You must log in or register to comment.
I’m doing my part! I’m yelling at leftists on the internet!
They share the blame, certainly, especially in depressing left-leaning turnout, but I think it was largely ‘swing voter’ twats sitting it out.
Suppose we’ll find out when more detailed analysis of this utter fuck-up and handing the keys to one of the most powerful countries in the world to fascists is available.
Blaming the people instead of the wet rag they ran.
This may come as a surprise to you, but yes, in a democracy the people are to blame for who gets elected.
In a functional democracy, the candidates would run on things people want. Instead, both parties cater to what the elites want.
The difference between Republicans and Democrats is whether they pay lip service to these policies or not (then Democrats find a way to not pass whatever that policy is, whether it’s with a rotating villain, the parliamentarian, keeping the filibuster, etc).
No? No. Democracy, functional or not, has no direct determining power on what candidates cater to. What democracy does is select the winning candidate, regardless of who the candidate caters to.
We may be a flawed democracy with candidates that cater to the elites, but we’re still a democracy and we still pick the winner.
If democracy doesn’t work for the majority of people, and your party runs on ‘rescuing’ that same democracy while at the same time villinaising the people that do want to improve the people’s economic conditions, you’re not going to be winning elections.
If you want to rescue democracy, you need to show that democracy can work for people, it’s the same mistake Weimar Germany made.
It’s hard to elect one person that works for the majority of the people. The majority of the people aren’t a homogenous group. Not everybody agrees on which policies are the best.
There’s a huge range of policies that poll in the 80-90% range that neither party wants to touch because they upset the donor class.
You’re describing an oligarchy with extra steps, not Democracy.
The Dems running a wet rag is a significant failing and they share the blame for fascism coming into power.
At the same time, that in no way excuses the thought process of any voter who sat by and said, “I don’t like the wet rag. Let’s go with fascism instead!”
Keep projecting this nonsense onto people you clearly do not understand and see if it gets better. Maybe 2028 will be different.
Maybe 2028 will be different.
HA,HA,HA,HA…~
“Stop calling me out for choosing fascism over the wet rag.”
“Too radical”
“Not radical enough”
“Trump Lite”
“Didn’t care about Trump voters”
“Another predicable establishment candidate”
“We didn’t know her”
“All she said was she not the other guy”
“Didn’t expose Trump enough”
“Joy bullshit! Where are the serious policies?”
“Elections are about feelings and she didn’t have appeal”
“Supports the Gaza genocide”
“Didn’t inspire pro-Israel voters”
“Failed border czar”
“Blue MAGA”
Everyone seems to think they know why Harris lost, and it’s always “didn’t do enough of what I like”. It’s boring and unhelpful.
Democrats continuing to blame everyone but themselves, as usual.
The Democrats could have run a turd as a candidate with the slogan “it’ll be a shit show” and I’d still have voted for them with no regrets, because I understand that fascism is an existential threat. If the Democrats are to blame in any way, it’s because they didn’t try to get people to understand that OH WAIT THEY DID.
Should the Democrats have run a better candidate and a better campaign? Obviously yes. Is it their fault that voters were willing to let a fascist win? Not even a little.
You’re defending the people who embraced the Cheneys and told Bernie and Tlaib to get fucked. Cutting off money and weapons to Israel- who represent only 2.4% of the US population- to end a genocide was the easiest possible win imaginable.
If by “defending” you mean “placing blame where it belongs” then yeah.
Like, if a serial killer has killed ten people then gets charged with killing an eleventh, but he didn’t, then I’d “defend” him too because the person who actually did the crime is still out there and should be held accountable.
You’re making it out as if I’m trying to say the serial killer didn’t murder anybody. That’s not what I’m saying.
The Democrats fucked up, big time. But it’s the electorate who let a fascist win.
No, the electorate told them exactly what was going to happen months in advance over gaza.
Biden/Harris decided YOLO! and found out.
“You better stop selling weapons to Israel so that Iran can steamroll you, or we’re going to throw the largest and most powerful country to the fascists”
I wouldn’t take that insanity seriously either. And that’s why I’m getting downvoted by a bunch of insane failures of anti fascism. Which is fine, I’m only frustrated at your refusal to take responsibility for your failure, which no amount of “they made me do it” will absolve you from; you’re responsible for your actions, nobody else.
Indeed we are, and my actions will never support a genocidal candidate while yours did. Doesn’t particularly matter which genocidal we get when thats the bar. I will admit to a small perverse pleasure knowing you dweeds will be suffering at least a small amount of discomfort. It was the least i could do for the harm we’ve inflicted on Palestinians and the shit stain behavior of people like yourself and harris.
The irony of this comment is profound.
I’m proud of my choices because I fought to harm as few people as possible.
You’re proud of your choice because you believe your hands are clean despite your choice harming the most number of people.
Your hands are not clean. I hope some day you realize it.
You’re absolutely correct. Your actions didn’t support a “genocidal candidate”. But your INACTION certainly supported a genocidal candidate.
