You must log in or register to comment.
Almost as if they are doing it on purpose and are just the more culturally liberal of the two Wall Street parties… 🤔🤔
Someone like AOC and Bernie will never be allowed anywhere near actual power. God damn money.
and even if they did get in power, they’d still support NATO and imperialism in general, still support capitalist exploitation, and still would only pay lip service to or fight symptoms of systemic issues instead of ripping the cause that is capitalism out by it’s root
Ooo that got downvoted. All for saying “Fuck America” until NATO is stated, then it’s “Actually, America is holy and great.”
Removed by mod
Not one of you clowns has any actionable idea.
Revolutionary action is 100% actionable. Always and forever.
Theoretically, but having an actionable idea means to have an idea that you have a plan to put in action. So as always, where is it?
… revolution. That is the idea. We are talking about two completely different things, you expect run-down people to think logically and clearly about something as complex as an alternative*(edit) societal system while actively existing in some of the worst social contexts we’ve seen in decades, while we are talking about acting in such a manner as to free up the cognitive bandwidth necessary to determine what you demand.
It’s like any other toxic relationship, you can’t begin to heal until you’ve exited said relationship.
To clarify, by any means necessary. Start demanding, start opposing, start rallying. Spread the word, keep the reality of things alive in people’s awareness, because the natural instinct is to retreat and deny in order to protect oneself, but that’s exactly the trap the Right sets and then springs for a massive boost in support from downtrodden, desperate people.
Edit to add: the Right and Capitalism, because they both infiltrate and exist by solving problems they themselves create, thus garnering support through necessity.
deleted by creator
You can easily look up the answer to your question by yourself: leftist theory, often in the form of books (or even just watching video essays, listening to podcasts etc. etc.)
You can start over here https://www.marxists.org/
One could argue that there are too many different socialist approaches to revolution or rather that it’s not all that easy finding the correct one to your situation
Additionally, check out the previous revolutions from around the world! Most of them didn’t happen on a basis of theory, but of people determined to change their condition.
Take Romania, for example. Sure, that’s an example of a revolution which ended up replacing one disaster with another, but even that holds a lesson for us: word-of-mouth is king, don’t give into desperation when figuring out the next attempt.
If you had made any honest attempt to look into socialist politics, you’d know that there are a lot of actionable ideas there
Oh we do, you just don’t like them.
Cries in Latin-American Spanish
And this is when you vote for a third party. IMO the mentality of “having to vote one of these two” is toxic for a democratic system.
It’s a trap and these two parties massively profit off of it.
And this is when you vote for a third party. IMO the mentality of “having to vote one of these two” is toxic for a democratic system.
So close, and yet so far.
The third party isn’t going to save you from the toxic system, nor stand a chance to fix it.
You can’t reform the system, nor fix it from within no matter how hard you participate. It must be completely eradicated from the root.
I hate that you’re not wrong. Gotta get rid of the current “winner take all” electoral system first though…
Im with you. If such trap can exist the system is wrongly setup.
That’s not possible in the current electoral system. Therefore voting third party needs to happen first.
Or really, the thing we can’t say in the Internet anymore and the thing that you liberals hate more than the thought of losing capitalism itself.
Mandatory vote, ranked choice, popular no electoral
Ranked choice was on the ballot in some state and it was voted down
Yeah, people are dumb we get that.
Apparently star is better?
I’m not sure I caught the reference.
STAR voting system
From a glance it seems so yes.
You’re not wrong, but there’s no way to get there from here that doesn’t involve the American political system becoming something else first.
My understanding is that for third parties to become viable at the presidential they have to have first become viable in other levels of government. A third party presidential candidate should be the culmination of bottom up building, not a once every 4 years thing.
You’re correct. The US third parties have never been acting in good faith, with few exceptions.
Its the fundamental death of democracy. There is only ever one “correct” choice on the ballot. No real decision except to show up and vote straight ticket or suffer guilt or derision from your peers.
This works just as well on Republicans as Democrats. You don’t see any dark horse Buchanans or Perots on the ballot anymore. Conservatives know any vote for someone other than Trump will be seen as a vote for the Democrat, just like Liberals know the opposite. And when the top of the ticket sucks (as with Hilary in 2016 or Romney in 2012), turnout sags and upsets happen.
