purity tests are bullshit, especially when the things that precipitated the "insufficient" response is literally fascism
There’s a huge difference between leftists and liberals. And I would argue most of the outrage is against liberals, not to leftist not responding properly. It’s amazing how many people still think liberals are leftists. We have 2 parties in the USA and both are right wing authoritarian shitfaces that serve billionaires and if you’re here to tell me to vote for the lesser of 2 evils when both are evil, you can go fuck yourself.
I'm here to tell you to stop attacking the lesser evil for getting in bed with oligarchs when the greater evil is actively murdering people in the streets. I'm here to tell you to stop attacking the lesser evil for bad tax policy when the greater evil is denying children food.
I'm here to tell you to stop doing the greater evil's job for them.
You can hate the lesser evil without making it easier for the greater evil to succeed.
If you spend a disproportionate amount of time focused on pointing out how the lesser evil is still evil, compared to the amount of time you spend fighting the greater evil, then you are a just a tool of the greater evil.
"But they're both evil" false equivalency bullshit is a position you can only take if you're privileged enough not to be ground into dust under the boots of the greater evil. And waxing philosophic about the merits of rejecting the lesser evil while the greater evil continued to murder and destroy is self-centered, self-aggrandizing, callous disregard for the the people whose lives are in jeopardy right now, today, because of the greater evil.
Imagine a German citizen during the Third Reich saying shit like "Hitler may be evil, but we can't support these other, less evil politicians who supported Article 48". It's grotesque.
Go read up on the history of the SPD and KPD and their lack of unity against fascism. It's literally the same shit happening today where opposition to fascism is incapable of uniting to stop the horrors that would follow.
Buddy, if you think dems are going to roll back ANYTHING that Trump has implemented these last couple years and what he will enact as he finishes his term, you’re living in a fucking fantasy land. The Dems literally campaigned on “Nothing will fundamentally change” when going against Donnie both times. They are happy to see these policies enacted as they aren’t the ones who will take the blame for them, but they damn sure will not try and repeal them.
Lmao immediately calls me a tankie for pointing out how Democrats are the useful idiots of the right. I have, nowhere in this entire conversation or anywhere in my profile, commented that Dems and Republicans need to be shot and killed to progress society. But please, keep conflating points to fit your narrative you fucking snowflake.
This is such an annoying discussion at this point. The "let's keep doing what we've always done because obviously that's working" folks never really engage with any arguments. They just ignore what people say and keep attacking the same strawmen over and over.
"Both metallica and the strokes have a guitar player"
"Oh so you're saying that metallica and the strokes are the same? That's so ridiculous, they don't even have the same number of members, you idiot."
It's so tiresome and pointless. And quite upsetting as well, because in attacking some of the strawmen, the "stay the course, this is going well" folks sometimes say some really heinous thing, bordering on full on genocide denial, or even worse, acknowledging the genocide but essentially saying "not my problem". It's really upsetting to read such things.
I guess that's at the core of it actually. It's one group of people that look at the millions of people that American imperialism has killed, and the way both parties have toed the exact same line on imperialism specifically, and consider this absolutely unacceptable. And on the other side you have people looking at this and thinking "yeah but what about my problems, the parties are different there". It's a fundamental difference in values, and there's no amount of convincing that either side can do to bridge that gap.
Anyway, here's my favorite Hannah Arendt quote, because I refuse to accept that we cannot somehow learn, eventually, from the holocaust:
In their moral justification, the argument of the lesser evil has played a prominent role. If you are confronted with two evils, the argument runs, it is your duty to opt for the lesser one, whereas it is irresponsible to refuse to choose altogether. Its weakness has always been that those who choose the lesser evil forget quickly that they chose evil.
I am not sure the group that thinks American Imperialism has killed millions is significant in American politics. Perhaps here on Lemmy there are quite a few people who rightly say this, but the vast majority of Americans reject this thought outright.
I view it as one group who is fine with the status quo so much they will fight to keep it that way. They are resistant to change and feel that the strong hierarchal orders are good and that people have their place and should stay there. They are a strong minority.
You have another group of people who don't really care and kind of just go where the wind takes them. They don't have particularly strong political beliefs. They are mostly self serving but generally good natured. These people are the majority.
You have the last group of people who are against the status quo for a myriad of reasons. They embrace change and are resistant to hierarchal structures. They are not really organized as they are incredibly diverse in their reasonings and are generally a weak minority.
I think the annoying part comes from the lack of critical thought and introspection. There are so many good ways to solve our problems we have never even thought of. There are solutions to moving forward and we absolutely have to find them.
I am not sure the group that thinks American Imperialism has killed millions is significant in American politics. Perhaps here on Lemmy there are quite a few people who rightly say this, but the vast majority of Americans reject this thought outright.
I agree with this, and my comment really focusses on the discussion here, on this niche forum. But I do think that a slightly amended version of this sentiment is broadly popular in the electorate. Something along the lines of "bring our boys home" or "we don't need to be spending our tax dollars on this". The motivation is much more selfish, but the desired outcome has significant overlap with the anti-imperialist sentiment, namely the cessation of war or funding genocide (the anti imperialist stance is broader than this, and would for example also be against the sanctions on Cuba, but this people really just don't give a shit about generally). I believe it's a big part of why the candidate promising "no new wars" won over the candidate promising to "ensure that america has the most lethal fighting force in the world" in the last presidential election.
No notes on the rest of your comment. "Fuck you I got mine" is infuriating.
but the vast majority of Americans reject this thought outright.
In that case, Trump is probably the best option for them. He's too stupid to lie effectively, and wil destroy the American Empire that this refusal to engage with reality allows for now.
It should also be noted that choosing not to choose, is also a choice, and not necessarily the lesser evil.
In other words, just because you didn't choose for one of two poor options, doesn't mean you didn't make a choice for a third option you believe to be a lesser evil.
Is voting the end all be all of one's political choices? Or perhaps after mitigating the worst outcome, people could have recognized that there is more work to be done?
Because voting democrat is not necessarily an endorsement of them, at least in a two party system. It is a condemnation of the other party. Thus, voting democrat is not choosing a lesser evil it is rejecting a greater one.
I've previously voted democrat because of great deal many completely unselfish reasons that would have helped people other than myself. Sure, self interest played a role, but it was far from the main reason.
Now... spite and self interest is kind of is my main reason this midterm election, but that's because I've grown to simply hate most people after November 2024 as its dawned on me the number of selfish imbeciles I'm drowning in and assume we're fucked anyway so might as well get some relief before the big funny kills all/most/many of us, whatever it may specifically be.
Probably because people who point out hypocrisy or ask a community to do better than the other side often results in them being echochambered out and Reddit mods love to permaban anyone who disagrees with their strict opinions.
And before you ask. No, that didn't happen to me. I just really like raunchy ass porn.
In the last month, specifically? I don’t disagree with what you’re saying but it seems to be targeted, time-wise.
It’s also rather beside the point in the American two party system, with current hardline far right people in leadership. Both sides do commit atrocities, but the current administration is speed running the collapse of the world order.
It's so funny that you think the uptick in critiques of Dems in the last month is specifically because the bot farms are spinning up and not because there's an uptick in electioneering that the critics are able to visibly respond to
I think billionaire interference is more prominent than foreign interference. You have news stations, Republicans and Democrats all spouting the same pro-Israel, anti-socialism rhetoric.
Well, yes. It's hard to see someone's entire comment history in a thread, but if you stalked me, you will find me repeatedly railing against our oligarchs as the primary problem we must solve - wealth inequality is the primary problem in the US, all else stems from that or is related, imho.
But that has little to do with the comment to which I was replying. :)
Swap Democrat and Republican and that's been my experience. No criticism may be brought up about Democrats without "yeah well Republicans are evil so you must hate (insert minority here)" without even asking who I voted for in any election. It's instant worst assumption when all I want is a politician who isn't bought and paid for.
Democrats are a political party, one that hasn't had a consistent ideological set of beliefs throughout its own existence. For that matter neither has the republican party.
They 1000% are pro capitalism in the United States. You’re eithe fucking stupid, or not a citizen of the USA to think democrats are not pro capitalism.
Liberalism historically from its inception has believed people have certain rights, right to “free market “ as they say is one of those.
In the US Democrats also go by liberal, but not all liberals and democrats know their position is definitionally pro capitalism and liberal has taken on a definition of left of conservatives/republicans that most Americans have not dug in that far.
TLDR To speak American politics their are conservatives/Republicans and everyone else is liberal, including in that camp progressives, leftists, Bernie Bros, anarchists.
To speak Leftist politics, you have Leftists, Anarchists, Liberals (including conservatives, liberals, progressives because all their policies are pro capitalism )
Until there's someone that accurately represents GenX and lower, people are just gambling by voting for the next geriatric senior that's gonna go fucking senile, shitting themselves and having agendas that don't benefit anyone of the current age of the actual workforce. We'll keep getting someone who's focused on social security and wars rather than the housing crisis and the AI workforce replacements that are pushing out people who dedicated time and effort and went into crippling debt becoming proficient at a six figure or top five figure earning positions, only to consider switching trades.
How about we get a president for the people, under 50 and doesn't fucking hate us.
Russian Psyops, as is the new tradition every 2 years in the US. That's why people blocking the .ml instances don't get flooded by this crap. I can't prove it, but have the intense impression that the FSB has a few accounts over there.
I wouldn't call it inconsistent with the political season. People are going to express their politics before the election, especially leading up to election day.
I'd be more concerned if people were so disengaged they had nothing to discuss.
Jamille Bouie gave a (brief) deep dive into the similarities and differences between the two parties (here on YouTube).
Both parties have a history of being influenced by business interests over public interests (especially after Reagan, and lobbyists and special interest groups were legally given access to elected officials).
However, the Republican party is openly and deliberately trying to unmake elections in the US at federal and state levels to gain a permanent majority all three branches of government, to turn the US into a one-party autocracy. Meanwhile, the Republican led government is borrowing money at an accelerated rate and funneling it into the pockets of plutocrats and conglomerate megacorporations through government contracts and subsidies.
(And once those plutocrats are done financializing the US into ruin, they will move on to the rest of the developed world, which they can alread easily afford to do. We're seeing signs of it already.)
ETA One morning later, it occurs to me when Republican rule is secured, it's in the interests of the oligarchal plutocrats and businesses to then shrink or eliminate the legislature, say by forcing them to sign an enabling act.
Fewer officials means fewer bribes. It also means fewer lobbyists. (According to How Money Works, the lobbyists and lobbyist-like employees in Washington number in the six digits, a veritable army compared to the officials they're there to petition.)
So it's actually in everyone's best interest to approach single-party autocracy but not actually achieve it. Especially since part of the bribery scheme is to hire retired officials as lobbyists.
I wonder if they collectively have this foresight, or are careening towards their own obsolescence like fossil fuel industrialists towards climate destabilization.
To me, we on the left reinforce this idea that bith sides are the same when we sink to their level. We don't need fake videos or out of context clips of him to prove he's a terrible person. It's there for all to see in his unfiltered words and actions. Same with the slop about Musk that does the rounds. We don't need fake stories to spread the word. It's self-evident in his actual, real life behaviour, and only serves to weaken the truth.
