Letters to the Editor: Your 'protest vote' for Jill Stein is really a vote for Donald Trump
Letters to the Editor: Your 'protest vote' for Jill Stein is really a vote for Donald Trump
Don't like Kamala Harris' recent comment on guns? The solution is to support gun control, not vote for a Trump-enabling third-party spoiler.
You're viewing part of a thread.
Oh, well that's still pretty stupid. Centrist voters are by definition less loyal, since they have to be courted in the first place. Democrats don't expect centrist voters to be unquestioningly loyal, or else they wouldn't even advertise to them.
No, I'd say they're pretty loyal to republicans (else you'd be correct, Democrats wouldn't be courting them with republican policy) and they don't question the status quo or capitalism, which gives Democrats plenty of room to maintain loyalty to their donors.
I’d say they’re pretty loyal to republicans (else you’d be correct, Democrats wouldn’t be courting them with republican policy)
That makes no sense at all. If they're loyal to Republicans, why would Democrats court them at all?
The entire POINT is that they're NOT loyal, to anyone. They're low-information, easily-swayed voters. They're the "I hate politics" type. They're the "oh he seems like a decent guy" type.
I don't know, you tell me why democrats are cedeing ground to the republicans on immigration, climate, and foreign policy instead of making the smallest effort to defend very popular progressive stances.
Edit: Also, yes. That is why they are imaginary. If they're voting for Trump in 2024 and can't be simply bought via campaign advertising then they aren't going to be convinced and they are not marginal voters. But man would democrats like to have that same kind of loyalty.
Maybe, rather than Democrats doing some shit that you admit makes no sense whatsoever, they're actually not doing that? You're just building up this weird idea of Democrats predicated on the idea that they want loyal soldiers. It doesn't make any sense. They don't. They never have.
So… you’re saying the DNC has not been actively ignoring progressives in favor of republicans since after Obama got elected? The “nothing will fundamentally change” party? The tough on immigration party isn’t actively courting republicans? Then who are they courting with that shit? The actively racist democrats in Texas and Florida? Why pretend suddenly immigration is a problem when it’s not? The country was built on immigration. We don’t need to deport more and split up more families. We need more immigration courts and better processes to help transition those families into legal immigration. Not give them court dates 5 months out and 300 miles away. Make batch hiring shit they do at meat packing plants illegal so we stop ending up with dead 16 year old kids they swear they thought were 32 year olds. Hell, crack down on wage theft and increase national minimum wage to a liveable wage (national+urban cost of living instead of single catch all) while we are at it instead of complaining about immigrants taking our jobs when we have to have two to live. Be plenty of jobs when everyone only needs one. And make Medicare for all so businesses don’t have to compete over expensive medical benefits.
But nah, be tough on crime and immigration instead cuz that’s what republicans want.
Also fuck man can be please stop giving almost as much as we spend on the entire countries education to supporting active genocide?
I love this new trend of taking all the evil shit Republicans do and just claiming that Democrats do it. Much simpler and more straightforward propaganda.
Thinking democrats couldn’t possibly do it cuz republicans are is wild.
If you seriously need an article on us supporting Israel’s genocide on Gaza I can as well.
Yea, republicans may be worse on these but the literal point of many voting third party is it’s absolutely fucked to just blindly accept the party of “slightly less excited for genocide but still definitely excited for genocide.” One party being worse should not be a pass.
Republicans do this horrible thing all the time and in really bad ways.
A Democrat once suggested thinking about possibly doing a part of it, might have been a joke I dunno.
Clearly, both sides are the same.
Fucking lol ok. Well, tried to be sane and reasonable but clearly you're not here for that. My bad. Sorry for treating you like a person.
Lmao. You are not a serious person.
But muh bOtH sIdEz hurt
My point is that the Democrats seem to think they are winnable, or else they wouldn't be so afraid even just to stay the course on progressive policy, much less push it forward. We both agree that it's stupid, I'm saying it's not a winning strategy. Ignore the loyal soldiers part, that was hyperbole, they're still experiencing diminishing returns from courting the conservative vote.
They're running out of winnable votes in the middle, yet they seem to prefer to scrape the bottom of that barrel at all costs, including bleeding votes from the progressive side, which is what is happening when a third party spoils the vote. The democratic party knows this, they have billions of dollars to figure things like this out, and they know how to spin it as not to cast doubt on their own institutions.
People who point fingers at progressive voters (who they otherwise agree with) when a candidate loses, rather than demand for that candidate to win back those compatible but alienated voters, seem to think that the candidates are just innocent victims of circumstance. This is false. They are active players in a game of bets and wagers, running billion dollar campaigns with strategists and focus groups. They know what they need to do to get the winning number of votes, if they really want to.
Every time they ignore what's popular to voters or even tell a group of voters to pipe down, not even acting like they are hearing them out, is a wager that they can win without representing that view. The more voters that toe the party line and guilt each other into doing so, the more they can tell us to pipe down and choose not to represent us. At the most you could say that they have something to lose by inching left, but this is difficult to argue (other than a monetary incentive of course) because of how motivated non-republican voters are just to keep Trump out this cycle. They have plenty of room to motivate the wide open margins on the left
There's no silent majority of Leftists. This is one of the fundamental things you guys need to grasp. Just because all the people you interact with are like that, doesn't mean you're anywhere near a relevant fraction of voters.
Even if that negated anything that I said, you guys sure seem to think they're relevant when they vote third party or become disillusioned and don't vote at all. So they're only relevant when they're not doing what you want? Cause that seems to me like ignoring voters until it bites you in the ass.
There's clearly enough progressives, or voters who find Democrats' current platform objectionable, that you understand you can't win without them. The Democrats could offer them something material to vote for, and/or they can pressure them to vote against their better senses on threats that things will get worse if they lose. They are going exclusively with the latter.
For some reason you keep getting stuck on the semantics of single words that I've used. Missing the forest, so to say. Ignore the word progressive (which is not the same word as leftist but whatever). There are things that are popular to the majority of this country that will motivate people to turn out to vote other than keeping Trump out of office, and those things definitely aren't being tough on immigration or funding Israel's war on the middle east.
So they’re only relevant when they’re not doing what you want?
There's far fewer leftists in relevant battleground states than there are moderates who we would alienate by a hard turn to the left.
The problem with Leftist "don't vote" rhetoric is that these moderates in battleground states...well, let's be honest. They're idiots. They're easily swayed. They're low information voters. They "don't like politics".
We don't care if a million voters in California break off and vote 3rd party, as long as they do so fucking quietly. If they influence 30,000 voters in Pennsylvania, we're fucked. Not as a party, but as a nation. It's shit, but that's the calculus behind FPTP.
Likewise, earning 15 million votes in California instead of 11 million, by championing Leftist causes, does not help Democrats get elected at all. But alienating just a few thousand voters in Michigan matters a LOT. You don't win Michigan and Pennsylvania and Georgia by championing leftist causes.
So yeah. You guys are too small in number to help us win, but loud enough in voice to help us lose.
And no, I refuse to conflate progressives with leftists. I've seen a lot of leftists trying to co opt the progressive label lately. Fuck that. Y'all are leftists.
lol
Regardless
There are things that are popular to the majority of this country that will motivate people to turn out to vote other than keeping Trump out of office, and those things definitely aren't being tough on immigration or funding Israel's war on the middle east.
Ok troll
Oy, you're not doing too well in this argument are you? :/
Rofl obvious alt says what?
Obivous alt of who? I'm not sure what you are implying. So all these people disagreeing with you are just obvious alts?! What?!
Ok
People who engage with you don't do well. Talking to a wall is never a good time.