top 98 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 31 points 1 year ago (1 child)

We need a "neither" option. If that one wins neither candiate gets to be president and the parties have to pick someone else. Not voting counts as neither.

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

    Also

    I only voted to drive off of a cliff as a joke. I wanted to trigger those sweet tooth ice cream eaters. I didn't want to die.

    Someone told me about people, who regretted eating ice cream. What if you are allergic to milk, amd die from eating ice cream? What if ice cream is a recent creation by to make children and adults addicted to ice cream, to the rest of their lives? Driving off from a cliff is therefore preferable to ice cream, and someone told me only ice cream eaters will die in a fire.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    FPTP is the real winner here. It's why we have Trump. Why can't we vote for proportional representatives or ranked choice?

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

    I believe there are three reasons our broken two party system stagnates and rots:

    1. Our slavery founders intended for our system to be a plutocratic republic that would resist change, not a democracy

    2. The purpose of every state is to maintain order which requires preserving itself

    3. Fixing our system would require our politicians to vote against their own interests, to risk their own power and status... This goes against every ideal that capitalists believe in. Capitalists believe that as long as they follow the rules, they are entitled to everything they can take. The fact that the rules were written by the rich to favor the rich is of no concern to them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 38 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Stay strong, talk to your neighbours if feasible where you live, work together locally. Every major catastrophe in my area of the world, even ones which totally upended my country (Romania) for a generation, my family survived via community and friend groups.

    In a collapsed or collapsing state, mutual aid is mandatory for survival.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    survived via community and friend groups.

    People often downplay associativity and are often encouraged to because power to the people scares the oligarchs. You're easier to subdue if you're alone.
    Join your local community in any ways you can.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You just had 4 years of Biden "reducing harm". How did that work out?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 65 points 1 year ago

    Some of the people refuse to believe that the accelerator and steering wheel do anything, even though the pro-cliff people are clearly steering and accelerating.

    Some people think we've already gone over the cliff, and thus trying to drive the bus is meaningless.

    They're wrong, but they believe it, and people's beliefs are sometimes too precious to let go.

    And some people aren't on the bus, just on video chat, but for some reason are still arguing to drive off the cliff.

  • source
  • [–] 80 points 1 year ago* (18 children)

    The ice cream no longer exists. It hasn’t existed for a long time, and no amount of wishing will bring it back.

    I want ice cream, too. But before we can have ice cream again, we need to not die.

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] [S] 35 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    That's QUITTER talk! I'm voting for Rocky Road.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    You're right - it's more like one group voting to drive off a cliff and the other voting to just drive really close to the cliff in case we decide to go off on some other vote, but so long as the cliff doesn't win now, we can focus on convincing people ice cream is the better option. We don't, and instead wait 4 more years to complain about the lack of ice cream, but that's a separate problem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Still better than not voting to not go off the cliff.

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

    The problem is people have voted for ice cream. They have read about people voting for ice cream for years before they were even born.

    Lots of people want ice cream but we are at a point where people KNOW the cliff exists. They DO NOT know the ice cream shop exists because all the times they were PROMISED ice cream the bus just stopped at a sewage treatment plant.

    The voters are not the problem. They have zero reason to trust the bus driver. Because the bus driver refuses to throw the cliff voters off the bus. Bad optics.

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

    The voters are not the problem. They have zero reason to trust the bus driver. Because the bus driver refuses to throw the cliff voters off the bus.

    The voters chose the bus driver.

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

    No they don't.

    Voters are told to pick which driver they want and both drivers don't listen to directions and can't read a map.

    So some voters don't care who's driving the bus or where it's going.

    Because they have no reason to care.

    They tolerate the shitty ride and shitty passengers while looking out the window. Waiting for the ride to end. But it never does.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Yes, they do. The voters get a chance to decide who those two drivers are, and 85% of them stay home. Then they got to choose between the driver that wants to drive off the cliff, and the driver who swears they'll go get ice cream. And then 40% of the voters stay home.

    Now the driver's taking us off the cliff, and you're whining that the driver that got the most votes is doing exactly what they said they would.

    They have every reason to care, but they don't anyway. You can't abdicate your power and then complain no one listens to you. We had a chance to have better choices, but no one but retirees reliably show up to primaries.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    Jeez more of this b b both sides same stuff.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

    If you think literally saying "they're definitely different, but the difference is smaller than ideal" means "they're the same" then things will never be fixed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    Dude you changed this it from "we want ice cream" to "we want to drive next to the cliff so we can drive off it later". That's not smaller than ideal, you literally changed it both sides the same, just later.