Yeah, the problem is that when people act bad they're allowed to keep their roles and continue doing harm. Republican ideology is the act of doing harm but we're just not supposed to ever hold democrats accountable or replace them with anything better.
Obviously I'm smarter than everyone because I got to the anti-reddit and have smarmy things to say that even happen to have some education behind them. Oh, and look, proper grammar! Clearly I am A Cut Above The Rest.
I swear, at least half the folks here are so far left they've gone around to reinventing libertarianism from the other side for how they argue amongst themselves.
i think those are statesian-version libertarians masquerading as anarchists. i could be wrong, but they smell the same as [forgive the statesian metaphor, it's the politicks i know] republicans masquerading as libertarians because they're embarrassed to publicly acknowledge their vote
One of those ticks is "genocide" (millions of people).
Another is "corporations enslaving 1-3 trillions animals in torturous conditions their entire lives".
Another is "corporations torturing 2-6 trillion animals to death every year".
Another is "omnicidal climate change" (billions of people and many trillions of other animals).
The 2 sides are not the same, but certain existential and unethical issues actively supported by both sides mean that some people don't want to vote for either of the evil sides who crossed clearly psychotic lines, and prefer to instead vote for decent Green people like Nader.
The issue with a dominant two party system is that voting for a third party gives power to the most centralised party.
I doubt many republicans are going to vote third party. If too many non republicans vote third party the republicans win easily.
This is a well known political mechanism.
The more effective action is to vote for the party than can actually win from the party you want least.
My personal opinion, vote for facism light and then when they win absolute riot and grill them and
start protesting over the fact that they are facism light. People always seem to forget the second part. As an other commenter in this post quoted, people who vote for lesser evil are quick to forget they still voted for evil. There should be no celebration, no rest.
Create to much dissent under the trump regime and it will collapse in a civil war. Because they dont care about the optics and they secretly want a civil war as a reason to become a dictatorship.
Create enough dissent under democratic leadership and you strengthen the third parties who dissent with you on a local level and force the dems to either adapt more progressive policy or they risk that civil war which will end their power to which optics are important.
Voting for the lesser evil is why many people vote Republican. I understand most people here don't understand it but very few Republicans really like their party. They just hate the Dem leaders way more. I've voted on both sides all my life, and 3rd party and I've had to hold my nose every single time.
The way you create dissent is by making a party lose elections till it changes.
The Democrats got that in 2024. They do NOT seem to have understood the message. Given that they've held the same geriatric, ineffective and neoliberal leadership, they are not intending to understand.
So your choice is to either destroy the party as it currently stands, or give up any illusion of lesser evil. Because going to hell slower matters only if you intend to change direction at some point.
I do absolutely understand and agree with this meme, its a variation on the ratchet effect.
But its based on the winner feeling vindicated because they win.
My proposal is to take away that feeling. Make them lose by winning the election by making them the target of non stop dissent and rightfull anger.
This seems to never happen, that is the problem, but i still think it has more chance then a third party actually getting elected.
Their should be a no kings protests the day after the election regardless of party and ideally every single day after, regardless of party.
Gril them to the point they don’t even want to get elected anymore.
The democratic party is one to fight. But the time to fight is when they are in charge, not when they are the alternative for a party that will masacre civilians if they gey the opportunity.
I support burning down the white house to the ground (in Minecraft) regardless of party, but recommend doing so when its the lesser oppressive people that inhabit it cause you have more chance to get actually get out alive.
Do what you must that you believe is right though.
Good luck!
But the time to fight is when they are in charge, not when they are the alternative for a party that will masacre civilians if they gey the opportunity.
This is nonsense. When they are in power, that you've helped them get, is exactly when you have lost ALL leverage over them.
See 2020 for a real life example - just look up the name Neera Tanden.
As we're seeing with Ed Sheeran, people are under the misapprehension that not taking a "side" is the more comfortable position. The reality that 'silence is still speech' hasn't yet sunk in for them.
And voting for people supporting genocide is somehow "taking a side" against genocide in the minds of most people here. Following the example of what happened with Ed Sheeran another conclusion to make is that milquetoast attempts at appeasement, while still materially supporting Israel, will get you nowhere fast.
I think a lot of it is cognitive dissonance for people who want to, for whatever reason, vote republican but can't ignore that they have made everything much, much worse. Easier on their tiny brains if they can terminate those critical thoughts with "Both sides same shrug"
It's also great propaganda to get people to stop bothering to vote, so fascists love it - because they rally their base and get the other side to not bother to vote.
Democrats will give lip service about healthcare when they have no chance of passing it, then when they do, 20% of them will fuss over details, dooming it. But they won’t actively rail against healthcare measures or vote largely in favor of corporate-driven DOD spending packages.
Most of their fault is in choosing not to fight Republican measures as hard as they can.
They could have passed it, Democrats chose not to. Likewise with minimum wage, and much more.
(look up the nuclear option. They never, ever need a super majority to pass a bill. Ever. It's a parliamentary rule ONLY)
Most of their fault is in choosing not to fight Republican measures as hard as they can.
Your comment was edited, so I'll address this sentence only. Democrats choose to accept money from "donators", and in return they purposefully decide, by not challenging parliamentary procedure (which they do often otherwise), to let a bill die. Like, for example, minimum wage increase under Biden.
His platform. They didn't even pretend to fight. And by "fight" I mean change a parliamentary rule by majority vote to pass a bill.
I just don't give a single angstrom of a fuck why you think it's worth supporting 99% Hitler over 99.5% Hitler. Because I'm not a Nazi, so I don't care how pure the Hitler particles in the puppet of the bourgeoisie I have to see on Television are.
Right. If one is 99 percent Hitler and the other is 99.5 percent Hitler, and you're saying you're going to vote for 99 percent Hitler, you're saying you'd vote for Hitler.
BlueMAGA, now as into conspiracy theories as their red bretheren, and for the same reasons.
I'm sorry you're worried that the Democrats strategy of doing nothing might not pay off, and that endorsing genocide still is such a loser issue. But that doesn't mean the people refusing to share your party loyalty over any common sense are part of a conspiracy, foreign or domestic.
Let me say as a person who used to care about elections for self interest and humanitarian reasons but at this point kind of no longer gives much of a shit about elections other than being fueled by self interest and a new sense of deep and bitter spite:
Voting for a party doesn't equal party loyalty. Pointing out that one party is significantly worse than the one you think people should vote for isn't party loyalty either. You can hate both parties and still vote for one and have good reasons to do so and encourage others to do the same with good reasons to do so.
Either you are an imbecile and don't know what words mean and shouldn't be posting and embarrassing yourself or you are a scumbag liar pretending to not know what words mean. In either case everyone should ignore you.
I think there should be more focus on what politicians stand to represent, their history, their associations, and what they voted for.
Policy changes are extremely important as well, but it gotten more and more complicated over time. Sounds good on paper, but turns out to be a market grab for corpos.
Then you have people like Charlie Crist... The I will be whatever party that will make me money. He was a republican and now he's a democrat. Right
In countries like the US, that approach would work if we actually had campaign reforms and a concerted effort to break the 'two-party' system (I use quotes because one hand of the corpo-fascist state hits us just a little less hard than the other and at least says "I'm sorry, baby" afterwards).
Rank choice voting, uncapping the House of Representatives, NO primaries at all (WYSIWYG politics), etc,. It would go a long way.
A lot of that would help. I would say the thing I yearn for is to be able to remove politicians from office in a emergency vote reform. Someone like Prick Scott committing the biggest medicare fraud should be voted on life imprisonment instead of a seat in senate.
Hey buddy, either leftist are too big a voting bloc to ignore and democrats better learn that and start advocating for leftist policies, or we’re so small and insignificant that you can ignore us and try to win anyways. But you can’t have both and cry that it’s leftists fault for losing.
The "all options are bad" voter discouragement has ramped back up for a while now. But also interesting is the absence of another kind of anti-democracy discourse: where are the "vote 3rd party" stooges that always become active before USA presidential elections?
If the stooges aren't promoting 3rd party voting now, then does that mean that 3rd party voting is not actually a bad thing during USA congressional elections? I mean, if it were bad for democracy in the USA, then I'd expect the authoritarian bootlickers to be promoting it now as well. But it's also possible that they are and that I'm just not watching the right places, since I don't follow any state specific discussion forums.
There isn't a single third party that is running candidates in a significant number of states, so it's harder to make sound bites. You can't just be like "vote green party or you hate the environment!" When many states don't have a green party.
I also love it when people fail to do the more intelligent thing and let a felon rapist pedo traitor run the show and destroy our futures and then act smugly about their moronic decision in retrospect on the internet.
But you couldn't have known that your dipshit decision wasn't going to make the difference when you made the dipshit decision. Saying you didn't end up killing someone while drunk driving doesn't absolve you from drunk driving.
maybe the democrats should have genocided less
Why does it matter? One of two parties was going to control your life and affect your future. One was orders of magnitude worse, as we're now experiencing first hand, and it wasn't exactly a secret that they were orders of magnitude worse, so what exactly did you think you were accomplishing by allowing the one that was orders of magnitude worse to gain control of your life and your future?
I just don't like morons that can't employ common sense.
You can keep saying "genocide" until you wear the word out (and it appears you will). Doesn't change that you make bad decisions because you value your pride over common sense.
Common sense is when you do the same thing people having been doing since the 1800's, while expecting something different to happen. Common sense is when you get mad at people who point this out.
Yes, I've noticed the same pre-election uptick every cycle. Bots (or boughts) come out of the woodwork to shame anyone for having principles that are more important than partisanship, and to make excuses for why everyone just has to hold their nose and vote for whatever genocidal trash monster the center right party nominates because the far right party is technically worse.
The problem with the lesser evil argument is that voting for the lesser evil cycle after cycle ultimately resulted in Trump and possibly the end of American democracy.
No, people voting for the MORE evil is what resulted in Donald Trump. you're mistaking the fact that people voted for Trump as the same as people voting for the lesser evil when that's not what has been happening in America. What's been happening is people have been voting for the most evil option which caused Donald Trump.
If the democrats were a genuinely left-wing party that took working class concerns seriously, whether that's migration keeping wages artificially low, industrial decline, jobs moving abroad, stagnating wages, increasing inequality, or the disproportionate influence of the 1% and wallstreet on politics, they wouldn't have lost as many voters to Trump or actually convinced them to turn up and vote.
A drowning man will grab on to a straw. Without a true left-wing party, plenty of working class voters took a gamble on the snake oil salesman, fell victim to the propaganda, or decided they wouldn't vote against him. Union members voted for Trump in droves. That's a damning indictment of the democratic party.
If the democratic party had been genuinely left-wing, those voters would have had less reason to take that gamble. Instead they have steadily moved further and further to the right on many issues, labouring under the false assumption that their base had no alternative but to vote for them, even if those voters were drowning.
To be clear, I think everyone can and should vote against fascism. But the democratic party failing to deliver for working class voters, while the rich got richer, made a populist demagogue an inevitability.