The bitter truth Dems can’t face is that they ran bad candidates on weak platforms after disappointing terms in office. And this is what drove down turnout. Not insidious Arabs or nefarious Jill Stein voters or Russia. If they’d had a candidate as appealing to voters as Trump, running on the left side of the ticket, they could have won. Instead, they shed 15M votes chasing the Liz Cheney endorsement.
This is cuz of fptp not cuz of parties
The parties enforce and secure fptp from any alternatives, given they massively profit off of it.
The modern party system is a product of FPTP, and it’s leaders will fight to defend FPTP for their own preservation
Bingo
kamala was not pro corporate.
Lol, good one mate
Hate to break it to you…. You couldn’t be further from the truth.
only as much as every politician since Clinton
we actually had some monopoly busting action going which is now going to be in the shitter.
The Biden Administration did, she didn’t. She had a bunch of billionaire Tech Bros telling her to drop Lena Khan if she got elected. We know exactly where she was headed.
I actually don’t think we know were that was headed and it sounds like fud to get trump elected.
She could have denied it.
I find this type of argument as unreasonable. When there is fud left and right the expectation that the public figure can address each and every one individually is ludicrous. That being said I think she was stringing along a few wealthy folks there as she was very non commital. You never really know but based on her track record I think she would have mostly continued what biden had started and likely any changes would be improvements.
Well far be it for me to say you’re wrong, but maybe uncertainty isn’t the best way to sell yourself as a candidate then. Maybe leaving breadcrumbs that lead to doubt but not actually saying things out right doesn’t engender confidence. Who knows? Except we kind of do cuz she just got her ass kicked.
I mean if uncertainty was the measure her opponent is way more uncertain. Cherry picking one thing and saying it was what caused everything is not something im going to believe. I mean look. Its pretty obvious from the result that I am by no way an example of the typical american voter. All I know is I do the best I can for myself, and my family, and my community, and my nation, and my planet. I voted for the better option and will in future in the hopes of getting the better option. I have been fine reaping with what I sow but not so happy to reap what others have sown but I dunno maybe they don’t like the flavor of what I sow.
Monopoly busting is good for the other corporations. Just because a company does anti-consunmer behavior doesn’t mean they aren’t also get screwed by another company’s anti-consumer behaviors.
yeah just like adequate tax and regulation is good for rich folks. thats the thing. not having monopolies is good for society in general.
Bahahah
What the actual fuck are you on about
No follower of ideological liberalism knows what the fuck words mean.
1939
1933 if you’re refering to Hitler. He was already six years in power in 1939.
Democrats sit here and use memes to beat themselves up over being such a shit bunch of losers and Republicans would have claimed victory even if Trump lost and very likely would have had their followers shooting guns about it. Yeah there’s a disconnect somewhere.
Idk, rightwingers made the argument that they are under no commitment to certify if they think there was funny business.
Voters: Can pick between fascism and no fascism
Voters: “Hmm I will not vote”
Lets be real. The non voters are to blame and they deserve project 2025
The voters don’t owe the candidate a damn thing. It’s funny that you believe otherwise.
The voters owe the test of the world, you idiot
Yeah… not a great idea to blame the very people you needed to stop fascism.
Oh and just a reminder the choice was between:
- The ruling party
- Literal fascism
That is not a democracy at that point, just authoritarianism though the threat of worse authoritarianism (in this case fascism).
Pandering to their unrealistic expectations to have a perfect candidate didn’t work, so I think I will blame them now. Every day for the rest of my life. Stop telling me to act nice to them to appease them, clearly nothing will.
Exactly. I would spit down on the non voters but dont want to waste the liquid on them
It makes me sick. The people who think they chose the moral high ground or whatever bull they tell themselves. They should know better. Shame on them and those who defend them, ignorance is no longer an excuse.
Oh no, be angry. Appeasement never works.
And non voters chose literal fascism. They are fascist enablers. They will not help stop fascism. They chose fascism.
Yes, and if you say that this was a “democracy” then it would be the people’s choice (terrible but hey that is how democracy works). But you are saying people killed democracy by not voting for one of two options, something that implies you can have a single option democracy work.
