732
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 23 Feb 2024
732 points (95.2% liked)
politics
18073 readers
4511 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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!
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Next women will have to marry their rapist.
Remember the anti abortion bullshit is from the same book, that mandates women marry their rapist!
The good thing is most of the populace is growing to hate these fuckers. Lol They'll be kicked out and never win another election. Ever.
Don't count on it. We've been saying that since the 90's.
Conservatism is a plague that must be dealt with. Voting is needed, but it's not all that's needed.
This doesn't align with how well Republicans are polling nationally right now in general election matchups.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/2024GeneralElection.html#!
This should be extra concerning to Democrats and good news to Republicans because in recent elections when the electoral college has been close, Democrats were ahead in the popular vote.
The cons are planning on fixing that little problem they have and it's: majorities voting in things called elections.
Remember HRC helped Trump win in the Republican primaries because she thought he'd be easier to beat.
These are the same people who tell you progressives and leftists are "too radical".
We can't defeat fascism without fighting moderates. They would rather lose to fascists than compromise with leftists and progressives.
I mean, can you fault someone for thinking Trump was unelectable?
While Hillary/Democratic party are at fault how they treated democrats during that election cycle, I think the US at large was at fault for its overall outcome.
Why did so many establishment Democrats get this one wrong though? I'll tell you exactly why. They were/are so in love with their technocratic elitist bullshit that they had no conception of how fed up most of this country is with them.
Hillary was the most establishment candidate possible running against a political outsider with attitude in a country full of people who have been routinely ignored for decades.
It sure wasn't obvious to me that Trump couldn't win. I remember every single clueless thing Hillary did in that campaign raising my concerns a little bit more. It became more and more obvious as the campaigns went on that Trump was a serious contender.
She and the rest of the establishment couldn't see the threat because their egos got in the way, and I do blame them for that.
I think they truly underestimated just how many deplorables there are, and how racist/misogynistic/homophobic they really are.
The "deplorables" were mostly already reliable Republican voters though, so I don't think that was much of a factor.
The states where the election was lost were in the rust belt. The swing came mostly from. Obama to Trump voters. The commonality between the two is that both disengenuously ran as reformers.
I think these kinds of statements just seek to dismiss the very necessary conversations we need to have about the ineptitude or outright corruption of establishment Democrats which results in unnecessary losses or unnecessarily close races. I also think people are very quick to revert back from this broad blame attitude as soon as leftists or progressives state they'll be voting 3rd party or write in. Ultimately moderates are the largest voting bloc in the Democrat party. If we assume the primaries aren't straight up rigged by the DNC then it's the moderate voters who control the outcome of the primaries. The lions share of the responsibility falls to them and yet they've done nothing to change course.
I think you're agreeing with them here. There's a point to be made that the voters are the problem too.
No. When moderates become the focus of the blame they deflect with "Well we're all responsible." but when progressives and leftists say they're voting 3rd party or write in they're like "You're the reason why Trump won in 2016." There's never any moment where the moderates take responsibility for the garbage candidates they vote for in the primaries or their complete refusal to compromise with leftists or progressives despite desperately needing their votes.
Let me ask a hypothetical -- if Sanders had been the candidate, would you have expected him to move a bit to the right to compromise with moderates and get their votes?
The whole "earn my vote" model often doesn't consider the opposite. If you won't vote for a moderate candidate because they haven't earned your vote, why should a moderate vote for a progressive candidate if they feel their vote hasn't been earned? What if moderates aren't voting for progressives in primaries because the progressives aren't trying to earn their vote?
I'm saying this as a progressive by the way. I think it's a worthwhile critique that if moderate candidates need to earn our votes, so do progressive candidates. And if moderates don't feel like their votes have been earned by the progressive candidate, it's worthwhile for us to talk with them and explore why. I'm not going to deign to think that I'm right about everything and morally superior compared to them.
I did though. I voted for Biden in 2020. I compromised and got nothing in return. I'm out. I'm not voting for Biden again. I'm voting 3rd party or writing in.
You've just demonstrated how backwards and ridiculous the thinking is. Moderates have gotten so used to winning elections on their own they don't even realize when people are compromising for them. They take it for granted and then throw a hissy fit when expectations come their way. Even worse they have the audacity to call it "entitled", "spoiled" and so forth. It's a complete lack of self awareness.
Moderates would rather lose to fascists than compromise with progressives and leftists. It's pathetic.
I mean I agree, that's my point. I don't like the "earn my vote" model of thinking
What is the benefit of democracy if candidates aren't trying to earn your vote?
Candidates are trying to earn the majority vote, not your vote specifically. Democracy is largely about compromise. It's not about convincing people that you're right, but about serving the majority. Your issue here is with the majority of voters, not the people seeking their votes.
From who? Does a majority who cannot win general elections on their own have to compromise? Or is the compromise purely one way?
It's both. The moderates as the majority voting bloc decided on Joe Biden in the 2020 primaries and are failing to remind him he can't win elections on their votes alone. Joe Biden should realize this and tell the moderates they can't win elections on their own and will have to concede some policy decisions to progressives and leftists.
Progressives and leftists don't need to be reminded democracy is about compromise. It's the moderates and the people they elect who fail to understand this.
Re the first point, that's an issue with your system of democracy, (I agree that it's stupid and outdated) again not an issue with Hilary herself.
I'm afraid I have to disagree with your second point, I think we fundamentally disagree on what democracy is. Electees are there to serve the people who vote them in, if the minority of those people want change then they need to convince the electorate, not the candidates.
