politics
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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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
view the rest of the comments
100% this. It's all so tiresome to listen to those types, too. They really do think they are so very self-righteous and better than the "neoliberal shills", etc. 🙄
If Harris wanted to win the election, they needed to listen to us and capitulate. It's not more complicated than that. We gave the roadmap, we were informed, and the post mortems show us to have been right the entire time.
Harris ran a losing campaign. That's an objective fact. We have a path to winning the election. Internet wide, apologists for Democrats chose to ban us, silence us, and wag their finger. Butt they didn't have right of it. Their calculations were wrong.
We were litterally begging Harris to just fucking lie to us about her position on Gaza. Just fucking signal that she'd do something, anything to push back on Israel. She couldn't even muster the most mediocre of efforts.
Then they lost the election.
And here's the issue, and I've outlined this ad nauseum, and I'll continue to do so until everyone understands: you don't control the electorate.
You don't have a choice in what people think or how they behave. And there are no functional mechanisms to move populations of people to whatever you think they "should" believe or how you think they should act. Moving populations is a decadal, generational project.
There is one path to winning elections: understand the electorate, and then move candidates into adopting those positions. You can't shame, badger, or otherwise abuse voters into voting how you want them to. It doesn't work. It doesn't if you don't like it. Trying to do so is counterproductive.
Bit weird how Darwin keeps ignoring you every time you prove him wrong. Even when pinged, he doesn't reply to you. I'm sure there's nothing weird about that.
@CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world You said you never actually got any response from leftists. Here's one. Why didn't you answer it?
^ Well, I'm not sure if this is an actual question in good faith given this is coming from a banned account.
But, to answer it - I'm not sure if I said I never get response from leftists. Hell, I consider myself and many I affiliate with a leftist (despite all the arguments in bad faith that tend to kick off by calling everyone with even a slight disagreement a "shitlib" or a "neoliberal shill" and so on). If I said that, I didn't mean it - what I meant is that I see less of them (online) since the election.
I have enough of the type of unapologetic unhelpful bad-faith types of "leftists" in my personal life even if all the online trolls/bots really did disappear immediately after the election.
I've had the conversation enough times and it's nearly always done in bad faith and delusion. I've had it so many times that I could practically write out their responses anyway, so I don't really see it going anywhere. In any case, I'm sure I'll have it IRL soon enough as I have enough associates of the tankie archetype. It's weird how much of the Murc's Law media and reactionary centrist tropes they have adopted, that's for sure...if I didn't experience this kind of thing IRL, I'm not sure I'd even be convinced that all of these online characters were not just a form of online agent provocateur. I believe that at least some of the online people legitimately hold their views.
Sorry, you didn't instantly say you'd vote for no matter who they appoint without the consent of the voters, so you're going to banned and ignored now.
Vote Blue No Matter Who! Even if they actively harm their own campaign, pledge to have a stronger border than Trump, actively enable genocide, and fail to keep promises that got voters engaged.
Vote blue no matter who, liberal!
I know I will.
I get the feeling that you would vote for Donald Trump if he switched party and the DNC was somehow okay with it.
Who do you favor? Donald Trump (D) vs Jefferson Davis ( R)? Or third party?
Well, since the orange shitstain just sits in the "first bedroom", eating KFC and watching Animal Planet and doesn't actually have any convictions or positions of his own and the entire administration would actually be calling all the shots, I would likely vote for Trump in that case once in the voting booth. Trump was actually a Democrat until 2009, he could have the Dem nominee if all of this had played out a particular way in 2008 instead of 2016. That said, I definitely would have been trying everything to keep the DNC from picking Trump up until the convention.
I guess it depends on who was really running against Trump since a 140 year old confederate corpse wouldn't be.
Right, that's what I was thinking. I admit Jefferson Davis was probably a bad example, but I was trying to go for someone who is clearly worse than Trump. With the scenario of:
Under such circumstances, I can see the Blue No Matter Who folks voting for Trump of their own free will in the general, because "he'll die of old age soon anyway".
I get the feeling you would suck Trump's dick if it tasted like candy and everyone was weirdly cool with it, but we don't live in your wackass alternate realities. The differences between party policies is night and day, and Trumps antics would get him removed in an instant if it were up to every GOP and 20 DNC.
So you would absolutely vote for him if you saw "Donald Trump (Democratic Party)" on the ballot? Thank you for clearing that up.
What are you even talking about?
I'm talking about who you would favor if there's a presidential election between Donald Trump's third term, on the Democratic ticket, and a despicable fascist who gives a new definition to the word evil, on the Republican ticket. And some third party candidates.
Does Blue No Matter Who still hold? I just want to clarify how strongly you believe in "No Matter Who".
I'll answer your hypothetical with another: Would you prefer to fondle your grandfather or have your grandfather fondle you?
The DNC candidate is chosen by primary, and Trump demonstrably would never have a chance since he tried it like 16 years ago.
Once again you avoid the question. Suppose Trump finds some way to get through the primary. Election rigging, legitimate support, whatever. He won. Now that he won the hypothetical primary, who do you vote for?
Once again you avoid the question. Suppose you have to fondle your grandfather before he fondles you. You're locked in a basement or whatever and the door doesn't open until fondling happens. Which do you choose?
You're giving me the impression that you do have a limit for "No Matter Who", but you don't want to admit it.
You're giving me the impression that you're incapable of understanding the analogy. I'll try to spell it out for you real clearly. It's futile, imbecilic even, to answer a hypothetical with no basis in reality where both options shame you.
Hey, I wanna be sure that I know what the Blue No Matter Who option is. Donald Trump (D) vs Ultimate Evil (R) could happen in my lifetime. I need to know how I should vote if I want to be a good person. And I want to be proactive, so I had might as well ask you now, since you seem to be an expert in these things.
So, do I vote for Donald J Trump (D), or the Ultimate Evil (R)? Or third party?
Be fondled or fondle, pick one.
Trump the Democrat. Or Satan the Republican? And you didn't give me a third party option.
Trump can't run for both parties, idiot.
Never said he could. So, do you have a third party option for me, or, do you have an answer on which presidential candidate you favor?
Welcome to Banjo, unable to read even his own comments.
WHOOSH
Sorry you don't want to win, if you wish to keep Republicans elected, you can just swap party affiliation. You clearly don't care about what Democrats want, only their corporate donors from the military-industrial complex.
You're right. I don't care about what the Democrats want.
I instead care about advancing Western Europe's interests in the US.
The user above you seems to be advocating that we vote for the only opposition the Republicans have ever had with any chance of actually winning elections, so your statement doesn't really make sense. You're saying voting for the only other option is keeping them elected? Are you Bizarro Superman?
Harris could have stood in the middle of 5th avenue, and shot someone, and still not lost some people's vote.
We had answers to get Harris elected. She and her working for free sycophants said that she didn't need them to win. She lost. Her sycophants then went on to say the people who they didn't need or needed to listen to cost them the election.
Again, sorry you don't want to have the DNC ever win again. You can just turn in your I Voted sticker for a MAGA hat, there's no difference in the end. Sorry we tried to help her win, not sorry we were right all along and were ignored.
So, once again, you're saying the DNC advocates, us, are opposed to the DNC winning?
Careful. This kid will report you.
For breaking rules? Sure hope so.
With advocates like you, who needs Republican propaganda?