You can’t, this is just authoritarianism at this point. People where clearly pissed off at the lack of agency and lashed out (classic fascism move) This was a failure of a two party system and the Democratic party, unless you think people really want fascism in that case go to the start of this comment.
People had the choice between democracy exists or stops existing. They chose it to stop existing. But yes normally both parties should have democratic voters. But in this case they werent so the non voters killed any chance of having this again
Yeah, I would agree if the vote turnout was low. But it was not, it was the second highest since 1932. People came out and voted hard against the status quo, the issue is (and the monkey paw curls) since it is not a democracy in the states but a stupid two party system by doing so they voted (or by not voting) for fascism.
America has ruined the very concept of democracy and long before this election (although this was a colossal fuck up I agree)
This image never fails to force a chuckle out of me.
Ahyuck, murder!
Also America has shifted to the right
The politicians have shifted to the right. Trump is a populist. So is Bernie
It’s funny because no one on here was talking about the how bad the Democrats’ strategy had been before the election, yet now suddenly everyone is an expert on what went wrong
This is just pattenly untrue.Unless you litterally live I. a corporate news echo chamber, the writing for this has been on the wall, and being discussed as such, litterally everywhere.
However, it was also being downvoted at a preposterously high ratio. So while it was present, Lemmy (and reddit too and pretty much all social media) was dutifully ignoring and abusing those saying that Kamala wasn’t winning.
Not only that, but there were bans, and significant bias in moderation behavior to support the building of that echo chamber.
So no. Only if you live in a self construct d bubble was this not obvious since the convention.
Yeah, its funny comparing online to real world discussions.
Most people I talked to seemed to never like Harris but all agreed Trump was worse. This tracks, makes sense, and the ones that did not think Trump was worse would vote for him.
Compare that to here where you had every negative thing said about Harris come with some heavy baggage (like .ml accounts) or out right dog piling.
Wait a minute, is it “patently” untrue, so false that you couldn’t even get a copyright on it, or is it “Pattonly” untrue, a feignt tactic like those used by US general Patton in the Great War 2 against Irwin Rommel in Africa?
They were. You called them Russian trolls and ignored them.
Literally dozens of us on this very site, but I guess before the election we were all Russian trolls and deserved getting downvoted out of the conversation.
Not only that, but they done forgot pro-corporate, “PrO-gEnOCiDe” Biden WON the previous election, running the same kind of campaign.
In 2016, Hillary received 65,853,514 votes, and Trump received 62,984,828
Harris received 68,103,050 votes. Trump received 72,757285.
It’s almost like a lot of Republicans worked hard and encouraged each other to cast their votes for Trump.
Meanwhile, all I saw on the Dem side was smug aholes trying to create voter apathy every chance they got. Either that, or there are a lot of Dem voters that will just. NOT. vote for a woman for president.
Behold this type of person, head in the sand, who will always blame the electorate.
The party can never fail, the party can only be failed
“You’re a Russian bot sowing division! These shills will disappear after the election.”
I talked about it and got straight up bullied. I shut up about 45 days before the election because it was just harmful at that point. But you can not bully people into voting for you. You can not tell them the economy is great when they’re in pain. You can not transparently be the puppet of a foreign government. You can not tell your base to get excited about people they’ve hated for literal decades.
The list just goes on. You can not win an election by enforcing a top down attitude. The Republicans worked ground up. Yes they did a lot of lying and gaslighting. But that brought people in and they worked from that during the actual campaign period. The Democrats did nothing to educate people and then told them they were wrong during the campaign.
You can not tell them the economy is great when they’re in pain.
This is a big thing in most western nations right now. The “economy” does not mean a healthy middle class, it does not mean higher wages for people, it does not mean affordable heating/food/shelter. I can see people struggling to make ends meet, and nothing pisses them off more then being told the “economy” is great. Basically the wealth inequality at this point has mostly removed the middle class and people being told the economic equivalent of “Git Gud”
And when those people complained that they’re literally unable to make a decent living despite working hard, they were told “you don’t get to complain, you’re a white male so you live life on easy mode”.
Oh I don’t even need to make it an identity politics thing, there is always someone “less privileged” to use. I have seen single non white mothers told that they have a house so need to “think hard” about that before complaining. A large part of the “western world” has become tone deaf to the reality of the working people. No one cares (clearly shown this election) that the numbers went up.
Anyone telling a single working mother that she’s privileged needs to SHUT. THE. FUCK. UP!
Agreed, I have also seen a Vet get told to remove their veteran license plate because “they where not a real veteran”, A man fighting cancer to “shut up and stop whining, just take it like a man” and watched a fight break out when someone was not let into a reserve casino because they said that the people there “where not real Canadians and they need to be deported”.
People suck, and identity politics is just another way for people to be tribal and awful to each other while maintaining a perceived moral high ground.
That is liberal identity politics which everyone hates. Real leftists like Sanders and AOC have never said anything like that.
I mean, I said Harris was a sure fire way to a Trump presidency. Does that count?
Fuckin LMFAO
I did ten months ago. An apology from Pug would be nice, I doubt I get it though. I learned then that I am incapable of getting through to American liberals and moved on with my life.
Everything I saw since then just reaffirmed my position, can you imagine my horror when liberals on Lemmy were literally asking people to vote for evil?! What came over them to think that was a winning strategy.
I made this meme a while back. Got downvoted.
Yeah, everyone who spoke up was told to shut up. Already white middle class liberal Americans are scrambling to blame anyone but themselves and the democratic party. Liberals are not a challenge to fascism.
I was banned from a couple communities for saying it
Going online to gripe about DNC strategy to other online leftists accomplishes nothing but generating more apathetic non-voters. Organizing in effective ways can actually accomplish something: mass letters directly to the DNC, banding together into massive documented coalitions, mass petitions.
If the Uncommitted movement had tens of millions of registered voters come together and pledge to vote Harris if and only if she took a harder stance on Israel, that might have helped.
When you’re speaking up to the wrong audience, and thereby doing more harm than good, yes you should shut up. Toward that audience, or at least with that message. The Democratic party is a lot of unsavory things, but they aren’t totally stupid. They have a great number of analysts developing strategy based on the information they have. If you want them to change, they need actionable information that supports that change.
Complaining in already largely leftist anonymous online spaces is not actionable information.
If the Uncommitted movement had tens of millions of registered voters come together and pledge to vote Harris if and only if she took a harder stance on Israel, that might have helped.
… are you familiar with what the Uncommitted National Movement was asking for? Like, half of Lemmy is bashing the Uncommitteds for the 15m vote difference between Biden in 2020 and Harris in 2024.
Like, do you get that Listen to Michigan alone got 101k Uncommitted votes in the Michigan Dem Primary to Biden’s 618k? That they had a stated goal of “an immediate and permanent ceasefire”? That there were Uncommitted delegates to the Democratic National Convention that were denied the opportunity to speak at the convention? That the there were protests outside the DNC demanding the Uncommitted movement be allowed to speak?
Which part of this is failing at being the movement you’re saying the DNC would listen to? If the 15m gap is truly completely at the feet of the Uncommitted, then what are you saying was the reason that the DNC cut them out of their strategy?
The candidate needs to be profitable, otherwise why even bother supporting him/her?
The DNC would rather have Trump than a progressive is what I’ve realized. We’ve been abandoned since '16
The DNC leadership would rather have control and fascism then have to share power but hold Congress and the white house
Weird question, were there any elections in between those years? If so, why did they get left out?
Either Joe Biden wasn’t “pro-corporate” or there was some other similarity to the 2016 and 2024 candidates that fits better…
Dem elections can be summarized as “upholding the status quo.” Americans want change. In 2016, Americans voted to break away from the status quo with Trump. In 2020, Americans voted to return to the status quo with Biden. In 2024, Americans remembered the status quo sucks, and voted to change it again with Trump again.
Change won all three elections, but Dems only got to campaign on change by virtue of being the opposition party for one of those three.
That sounds right to me but is both a little hopeless (I guess we’ll just flip flop the presidency term-to-term forever?) and disagreeing with the premise of “pro-corporatism” from the OP.
The status quo is pro-corporatism.
the chaos of the first trump presidency was fresh in everyones mind then.