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

    No, I changed it to "one side killing us, the other not, but still leaving it on the table" Which is a huge difference, but still a troubling scenario. Not driving off a cliff is orders of magnitude better than driving off a cliff, but still significantly worse than ice cream.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Dude one side wanted to get ice cream and you changed it to "nah, not that. I'm gonna change it to what the other side wants, just later. Change it to the complete opposite". You completely changed it. Changed everything. Smh. That you either don't want to see that or can't see that... I'm out.

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

    Again, I didn't change it to "later" I changed it to "if the cliff drivers win the next vote, it'll be a short drive." Do you really think that's inaccurate? Look at how Trump drove the country into the ground in his first 4 years, and how easy it was to just keep doing it even after we had 4 years of democratic leadership that was meant to get things back on track. I don't call that "ice cream," I call that "sitting by the cliff waiting for the cliff drivers to be in power again." We need leadership that will drive away from the cliff even if it upsets the people and politicians that want to drive off it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    This is kind of a good analogy for ranked choice voting, to be honest.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The bus analogy would have been better if the only two choices were 1. to run over a bunch of poor brown kids (Israel's genocide) and being pissed on by billionaires before driving off a cliff OR 2. run over slightly fewer brown kids while being given moldy bread to eat.

    If liberal democrats truly believed in democracy than they would fight to give us a multiparty system where people don't have to vote for genocide just to prevent a more evil tyrant from taking power.

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

    Ranked choice voting is the answer. Our team sports mentality is why we support our team even when they're wrong. Without a team mentality Trump would never have been able to take over the Republican party. With us or against us will be the end of our country.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    Remember, no matter how beautiful, morally righteous, or gratifying your strategy is, you should really look at the results

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    You're right. And the results show that the idea that the election was lost because progressives stayed home is a complete historical myth.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/26/2024-election-turnout-trum-00426544

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I don't see how your link supports your assertion.

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

    Well then you need to work on your critical thinking skills, it's pretty obvious. The election wasn't lost because people stayed home. If more people had voted, Trump would have one even more. Kamala didn't lose because progressives stayed home. She lost because she abandoned enough policies that support the working and middle class that many of these voters voted for Trump instead. The online progressives that centrists love to blame thing on held their nose and voted for Kamala anyway, as unlike liberals, progressives will actually vote blue no matter who.

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

    Again, the article does not support your assertion. It seems you have been led on by the suggestion presented in the article. If you consider the statistics the author presented without that suggestion, you'll realize they're fairly unrelated data points that add up to... several interesting, but unrelated data points.

    Furthermore, it's a nation wide data set, right? So how does that break down along state lines? For example, did enough people stay home in Michigan to affect the outcome of Michigan? We don't know based on the data presented in the article.

    Now, would you like to discuss my critical thinking skills? If you have more data I'd be happy to consider it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    This is that garbage Pew report from

    … 8,942 U.S. citizens ages 18 and older who are members of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP). We verified their turnout in the five general elections from 2016 to 2024 using commercial voter files that collect publicly available official state turnout records.

    It’s bullshit and the reason why is right there - and the fact that they ran the survey two weeks after the election. Idiocy.

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

    You care to support your unfounded assertions? Two weeks is still pretty close to the election. You can only do so much on day-of exit polls. Two weeks later is very close to the election. And you quoted a paragraph, but I see nothing actual objectionable there. What exactly is your problem with anything you quoted? That's a very large sample size. You're just dismissing the study's methodology as "bullshit" by fiat. It's bullshit because you arbitrarily decided it was bullshit. Or more precisely, it's simply bullshit because you didn't like the conclusions reached. Blue MAGA indeed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    My strategy of voting as much as possible ended up with Republicans controlling all three branches of the federal government.

    Not the best results.

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

    Right, not the best. Would you change your strategy?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago*

    You're on a bus with 9 people. 1 guy takes up 2/3rds of the bus by himself. 3 people take up 90% of what remains, and the last 5 are stacked on top of each other on the last remaining seat.

    The one guy with 2/3 of the bus says he wants to throw two of the other passengers off a cliff at random so he can have their seats. 2 of the 3 in the next segment think this is a terrible idea and say we should keep things as they are, with one voting for it because he thinks somehow everyone will benefit from the top guy having more space. The bottom segment votes 3-2 in favor of the idea, because they hate the people in the second group for taking up space they could use, and like the idea of possibly throwing them off a cliff.

