TranscendentalEmpire comments on Diarrhea forever vs free puppies

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

In no American reality is Mark Kelly right-wing. Neither was Kamala. The right in America has pulled so far right at this point that no Democrat candidate could be considered right wing.

The center right party in the Weimar Republic wasn't left winged just because they didn't endorse the Nazi party. If we're evaluating evaluation the democratic party under accepted geopolitical terms the vast majority would fall under the center right. Mm

Like Bernie Sanders, who lost the POPULAR VOTE in both primaries by a wide margin? Bernie was not as popular as the internet suggested,

Wh, the 2016 primaries were pretty close considering that the DNC was all but tipping the scales for Hillary.

Hey, I'm onboard. Most of America isn't though.

Would be hard to tell, the DNC hasn't actually gone through a fair primary in quite a while.

The issue isn't that we aren't going far left enough. That's just going to drive a significant chunk of voters away in this country.

That's just chasing after Republicans that are too ashamed to actually lable themselves as right winged. The "centrist" have already clearly signaled they'd rather have a fascist than pay a cent more in taxes. The only thing left to do is to galvanize young voters to the polls.

The only widespread alienation I've witnessed is the Israel thing. That was a complicated geo-political situation that a bunch of people who fail at seeing the forest for the trees let drive a wedge between them and voting for what was best for our country.

What long winded way to say that progressive voters don't want to vote for someone advocating for a genocide...... You are blaming voters for not showing up to the polls for baby killers.

And now we have blatant fascism. Which I believe we will get more of if we keep gambling with super left candidates with other qualities that have been proven to be negative in this bigoted nation of ours.

Such a high bar...... Asking for a candidate that doesn't endorse the genocide of Palestinians, we ask too much!

Kamala Harris was just too woke for the American public! You know, the fucking cop....

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

If we’re evaluating evaluation the democratic party under accepted geopolitical terms

We're not. We're evaluating it within the confines of the United States of America. And in the United States of America a party that supports creating and bolstering social support programs is on the left of the spectrum since the other side seeks to (and is) eliminating social support programs.

the 2016 primaries were pretty close

55% 34 states (Hillary) to 43% 23 states (Bernie). Personally I wouldn't consider that close. Could have been worse.

Would be hard to tell

Not really. On a national scale far left candidates and 3rd parties get crushed to the point of irrelevancy. That's pretty solid proof that, while they might be popular in deep liberal regions, they aren't on a national level and can't win a national election. That's why I warn against thinking candidates like Bernie and AOC are popular because they're big on the internet. Reality has proven there's a big swath of America that is not represented by internet hype but show up at the polls.

That’s just chasing after Republicans

There aren't just two types of voters in this country. There are a TON of independents. You will scare them away with far left candidates. AOC is a bridge too far for MANY voters. Just like Bernie was. Look at our country. Look where we are right now. We are deeply conservative. You can't just leap frog us to a far left scenario. That's wishful thinking and that's what children do.

The only thing left to do is to galvanize young voters to the polls.

Young voter turnout is always awful. Everyone really thought this last one would be different. It wasn't. They had bad turnout like they always do. A lot of people just don't vote until they get older and more invested.

What long winded way to say that progressive voters don’t want to vote for someone advocating for a genocide

Great. Cool. Genocide. Awesome. The word of the year. Let me restart my counter for how many minutes I've gone without hearing it. Regardless of genocide, there was a better and worse choice to make regarding OUR OWN nation. People let a situation on the other side of the planet drive them to make a poor decision regarding their own nation. You can say the word "genocide" until the day you die, nothing changes that. If you don't like ham are you going to starve or eat dogshit instead of just dealing with a ham sandwich? It's not like the other option was NOT genocide. It was a guy being clear he was 100% onboard with Israel no matter what. How dumb do you have to be to not vote or vote 3rd party to help that guy win if you give any shits at all about Palestinians?

Such a high bar

My bar is not allowing an actual fascist from being placed in the highest office in our federal government which the Supreme Court gave almost unlimited powers to, and watching him systematically disassemble our federal government and violate our Constitutional rights. I do actually care more about preventing that than I do about a religious conflict taking place on the other side of the planet.

the fucking cop…

Oh no. A prosecutor (not cop) vs a felon rapist pedophile fascist or a 3rd party candidate with literally no path to victory, or not voting at all. Damn, this one is real hard. Better put my thinking cap on.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 2 points 2 months ago

We're not. We're evaluating it within the confines of the United States of America.

That just cedes control of the overton window to the right and solidifies the idea that anything moderately progressive is depicted as socialism. Definitions matter, there is a reason they are attempting to veil center left ideas as radical communism.

55% 34 states (Hillary) to 43% 23 states (Bernie). Personally I wouldn't consider that close. Could have been worse.

Again, that is without acknowledging the inside electioneering that the DNC got up to, including the rest of the moderate candidates bowing out at the last minute to not split the vote for Hilary.

On a national scale far left candidates and 3rd parties get crushed to the point of irrelevancy. That's pretty solid proof that, while they might be popular in deep liberal regions, they aren't on a national level and can't win a national election.

And the last time there was a national election for a viable left winged candidate was.......? Oh yeah 2016.

Bernie and AOC are popular because they're big on the internet. Reality has proven there's a big swath of America that is not represented by internet hype but show up at the polls.

Again, Bernie was broadly popular with Democrats and more popular in southern states than Hillary. Hillary won because she got the liberal strongholds, she lost to Sanders in the middle America you claim is critical of "the far left". Which is why a lot of studies over that election have summized that Bernie would have been a better candidate to run against Trump.

There are a TON of independents. You will scare them away with far left candidates.

There are a ton of people who claim to be independent, in reality they just don't like to lable themselves as a conservative or liberal. Only 7-15% of self described independent voters aren't just leaners.

We are deeply conservative. You can't just leap frog us to a far left scenario. That's wishful thinking and that's what children do.

The American people don't really know what they want, they just want change. Which is why populist candidates have taken off on both sides of the isle. Most Americans are not politically educated enough to really define the difference between socialist, communist, liberal, conservative, libertarian, or fascist.

Young voter turnout is always awful. Everyone really thought this last one would be different. It wasn't. They had bad turnout like they always do. A lot of people just don't vote until they get older and more invested.

Because no party ever takes the time to reach out for their vote by offering them a significant reason to do so. The last time someone did decent outreach was 2008.

Regardless of genocide, there was a better and worse choice to make regarding OUR OWN nation. People let a situation on the other side of the planet drive them to make a poor decision regarding their own nation.

First of all, that's an incredibly selfish and blackhearted assessment to make about our country helping kill children. Secondly, you are still blaming the voter for the DNC forcing a bad candidate without running a primary.

How dumb do you have to be to not vote or vote 3rd party to help that guy win if you give any shits at all about Palestinians?

When did I say I voted third party...... I said I blame the DNC for running a candidate that was out of touch with the voter basis.

My bar is not allowing an actual fascist from being placed in the highest office in our federal government which the Supreme Court gave almost unlimited powers to, and watching him systematically disassemble our federal government and violate our Constitutional rights.

And yet that is still too much to ask for the DNC, who would rather lose than run anyone who wasn't a centerist.

Oh no. A prosecutor (not cop) vs a felon rapist pedophile fascist or a 3rd party candidate with literally no path to victory, or not voting at all. Damn, this one is real hard. Better put my thinking cap on.

Yeah..... Your only go to is to measure against the worst person in the world. We were talking about the DNC picking a candidate, not about the general election. There were plenty of other option other than choosing a walking corpse till the very last second and then when it was already too late picking the cop.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent