I swallowed my misgivings and voted Democrat, just like I’ve done at each election since I turned 18, but handwaving away valid criticisms is not how you get people to side with you. Pressure needs to be put on the democrats to be better, too.
I’m 100% for valid criticisms—I don’t even consider myself a Democrat and I have no compunctions about criticizing them when I think they are wrong. But I’m pretty sure that meme is directed at those who withheld their vote.
The problem is that those people (leftist prostest not-voters) most likely wouldn’t have changed the results.
No, I agree. There weren’t enough single-issue Gaza voters to have changed the outcome. It’s still an idiotic position to have taken.
Shielding the Democrats from the pressure to adopt more popular positions lost this election.
No, they were never going to do that. They’ve already said that they learned their lesson, and in 2026, they’re gonna double down on the losing strategy that they’ve been running since Clinton was in office and run on building the wall on the Mexican border and deporting immigrants to court the moderate Republican vote that doesn’t exist and never would vote for them even if it did.
By the Presidential election, it’s already years too late to force them to actually do good things. Protest votes and withholding your vote have done nothing to stop the slide that led to Harris campaigning with Liz Cheney in tow in the 16 years that I’ve been voting. If you want change, it’s only going to come by threatening the position of the people in charge of the party and replacing the old guard with people like AOC. Whoever gets elected President does neither of those things. Unless Krasnov declares the Democratic Party a terrorist organization and has them all arrested as political prisoners. But then we won’t have to worry about voting ever again, just like he promised.
A few things.
Firstly, we can dismiss the notion that the candidate can’t be moved. The citation for that is Biden in 2020, who effectively campaigned during the primary as a moderate Republican, and until the southern states which we’re never going to go blue anyways weighed in, was getting his ass handed to him. The Sunday before Super Tuesday, the rat-fuckening, Oblivious Warren. All that old history.
And then something remarkable happened. Biden opened the doors to the tent and invited the progressive wing of the party in. He handed the Bernie-crats the platform and said “have at it hoss”. And it worked. Instead of disenfranchising the activist base, he embraced them, or at least, extended an olive branch by giving them the platform, without which he assuredly would have lost.
So: Candidates can be moved.
Second:
By the Presidential election, it’s already years too late to force them to actually do good things. Protest votes and withholding your vote have done nothing to stop the slide that led to Harris campaigning with Liz Cheney in tow in the 16 years that I’ve been voting.
Again. And I’m singling you out because you responded and well, here we are. This is an obtuse, bordering on bad faith interpretation of the argument being made. You aren’t arguing with me. You are arguing with the millions of voters who stayed home for Kamala but showed up for Biden. And you moralizing about an objectively misguided application of strategic voting didn’t/ doesn’t/ won’t/ change their votes. When your “strategic voting” strategy results in losing you the election, explain to me how and why its strategic?
You don’t/ can’t move millions of voters to a new position. Or at least it hasn’t been shown to be possible (2016, 2024). Asking voters to “vote against” instead of “voting for” doesn’t work and we now have so many receipts, that they will write text books on the matter. What can be done, is that the candidate can be moved. Its also been shown through an evidentiary process to work.
To summarize, candidates can be moved. Biden moved and won an election because of it. When you moralize about your own, demonstrated-to-be-wrong conception of strategic voting, you aren’t arguing with me, you are arguing with the literally millions of people left on the table by the Democrats. A strategy that when examined before hand will clearly lose, the insistence of then implementing it becomes a “burn the world down” moralization to wash your own hands: Democratic voters who reliably show up, but did not, because the DNC got a hall pass from those making the exact arguments you are making here. They did not need to respond to criticism because this argument you are making shielded them. And it cost us all, practically everything.
Further evidence that the democrats can be moved if we don’t let them maintain the delusion they can win while trying to be republicans: The entire party told Biden to drop out when it was clear he had no path to victory.
Sadly Kamala was allowed to believe she could win while embracing the same policies and messaging that killed the Biden campaign. Instead of screaming at the party to campaign on overwhelmingly popular left policy necessary to win the election and use every power at the democrat’s disposal to accomplish it, blue MAGA told anyone pointing out that we’re headed back towards the waterfall to shut up and paddle harder.
honey look, freedom of expression and the right to protest in America just
gotdropped.Let’s not keep making the mistake of assuming Trump’s tweets have force of law. He’s just talking out of his ass again, just like he’s not actually invading greenland and canada. Notice how he’s talking about at least 4 different actions here, I’m pretty sure none of which he can actually do. 5 if you count thanking us for our attention to this matter (?). If Trump tries to do anything in this regard no judge* will uphold it.
*Obligatory other than Clarence Thomas
People in power do what he says. His word is de facto law, even if it’s illegal. It literally does not matter. You are in denial if you think he’s not going to get away with this.
Let’s not keep making the mistake of assuming the rule of law matters at this point. If he does something and nobody stops it, its legality or lack there of is moot. If he says to do something and people do it and nobody stops him (or judge’s rulings about it are ignored), then it doesn’t matter that it was illegal.
I know you’re just trying to get people to calm down, but at this point, people are right to be scared and right to think these things could actually come to pass considering it has happened before. Maybe it won’t get that far… But plenty has already happened that should never have happened, and the US currently has a president who is illegally, specifically unconstitutionally, holding office and was allowed to be sworn in anyway, so it’s probably not a good idea to assume this won’t happen just because it’s also unconstitutional.
We need something like this for daytime.
Also, read up on what they are ultimately going for: Eliminating the First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Trump supporters: “that’s fine, the president isn’t congress”
