this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
690 points (95.3% liked)

Political Memes

5605 readers
1309 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Democratic political strategy

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Cenotaph@mander.xyz 118 points 1 month ago

Meet me in the middle, says the unjust man. You take a step towards him, he takes a step back. Meet me in the middle, says the unjust man.

[–] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 77 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"Why isn't anybody voting for us"

[–] frazw@lemmy.world 54 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I think the question they ask is more like "why are people voting for the other side?" ...leading to "we need to be more like them"

[–] jewbacca117@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The problem is theres nothing on our side. Our choices are right of center and so far right they fell off the graph.

[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 20 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

There's also the choice of doing what Bernie did, and build up an alternative from the local level, but that would require people to realise that politics aren't restricted to TV-level races nor snooze for 4 years.

If Americans did that in large scale they could to the democratic party the reverse of what the tea party did to the republican party.

[–] jewbacca117@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago (4 children)

The Democratic party hates Bernie though. Theyran so hard against him back in '16 and '20. I swear the Democrats would rather lose to a Republican than run an actual left candidate.

[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 month ago (4 children)

That's because there are only a handful of "Bernies". A party is not a monolithical block, it's the sum of it's members, and the centrists end up being in charge because they are the ones that end up representing the party at most levels. If you want to shift the balance you need leftists to run for school boards, and city halls, and build from there by starting taking over the state committees and DNC members elected by each state (which in turn control the DNC).

If even the most extreme of the extreme right managed to do it in the republican party, there's no reason why a moderate left movement couldn't do it in the democratic party - if anything I would expect it to be easier.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

They only look at the votes that were cast not voters who stayed home

[–] Zier@fedia.io 31 points 1 month ago

Always reach across the isle and punch nazis.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 31 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The rightward shift of the GOP and the tendency of the seemingly infinite number of spineless Dem careerist politicians to seek compromise is very real, but please remember the 90s and 2000s, everyone. They were not as rosy and left-wing as you remember; while not nearly enough, the Dems are notably more left than they were then.

[–] Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago (2 children)

In the larger picture the rightward trend is kind of true on economic fronts.

But yeah, since the 90s we've slowly moved left.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Since the 90s we've moved left economically as well. The 90s were where the Dems had their massive neoliberal shift, after all. Not hard to be more left than THAT.

[–] Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Right, that's why I said in the larger picture. Before Reagan, taxing the rich and a living minimum wage were standard. Now it's considered radical. But we've definitely moved back to the left since then.

[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Can you please explain what you mean exactly by "economic fronts?" Do you mean there are specific things they're further right on than before, or that they're further right on the economy as a whole? If the latter: what issues are you accounting for, and how are you turning their stances into a clean metric?

[–] Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

I mean taxing the rich and a livable minimum wage used to be acceptable. But due to the rightward slide, the tax rate from most of the 20th century and livable single income minimum wages would be considered radical now.

[–] TheFogan@programming.dev 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If I were to guess, I'd say, the left is winning on social fronts. IE Say topics like gay marriage, Partial legalization of pot etc... would never have even been on the table 40 years ago.

Now admitted, The current position of the pieces of the country is poised in a way that we are very likely to take huge backslides on those issues.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 26 points 1 month ago

The Overton Window is set in an abandoned lot. The house burned down a long time ago.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] spujb@lemmy.cafe 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

not saying i disagree, but people always link this article as though it even has a section on partisan politics. it doesn’t, or really even pose any evidence that suggests the effect applies to the overton window. would be curious if there are any sources that pose evidence.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] USNWoodwork@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago (3 children)

This fails to recognize that for a very long time things trended left. I remember talking to someone in the 90s and we went down a list of major issues and the left had essentially won on all of them. Roe vs Wade EPA Gay Marriage Welfare Reform and Child Tax Credits

My hope for the Democratic party is that they go to a single issue for the next National election, and that issue should be Anti-trust/Breaking up monopolies

[–] brianary@startrek.website 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

That's an important issue, but if Democrats ever see power again, it'll be important to focus on re-enfranchisement (RCV, instant runoff, or anything fairer than FPTP; NPVIC; national mail voting; mandatory voting), on judicial reform to undo the corruption and incompetence that has been packed there. Without those, keeping any gains will be impossible.

Then, triaging existential threats is critical, which will mean fighting climate change, investing in public transport (trains), and breaking up trusts will have to be pursued simultaneously. Stopping any support for genocide needs to happen as soon as possible.

There will be plenty more structural changes to fix beyond that: Protecting whistleblowers and protesters, improving FOIA, replacing norms with laws (Emoluments Clause enforcement, financial records disclosure, no insider trading for Congressmembers, &c), and all manner of civil rights protections and police reform.

After all that, it'll be time for the stuff I've been hoping for: nationalizing healthcare and Internet access, and copyright reform.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Turret3857@infosec.pub 4 points 1 month ago

Things should be progressing no? that's the whole point of being the "progressive party"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] adarza@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 month ago (4 children)

just playin' the long game. won't be long now and it will loop around to the far left.

[–] Gutek8134@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago (1 children)

So, everyone's hoping for the bit overflow

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 points 1 month ago

Yup, we just need to accelerate and we totally won't end up in a fascist dystopia

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 month ago

Ah, so they are doing horseshoe theory in real life?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] madjo@feddit.nl 6 points 1 month ago (3 children)

This could mean that there’s room on the left for a brand new party.

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

Only if America will implement proportional representation

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It could if we weren't locked into a two party system.

[–] madjo@feddit.nl 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I mean, if there ever was a time for a grass roots growing of a third party, it would be NOW, not a year before the election with Putin-stooge Jill Stein.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Turret3857@infosec.pub 4 points 1 month ago

There are plenty of people trying but it is clearly not working

[–] prototact@programming.dev 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Frankly the people are the ones moving further to the right because the state does not educate them and regulate corporate power, transforming the public into a myopic panicked herd.

[–] wpb@lemmy.world 26 points 1 month ago (4 children)

That's actually false. When it comes to policy preferences, the actual electorate swings pretty far left compared to the right wing and far right parties they can choose between. Universal health care, parental leave, paid sick leave, higher minimum wage all enjoy broad and firm popular support, and neither party is even talking about this.

[–] spujb@lemmy.cafe 5 points 1 month ago (4 children)

!! yea

always important to remember that the electorate’s preference in policy has only a loose relationship to who they vote for. this air gap is where most elections are fought, where strong messaging tightens the gap and messaging failures loosen it. the 2024 presidential election had a hella loose connection between party and people.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] spujb@lemmy.cafe 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

/genuine question, asides from the obvious of republicans adopting left policy, what would have to happen for another party switch to occur?

like, i know it happened once. wondering what circumstances and context brought that about and if that’s even a realistic framing to think about today’s world?

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

There is also the Whig party for reference. They were one of the two parties until they refused to take a meaningful stance on slavery. They were the 'bipartisanship states rights solves it' party versus the 'pro-slavery' party.

There is no longer a Whig party and the slavery party went to war over a decade or so after the anti slavery parry formed.

So there's that alternative to Party switch.

[–] NABDad@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

I agree. I think we're at the stage where the Democrats are the Whig party. They aren't going to change, they need to be replaced with a true progressive party.

Assuming that we continue to be as much of a democracy as we were, now might be the time for that replacement to happen.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›