334
submitted 1 year ago by GiddyGap@lemm.ee to c/politics@lemmy.world

"We recognize that, in the next four years, our decision may cause us to have an even more difficult time. But we believe that this will give us a chance to recalibrate, and the Democrats will have to consider whether they want our votes or not."

That's gotta be one of the strangest reasonings I've heard in a while.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] just_another_person@lemmy.world 64 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They must want to completely lose Democracy because they aren't getting their way. That's what's in the ballot. There very likely won't BE 2028 election if Rump gets back in.

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 32 points 1 year ago

If democracy isn't working for them, why would they vote for it? Remember, they just voted with Republicans to censure Rashida Tlaib over nothing too, and then there's all the other stuff like student loans, the child tax credit, gaslighting people about how well the economy is going, etc.

Generally voting for democrats on the federal level just means halting or slowing down the inevitable ratchet towards fashism, not actually improving things, because there always a Lieberman or a Manchin ready to sink anything that would be too lefty.

[-] capital@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago

If democracy isn't working for them, why would they vote for it?

Because it can get worse. This seems obvious.

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Of course it can and will. But just like Weimar Germany, the centrist parties (or in this case, the only non-fascist party) are too busy with their heads up their asses (or scare mongering about socialism) instead of solving people's issues. Why would they support the party that will punish the few representatives they have any time they stand up for Muslim issues?

[-] capital@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago

BECAUSE THE ALTERNATIVE IS WORSE.

This also seems PAINFULLY obvious.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

The alternative in this case being "treating people like you need their votes."

The party would rather have Trump than the nightmare scenario of acting like their voters are worth anything.

[-] capital@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

Look, I can’t keep people from hurting themselves. I will call them morons leading up to and afterwards though.

Same as I did for dipshits in red states losing maternity wards now. /shrug

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

You'd rather blame people for a loss than try to win.

[-] capital@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

I’m simply reminding people of the reality that either the Dem or Rep will win.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

If you need a group of people to vote for you, you need to get their votes.

If you have a scapegoat to blame for any loss, you don't need to do anything to get anyone's votes. You'd rather have the scapegoat.

[-] capital@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

That has nothing to do with what I said.

You are desperate to say anything except admit I’m right about that simple fact.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

The choice is between Biden and Trump, yes. One of them will win, assuming neither dies of old age before then. I never argued otherwise and don't intend to start.

Now that I said the thing that you want, how has that changed the situation? Has that suddenly made this group more likely to vote for Biden?

You get to pretend you won an argument against someone who wasn't arguing against the non-point you kept spamming. Congratulations. It's not me you need to convince. I'm already voting for Biden.

If you need their votes, you need to secure their votes.

[-] capital@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

I think someone just needs to remind them of how Trump literally tried to stop the transfer of power last time and any “recalibration” the Dems might do will mean FUCK ALL if Trump gets his way next time as there might not be another election.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

I think someone just needs to remind them of how Trump literally tried to stop the transfer of power last time

They know that now and are leaving anyway.

any “recalibration” the Dems might do will mean FUCK ALL if Trump gets his way next time as there might not be another election

If Democrats don't adjust before the election, they won't get these voters back. Call them any name you want, it'll make you feel better. Make all the dismissals and accusations you want. But none of that will get them back.

[-] capital@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

They’ll regret it.

But here we go again. Only way some people learn is by putting their hand back on the hot burner a second time.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

They’ll regret it.

Maybe the party should try to get their votes instead. But they'd rather have Trump.

[-] capital@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Or they believe they’re doing the right thing. Have you considered that?

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

Anyone who expects me to believe supporting genocide is the right thing is not worth my continued effort.

[-] K1nsey6@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

That's the entire party platform.

[-] Uranium3006@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago

Both options keep getting worse and continuing to paly a rigged game isn't worth it. The Republicans might just cheat and win and all.the.Biden capitulation will have been for nothing

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

You show me the policies the Democrats have that comes even close to this- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025

I mean I don't like the Democrats, but my god... Trump and his people want a one-party state with him as dictator for life and one of his kids succeeding him.

The capitulation would have been for stopping that.

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 14 points 1 year ago

Don't worry. There will be no shortage of people clutching their pearls and smugly saying they stood up for their ideals by not voting for Democrats, as they ride to concentration camps.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Pft no they'll just continue to blame Democrats. How dare they make you vote for the Republican because they weren't inspiring enough for your vote?

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago

Generally voting for democrats on the federal level just means halting or slowing down the inevitable ratchet towards fashism

Is it an inevitable turn towards fascism, or is it people refusing to vote against fascism because Democrats don't "inspire" them?

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 13 points 1 year ago

You can either keep shaming non-voters, or democrats could maybe do something for them once in a while that's not a corporate giveaway disguised as policy.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

If a progressive is running against a fascist, and a moderate chooses not to vote because they think both options are "too extreme", does that mean the progressive candidate inevitably leads to fascism?