Learn the lessons of the Weimar Republic and how it fell.
No, but not any better for it to be the Blue Wall St fellators over the red ones.
If you were old enough to remember the last time a Dem majority passed legislation that benefited working people more than it benefitted Wall St, you'd be pretty statistically unlikely to be on the Internet at all, let alone on Lemmy.
I mean at present. The majority of democratic seat holders are no different than the majority Republican politicians.
Most are owned by aipac and billionaires. One is just more sneaky about it and puts on a progressive mask while undermining progress at every opportunity.
To me it just means we have to clean up the Dem party. It's full of reds.
What about people who don't live in your shithole genocidal country and only see the results of your bipartisan foreign policy, which is genocide, starvation, and violent coups?
Are we slime for pointing out there's no difference to the rest of the world which color the rape and pillage is?
Daily reminder that not voting or voting for a ugly complicit communist bitch with zero redeeming qualities is the same as voting for fascist terrorist
351 Comments
TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world · 128 pts · 1d
Vote Democrats if there is no progressive alternative. But always primary progressives in Democratic primaries.
chaogomu@lemmy.world · 32 pts · 1d
This is the way, at least until we get rid of First Past the Post and other Ordinal voting systems.
Score, STAR, or Approval would all make primaries unnecessary, and also reward people for honestly voting their preferences. Which is sort of why there's so much pushback against them.
Souvenir@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 9 pts · 23h
Ending FPTP probably won't necessarily solve the problem, as the German example shows.
chaogomu@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 23h
Germany still uses Ordinal voting.
But yes, you also have about 20% of any given population that will openly choose the greatest evil.
DudleyMason@lemmy.ml · -2 pts · 1d
But since the people benefitting from the current setup are the ones who'll have to agree to change it and create the new system, there is absolutely no hope of ever peacefully ending the current status quo.
chaogomu@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 1d
Except for the fact that pretty much every single progressive in Congress or on the ballot is in favor of some form of electoral reform.
But like you said, obviously nothing at all can be done, you know, besides voting for them.
ayyy@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 16h
I think you need to put more weight on their qualifier word “peacefully”.
chaogomu@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 16h
Do you have enough guns to fight the US military? No? Well neither do I.
Which is why there are steps that must be followed. And right now those are peaceful protest and voting. Making sure everyone votes.
The time for violence is likely coming, but it has to be after the election. After Trump blatantly ignores the will of the people.
ayyy@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 16h
The violence in the street is already happening. The violence in the courtrooms is already happening. The violence in universities is already happening. The violence in the legislative chambers is already happening. The violence at the homes of resistant politicians is already happening. Roll over, if you must.
chaogomu@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 14h
You sweet summer child, you think you know what violence is. You most certainly do not.
No revolution has ever succeeded without the aid of the military. If the left kicks of the violent resistance too early, the military will not side with us, and in fact will join in the hunting us down part of things.
That's why we have to follow specific steps. First is peaceful protest. Second is voting.
Third is violence. And if we get steps one and two right, we might not have our homes bombed as we sleep.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 0 pts · 13h
Gentlemen may cry, "Peace, peace" - but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
DudleyMason@lemmy.ml · -9 pts · 1d
And the people who actually control the party, decide what legislation gets a vote, and punish members who go against leadership will never allow it to happen, nor will they allow any of those progressive politicians to succeed them in their positions of power. Progressives are allowed on the party bcs they help keep the left flank in line, but they will never be allowed to hold any real power. That might threaten the Wall St donation gravy train, and the Third Way Foundation assholes who have a death grip on the power structures of the party will kill everyone on Earth before they give up that money.
chaogomu@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 22h
Ah, defeatism. And basically telling other people to not even try.
I'd expect nothing less from .ml
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 18h
Somehow not defeatism: We have to vote for the democrats, dont you dare think a better world is possible
chaogomu@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 18h
Did you vote for progressives in the primaries? Actually I don't care, the primaries are over, you fuck with the dick you've got, not the one you wish you had.
DudleyMason@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 7h
Lol, the people insisting that continuing to do the exact thing that got is here is the only viable way to change things accusing others of defeatism will never stop being hilarious.
Now do the one where you pretend Democrats have passed a bill that helped the working class more than it helped Wall St any time in the last forty fucking years, that's always a riot!
chaogomu@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 6h
Did you vote for progressives in the primaries?
No? you just want to feel superior by representing the very meme at the top of the page? Sure. Just shut the fuck up until after the election because the rest of us need to be the adult in the room. The simple reality is that thanks to First Past the Post you have exactly two choices.
Pro-fascism or anti-fascism. If you refuse to make a choice, well guess what, thanks to FPtP, you've chosen pro-fascism. That's the hell we live in.
If you tell others to not vote, then you've again chosen the pro-fascism side and are a piece of shit on top of it.
InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 15h
Tankies won't but the effort into voting but want to be perceived as serious to actually be marching in the streets.
They have some real criticism of the dem establishment, but no real perspective that they are surrendering office to fascism.
Diva@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 10h
i get called a tankie all the time and i vote in every election from the municipal up.
the democrats are not a serious opposition party, many democrats in blue states are essentially just republicans who learned how to not openly say slurs in college (think people like seth moulton)
they squat on power and are not credible opponents to fascism, only to thier left do they actually put up a fight.
why would they? they have unlimited money and legions of people willing to debase themselves defending any incompetence out of pure team loyalty.
PapaStevesy@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 18h
You missed the "vote progressive in the primaries" part
DudleyMason@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 7h
Nope. I spent a decade working my ass off to do that and worked my way up to being a paid campaign staffer for progressive candidates.
I suggest you do the same so that you can learn what I did: the people who control the levers of power in the party will allow progressives to be elected, it helps keep the left flank in line, but they will never allow progressives to have enough power to change the fundamental nature of the party as a machine that turns bribes into Wall St friendly legislation.
Pacattack57@lemmy.world · 22 pts · 19h
The time to argue and complain about candidates is during the primaries. When a candidate for a party has been chosen you vote with the party. Out system is the way it is and no amount of protest votes are going to fix it. Do not vote 3rd party in the general election.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · -5 pts · 18h
Im going to write in Hillary
sharps89@lemmy.zip · 16 pts · 21h
Lemmy users in socialism.ml actually define Putin as progressive (I wish I was joking)
EDIT: look at them all brigading me below. PUTIN SUCKS and North Korea is an authoritarian shithole!
Pratai@piefed.ca · 6 pts · 18h
Well, to be fair, they’re a bunch of idiots. So… no need to take them any more serious than you would MAGA.
dreamy@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 10h
Where? I would love to see one case of this happening.
sharps89@lemmy.zip · -2 pts · 8h
I would show you, but mods deleted all my comments! Just criticize Putin, Stalin or Kim Jogn Un in the socialism.ml or memes.ml instance and you'll instantly have -10 downvotes and probably a ban
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 4h
That doesn't make sense. We're not looking for your comments.
sharps89@lemmy.zip · 0 pts · 4h
He said he would like to see one case of this happening... a comment would demonstrate that
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 2h
No, he said he would like to see an example of an .ml user calling Putin progressive. Are you drunk?
sharps89@lemmy.zip · 0 pts · 2h
Could we please not resort to ad hominem attacks and insults, "Nonconfrontational"? This isn't Reddit.
Logically, I don't follow where that was specifically asked, but here's a comment calling Putin's Russia progressive: https://lemmy.ml/comment/27815508
Diva@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 8h
lmao pointing out that the US has more people imprisoned than the USSR is not a mossad psyop
I am glad that people like you get banned
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 7h
Its awesome how these people can just make up bullshit and never get punished on their instance.
I suppose thats a universal issue, but its still egregious.
Diva@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 6h
literally every time someone is like 'woe is me the tankies got me, all i did was speak truth to power' i look at the modlog and it's them insulting people or being a reactionary
sharps89@lemmy.zip · 0 pts · 4h
The only insult is your support of Putin and Stalin.
sharps89@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 4h
I've been banned for stating North Korea is an authoritarian shithole. Is that bullshit, in your opinion?
sharps89@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 4h
That was not the comment I was banned for, and you know it.
80% of that figure weren't imprisoned, they were on probation! Clearly misinformation when you look at the facts... that upsets Stalinists.
Have a sense of humor!
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 18h
I love how you can just make shit up and libs eat it like slop, as long as its about someone they're preconditioned to hate.
Oppopity@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 11h
It really weakens your position too. Because people who aren't familiar with the issue will see one side blatantly strawmanning and when they see the other side not mentioning that at all, they'll just awesome the first side is full of shit. Even if their positions are corrects.
HerbGrower@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 10h
I find that .ml can sometimes be questionable, but yeah that sounds like a claim that needs evidence.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 10h
If they ever source their claims they always either point towards
HerbGrower@slrpnk.net · 3 pts · 10h
Yeah, if its common there should be plenty of highly upvoted comments like that, and not just a meme/shitpost either.
dreamy@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 9h
Vote Blue No Matter Who 💙
I'm definitely not in a cult 😊
TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 5h
But you would support Russian and Chinese genocide of Ukrainians and Uyghurs, respectively.
dreamy@lemmy.ml · -1 pts · 5h
Lmao, do you actually think that "Uyghur genocide" means that China is carpet bombing Xinjiang 🤣
"Genocide" in China's case means cultural genocide. It stands in for forced assimilation. China isn't bombing every single school and hospital in Xinjiang and massacring hundreds of thousands of Uyghur people dumbass. And I don't support the treatment of Uyghurs in China, nor do I support Ukraine's invasion.
And this comment was really eye-opening. You American libs have made the word 'genocide' so fucking meaningless that you just throw it around for every single thing, including regular invasions. You didn't watch the video I sent you of an actual genocide, did you?
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 4h
The entirety of the Muslim world agrees that what China is doing is absolutely not genocide. Cultural or otherwise.
TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 4h
Okay I misunderstood your initial comment. I thought you were being one of those tankies.
ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 14h
Issue with that tactic is that it's actively being used to justify Chuck Schumer's "for every big city liberal we alienate, we will gain 3 to 4 hillbillies from the rural area" schtick, which is costing democrats elections and us (the world) the real progressive movement.
TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 14h
Just tell Schumer his shtick cost everyone two presidential elections.
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 0 pts · 3h
No, do NOT do this. This just gives a boundary to the left and none to the right of the Democratic Party.
Always vote for "progressives" (or ideally socialists) in the primary. If you're in a red state, consider even voting and running in the GOP primary instead.
If your candidate loses the primary, VOTE AGAINST THE PARTY IN THE GENERAL. Make it apparent that they either move to the left, or they lose.
And - crucially - join and form organizations that publicly state they will do exactly this.
ramble81@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 1h
No, no, and no. Shit like that is how we got Trump. Stupid protest votes are not what’s needed right now.
Does it suck? Yes. Do you just have to hold your nose and do it? Yes. But voting against things or not voting is what put us in this situation.
The primaries are the time to push things left.
ShellMonkey@piefed.socdojo.com · 79 pts · 1d
Not in near as great a volume as during the presidential years, but there's the usual drum beat of 'Dems bad so don't bother cause it's all useless' type posts. Might be that I see less though having defederated the triad when I switched from Lemmy to Piefed.
Godric@lemmy.world · 124 pts · 1d
Gullible@sh.itjust.works · 38 pts · 1d
Saved. This should not be as applicable to lemmy as it is.
cattywampas@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 1d
Save this one too: "I can't even trust you to vote and/or be a poll worker, why would I trust you in a violent revolution?"
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 21h
"because you can lob biological weapons at the enemy and i am very light"
X@piefed.world · -1 pts · 23h
Oh wow, that’s good
daychilde@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 1d
Ex-CUSE me, but HAVE you firebombed a Walmart? No? Then shut up!
(I'm kidding, I'm kidding!!! And I'm also stealing the image as well.....) :)
edible_funk@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 1d
Cowb in shambles.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 18h
Rent free
socsa@piefed.social · 13 pts · 1d
Everyone knows that in a democracy the only two options are voting and firebombing Walmart. You can't do both, and anyone who suggests otherwise is blue MAGA.
sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz · 3 pts · 19h
God that's become such a hot term here lately. Particularly among the type of people who will go into repeating the same phrase over and over when they get shut down in an argument.
Cosmonaut@lemmy.today · 9 pts · 1d
guy who thinks revolution when firebombing walmart
TaterTot@piefed.social · 6 pts · 1d
I mean the Revolution can have a little firebombing walmart.
As a treat.
Pratai@piefed.ca · 5 pts · 18h
That’s everyone here.
A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 4h
Am confused, how would firebombing a walmart bring change?
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 18h
People on lemmy be like "your strategy of doing literally anything else pales in comparison to mine of voting for genocidal geriatrics" and then they go on and lose the election anyway
InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 15h
People join and support groups that take real action. Take the houthis for example. MLs by comparison can't even fill out a ballot.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 15h
Good argument, I will now join ISIS.
In the real world there's plenty of marxist-leninist organisations in the west that do take action. One might wonder why these groups are cracked down on viciously as soon as they get any traction, while this "just vote for progressives" idealism has been allowed to flourish for decades now.
InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 15h
Ohh no there opposition to reform. Let me also discourage other forms even tho its easy to do more than one thing
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 14h
"MLs don't do anything!"
Actually they do. "Well they don't do enough!"
Because whenever an ML group gets political traction, it gets targeted harshly by the state
"Defeatist! Russian propagandist"
The fact that you are allowed to run your mouth about your little idealistic strategy of "changing the democrats from the inside", while any actual vector of progress gets shut down, should give you a hint on how viable your idea is. Either that or, you know, look at the many many many many times you've tried this so far, to no success.
You people keep acting as if you're being told to do nothing, when all you're told is this one thing that you keep doing does not work. I suppose acting as if you're told to do nothing is easier than actually engaging with the people disagreeing with you
InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 14h
Support them anyway.
Is taking an evening to vote in primary and election day too hard for you yet expect others to velive your serious about higher level activism?
Arcanepotato@crazypeople.online · 8 pts · 1d
Doesn't help if people read "Dems bad" as "don't bother".
tidderuuf@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 1d
Isn't it possible to ask some Dems to do better and maybe get rid of the geriatrics? It's hard to include all that when pointing out to someone why "vote blue no matter who" or "vote left straight down the ballot" are not the best choices.
After all... We have "vote blue no matter who" and "vote left straight down the ballot" a few times resulting in Dems controlling the exec and leg branches which didn't turn out so hot for a vast majority of folks.
marcos@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 1d
AFAIK, not anymore. The time for that was a month ago.
grue@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 1d
Yes, right up until the primary is over.
After that, it's time to hold your nose and vote for the (D) anyway as a matter of harm reduction.
daychilde@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 1d
Sure, get rid of the progressive ones as well as the centrist/establishment ones and then wonder why it doesn't help when you still have the younger progressive ones and younger centrist/establishment ones.
The time to get who you want is BEFORE the general election. When it comes to the general election, a centrist/establishment Dem is still better than a fascist. So in the general, "vote blue no matter who", but in the PRIMARY is where you support a candidate - not just with your vote, but money if you can, canvassing if you can, online discussion if you can.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 21h
people do not want to hear this but if you want to have legitimate change in 2032 it's time to start working toward it. 2028 is not going to be the year you want.
politics is slow as fuck.
daychilde@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 21h
Bingo.
AmyAye@nord.pub · 8 pts · 1d
The purpose of Vote Blue No Matter Who is just that.
Dems suck, don't get me wrong, but there is no path to anything good through the GOP, and 3rd parties are essentially a waste.
The general idea is basically, push the Dems to a super majority for a few cycles so the GOP dies off, then split the Dems into a new Conservative (current Dems) and proper Progressive (Probably Dem Socs) parties.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 18h
Oh wow, sounds like a great plan, wonder why it has never panned out over the many decades of this talk.
AmyAye@nord.pub · 1 pts · 3h
Because too many people don't have the patience or attention span to suck it up for an decade and "protest not vote" over stupid shit like Palestine/Israel being eternally at war or because a candidate didn't campaign EXCLUSIVELY on giving trans people all the candy.
These issues are important, but maybe a bigger, more important issue is not letting the fucking Nazis take over. Because no one wins under the Nazis, not Palestine, not trans people, not women, not Hispanic people, not even white CIS asshole dudes in the end.
No one.
PapaStevesy@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 17h
Couldn't possibly be because a sizable portion of the "left" is actively working against it...could it???
✊↔️🖐️💦
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 17h
Probably not, since Obama had a supermajority and yet your promised land never came to be. All we got was drone-strikes on Afghan wedding-venues, slave-trade in Libya, bailouts for stockbrokers, more deportations than under Bush and the slow deterioration of conditions that fascilitated Trumps first election victory.
Somehow this is the lefts fault, a movement that is both powerful enough to hamstring the democrats from... implementing health care? And also not powerful enough to actually listen to.
Personally I think its the fault of that dastardly parlamentarian and [insert designated villain of the week democrat]!
You know this talk of yours has been around since the 1800's, right? All it has amounted to is running Democrats that would make Reagan look like a pinko.
InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 15h
Preach
edible_funk@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1d
That's why you vote in the democratic primaries, to do that thing you just said. Then you prevent republicans from getting power in the general. It's not hard, but leftists would have to actually vote instead of just bitching online. You wonder why democrats don't cater to leftists? Leftists don't fuckin vote.
In twenty years Dems have only held a supermajority for like two months and they passed the ACA. Fuck outta here with your bullshit.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 12h
the aca was a Republican handout to insurance companies.
edible_funk@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 6h
The aca improved the quality of life of the average American. The aca slowed down the rapidly increasing premiums insurance companies were rolling out. The aca prevented those insurance companies from denying or gouging for preexisting conditions or removing people from insurance for developing chronic conditions. The aca was a mess and far from perfect but it absolutely was a significant improvement to the status quo and a net benefit to every citizen. And always remember that it wasn't better due to the policy of republican obstructionism. Don't be a fuckin idiot.
socsa@piefed.social · 2 pts · 1d
Do that after you have power. Not during an election, in ways which amplify information warfare. Like, just activate a single strategic brain cell for like three months every 4 years.
Republicans have figured this out. How long will it take progressives?
socsa@piefed.social · 2 pts · 1d
Nah, this is the standard pattern. The usual election information warfare strategy simply doesn't scale as well for hundreds of races because it can't be orchestrated from a top down structure, so they don't put in the same effort. It's meant to rely on useful idiots, teenagers, malcontents and cynics amplifying a single narrative on the Internet, which just doesn't work when the issues are sufficiently local.
It's honestly amazing people still fall for this though, but the evidence that it works is that they keep doing it, and gestures broadly. And also that they don't really bother for the midterms.
urthoughtsrbad@lemmy.zip · -10 pts · 1d
Freeposity@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 1d
Who are "You folks"?
urthoughtsrbad@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 1d
ShellMonkey@piefed.socdojo.com · -1 pts · 1d
Who lumped anything all into one? A young account who calls others cowards for not starting a violent uprising doesn't suggest serious discussion material.
It's not complicated, primaries to make progress, generals you deal with to at least reduce harm.
urthoughtsrbad@lemmy.zip · -2 pts · 1d
edible_funk@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1d
Hello nine day old account encouraging people not to vote democratic!
urthoughtsrbad@lemmy.zip · -1 pts · 1d
edible_funk@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
You can do better than that MAGAt.
urthoughtsrbad@lemmy.zip · -3 pts · 1d
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · 0 pts · 1d
Well, if you're not gonna vote, then your political opinions ain't really worth listening to, are they? I mean, not like you could even be bothered to do the bare minimum political speech.
urthoughtsrbad@lemmy.zip · -1 pts · 1d
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · 0 pts · 1d
Nah, non-voters ain't worth listening to.
urthoughtsrbad@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 23h
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 23h
Oh. Did you vote?
KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -1 pts · 14h
Bahahaha I was planning on lurking, but calling someone “lil man” in an attempt to be condescending gives off such a tiny dog syndrome vibe I just had to comment.
urthoughtsrbad@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 8h
KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 5h
Read what, exactly? You decided to be a condescending asshole because he got in your head, what more context is needed? Even missing any context other than you trying to unironically use “lil man”, my comment still stands.
urthoughtsrbad@lemmy.zip · -21 pts · 1d
agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works · 20 pts · 1d
As is so often the case, the details matter. How blue is your city? Did your DSA candidate run as a third party, or as a Democrat after winning the democratic primary?
ShellMonkey@piefed.socdojo.com · 8 pts · 1d
Good on them, but when the long shot nobody had heard of on a national stage is barely an afterthought telling people to not vote for the less evil blue person running 49/49 with the very evil red person is helping the red person.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 1d
Turns out when you vote for that blue person, you're electing them into office where they will go ahead and help the very evil red person on your behalf. Isn't representative democracy grand?
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 17h
Noooo you dont get it! We have to vote for them, otherwise the other genociders will win! And they're kind of rude!! Besides, now is not the time to critique the party, as we all know, if we don't point out the obvious flaws with our candidate, then the opponents aren't allowed to do it either!
Look you can critique the party after the election (not really, because that's when we have to rally around them and support them) not at the time of the primaries though, that's when you have to advocate for your specific candidate only (and if we ratfuck them, then that's just too bad) and only in a way where you dont critique the party. You also cant do it before elections. And obviously not during them. There's maybe a two-week window where you can critique the democrats, as long as you are polite about it.
The best way to push the party left is to shut up and vote for it no matter what. As you can see, this has been an incredibly succesful strategy. Remember when we didnt get universal healthcare or when we didnt codify Roe v. Wade? Remember when we invaded Libya or when we decided to destroy ACORN? Or the patriot act, boy that was swell. Hey remember Jimmy Carter? He was so nice when he destroyed Cambodia. Or Clinton, good ol' Bill! The saxophone guy who did NAFTA and bombed Yugoslavia so he could have sex with his wife again - in between his visits to Epstein island.
And what about Joe Biden?? The most progressive president since JFK! What with all the Union busting, the complete murder of MeToo, increased police budgets, arbitrary declaration of COVID being over (despite thousands still dying), his unrepentant support for Israel, all the fracking... This thing is just going so well, don't mess it up now! One of these days we might even have a president who deports fewer people than the previous administration.
Look... I know we're doing genocide and only paying lip-service to taking climate change seriously, but if you ever do anything but shut up and vote for Norm Respectable (previously worked at McKinsey and before that had an internship at Guantanamo Bay) then you'll never get a partial reduction in interests on student loans given out to Pell Grant recipients who have operated volunteer institutions for two years in poor neighborhoods. The genocide will continue no matter what though.
urthoughtsrbad@lemmy.zip · -3 pts · 1d
daychilde@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 1d
You added this reply less than two minutes after your original. I'd recommend looking for the "edit" button next time. It's more polite than expecting people to keep up with the fact that you replied to yourself before anyone else even had a chance to reply to you.
culprit@lemmy.ml · 45 pts · 1d
A lot of DSA/progressives won the primaries because taking AIPAC money is now generally considered toxic. Also, there's not currently a national election contest featuring blue-flavored genocide enablers. It's almost like people learned something from the experience last election. Just running as "not as evil" isn't really an effective electoral strategy or something.
grue@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 1d
There's a big fucking difference between expressing this kind of sentiment before the primaries, when it has the possible outcome of changing the nominee from a neoliberal to a progressive or leftist, and expressing it after the primaries, when the only possible outcome is discouraging turnout for Democrats generally and thus helping the pro-genocide fascists.
By all means, yell from the hilltops about AIPAC-tained candidates etc. during the primary. That's a good thing! But once the primary is over, it's time to STFU about it if the nominee isn't your preferred candidate because at that point there is no longer any better alternative.
culprit@lemmy.ml · 11 pts · 1d
Local lefties can make their own choices. The Fettermans and Sinemas have clearly shown themselves to be consistent enemies of progress.
Doom@discuss.online · -5 pts · 1d
You are literally doing the meme though. 2 terrible examples, but plenty of others are nothing like that.
culprit@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 1d
Can you read?
Doom@discuss.online · -8 pts · 1d
I.. don't understand how that changes anything?
You're still in a way telling people not to vote dem even though we are past primaries.
culprit@lemmy.ml · 13 pts · 1d
I prescribed no decision, as it is their own choice. See how that works?
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 21h
Explicit statements bad implicit statements good, got it.
Doom@discuss.online · -5 pts · 1d
Oh that relieves you of being the meme in question, okay.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 21h
yeah, i'm pretty sure if the democrat in a statesian race is taking AIPAC money, the republican is taking more. it's like oil money.
TexasDrunk@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
This. Between the mid terms in a couple of months and the next primary I absolutely welcome it. We will call establishment Dems names, shit on their neoliberal policies, mock their strongly worded letters, search for their backbone, push everything from the big issues to our pet issues, engage with OUR candidates, and generally be a thorn in the side of the institution. Viva la fuck them guys.
But for the sake of all that is unholy, please vote for harm reduction once the primary is locked.
edible_funk@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 1d
They know what they're doing grue.
peopleproblems@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 1d
Which makes sense, but this is all still predicated on side B complying with rules.
The biggest worry I have is that this is pushing the animal of fascism into a corner, as must happen. The rapid buildup of the DoJ into a paramilitary organization at the beginning of Trumps turn indicates to me that he has no plans on relinquishing power, mid-terms be damned.
culprit@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 1d
This is a quote from a liberal btw. Best to be prepared for the inevitable.
cogitase@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 44 pts · 1d
I live in a state with partially open primaries that goes red 90% of the time. In order to maximize the effectiveness of my vote and thereby maximize my voice, I registered as an independent and generally request a Republican primary ballot.
I then have to sift through each list of candidates looking for someone who doesn't mention Trump and has a stated policy goal that isn't evil. There's usually one candidate who mentions their focus as being healthcare or education. This is a fairly laborious process and there are plenty of races where the least-worst option is still a horrible person. However, given the winner of the Republican primary has a 90% chance of winning the general AND voter turnout for the primary is generally under 10%, I know that this is effective.
Anyway, doing all this because it is the most logical course of action where I live and then seeing people cry about only agreeing with 87% of one candidate's policy goals always annoys the hell out of me.
CrypticPseudonym@lemmy.ml · 19 pts · 1d
Same strategy in Utah. 100% logical and effective.
traxex@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 7 pts · 1d
Doing gods work. Thank you soldier.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 21h
i live in california. back when we had limited/closed primaries (before the joke that's the top two runoff now) everyone would register democrat because republicans didn't have a chance in hell, and they wanted a say in which democrat got in elected.
InvalidName2@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 4h
I've done similar in the past. In my instance, this doesn't necessarily work:
All of the R candidates mentioned Trump, directly. However, one of them mentioned Trump's name in the context of opposing some of the more extreme and unpopular Trumpnanigans.
The ones who have a focus on healthcare and education have VERY different ideas on what it means to support those. Nearly universally they mean pushing healthcare even further into the private sector, allowing scam plans that cover practically nothing and are "insurance" in name only, or things like that. The ones talking about education want to privatize that that, switch to voucher systems that people can use in private schools, and other nefarious things like forcing Christianity into the schools.
But either way, these folks aren't the ones who ultimately get chosen in the primary because they're never extreme enough.
The crazy part about living in a rural, red district is that even the majority of Democrats on the primary are basically Republican-lite and often "former" Republicans. Go figure.
cogitase@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 4h
I think this is primarily due to the fact that the practice hasn't caught on or been promoted effectively in deep red states. If you had a movement to get people voting in the only election that matters in their state to the point where moderates started winning, you'd permanently start to shift the policy positions of candidates. Nikki Haley didn't win the primary but she was only able to hang on as long as she did due to this strategy.
Mulligrubs@lemmy.world · 36 pts · 1d
Isn't it always pre-election? Every two years and all.
Meanwhile, the reason that the claim is so prevalent is because it is so true.
bOtH sIdEs are anti-union, anti-labor, pro-corporate, and pro-billionaire.
US workers have lost income and standard of living for over FIFTY YEARS. You will hear this for the rest of your life, because it's an indisputable fact.
The USA needs a labor party, the Democrats are no labor party.
HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 23h
You are depicted in this meme, and you don't seem to see it.
Gold_E_Lox@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 11 pts · 23h
you are in a dystopian hell and you think you can vote your way out of it.
HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 23h
You are entirely missing the point.
You hear or see "Lesser Evil" and you think they're saying "Good."
Is the issue literacy? Is it stubbornness? Plain ol' propaganda to destabilize the US?
Gold_E_Lox@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 13 pts · 19h
i think the issue is you still think your warmongering, nazi country still has a hope at not being evil.
HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 18h
That's an impressively inaccurate read of what I wrote. Why are you wasting time working miracles in interpreting text when you could use your talents elsewhere?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 11 pts · 17h
Funny to accuse the other of strawmanning in a comment section under the most ridiculous caricature of what a liberal would like the leftist critique of their favorite color of genociders to be.
I know reading comprehension is abysmal in the US and online, but Jesus christ. If youre going to use fallacies as a rhetorical shield, then at least use them correctly. They're not arguing against a strawman, they are making a conclusion on your beliefs, based on what you have written.
I think you need to read up on what a "conclusion" is, and how you draw one. Its pretty reasonable to assume, from what you wrote, that you think the United States, as a political entity, can be saved. The adjectives are clearly the author indicating their own personal opinion about the United States.
If you wanted to accuse the other of some sort of rhetorical fuckery, then the obvious one is changing the subject.
But if we're doing fallacies then this whole argument is built on the back of a false dilemma.
Gold_E_Lox@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 15h
thanks, i was a little confused as to what they were trying to say my strawman was but decided i couldnt be bothered. glad someone can make my points for me :)
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 18h
I think the issue is you see the democrats as "lesser" evil, despite them being gleeful participants in genocide, climate change, "tough-on-crime"-prison-slavery, deportation, police states and everything else. The only two practical differences are that Democrats are more competent administrators of empire and they're less rude about bombing brown people.
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 4h
They might be the lesser evil to Americans but to the rest of us they're just evil.
HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 18h
Which is more dangerous to detonate, a grenade or a nuclear bomb?
Which is hotter, 60C or 100C?
It's like you're bending over backwards to refuse that the words "more" and "less" exist in English?
I really do need to get around to blocking lemmy.ml, apparently.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 18h
Whats more dangerous, a nuclear bomb or a nuclear bomb that's kind of rude about doing the same stuff as the other one?
Its like youre bending over backwards to avoid discussing the fact that the two parties are the same, because this gross caricature where there is a measurable difference is easier for you to engage with morally and intellectually.
Cosmonaut@lemmy.today · 3 pts · 4h
de stabalizing and balkanizing the US would be a blessing for humanity actually
neatchee@piefed.social · 35 pts · 1d
I've also noticed a significant increase in "the right did something awful and the left's response wasn't good enough, how could the left do that, the left is terrible, I'm not going to support them" type posts and replies.
Purity tests are bullshit, especially when the things that precipitated the "insufficient" response is literally fascism
Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works · 0 pts · 13h
Macklemore said he'd never vote for Biden in one of his songs.
Let's talk about that.
Dude isn't a fucking saint, he's a dumbass. Free Palestine, though.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 11h
> mad at macklemore for not being willing to vote for genocide Joe
> free Palestine, though
"Coexist" I mutter serenely as I shoot up a mosque.
Space_Cowboy92@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 1h
There’s a huge difference between leftists and liberals. And I would argue most of the outrage is against liberals, not to leftist not responding properly. It’s amazing how many people still think liberals are leftists. We have 2 parties in the USA and both are right wing authoritarian shitfaces that serve billionaires and if you’re here to tell me to vote for the lesser of 2 evils when both are evil, you can go fuck yourself.
neatchee@piefed.social · 0 pts · 1h
I'm here to tell you to stop attacking the lesser evil for getting in bed with oligarchs when the greater evil is actively murdering people in the streets. I'm here to tell you to stop attacking the lesser evil for bad tax policy when the greater evil is denying children food.
I'm here to tell you to stop doing the greater evil's job for them.
You can hate the lesser evil without making it easier for the greater evil to succeed.
If you spend a disproportionate amount of time focused on pointing out how the lesser evil is still evil, compared to the amount of time you spend fighting the greater evil, then you are a just a tool of the greater evil.
"But they're both evil" false equivalency bullshit is a position you can only take if you're privileged enough not to be ground into dust under the boots of the greater evil. And waxing philosophic about the merits of rejecting the lesser evil while the greater evil continued to murder and destroy is self-centered, self-aggrandizing, callous disregard for the the people whose lives are in jeopardy right now, today, because of the greater evil.
Imagine a German citizen during the Third Reich saying shit like "Hitler may be evil, but we can't support these other, less evil politicians who supported Article 48". It's grotesque.
Go read up on the history of the SPD and KPD and their lack of unity against fascism. It's literally the same shit happening today where opposition to fascism is incapable of uniting to stop the horrors that would follow.