  • source
  • [+] 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    Being made aware I’m lashed to a bunch of psychotic apes is terrifying and makes me want to kill the rest of the people on the bus and take control myself.

    People are the absolute worst.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago* (22 children)

    I just knew the comments were going to be us tearing each other apart.

    I'm just thinking out loud here. What if Progressives that are registered as Democrats changed their registration to independent? Also, stop sending them your money. We could organize it to happen over one week. Then keep it that way for 30 days. See how much power we truly have. If we can show the Democratic party that they would never win another election without us, maybe they would be more likely to listen.

    We have to be careful though, I know this President is running roughshod over the Constitution with the blessing of SCOTUS and Congress but they don't have enough votes or State legislatures to amend the Constitution. If they get that, then that truly is the end of this experiment.

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    I just knew the comments were going to be us tearing each other apart.

    That'd be point of re-re-re-rehashing this. Zohran Mamdani, using the big S word, recently won a primary. So now we all gotta go back and drag through this mud some more.

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

    We just saw Progressives not voting for Harris, which lost her the election. The Democrats ignored that.

    The good part is that the Democrats have no plan right now. So if anything Progressives should register to primary in better candidates. Also donations, but to individual candidates. This is why New York mattered so much. If Progressives can win, then it is a huge problem for the neoliberals.

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

    Nope. That's not what happened in 2024. This is victim blaming. Progressives did not cause Harris to lose. Progressives refused to go full Orwell and pretend that Harris was the messiah. They had no problem speaking out about her failures and trying to get her to do better. But in the end, progressives still turned out to vote for her. Harris didn't even lose because people stayed home. If the voter turnout had been higher Trump would have done even better.

    Biden won in 2020 because of two key reasons. First, he had covid helping him. Second, he adopted a lot of policies popular with the working class that would provide direct support to the embattled working and middle classes. Harris abandoned this path and only offered paltry heavily means-tested wonkish tax credits for a handful of people. She certainly wasn't running on something like Medicare for All.

    Yes, progressives shat on Harris in a lot online discussions; she was a deeply flawed candidate. A lot of liberals took a more Orwellian bent, wanting to censor any and all criticism of her. They forget that responding to criticism is the fire that forges strong candidates. Instead they shielded her from criticism, and it just made her look weak.

    Harris lost because her policies were so uninspiring that she couldn't appeal to enough low-engagement voters to get her over the top. The politically active people on the left who spend time talking politics on social media? Yeah, they held their nose and voted for Harris. Her status on Gaza cost her a lot of Muslim votes, but Muslims aren't hardly a reliably progressive voter base. If it weren't for the right's raging Islamophobia, most practicing Muslims would naturally be Republicans. It's only the right's historic Islamophobia that gives Democrats any chance with Muslim voters. Naturally, the religious conservatism of most Muslims should fit right in with Republican values. And predictably, as Harris chose to run a campaign leaning in to Islamophobia, Muslim voters found little reason to support her. Resisting Islamophobia is one of the few reasons most Muslims have to support Democrats. If Democrats aren't going to resist Islamophobia, then Muslims might as well support the party that aligns with more of their beliefs.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (16 children)

    You can't play Mexican standoff because the Dems have an out: the center voter. If they left doesn't vote them in, the Dems will go to the center to find voters. And a center voter is worth double because it's a vote for you plus a vote taken away from the GOP.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    The Harris campaign tried to appeal to the centrists, and look how that turned out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (14 children)

    She looked at Biden who did left things and what did that get him? Lose the house for years 3 and 4. And polls showed he was going to lose. Aka the left never showed up even after getting some left things.

    Harris ran on women's rights, mf'ing democracy, and while she didn't say it it was clear there would be continuation of student debt relief, green energy, EVs, infrastructure, etc. But it didn't work because "it's the economy, stupid". The left couldn't even show up for their own human rights.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    Biden did very, very few "left" things. His policies were center-right. (For example, when the railroad workers threatened the economy with a strike, the left-wing response would be to temporarily nationalize the rails; the right-wing response would be to protect the railroad companies and remove the workers' ability to strike.) Progressives showed up to vote for Harris, anyway, as the numbers show. The mythical "centrists" did not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    Biden: Green energy, EVs, drug price control, PACT act, Chips act, student debt relief, build back better, etc. Rail. That's just of the top of my head. But it's always n n n not enough for the left. He did left things but the left wasn't going to show up. Every. Single. Time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (8 children)

    He did some lefty things sure, but most of those were dramatically weaker than they could and should have been. He also spent the majority of his efforts on right-wing policies.