For context, I think we probably align quite closely politically, I just feel your expectations are misplaced.
You didn't answer my question.
Whatever your political views actually are you're in here doing the work defending moderates for their shitty behavior. If you spent your time arguing with them instead of someone you supposedly align with maybe we'd get somewhere.
Yes, I can fault someone for thinking Trump was unelectable; any professional politician who thought that would have been incompetent. But more importantly, Hillary Clinton isn't incompetent - she knew it was a risk, and she played Russian Roulette with the country. Beyond that, she has been part of the neoliberal establishment that has set policies that we know historically set the stage for fascism, for decades. It's amazing to me that people can look at the most powerful, privileged, and entitled people in our country, and somehow think they are guiltless, but put all that weight on our fellow citizens.
Last I checked, Hillary wasn't running this year 🤔
So?
So, your comment was just out of left field. By all means, I dislike Hillary and what her astronomical failure has lead us to and I completely agree that the DNC is borderline useless if not outright harmful, but your comment appears to shoot down the message just because of who it comes from.
The point here is focusing on the conservatives going after further reproductive rights issues and you're over here going "both sides are baaaad!".
Like, at the end of the day I don't disagree with you, it was just kind of random lol.
I think it's relevant to point out HRC is the reason we're living in this reality.
That's an absurd take. Fyi I'm from the UK and don't have any skin in the game, but blaming the opposition instead of the people who are actually causing the issues is just bizarre and kind of self destructive. Yes the DRC made mistakes, but they aren't responsible for what the GOP have done since.
HRC helped Trump win the Republican primaries in 2016.
Do you believe that she actively helped trump over herself, or that she messed up? It's so much easier with hindsight...in essence you're making the "the west is responsible for ww2" argument, sure they messed up with the restrictions put on Germany after WW1, but WW2 wouldn't have happened if it wasn't for a bunch of tyrants...
So many people seem to think they have a right to the perfect candidate for them, but democracy is about the best compromise for the masses. (In reply to some of your other comments on this thread)
It's a well documented fact.
https://news.yahoo.com/risky-strategy-democrats-using-win-095210806.html
...over herself
Hillary Clinton helped get Trump elected. That's enough for me to confidently call her a piece of shit. Is it for you? Or is it okay to help Trump in some situations?
You've deliberately avoided answering the question. Promoting one other candidate because you think it's better for you is a very legitimate strategy, the fact that it backfired is another thing. You seem to be implying that she somehow intentionally screwed everyone over when her intention was clearly to win, other factors had a far greater influence (ie the meddling of other countries)
For the personal interests of Hillary Clinton? Absolutely. Doesn't change the fact that she's a piece of shit.
Anyway I'm not interested in answering your question. I'm just here to remind everyone Hillary Clinton is a piece of shit.
ok, so you didn't understand. you misquoted the aboe poster by leaving out the "over herself" part. That is the key part of the above posters point, that Hillary did try to become president for real, but screwed it up. The above poster was asking if you really believed that Hillary never even tried to beat Trump and become president. I am pointing this out because you are essentially talking past the above posters point.
And I'm pointing out they're talking past the point I made in the comment they're responding to.
See how that works?
Not at all correct, I'm trying to establish whether you believe Hilary deliberately got trump elected, or whether she screwed up. You seem to be avoiding the answer because it doesn't fit your narrative, made even clearer by your choice to cut out the key part of my question when paraphrasing. If you aren't open to a legitimate discussion then there isn't much point in continuing.
(Paraphrasing, ignoring questions to make your own point etc see the exact traits I see and hate in the right, usually I can have proper honest conversations with fellow lefties so I have to admit I was surprised by your tactics here)
No you're trying to deflect the conversation away from a very simple fact: Hillary helped Trump get elected. Anyone who helps Trump get elected is a piece of shit. Hillary Clinton is a piece of shit.
It's rich that you're lecturing my narrative when we're both trying to push one. Yours just happens to be the same narrative being pushed by pro-corporate, strike blocking, genocide supporting establishment Democrats. What's in it for you?
That's some very aggressive spin. All I get from you is anger towards anyone with a different opinion, you don't seem open to conversation, you attempt to spin what other people have said, so why should anyone take what you're saying at face value?
You didn't answer my question so I won't be answering yours.
That's weird, because from my experience on Lemmy, leftists are far more hostile to me than I am to them.
Your hostilities are committed at the ballot box. You vote against our interests. You refuse to compromise with us. You blame us when your garbage pro-corporate, strike blocking, genocide supporting candidates fail to get elected in the general.
So you just remove the agency of everyone you disagree with and believe that makes you the victim?
Hey if you want to respect my decision to vote for 3rd party or write in the general election and take responsibility for picking a loser candidate in the 2020 primaries when Biden loses in the 2024 general then I will absolutely respect your agency. But we both know that's not what you're after is it? You want the agency to vote for whoever you want in the primaries and then turn around and lecture people for not supporting your choice in the general.
You like the control you have being a part of the majority voting bloc in the Democrat party, but you're refusing to accept the responsibility that comes with it.
I voted for Bernie in the primaries, worked for his campaign, and donated the maximum personal donation. How about you?
I phone banked, canvassed and donated in the 2016 and 2020 primaries. I hated Joe Biden from the beginning but I voted for him in the 2020 general. He's not compromised with leftists or progressives in any material manner so I won't be voting for him again.
I'm not going to apologize for calling out moderates for being uncompromising pieces of shit and voting for procorporate trash candidates in the primaries. And you shouldn't waste your time sticking up for them.
Leftists on Lemmy are hostile to everybody, especially other leftists.