Space_Cowboy92@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 1h
Buddy, if you think dems are going to roll back ANYTHING that Trump has implemented these last couple years and what he will enact as he finishes his term, you’re living in a fucking fantasy land. The Dems literally campaigned on “Nothing will fundamentally change” when going against Donnie both times. They are happy to see these policies enacted as they aren’t the ones who will take the blame for them, but they damn sure will not try and repeal them.
Get fucked on your lesser of 2 evils bullshit.
neatchee@piefed.social · 0 pts · 55m
okay tankie. enjoy the fascism. fucking tool of the right, doing their work for them. disgusting
Space_Cowboy92@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 25m
Lmao immediately calls me a tankie for pointing out how Democrats are the useful idiots of the right. I have, nowhere in this entire conversation or anywhere in my profile, commented that Dems and Republicans need to be shot and killed to progress society. But please, keep conflating points to fit your narrative you fucking snowflake.
wpb@lemmy.world · 20 pts · 14h
This is such an annoying discussion at this point. The "let's keep doing what we've always done because obviously that's working" folks never really engage with any arguments. They just ignore what people say and keep attacking the same strawmen over and over.
"Both metallica and the strokes have a guitar player"
"Oh so you're saying that metallica and the strokes are the same? That's so ridiculous, they don't even have the same number of members, you idiot."
It's so tiresome and pointless. And quite upsetting as well, because in attacking some of the strawmen, the "stay the course, this is going well" folks sometimes say some really heinous thing, bordering on full on genocide denial, or even worse, acknowledging the genocide but essentially saying "not my problem". It's really upsetting to read such things.
I guess that's at the core of it actually. It's one group of people that look at the millions of people that American imperialism has killed, and the way both parties have toed the exact same line on imperialism specifically, and consider this absolutely unacceptable. And on the other side you have people looking at this and thinking "yeah but what about my problems, the parties are different there". It's a fundamental difference in values, and there's no amount of convincing that either side can do to bridge that gap.
Anyway, here's my favorite Hannah Arendt quote, because I refuse to accept that we cannot somehow learn, eventually, from the holocaust:
Doomsider@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 12h
I am not sure the group that thinks American Imperialism has killed millions is significant in American politics. Perhaps here on Lemmy there are quite a few people who rightly say this, but the vast majority of Americans reject this thought outright.
I view it as one group who is fine with the status quo so much they will fight to keep it that way. They are resistant to change and feel that the strong hierarchal orders are good and that people have their place and should stay there. They are a strong minority.
You have another group of people who don't really care and kind of just go where the wind takes them. They don't have particularly strong political beliefs. They are mostly self serving but generally good natured. These people are the majority.
You have the last group of people who are against the status quo for a myriad of reasons. They embrace change and are resistant to hierarchal structures. They are not really organized as they are incredibly diverse in their reasonings and are generally a weak minority.
I think the annoying part comes from the lack of critical thought and introspection. There are so many good ways to solve our problems we have never even thought of. There are solutions to moving forward and we absolutely have to find them.
wpb@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 8h
I agree with this, and my comment really focusses on the discussion here, on this niche forum. But I do think that a slightly amended version of this sentiment is broadly popular in the electorate. Something along the lines of "bring our boys home" or "we don't need to be spending our tax dollars on this". The motivation is much more selfish, but the desired outcome has significant overlap with the anti-imperialist sentiment, namely the cessation of war or funding genocide (the anti imperialist stance is broader than this, and would for example also be against the sanctions on Cuba, but this people really just don't give a shit about generally). I believe it's a big part of why the candidate promising "no new wars" won over the candidate promising to "ensure that america has the most lethal fighting force in the world" in the last presidential election.
No notes on the rest of your comment. "Fuck you I got mine" is infuriating.
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 3h
In that case, Trump is probably the best option for them. He's too stupid to lie effectively, and wil destroy the American Empire that this refusal to engage with reality allows for now.
Souvenir@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 3h
It should also be noted that choosing not to choose, is also a choice, and not necessarily the lesser evil.
In other words, just because you didn't choose for one of two poor options, doesn't mean you didn't make a choice for a third option you believe to be a lesser evil.
HalfSalesman@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2h
Is voting the end all be all of one's political choices? Or perhaps after mitigating the worst outcome, people could have recognized that there is more work to be done?
Because voting democrat is not necessarily an endorsement of them, at least in a two party system. It is a condemnation of the other party. Thus, voting democrat is not choosing a lesser evil it is rejecting a greater one.
I've previously voted democrat because of great deal many completely unselfish reasons that would have helped people other than myself. Sure, self interest played a role, but it was far from the main reason.
Now... spite and self interest is kind of is my main reason this midterm election, but that's because I've grown to simply hate most people after November 2024 as its dawned on me the number of selfish imbeciles I'm drowning in and assume we're fucked anyway so might as well get some relief before the big funny kills all/most/many of us, whatever it may specifically be.
timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works · 18 pts · 22h
I like these threads because they make it easy to see who to block.
Diva@lemmy.ml · 10 pts · 21h
you should block me if you haven't already, my posts are for cool people only
Itdidnttrickledown@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 20h
Cool people block you?
Diva@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 19h
the less insufferable assholes responding to me the better as far as i'm concerned
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · -3 pts · 17h
Did you just graduate kindergarten? What a dogshit comeback
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · 0 pts · 19h
Leave an insult on the floor and the owner will be by to pick it up shortly.
CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de · 17 pts · 1d
Yes, even on Lemmy, seems to be a lot more of that.
tidderuuf@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
Probably because people who point out hypocrisy or ask a community to do better than the other side often results in them being echochambered out and Reddit mods love to permaban anyone who disagrees with their strict opinions.
And before you ask. No, that didn't happen to me. I just really like raunchy ass porn.
CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de · 5 pts · 1d
In the last month, specifically? I don’t disagree with what you’re saying but it seems to be targeted, time-wise.
It’s also rather beside the point in the American two party system, with current hardline far right people in leadership. Both sides do commit atrocities, but the current administration is speed running the collapse of the world order.
frisbird@lemmy.ml · 7 pts · 1d
It's so funny that you think the uptick in critiques of Dems in the last month is specifically because the bot farms are spinning up and not because there's an uptick in electioneering that the critics are able to visibly respond to
daychilde@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
It's not so funny that you ignore years of reports about people in other countries paid to post on social media.
It's neither fully one thing or the other, but ignorance of foreign interference only helps them win.
kurwa@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1d
I think billionaire interference is more prominent than foreign interference. You have news stations, Republicans and Democrats all spouting the same pro-Israel, anti-socialism rhetoric.
daychilde@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 1d
Well, yes. It's hard to see someone's entire comment history in a thread, but if you stalked me, you will find me repeatedly railing against our oligarchs as the primary problem we must solve - wealth inequality is the primary problem in the US, all else stems from that or is related, imho.
But that has little to do with the comment to which I was replying. :)
kurwa@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 17h
I think it's prettyyyy related. I mean what kind of comments are we even talking about against dems?
frisbird@lemmy.ml · -2 pts · 1d
Only Russians could hate Democrats, our true saviors.
daychilde@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
I won't say what I think about people who don't understand basic logic, but I will say that's an amazing leap of "logic" there, friend.
agent_nycto@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 23h
Lemmy in my experience has been like this.
"Hey Republican did evil thing"
Well DID YOU KNOOOOOW DEMOCRAT ALSO BAD??!
doctordevice@lemmy.ca · 12 pts · 23h
Swap Democrat and Republican and that's been my experience. No criticism may be brought up about Democrats without "yeah well Republicans are evil so you must hate (insert minority here)" without even asking who I voted for in any election. It's instant worst assumption when all I want is a politician who isn't bought and paid for.
epicstove@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 21h
For me this has been on reddit and YT comments.
lobut@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 14h
It's so weird because it makes me defend the Democrats and I hate the Democrats.
Diva@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 10h
hey i hate the democrats too! you know you dont have to defend them just cause leftists are shitting on their incompetence and complicity
agent_nycto@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 4h
Same
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · 14 pts · 1d
Not as much once I started ignoring a bunch of .ml instances.
OwOarchist@pawb.social · 6 pts · 1d
.ml saying "don't vote!" can practically be used as an election reminder.
Oh, they're telling us not to vote again? Must be an election coming up soon -- I should make sure I've got my ballot.
hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 13 pts · 5h
Yes, I've noticed. The electoralists have started their screeching as they do very two years. They're like cicadas.
Kurtismayfield@lemmy.zip · 12 pts · 4h
Its almost as if these posts are put up to be divisive, and to keep any opposition to the current right wing neoliberal order divided. Huh.
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 9 pts · 4h
Do you think the Democratic Party opposes the neoliberal order?
HalfSalesman@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 2h
TIL Pelosi is the only democrat.
Mulligrubs@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 17m
Did you know she was speaker of the house? That's, like, a big deal.
It doesn't matter what random Democrats think (obviously), it matters what the leadership thinks.
Space_Cowboy92@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 1h
Democrats and liberals by definition are pro capitalism. Stop conflating leftists and liberals. Leftism begins at anti capitalism.
HalfSalesman@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1h
Democrats are a political party, one that hasn't had a consistent ideological set of beliefs throughout its own existence. For that matter neither has the republican party.
They are not "by definition" pro capitalism.
Mulligrubs@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 16m
Well, they've always been capitalist. There's never been a time when they weren't capitalist. So.... odd argument to make.
Space_Cowboy92@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 1h
They 1000% are pro capitalism in the United States. You’re eithe fucking stupid, or not a citizen of the USA to think democrats are not pro capitalism.
MrGeneric@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 5m
Liberalism historically from its inception has believed people have certain rights, right to “free market “ as they say is one of those. In the US Democrats also go by liberal, but not all liberals and democrats know their position is definitionally pro capitalism and liberal has taken on a definition of left of conservatives/republicans that most Americans have not dug in that far.
TLDR To speak American politics their are conservatives/Republicans and everyone else is liberal, including in that camp progressives, leftists, Bernie Bros, anarchists. To speak Leftist politics, you have Leftists, Anarchists, Liberals (including conservatives, liberals, progressives because all their policies are pro capitalism )
ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 4h
Carrying the flame, even.
Hueristic_Autistic@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 9h
Until there's someone that accurately represents GenX and lower, people are just gambling by voting for the next geriatric senior that's gonna go fucking senile, shitting themselves and having agendas that don't benefit anyone of the current age of the actual workforce. We'll keep getting someone who's focused on social security and wars rather than the housing crisis and the AI workforce replacements that are pushing out people who dedicated time and effort and went into crippling debt becoming proficient at a six figure or top five figure earning positions, only to consider switching trades.
How about we get a president for the people, under 50 and doesn't fucking hate us.
Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus · 8 pts · 1d
Russian Psyops, as is the new tradition every 2 years in the US. That's why people blocking the .ml instances don't get flooded by this crap. I can't prove it, but have the intense impression that the FSB has a few accounts over there.
Diva@lemmy.ml · 7 pts · 1d
i actually get checks straight from putin himself, he even licks the envelopes
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 18h
Everyone Who Disagrees With Me Is A Foreigner
edible_funk@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 1d
Many ml zealots have alts on other instances so they can still do their propagandizing.
ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 23h
I wouldn't call it inconsistent with the political season. People are going to express their politics before the election, especially leading up to election day.
I'd be more concerned if people were so disengaged they had nothing to discuss.
uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 7 pts · 23h
Jamille Bouie gave a (brief) deep dive into the similarities and differences between the two parties (here on YouTube).
Both parties have a history of being influenced by business interests over public interests (especially after Reagan, and lobbyists and special interest groups were legally given access to elected officials).
However, the Republican party is openly and deliberately trying to unmake elections in the US at federal and state levels to gain a permanent majority all three branches of government, to turn the US into a one-party autocracy. Meanwhile, the Republican led government is borrowing money at an accelerated rate and funneling it into the pockets of plutocrats and conglomerate megacorporations through government contracts and subsidies.
(And once those plutocrats are done financializing the US into ruin, they will move on to the rest of the developed world, which they can alread easily afford to do. We're seeing signs of it already.)
ETA One morning later, it occurs to me when Republican rule is secured, it's in the interests of the oligarchal plutocrats and businesses to then shrink or eliminate the legislature, say by forcing them to sign an enabling act.
Fewer officials means fewer bribes. It also means fewer lobbyists. (According to How Money Works, the lobbyists and lobbyist-like employees in Washington number in the six digits, a veritable army compared to the officials they're there to petition.)
So it's actually in everyone's best interest to approach single-party autocracy but not actually achieve it. Especially since part of the bribery scheme is to hire retired officials as lobbyists.
I wonder if they collectively have this foresight, or are careening towards their own obsolescence like fossil fuel industrialists towards climate destabilization.
YeahIgotskills2@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 23h
To me, we on the left reinforce this idea that bith sides are the same when we sink to their level. We don't need fake videos or out of context clips of him to prove he's a terrible person. It's there for all to see in his unfiltered words and actions. Same with the slop about Musk that does the rounds. We don't need fake stories to spread the word. It's self-evident in his actual, real life behaviour, and only serves to weaken the truth.
sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz · 3 pts · 19h
Yeah, the problem is that when people act bad they're allowed to keep their roles and continue doing harm. Republican ideology is the act of doing harm but we're just not supposed to ever hold democrats accountable or replace them with anything better.
DjangoFett@lemmy.zip · 6 pts · 1d
Its called "being on Lemmy."
Obviously I'm smarter than everyone because I got to the anti-reddit and have smarmy things to say that even happen to have some education behind them. Oh, and look, proper grammar! Clearly I am A Cut Above The Rest.
I swear, at least half the folks here are so far left they've gone around to reinventing libertarianism from the other side for how they argue amongst themselves.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 21h
i think those are statesian-version libertarians masquerading as anarchists. i could be wrong, but they smell the same as [forgive the statesian metaphor, it's the politicks i know] republicans masquerading as libertarians because they're embarrassed to publicly acknowledge their vote
A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 4h
Man, the libertarians really did a number on anarchism :<
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 4h
pretend i made a good an-cap pun i need more coffee
A404@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 4h
oke
Throwaway131447@lemmy.today · 6 pts · 1d
No. Seems fairly consistent. The only thing I've seen an uptick in is these posts.
Jack@lemmy.ca · 5 pts · 8h
One of those ticks is "genocide" (millions of people).
Another is "corporations enslaving 1-3 trillions animals in torturous conditions their entire lives".
Another is "corporations torturing 2-6 trillion animals to death every year".
Another is "omnicidal climate change" (billions of people and many trillions of other animals).
The 2 sides are not the same, but certain existential and unethical issues actively supported by both sides mean that some people don't want to vote for either of the evil sides who crossed clearly psychotic lines, and prefer to instead vote for decent Green people like Nader.
Zwrt@lemmy.sdf.org · 4 pts · 5h
The issue with a dominant two party system is that voting for a third party gives power to the most centralised party.
I doubt many republicans are going to vote third party. If too many non republicans vote third party the republicans win easily.
This is a well known political mechanism.
The more effective action is to vote for the party than can actually win from the party you want least.
My personal opinion, vote for facism light and then when they win absolute riot and grill them and start protesting over the fact that they are facism light. People always seem to forget the second part. As an other commenter in this post quoted, people who vote for lesser evil are quick to forget they still voted for evil. There should be no celebration, no rest.
Create to much dissent under the trump regime and it will collapse in a civil war. Because they dont care about the optics and they secretly want a civil war as a reason to become a dictatorship.
Create enough dissent under democratic leadership and you strengthen the third parties who dissent with you on a local level and force the dems to either adapt more progressive policy or they risk that civil war which will end their power to which optics are important.
doingthestuff@lemy.lol · 3 pts · 5h
Voting for the lesser evil is why many people vote Republican. I understand most people here don't understand it but very few Republicans really like their party. They just hate the Dem leaders way more. I've voted on both sides all my life, and 3rd party and I've had to hold my nose every single time.
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 3h
The way you create dissent is by making a party lose elections till it changes.
The Democrats got that in 2024. They do NOT seem to have understood the message. Given that they've held the same geriatric, ineffective and neoliberal leadership, they are not intending to understand.
So your choice is to either destroy the party as it currently stands, or give up any illusion of lesser evil. Because going to hell slower matters only if you intend to change direction at some point.
Zwrt@lemmy.sdf.org · 1 pts · 3h
I do absolutely understand and agree with this meme, its a variation on the ratchet effect.
But its based on the winner feeling vindicated because they win.
My proposal is to take away that feeling. Make them lose by winning the election by making them the target of non stop dissent and rightfull anger.
This seems to never happen, that is the problem, but i still think it has more chance then a third party actually getting elected.
Their should be a no kings protests the day after the election regardless of party and ideally every single day after, regardless of party.
Gril them to the point they don’t even want to get elected anymore.
The democratic party is one to fight. But the time to fight is when they are in charge, not when they are the alternative for a party that will masacre civilians if they gey the opportunity.
I support burning down the white house to the ground (in Minecraft) regardless of party, but recommend doing so when its the lesser oppressive people that inhabit it cause you have more chance to get actually get out alive.
Do what you must that you believe is right though. Good luck!
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 2h
This is nonsense. When they are in power, that you've helped them get, is exactly when you have lost ALL leverage over them.
See 2020 for a real life example - just look up the name Neera Tanden.
SoloPhoenyx@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 14h
As we're seeing with Ed Sheeran, people are under the misapprehension that not taking a "side" is the more comfortable position. The reality that 'silence is still speech' hasn't yet sunk in for them.
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 7h
And voting for people supporting genocide is somehow "taking a side" against genocide in the minds of most people here. Following the example of what happened with Ed Sheeran another conclusion to make is that milquetoast attempts at appeasement, while still materially supporting Israel, will get you nowhere fast.
ALoafOfBread@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 1d
I think a lot of it is cognitive dissonance for people who want to, for whatever reason, vote republican but can't ignore that they have made everything much, much worse. Easier on their tiny brains if they can terminate those critical thoughts with "Both sides same shrug"
daychilde@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 1d
It's also great propaganda to get people to stop bothering to vote, so fascists love it - because they rally their base and get the other side to not bother to vote.
Cheebus@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 1d
Well make our own ranked choice voting system with blackjack and hookers!
Cosmonaut@lemmy.today · 4 pts · 1d
You have to be american to believe this because for others, dems and reps are like 99% hitler and 99.5% hitler
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · -11 pts · 1d
That's exactly what the meme says!
Did you know that 99.5 > 99?
Cosmonaut@lemmy.today · 17 pts · 1d
its not what the meme says
it says dems are 5% hitler and reps are 99.5% hitler, completely false.
Katana314@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1d
I still don’t even fully agree with this.
Democrats will give lip service about healthcare when they have no chance of passing it, then when they do, 20% of them will fuss over details, dooming it. But they won’t actively rail against healthcare measures or vote largely in favor of corporate-driven DOD spending packages.
Most of their fault is in choosing not to fight Republican measures as hard as they can.
Mulligrubs@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 1d
They could have passed it, Democrats chose not to. Likewise with minimum wage, and much more.
(look up the nuclear option. They never, ever need a super majority to pass a bill. Ever. It's a parliamentary rule ONLY)
Your comment was edited, so I'll address this sentence only. Democrats choose to accept money from "donators", and in return they purposefully decide, by not challenging parliamentary procedure (which they do often otherwise), to let a bill die. Like, for example, minimum wage increase under Biden.
His platform. They didn't even pretend to fight. And by "fight" I mean change a parliamentary rule by majority vote to pass a bill.
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · -13 pts · 1d
Oh, okay.
Did you know that 99 < 99.5?
DudleyMason@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 1d
Did you know that voting for 99% Hitler over 99.5% Hitler still makes you a fucking Nazi?
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · -4 pts · 1d
Yup!
Did you know 99 < 99.5? Cause it kinda feels like you don't.
DudleyMason@lemmy.ml · 7 pts · 23h
I do know that, Nazi.
I just don't give a single angstrom of a fuck why you think it's worth supporting 99% Hitler over 99.5% Hitler. Because I'm not a Nazi, so I don't care how pure the Hitler particles in the puppet of the bourgeoisie I have to see on Television are.
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · -5 pts · 23h
So you're in favor of 99.5% Hitler, gotcha. Mr. Not a nazi.
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 4h
So you're saying you'd vote for Hitler?
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · -1 pts · 4h
Hey, I know you have trouble with reading comprehension from the other thread, so why don't you try that one again.
Maybe loosen your cap, too. Improve blood flow to the brain.
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 3h
Right. If one is 99 percent Hitler and the other is 99.5 percent Hitler, and you're saying you're going to vote for 99 percent Hitler, you're saying you'd vote for Hitler.
Explain how this is incorrect.
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · 0 pts · 2h
I don't have enough time, crayons, or assumption of good faith to explain it to someone of your intellectual caliber.
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 2h
It's a pretty simple question, I understand why you'd want to continue dodging it though, lmfao.
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 1h
Answer: you're literally the meme in the OP.
lobut@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 1h
I admire your courage to do this. I don't have the energy. Much respect, honestly.
brownsugga@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1h
Lol at the comments in here, it's a fucking dumpster fire. Hey at least it's not Twitter
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 3 pts · 4h
BlueMAGA, now as into conspiracy theories as their red bretheren, and for the same reasons.
I'm sorry you're worried that the Democrats strategy of doing nothing might not pay off, and that endorsing genocide still is such a loser issue. But that doesn't mean the people refusing to share your party loyalty over any common sense are part of a conspiracy, foreign or domestic.
HalfSalesman@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2h
Let me say as a person who used to care about elections for self interest and humanitarian reasons but at this point kind of no longer gives much of a shit about elections other than being fueled by self interest and a new sense of deep and bitter spite:
Voting for a party doesn't equal party loyalty. Pointing out that one party is significantly worse than the one you think people should vote for isn't party loyalty either. You can hate both parties and still vote for one and have good reasons to do so and encourage others to do the same with good reasons to do so.
Either you are an imbecile and don't know what words mean and shouldn't be posting and embarrassing yourself or you are a scumbag liar pretending to not know what words mean. In either case everyone should ignore you.
Godric@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 3h
Average Trump XO:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/releases/2026/03/president-trump-ended-democrats-transgender-for-everybody-insanity/
"Both sides same tho"
myyass@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 15h
I think there should be more focus on what politicians stand to represent, their history, their associations, and what they voted for.
Policy changes are extremely important as well, but it gotten more and more complicated over time. Sounds good on paper, but turns out to be a market grab for corpos.
Then you have people like Charlie Crist... The I will be whatever party that will make me money. He was a republican and now he's a democrat. Right
SoloPhoenyx@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 14h
In countries like the US, that approach would work if we actually had campaign reforms and a concerted effort to break the 'two-party' system (I use quotes because one hand of the corpo-fascist state hits us just a little less hard than the other and at least says "I'm sorry, baby" afterwards).
Rank choice voting, uncapping the House of Representatives, NO primaries at all (WYSIWYG politics), etc,. It would go a long way.
myyass@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 13h
A lot of that would help. I would say the thing I yearn for is to be able to remove politicians from office in a emergency vote reform. Someone like Prick Scott committing the biggest medicare fraud should be voted on life imprisonment instead of a seat in senate.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.social · 2 pts · 1d
Yes.
A lot of them are accounts with a ton of posts reposted from other social media and a handful of comments.
Squirrelknight@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2h
I've heard so called "liberal" media discuss and condemn Hassan Piker more than I've seen them discuss and condemn Trump and all his lackeys combined.
They're the definition of controlled opposition.
spitfire@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 19h
We got to love symmetrists
LuannePlatter@infosec.pub · 1 pts · 4h
veryblandusername@fedinsfw.app · 0 pts · 8h
"Both Republicans and Democrats shit in my soup, I want a politician that doesn't shit in my soup, lets vote candidates that are anti-soup shitting"
"OH MY GOD ENLIGHTENED CENTRIST, YOU'RE BASICALLY HITLER ADJACENT, I AM VERY SMART LOLOLOLOL"
Redditmodstouchgrass@lemmy.zip · -1 pts · 5h
Let me know when you win an election instead of leeching votes.
mattyroses@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 3h
Yes, because your shitty genocide candidates were promised our votes 3,000 years ago or something?
Space_Cowboy92@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 1h
Hey buddy, either leftist are too big a voting bloc to ignore and democrats better learn that and start advocating for leftist policies, or we’re so small and insignificant that you can ignore us and try to win anyways. But you can’t have both and cry that it’s leftists fault for losing.
RunawayFixer@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 1d
The "all options are bad" voter discouragement has ramped back up for a while now. But also interesting is the absence of another kind of anti-democracy discourse: where are the "vote 3rd party" stooges that always become active before USA presidential elections?
If the stooges aren't promoting 3rd party voting now, then does that mean that 3rd party voting is not actually a bad thing during USA congressional elections? I mean, if it were bad for democracy in the USA, then I'd expect the authoritarian bootlickers to be promoting it now as well. But it's also possible that they are and that I'm just not watching the right places, since I don't follow any state specific discussion forums.
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · 8 pts · 1d
There isn't a single third party that is running candidates in a significant number of states, so it's harder to make sound bites. You can't just be like "vote green party or you hate the environment!" When many states don't have a green party.
Oppopity@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 1d
Go to any left wing space and they'll never shut up about doing practice and that involves joining and supporting left wing parties.
reptar@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
It's a 4yr, pres cycle gig. Part of the problem
rumba@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 21h
The third-party stooges are used when it's going to be close, to dilute the winning side. Also, this is a mid-term, so there's less of that there.
Diva@lemmy.ml · -1 pts · 1d
i love how angry it makes people when politicians participate in a genocide and then i refuse to vote for them
HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 20h
Holy shit imma just block Lemmy.ml completely. I didn't realize it was so.....obvious. But this thread just proved it. Wow.
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 4h
Bye!
DarkFuture@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 1d
Thank you, smug moron.
I also love it when people fail to do the more intelligent thing and let a felon rapist pedo traitor run the show and destroy our futures and then act smugly about their moronic decision in retrospect on the internet.
Ah yes. ml. It all makes sense now.
Diva@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 1d
believe me, my vote had zero impact. harris won my state handily.
maybe the democrats should have genocided less and they wouldn't have eaten shit.
agent_nycto@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 23h
Sounds like victim blaming logic.
Oh well if we wanted Jeff to stop eating kids, Barry should've tried harder.
Maybe we should point fingers at Jeff who's doing the kid eating.
Postimo@lemmy.zip · 6 pts · 21h
Yeah everyone knows the real victim of the genocide in Gaza are the liberals that had to deal with the fallout of no one liking their favs.
agent_nycto@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 21h
Im not saying they are victims, I'm saying it follows the same logic as victim blaming.
Postimo@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 20h
I'm aware of what you said. I'm saying it's a gross weaponization of the term.
agent_nycto@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 4h
Poor phrasing then, sorry.
It's still dumb thinking though.
Diva@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 23h
in what world are the democrats the victims? democrat politicians have been co-conspirators in imperial violence for decades.
DarkFuture@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 1d
But you couldn't have known that your dipshit decision wasn't going to make the difference when you made the dipshit decision. Saying you didn't end up killing someone while drunk driving doesn't absolve you from drunk driving.
Why does it matter? One of two parties was going to control your life and affect your future. One was orders of magnitude worse, as we're now experiencing first hand, and it wasn't exactly a secret that they were orders of magnitude worse, so what exactly did you think you were accomplishing by allowing the one that was orders of magnitude worse to gain control of your life and your future?
Diva@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
i don't live in a swing state, there was zero percent my vote was ever going to impact the outcome... and it didn't.
you seem really invested in browbeating people to vote your your favorite color of genocidal authoritarian
DarkFuture@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 23h
I just don't like morons that can't employ common sense.
You can keep saying "genocide" until you wear the word out (and it appears you will). Doesn't change that you make bad decisions because you value your pride over common sense.
Diva@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 23h
you keep saying 'common sense' like it means anything
BanMeFromPosting@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 6h
Common sense is when you do the same thing people having been doing since the 1800's, while expecting something different to happen. Common sense is when you get mad at people who point this out.
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 4h
And you voted for someone promising more genocide.
DudleyMason@lemmy.ml · -2 pts · 1d
Yes, I've noticed the same pre-election uptick every cycle. Bots (or boughts) come out of the woodwork to shame anyone for having principles that are more important than partisanship, and to make excuses for why everyone just has to hold their nose and vote for whatever genocidal trash monster the center right party nominates because the far right party is technically worse.
And here you are, OP, right in schedule.
boonhet@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 1d
Yes. Be sure not to vote in the upcoming midterms in the US. It would be horrible if the genocidal dems win it. Better it be the republicans.
Souvenir@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 6 pts · 23h
The problem with the lesser evil argument is that voting for the lesser evil cycle after cycle ultimately resulted in Trump and possibly the end of American democracy.
Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 4 pts · 23h
No, people voting for the MORE evil is what resulted in Donald Trump. you're mistaking the fact that people voted for Trump as the same as people voting for the lesser evil when that's not what has been happening in America. What's been happening is people have been voting for the most evil option which caused Donald Trump.
Souvenir@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 19h
If the democrats were a genuinely left-wing party that took working class concerns seriously, whether that's migration keeping wages artificially low, industrial decline, jobs moving abroad, stagnating wages, increasing inequality, or the disproportionate influence of the 1% and wallstreet on politics, they wouldn't have lost as many voters to Trump or actually convinced them to turn up and vote.
A drowning man will grab on to a straw. Without a true left-wing party, plenty of working class voters took a gamble on the snake oil salesman, fell victim to the propaganda, or decided they wouldn't vote against him. Union members voted for Trump in droves. That's a damning indictment of the democratic party.
If the democratic party had been genuinely left-wing, those voters would have had less reason to take that gamble. Instead they have steadily moved further and further to the right on many issues, labouring under the false assumption that their base had no alternative but to vote for them, even if those voters were drowning.
To be clear, I think everyone can and should vote against fascism. But the democratic party failing to deliver for working class voters, while the rich got richer, made a populist demagogue an inevitability.
Learn the lessons of the Weimar Republic and how it fell.
DudleyMason@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 1d
No, but not any better for it to be the Blue Wall St fellators over the red ones.
If you were old enough to remember the last time a Dem majority passed legislation that benefited working people more than it benefitted Wall St, you'd be pretty statistically unlikely to be on the Internet at all, let alone on Lemmy.
HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca · 0 pts · 20h
Another .ml bites the dust
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 4h
You don't have to announce that you're censoring yourself, lol.
DarkFuture@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 1d
Greymattertripp@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 4h
How my stupid, loose, hyporcrite, ,whore wife is about EVERYTHING.
beejboytyson@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 3h
.... I feel like this outburst is separate from politics
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · -2 pts · 4h
I wonder what the genocide scoreboard looks like between dems and repubs? Probably pretty even.
mattyroses@lemmy.today · -1 pts · 4h
no, you don't understand - Biden killed as many, but Trump was RUDE about it!
GripenGal@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 2h
Biden didn't kill USAid which killed more people that Israel.
And didn't plan to build a golf course and hotels instead of Gaza
But sure, appearances is the only difference in the world
mattyroses@lemmy.today · -1 pts · 2h
I love this, liberals apparently think the bad thing isn't the genocide, but the fact they want to build a golf course instead of settlements.
GripenGal@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 2h
No, it's the part where that support is enthusiastic and overwhelming and includes fucking up worlds economy by attacking Iran.
... Which benefits ruSSia because of increased petrol prices which is trying to genocide Ukraine.
So really piss off with your both sides bullshit and ignoring the vast differences in the amount of dead people because you have an agenda.
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 2h
Disgraceful
daannii@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 14h
I mean at present. The majority of democratic seat holders are no different than the majority Republican politicians.
Most are owned by aipac and billionaires. One is just more sneaky about it and puts on a progressive mask while undermining progress at every opportunity.
To me it just means we have to clean up the Dem party. It's full of reds.
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -2 pts · 4h
Yes, this OP is an uptick in bullshit fascism.
Godric@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 4h
TIL "Be against the literal fascists" is bullshit fascism
Fancy_Gecko@lemmy.ml · -3 pts · 3h
i'll save this image for when you liberals argue that enemies of israel are just as bad as israel
DarkFuture@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 1d
Both sidesers are slime. Period.
Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 4h
What about people who don't live in your shithole genocidal country and only see the results of your bipartisan foreign policy, which is genocide, starvation, and violent coups?
Are we slime for pointing out there's no difference to the rest of the world which color the rape and pillage is?
SwissArmyKazoo@lemmy.world · -10 pts · 3h
Daily reminder that not voting or voting for a ugly complicit communist bitch with zero redeeming qualities is the same as voting for fascist terrorist
Both siders are the distinctive worst.