    You can keep complaining that it's not enough for leftists, and you'd be right. Someone who half-asses a bunch of leftist policies, and hardcore pushes a bunch of right-wing policies is not going to be supported by leftists.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (7 children)

    Are you serious? The question is how do you get more left things? The answer is to reward the left things that happen. Tell Show them that doing left things gets you voted in.

    Right now they are punished for the left things they do. So what's the logical course of action? Drop them and move to the center. To find voters that actually show up.

    Cmon. This is simple.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (6 children)

    They are punished because they sprinkle a couple of left things into a mountain of right-wing policies, and keep telling us that we should be grateful. When actually try to push left-wing stuff, they get massive support from voters. When they continuously push right-wing bullshit, they lose support.

    Look at Sander's/AOC's approval ratings. Look at the Fight the Oligarchs rallys. Look at the BLM movements. Look at the NYC election.

    Then look at the votes for the increasingly right-wing presidential candidates. Look at the approval ratings for those candidates.

    Notice a correlation? When they lean left, they get more support from voters. When they lean right, they get less support.

    How has moving to the center been working out? If moving to the center has been helping them get more votes, why do they keep losing in what should be easily-winnable elections?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (5 children)

    Polls (effectively what they are) are idealized. I remember one person before the election kept saying "polls show people don't want fracking Dems just need to be against fracking and it'll be a landslide." Yeah fucking right, right until the GOP starts shouting "it'll raise raise gas prices, they're going to raise gas prices. Prices prices prices, inflation inflation inflation". Trump won on the economy. When the rubber meets the road, in actual elections, on the national stage, the left policy gets punished and hilariously by the left.

    Oh yeah more on polls. I already covered it: Tell Show them that doing left things gets you voted in. Polls is telling (kinda). Votes is showing. Showing is orders of magnitude more important.

    They only win when they go to the center. Here's my copy paste because I have this conversation so much.

    Ok let's go through this chronologically.

    Bill Clinton: After successive Dem losses Bill figured out "it's the economy stupid", aka center policy, not leftist policy. Plus when you run against an incumbent (Bush senior) you generally run from the center. So that's what he did. And he won.

    Gore: After the population hopefully warmed up with Bill Clinton, he stuck his head out left with climate change. And bam he lost the election. Thanks 3rd party protest voters! Aka: The left never shows up.

    Obama: So guess what Obama learned? Don’t stick your head out. He ran on broad “hope” and “yes we can” and having energy, hoping the ambiguity would be enough considering Bush’s disastrous wars. And he won.

    More on Obama: So he enacted the ACA. That's great, right? The thanks Obama got for that was to lose the House of Representatives for year 3 and 4. And lose the House of reps again for years 5 and 6. And then lose both the House of reps and the Senate for years 7 and 8. He enacted left policy and: The left never shows up.

    Hillary Clinton: So what did Hillary learn from the last 6 years of Obama? She learned that the left never shows up. So she only stuck her head out with a big position to left on the map room to climate change. She basically declared war on climate change. You know that big existential issue that all the leftists care about, right? The big important issue that the left says they want so badly, right? And guess what happened? Bam she lost. Thanks protest non-voters! Aka: The left never shows up.

    Biden: Just like Obama learned from Gore, Biden learned from Hillary that you don't stick your head out left on anything. Not one thing. And he was running against an incumbent, so once again when you do that you run center. And he won.

    Biden in office: But he did left things anyway. He did green energy, EVs, drug price control, PACT act, Chips act, etc. And what were the results? Lost the House of Representatives for years 3 and 4. Polls showed him losing the election to Trump. He enacted left policy and: The left didn't show up for midterms, and was not going to show up for the next election.

    Harris: Harris ran on abortion rights, democracy and it was apparent she'd continue green energy. She relied on the left to show up for their rights and for democracy. They couldn't even do that. Aka the left never shows up. (Btw Bill Clinton was right, it's the economy stupid. Trump won on the economy.)

