you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 134 points 1 year ago (57 children)

Harris wasn't progressive enough for me so I'm okay with this.

  • source
  • hideshow 57 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago

    I refused to let a wanna be dictator walk into office without my ballot in the box for anyone with a chance to beat him. I think doing otherwise would be an act of tacit approval, and I would be complicit in all the deportations and rolling back of the rights of all Americans.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 61 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    Harris is a woman, so I’m okay with this.

    edit:
    Oh, and because she turned black.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I personally liked her better as an Indian.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    She represented the status quo every single person is so fucking sick of. To the point Donald Trump seemed like the better option to enough people. That's an abysmal fucking failure of, well, the status quo.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago

    I don't think most people understood what the "status quo" was until Trump started destroying it.

    Yes, "status quo" is billionaires, and monopolies, and low-level corruption, and so-on.

    But, "status quo" is also civil liberties, a somewhat functional department of education, not having the national guard chasing down brown people in the street, a bureau of labour statistics that didn't invent numbers to please the dear leader, cabinet secretaries that weren't actively working to destroy the thing they were assigned to lead, low-level crony and nepo corruption and not over-the-top obvious bribery, and so-on.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -28 points 1 year ago* (22 children)

    Keeps' blaming the base for the candidate staying pro-genocide. Precisely what mechanism should be be used to "move" 6 million voters on their anti-genocide position?

    Pretty bad look. Makes you look like a genocide apologist. You should just stop.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 1 year ago (17 children)

    I would take Harris, who was the only other choice in our two party system, any day over Trump.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    How many votes did those other three get?

    Did they miss second place by a vote or two?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [+] -26 points 1 year ago* (7 children)

    You keep trying to blame the voters. Harris was the problem. Blaming the voters (which you did in real time in 2024) handed the election to Trump. You can't, nor should you "move" 6 million people onto the wrong side of history by asking them to support a genocide. You might be able to move a candidate. Blaming voters is a total and complete distraction.

    You (and those who adopt the same strategy as you) are the reason we ended up with Trump. And this toxic, destructive mindset of yours needs to be buried so we can actually have a chance of stopping Trump in the future.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Voting red or not voting is still the reason Trump got into office. He supports the genocide, but ok, HaRriS BaD. Note I don't like Democrats either, but I don't agree with throwing votes away because of one issue that was worse on the other side. The people who didn't vote or voted the other way supported genocide by letting Trump win.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -14 points 1 year ago

    But this is entirely the point. Blaming the voters gives you the opportunity to wash your hands and absolve blame, but it doesn't get us any closer to winning the election in 2024. Not now, and not then, in 2024, when it was happening in real time.

    There was one way to beat Trump in 2024: Get more votes than him. Its obvious now that the argument "less bad" wasn't good enough to convince 6 million people to show up. We ran the experiment. We got the data. We know the outcomes.

    If you, or SatansMaggotyCumFart, or anyone else wants to keep defending this approach, the onus is on you to provide a mechanism for how this argument gets Harris 6 million more votes.

    Satan' thinks they have an axe to grind because they were couching their rhetoric with the expectation of failure from the onset. The argument that "less bad" should be good enough is bad politics and doesn't work because it doesn't convince any new voter who didn't already accept that argument to show up. The more that argument shows up, the more people think that this failed approach to electoralism has legs, the further we get from actually being able to beat the Trumps of the world.

    Harris offered voters nothing, and we were quite literally begging her to throw a fucking crumb of rhetoric saying she would stop arms to Israel, because it was obvious to anyone with eyes that she was going to lose the election if she didn't move on this issue in August. And Satans approach to that point was to push those who were critical of kamala FURTHER out of the party; basically the same treatment the DNC gave to Palestinians at the convention.

    Don't be like Satan. We need to actually win, and Satan's approach will lose us another election. Criticize candidates, intensely. FORCE them into positions that can actually get them elected. Demand that candidates move to where their voters are, because there is quite literally no mechanism to move 6 million voters into supporting genocide, and if you promote that, you are a bad person.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

    It really must be difficult to do the mental gymnastics required to absolve yourself from the key role that you played in the rise of American fascism... I mean, I get why. It must feel awful to know the truth.