The right won. They had more votes because many who voted democrat in 2020 voted red. How does going further left change that outcome?
If voters wanted politicians that are further left then wouldn’t they have voted for the politician that is furthest left?
I think most people just voted republican because they experienced inflation under Biden and dont understand why.
They had more votes because many who voted democrat in 2020 voted red.
Source?
That quote isn’t saying what you’re saying.
Trump kept pretty much all of his republocan support from 2020. That quote is saying 94% of Republicans voted for him, the same overall share of republican votes in 2020.
“Reduced the Democratic edge among independents”
When tallying votes this looks like less democrat votes that previously.
That doesn’t mean what you think it does. The fact that Harris received fewer votes from independents is because they stayed home (as evidenced by the lower turnout), not because they moved to Trump en masse.
Your conclusion also makes very little sense when you consider that Harris already conceded so much to Republicans compared to 2020, i.e. on migration, campaigning with Cheney and even proposing to appoint Republicans in the cabinet.
2020 voter turnout was the highest it has ever been in the history of our country because of the pandemic. We weren’t going to hit those numbers again without another motivator as big as the pandemic.
Thus, fewer votes this year compared to 2020
It’s not soorts teams. Going further left means reaching rural people and poor people. A lot of the working class just isn’t aware of what left and right mean. If the left let’s republican dictate who is taking those ppl’s side this is how it’s auways gonna end. Posh elitism has failed yet again
There was an election between an independent union leader and a career politician in Nebraska and the career politician won by a landslide. How do you explain that?
The career politician ran a better campaign and lied more believably.
Also not all union leaders are left wing, paradoxically. There are legitimate reasons that Americans distrust unions.
Nebraska isn’t a homestead of liberal ideals?
Neither is the entirety of America.
One example does not a rule make, and in the US electoral system money (and the party affiliations that bring it) speaks loudest of all. Maybe going further left wouldn’t work, but going further right certainly hasn’t. When Harris first emerged as the candidate she had such a swell of support, as she moved further right she lost it.
One example does not a rule make
Missouri voted to overturn abortion ban and voted for republicans.
Florida nearly voted for abortion ban and voted for republicans.
Americans have shown they want change but they also don’t understand how that can be achieved.
Apparently Biden/Harris chose not to push ‘make things better’ magical button in the Oval Office so they’re getting the boot and the guy who shat the bed earlier is now getting the opportunity to burn the house down.
Voters are saying it is because of inflation. Not because she didn’t go further left.
Sure, but if she had spent her few months promising to tax the shit out of Elon Musk and other billionaires I bet people would have been more excited and actually showed up to vote than when she promised to keep the course and also appoint a Republican
Harris literally campaigned with a promise to tax the billionaires more.
Billionaires countered her campaign by doing things like literally buying votes.
Now people on lemmy are pretending she never promised to tax billionaires more.
thats nice, did you figure out how that would translates to americans affording a roof, eggs, and milk?
Sorry, I meant she should have been Bernie-style grandstanding about it and hammering it home and making it a core part of her campaign more than it not being in her plans at all. I feel like she started with that kind of message and was doing well and ended with the Cheneys like me and ill put a Republican in my cabinet and lost
And non-voters don’t get to have an opinion or seat at the adults table because they enabled fascism.
This is factually false. Trump received no more vote really than he did the last 2 times. Dem voters simply stayed home.
How does Bernie win again and again then?
He hasnt been able to win outside of Vermont. Even when he lost the primaries he it was because he didn’t have enough votes.
Well he did until the DNC scuttled his momentum with spoilers like Clinton and biden
He didn’t have enough votes before the DNC got involved.
It’s also interesting that the argument here is that the only way Bernie would have had a chance as if there were enough candidates to dilute the vote. But in a straight up head to head contest he couldn’t win. Which is what happened. When the choice came down between Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden the latter got more votes. That’s not a pro Bernie argument. Yet we see it all the time.
wtf are you on about. It was never bernie vs joe. it was bernie vs warren vs joe. literally all the candidates joe adjacent dropped out for cabinet positions and endorsed him. then the bernie / warren votes were split.
deleted by creator