    And people are amazed that they don't run a big left platform? Every time they rely on the left they lose. Every Single Time. And the next guy learns to go to the center to win. Because the center voters actually show up.

    With this history, you’d be an absolute fool to cater to and rely on the left. Because. They. Never. Show. Up.

    So how do you get them to move left? By giving them victories first. Consistent and overwhelming victories. Show them it’s safe to take policy chances. Because right now every time they run on left platforms or enact left policies, they lose.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

    Gore won the votes in election. The system wouldn't let him claim the win.

    Yes, Obama gave a us the terrible ACA, which was drastically less than it should have been. He also abandoned most of his lefty campaign promses, and basically ran as a Republican, as he himself admitted. So yes, lefties didn't show up after that. Why would lefties be happy about a supposedly leftist candidate who self admittedly ran like a Republican?

    Hillary lost because she is cartoonishly evil, and clearly campaigned on things that she had no intention of doing. She is practically the embodiment of the lying Corporate Democrats, so I don't see why you think she would get votes from the left.

    Biden barely won when Trump was at his lowest. It took our lowest-approval rated president, at his worst time, for Biden to win. And once Biden got into office, he ran mostly to the right, with a few small leftist things sprinkled in. His approval kept declining as he continued to do right-wing things. Why you think a right-wing running president should expect to get votes from the left is beyond me.

    Harris said she approved of, and would continue with Biden's mostly right-wing policies, all while chasing to the right after Trump.

    You keep saying that leftists don't show up, but then point to mostly right-wing politicians, who run mostly right-wing campaigns and policies as your evidence. Meanwhile, actual leftists keep gaining popularity. We have plenty of evidence of voters showing up for the left, but we don't have evidence of politicians actually doing lefty things. It seems logical to me that when politicians pretend they are on the left, but end up moving to the right, that leftist-voters don't show up for them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

    If left policy was this "if they just did it, it'd be a landslide" that the left keeps telling me, then gore would have been a landslide, right? Nope.

    Obama. That's what I said, he ran center. and guess what happened???? HE WON. That was the whole point. The only times they win is when they go to the center. Thank you for admitting it. [Slow clap.]

    But when in office he did left things like the ACA: N n n n n n n n n n (how many n's should I have?) not good enough! This is a perfect example of how nothing will be good enough. Want more? They have to walk before they run.

    Hilary: "I'll do this". You: "LIAR". How do I even respond to this, you're just shutting out reality at this point. No conversation can be had, so this is my last message. Oh and it doesn't even matter because that's what she ran on and that left policy is what lost. That was the whole point.

    Both Hilary and Obama you're doing mental gymnastics to avoid the point: center wins elections, left loses elections. That was the whole point.

    Biden. That's how he won. That was the whole point. You're 3 for 3 on missing the point that center wins and left loses.

    Green energy. you: "RIGHT WING NONSENSE". Student debt relief. You: "MORE RIGHT WING NONSENSE". Repeat ad nauseum.

    I was wrong, it wasn't n n n not good enough. You're just doing mental gymnastics to avoid the point and then shutting out reality. Ciao.

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

    You are correct. The ACA was not good enough. We could have healthcare for all, but instead we got giant handouts to Health Insurance companies. Once again, Obama himself said that he was basically an old-school Republican. It seems pretty logical to me that leftists don't want right wing politicians.

    If being a leftist loses elections, how come the aforementioned politicans campaign on leftist policies, then abandon them? It seems like the entire point of their strategy is to appear leftist, then suddenly run to the right once they get elected. That strategy only works if leftists bring in the votes.

    If you keep ignoring my points about how badly Trump had to be for Biden to win, then no, you won't ever really understand what I'm saying. But if you actually engage with what I said, that changes things.

    Biden did half-ass green energy. I applaud him for that, while saying it was still nearly not good enough. Biden did less than the bare minimum that he campaigned on for debt relief. Yes, I don't think that is good enough.

    A left candidate would not have done more drilling for oil than first term trump. A left candidate would have eliminated the student-debt system altogether. A candidate that leftists would vote for would not have deported massive amounts of people, while bailing out his rich friends, and bombing children.

    Biden ran on a lot of those things, and as he abandoned them, his approval rating tanked. Weird, how that works.

    You are correct, that your examples of right-wing politicians doing minorly leftist policy aren't good enough. I don't know why you think that is an argumentative win.

    I haven't shut out anything. I keep bringing up points, and you keep saying "n n n not good enough", as though it's an actual argument.