I'll happily keep shaming non voters, because their logic makes no fucking sense and I hate such blithe idiocy. I'm no Democrat spokesperson nor party official. If a random person being mean to them online is enough for them to refuse to vote against bigotry, I couldn't care less about their opinion.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

If a progressive is running against a fascist, and a moderate chooses not to vote because they think both options are “too extreme”, does that mean the progressive candidate inevitably leads to fascism?

Last time moderates didn't get their very first choice, they formed a PAC to fundraise for McCain/Palin.

[-] Whattrees 15 points 1 year ago

then there's all the other stuff like student loans, the child tax credit

I see someone isn't following what is happening or how this works. The President, leader of the Dems, changed federal policy to forgive student loans (or at least a big chunk of them for a big chunk of the population) and it got struck down by the Supreme Court thanks to the other party. The Dems passed the child tax credit and then couldn't get it through the house to renew it because of the other party.

Generally voting for democrats on the federal level just means halting or slowing down the inevitable ratchet towards fashism, not actually improving things

Let's say that's true, it's objectively not but let's pretend it is. Isn't that still the obviously better option? How the fuck is fascism today better than fascism tomorrow?

[-] jhulten@infosec.pub 20 points 1 year ago

Then we don't fucking deserve it or it will be time to refresh the tree of liberty. When disenfranchised people tell you that they don't see a difference, ask why. These folk have lost family members and are telling you that, from their perspective the only difference between having a R and a D in the White House is whether you show up to protest too.

[-] iBaz@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

“Refresh the Tree of Liberty”.. that’s some bullshit, Trump gets into office and he’ll chop that tree down himself. Then deport all the Muslims he can. Voting R is the literal version of “chop your nose off to spite your face”.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] capital@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

If they can’t see a difference between having legal abortions and not, they’re fucking idiots.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Yes, Roe still exists and we need to preserve it by... making excuses for not codifying it.

[-] capital@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Hey maybe republicans will do it.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

"Everyone to my left is all the way to my right"

[-] capital@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Na mine is “those idiots think getting the party furthest from their supposed ideal elected will be good for them”.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Then don't accuse me of being a Republican for pointing out that Democrats did fuck all to preserve Roe.

[-] capital@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

I didn’t. I was sarcastically pointing out that we have a 0% chance of that happening under republicans.

Meanwhile if we had elected Clinton we would be looking at a very different SCOTUS and still have Roe standing.

I naively thought that out little Trump boondoggle would remind people of what can happen when they forget what kind of system we all function under but here we are, again, saying “you really don’t want to do that”.

Guess we need another round to make things even worse?

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

I didn’t.

Bullshit.

Meanwhile if we had elected Clinton we would be looking at a very different SCOTUS and still have Roe standing.

If Clinton had run as though she needed votes in states she ignored, she might have won.

But trying to get votes is beneath Democrats.

[-] capital@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

lol the fuck? It’s literally a facetious statement “maybe republicans will do it” while knowing full well that would never happen.

Nothing in that comment even slightly suggests I’m calling you a Republican.

How does one “ignore” a state?

That’s it, if Biden doesn’t come knocking on my door I’m not voting for him. Otherwise, how could I ask him questions and gather information on his policy positions? [this is another sarcastic paragraph meant to point out the fact that people shouldn’t need a visit from a candidate to make a voting decision. TV and the internet exist.]

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

How does one “ignore” a state?

By not campaigning in them.

That’s it, if Biden doesn’t come knocking on my door I’m not voting for him. Otherwise, how could I ask him questions and gather information on his policy positions?

I mean, that's what Clinton failed to do in swing states. And it's why she lost. You may think that swing states have an overinflated sense of their own importance and that talking to the flyover hayseeds is unbecoming, but ultimately, votes are earned, and can be lost. Clinton couldn't grasp that. She lost.

You can't grasp it either.

Maybe it's because understanding it means you'll have to admit that Clinton earned her loss.

[-] jhulten@infosec.pub 12 points 1 year ago

If you can't see the difference between not being able to get an abortion and your mother being dead, then I pity you and your lack of empathy.

If the overturn of Roe has turned you into a one issue voter, then I will pair you off with a 2nd amendment one issue voter and you can angrily jerk each other off.

[-] capital@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Na I just picked an issue that any fucking moron would be able to tell the parties apart on.

Hey maybe Trump will be better on Muslim relations though.

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 4 points 1 year ago

Ah yes, Muslims are famously all pro-choice.

[-] capital@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

TIL discerning between two things is tantamount to support for one of them.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

If you look at Democrats and Republicans and see no difference, you may want to ask yourself why a Trump presidency would be the same for you as a Biden presidency. There aren't a whole lot of non white working class Americans who can say that.

this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2023
334 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19240 readers
2069 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS