790
Have some civility.
(lemmy.ml)
(not OC)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
790 points (100.0% liked)
Memes
50384 readers
1244 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
Shocking idea but I do not give a shit about the Democrats, maybe they should be trying to appeal to voters rather than the other way around? Oh wait, they cant because as the saying goes your vote doesn't matter unless you buy it in advance.
Nor do I. I did give a shit about preventing the election of a fascist dictator. Apparently that was not as important to you.
If the Democrats wanted to win they should have learned that blaming voters for their losses will get them nowhere. Because its aways the voters fault. If they loose the voters did vote hard enough, if they win the voters didnt vote hard enough so they do nothing, and if they win an outright majority in both houses you better believe that people still didn't vote hard enough because some party traitor will make sure nothing gets passed (or the Republicans will just filibuster).
When do they blame voters? I’ve never heard of that.
If you’re referring to me, you’re sadly mistaken. I only register as Democrat to vote in their primaries, but they are way too far from my values for me to consider myself one. I blame voters for not doing what smart people should be doing; manipulating their rigged system to gain the most influence rather than wasting your vote on the most ethical and impotent option.
Every time a centrist loses.
For realz, I'm not a Democrat! I just vote for them in primaries and general elections and defend them when those mean ol' leftists come around.
The Democratic party may be a big tent party with values of varying progressive pedigree, but the adage of lying with dogs and getting fleas applies.
Bruh, are you really that dense? The most electoral votes a third-party candidate has ever won in our 250-year history is 88. It was Teddy Roosevelt back in 1912.
2028 is your year though. I can feel it.🙄
I rank independent candidates first in NYC, because it actually works as a system to prevent spoilers. I’ve cast votes for independent and green candidates in local elections. I vote for the most progressive democratic candidates in congressional primaries. What I don’t do, is live in a delusional world where voting for a third-party presidential candidate amounts to anything more than abstaining.
For a 3rd party to win, another party has to die. (See Republicans taking over the Whigs for their silence on slave states).
So, if you can get on board with that premise, which modern party of the republicans or democrats do you believe closer to destruction due to their voters abandoning them?
Republican voters seem generally happy with the people they vote for unless some specific policy starts affecting them in a way that Fox News can’t sufficiently spin.
Democratic voters seem to be voting against republicans more than for someone they really believe in.
Now, I’m not into incrementalism or reformism, but if you are, it might make sense to try to put as much electoral pressure on democrats as possible to either try to make them massively shift OR to prove to millions of democratic voters that the party would rather lose than capitulate, causing a mass loss of trust in the party, causing change (presumably).
I’m not sure I’d assume 3rd party voters are all aligned on what they want or expect out of voting 3rd party. Maybe some of them think they could win, but I don’t think I’ve met anyone who thinks that.
That’s absolutely correct. The worst possible fucking time to try and kill a party was when it was the only option other than a fascist dictatorship. Your argument could not be more tone deaf.
Tone deaf is pleading to people to vote for those directly responsible for genocide even though their families are being killed because you want to remain relatively comfy in your own country, reaping the benefits of the colonialism you desperately wished was pushed back into the shadows so you can go about your life unaware of the harm you cause.
You use that excuse every election for two decades and it starts to seem like you're deliberately keeping the country on the cusp of fascism to ensure its never the right time.
Then maybe that party shouldn't have risked fascism by taking advantage of the situation.
That’s true. Everyone knows the Holocaust was the fault of the Communist Party for not being more compelling in 1932.
If the communist party had as little difference between themselves and nazis as democrats have from republicans, you would be saying this without sarcasm.
Do you deflect responsibility with everything you do in life, or just when you engage people online?
Do you blame anyone who supports genocide for anything?
Of course. The problem you’re not willing to accept is there was no way to vote that would effectively stop the US from providing Israel with aid. You wasted your chance to stop fascism and minimize the horrors in Palestine so you could say you’re morally superior, and now the West Bank is being turned into a billionaire resort while the US descends into fascism. Great job. I’m sure the Palestinians appreciate your idealism at their expense.
And as always, the assumption is that anyone who doesn't love netanyahu's genocide didn't vote for harris.
Then again, your issue isn't with how anyone actually voted. Your issue is with people who object to genocide.
No. The democrats were one hundred percent on board with Israels genocide, and the fact you think otherwise is because you are a genocide denier when it's your team doing it.
The opinions of who is a lesser evil are completely worthless when they come from someone who is demonstrably choosing to commit genocide denial to white wash their preferred evil.