    So blame everyone but yourself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    So what exactly is it you think you are accusing me of? Not voting sufficiently hard enough for Kamala? That I argued too strongly that Kamala wasn't winning based on the data I had available and what analysis and inference I could develop?

    Or that I argued that she needed to do something different in her campaign to win based on where the electorate was at?

    Do you genuinely believe that because people pointed out that Kamala was running a disastrous campaign, that this was why she lost?

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I always find it telling when people blame the voters that couldn't stomach voting for genocide, rather than blaming their candidates for chosing genocide.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Its extremely telling; but its also like, brainlet level stupid:

    Their argument is that 6 million voters needed to vote differently, on their own. Like think the process through. How the fuck do you make that happen? What is the mechanism that changes 6 million voters minds?

    There is no mechanism that changes the mind of 6 million people. That's not how elections work. Period. And keeping insisting that the voters "just needed to vote differently", ok, but how? How does SatansMaggotyCumFart change 6 million minds on the matter by just repeating "Trump worse"?

    You can change the mind of one person (the candidate, Harris). We could have moved Harris if she knew she didn't have enough of the bases support on this issue. But Blue MAGA/ BNMW through the entire country to the wolves so they could wash their hands of responsibility.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I agree with you mostly, except for this part:

    We could have moved Harris if she knew she didn't have enough of the bases support on this issue.

    I'm pretty sure the polling was out already, and she knew that she didn't have support. But she cared more about money and building out the War Machine, than she cared about winning the election.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago

    than she cared about winning the election.

    Like, I want to believe she wanted to win, but because of the BNMW/ Blue MAGA, and the censorship across media that resulted of this (I mean we saw it here, directly), she didn't think she needed to earn the bases support.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -33 points 1 year ago* (17 children)

    I choose the lesser of two evils so I can feel smug as wealth inequality spirals out of control and the planet dies around me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    As opposed to? Doing nothing? Voting to accelerate that process even faster? What do you think is going to happen next, now?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You can do both... Most people are trying to do both. Harm reduction and improvement are COMPATIBLE STRATEGIES. If you think you have helped the world by refusing to vote for Kamala, then you have fallen for propaganda. Everyone is sick of the neolibs... Doesn't change that letting Donald Trump get elected was a deathblow to the United States

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Idk, seems like fascism is spreading all over the world. Like it or not we are all linked. The problems we are having here will find their way to your homeland one way or another

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    What, everyone supporting a new party? Wasn’t there a book called Tipping Point? Why hasn’t it happened yet with that?

    I just don’t see how we can change the process, same as you, by everyone suddenly changing their minds before Trump dies setting a precedent for a third term. There aren’t enough Mamdani’s out there.

    Just shooting the shit dummy, not shitting on you.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    If more people did that my hard working tax paying really nice neighbors wouldn't have been deported to god-knows-where.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago

    Yeah, it sucks that our population is so uneducated that they will just spitefully vote out the incumbent when the economy gets worse.

    But no amount of blaming voters will ever win a race, the Democrats failed to manipulate the dumbass masses, it's the Democrats fault they lost.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    The irony of this comment calling out smugness.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I voted correctly last election, sucks our country's to fucking dumb to know what's best for them.

    No amount of blaming voters will ever win an election

    The "protest voters" did not meaningfully impact the election, no matter who the billionaire owned news tells you to be mad at.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    There's more to civic engagement than voting

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    How do we civic engagement our way out of wealth inequality?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Going to pretend this is a genuine question in case someone else sees this.

    First and most obviously: mutual aid networks, food kitchens, and other volunteer organizations are NGOs that provide literal relief from the immediate effects of economic inequalities.

    Additionally, these programs can be used to build relationships with people that agree broadly on these issues and develop the education needed to get people on board with more radical change.

    Second, engagement with local politics can be used to push political party platforms that are more beneficial to everyone. Yes, there is a ton of inertia to overcome, and national parties are heavily captured by capital interests, but a lot of concessions can, and have been, won at local and state levels. Again, even where this effort fails directly, it helps build the kind of connections needed to create the consent needed for more radical change.

    Finally, and most Libby, yes, also vote. Every lever we can keep out of the hands of opposition is one that is harder to use against us later.

    Voting is the least effective of these, but (until proven otherwise) there is still some power available to us through this method.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)