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

    All of those are center-right policies, tinkering with the mechanics of a fundamentally neo-liberal system, when that system is slowly crushing us (57% of Americans living hand-to-mouth). Imagine why voters aren't fired up to come out and support a boost to, say, semiconductor research spending to strengthen U.S. supply chain resilience.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Called it: n n n n n n n n not good enough.

    Want more? They have to walk before they run. Right now y'all don't even want the walking, you'd rather protest no vote in Trump lol.

    Or: Aka you'll never show up, so why would they cater to you? Why would they cater to the voter who will quite literally never show up.

    *Ps I also like how you don't respond to the rail bit, your whole big argument.

    In what world is green energy right (sorry, center right) wing. This is... insane is the best word I can find. Ciao.

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

    I’m just thinking out loud here. What if Progressives that are registered as Democrats changed their registration to independent? Also, stop sending them your money. We could organize it to happen over one week. Then keep it that way for 30 days. See how much power we truly have. If we can show the Democratic party that they would never win another election without us, maybe they would be more likely to listen.

    I mean, honestly, if you manage to coordinate action on that scale, you're probably better off either attempting to take over the Dems or start a third party entirely.

    We have to be careful though, I know this President is running roughshod over the Constitution with the blessing of SCOTUS and Congress but they don’t have enough votes or State legislatures to amend the Constitution. If they get that, then that truly is the end of this experiment.

    Next election isn't for a year and a half, and there's no guarantee that it'll mean anything. If you want to try anything radical in electoral terms, now's definitely the time to do so. The chances of failure substantially changing our position is... low, unlike previously.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    i mean i've had some ice cream, i contest the validity of the last position

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    But have you ever ridden on a bus with three people who want to drive off a cliff and four who don't care? Because that's the reality here! \s

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    But have you ever ridden on a bus with three people who want to drive off a cliff and four who don’t care? Because that’s the reality here! \s

    Sorry that they didn't teach what an analogy is in your elementary school.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    This one's much simpler than that; one party will throw people I love into a concentration camp in the next four years, one party will not. I will vote for those who will not. The rest is just bullshit.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] [S] 16 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    You sound like one of those dangerous shitlibs, not wanting people to be thrown into concentration camps. Don't you know that the lives of the likes of you and me are acceptable sacrifices so that the wannabe revolutionaries can (checks notes) do nothing but feel really smug about how superior they are to The Establishment?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    There's a part of me that thinks these people fell for very well crafted propaganda that kept them away from the voting booth and, like Magats, they keep doubling down instead of admitting they got duped and moving on.

    In a binary system where my choices are Nazis or not Nazis, anyone who comes along and tells me not voting is the best option is my fucking enemy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago

    I had people unironically tell me that Kamala Harris was no better than Hitler, and that she & Trump were the same but just did the exact same harm in "different areas," which is why it looked like they were any different policy-wise. 💀

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

    Since both support Genocide I don't think it's fair to say it's nazis vs non-nazis. It's more like genocide over there vs genocide maybe here and there. That's assuming that the Republicans will actually go full authoritarian dictatorship which isn't necessarily going to happen. A lot of people are speculating that things will happen that didn't last time Trump was in charge. It definitely could happen, but I don't think it's as likely as people are making out. Trump would have to convince all of the keys to power to abandon democracy, and that hasn't happened yet. He is already getting push back for certain things, not to mention braking up with Elon.

    Anyway I sure am glad I don't live in the USA. Although honestly my own country is having its own issues. The supposedly left wing party seem to have decided they have the same level of support for trans people that the right wing one does, or at least their leader is willing to follow the conservatives on that issue. I almost regret voting for him now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    That's assuming that the Republicans will actually go full authoritarian dictatorship which isn't necessarily going to happen.

    Wtf? They already have. They've ballooned ICE's budget to more than that of the marines. They want to deport 65 million latinos. That's all the Latinos. They've already gone full authoritarian dictatorship while you were watching

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    That's assuming that the Republicans will actually go full authoritarian dictatorship which isn't necessarily going to happen.

    It has happened, is continuing to happen, and will get worse. ICE now has a large budget than most militaries and Trump is exploring ways to "deport" American citizens (probably to concentration camps). They're exploring ways to essentially make migrant farm workers slaves. The supreme Court just made it harder for judges to pause executive orders. The US (of which I'm a citizen) is fucked.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›