This is entirely on all of you.
Prepare to lose again 2028 with this attitude.
I’m with you that fascism is alive and well in the states, no doubt.
But you have to see that years of “fascist” accusations from anyone even slightly left has watered down any impact that language might have had. Most people who are and have been on the receiving end of that accusation just roll their eyes when they hear the word - regardless if it’s true or not. It comes off to them as a “blue hair” reee-ing.
Just letting you know most people don’t take it with the same gravity any more. To most people “real” fascism was a 1940’s thing, and fascism now is just an insult throw around by keyboard warriors and “SJWs” - whom they find annoying and pathetic.
The term, however appropriate, doesn’t affect people’s political decisions as much as you would think.
R’s have learned to change their boogiemen occasionally while keeping them substantially similar. Is DEI or CRT substantially different then “Political correctness gone wild”? Not even a little. But it feels new.
You’re right, that is a thing they do.
I see my original comment got at least one down vote because we’re still in the “denial” phase. It’s the truth though: most people, however wrong they may be, view the fascist label as just another flippantly-tossed insult not to be taken seriously.
I’ve reached across the aisle to vote for a conservative for 3 elections now against Trump. It would be nice if centrists and conservatives did the same.
If anything non-voter related is to blame, it’s the global economy which has shifted every single developed country away from the party in charge. But that doesn’t excuse the non-voters.
Now let’s get Ukraine everything we possibly can and put as much pressure on Israel as possible.
You would, but millions of Americans wouldn’t. Those Americans act out of self-interest, and the economy was the biggest pain point with most voters this past election.
Instead of catering to the middle class, what Dems’ base has been historically, Harris campaigned to business owners with tax incentives/breaks.
Democrats failed. Hell, Harris could have even lied just as Obama did to get Democrats and moderates to believe that she represents them. But she didn’t!
That democrats weren’t even willing to budge on their support for genocide means that they don’t actually mind fascism. They can scream on and on about how dangerous trump is, but when they’re kissing dick cheney’s ass and trying to court other such “moderate” fascists, then they’re just full of shit. So yes, it is largely the fault of democrats, who are the only other viable party in the country, for not fighting fascism. They set themselves up as the only solution and then failed to get the votes. Reminder that this is the same party boosting the campaigns of far-right candidates just so they can point at how crazy their opponents are. All they’re accomplishing is helping out the fascist cause, which again, democrats don’t seem to mind based on their actions.
They didn’t “set themselves up as the only solution.” We have First Past the Post voting, that’s just how it works.
If they didn’t set themselves up to be the only solution then they should disband so another party could do so.
Guess what, not everyone thinks that, and a good politician would actually promise to improve people’s lives instead of continually talking about how bad the other guy is.
Trotting out the least popular Republicans ever as being on your side didn’t help either.
not everyone thinks that
Yes, obviously not everyone thinks fascism is an existential threat. Which is probably one of our greatest failures as a society, in terms of education.
I think it’s more “a lot of people would really like someone to significantly change the system of politics, and Trump promised to be a wrecking ball… oh and btw… wtf do you mean Facism. Are you like my Highschool history teacher or something? Isn’t Hitler dead”
If the democrat party genuinely gave a shit they would of held a primary and nominated a qualified and popular candidate. They didn’t. They don’t care!
the democratic party never fought like it was existential threat and it showed. ‘Long as I did my best’ indeed biden, indeed.
I just want you to note that at the bottom of the link you sent me it essentially says it’s written with chat gpt.
It’s not trustworthy, though I agree with it.
This content was partially produced with the help of Benzinga Neuro and was reviewed and published by Benzinga editors.
Its a video of a former obama official and the video is a primary source. Didnt really care about the textual contents of the page was just grabbing a source for the video. Whether jon is trustworthy source shrug id believe it though.
So, when you’re running, ostensibly to save democracy, you should probably offer those voters stuff that will turn them out. In 2020 Biden promised them a $2000 check, and that worked (even though he reneged on it afterwards).
The only ones to blame are the Democrats. Trump got less votes than in 2020, so it’s not like he got more popular, the Democrats failed to get their base out. You can’t even blame the Greens this time.
Trump is currently sitting at 75.6 million votes, with a few states still finishing off their counts. His 2020 total was 74.2 million. He’s not only already got more votes than he did in 2020, but he’s on track to eclipse that amount even further. Meanwhile Harris is at 71 million vs Biden’s 81 million. So yeah, Dem voters didn’t show up because the lives of their fellow Americans don’t really mean anything to them, but either some of them flipped for Trump or more people who typically sit out elections showed up for him. The numbers show Trump did get more popular. This is apparently what our country wants.
I don’t think that MAGA is an existential threat to democracy, or to Americans’ lives. If it were, Pres. Biden would do something about it, right? Like, maybe, lock them up. Or at least say so. He certainly wouldn’t be planning to just hand over the reins and walk away.
(P.S. If you can’t tell if the above is serious, then why couldn’t millions of voters actually think this way?)
So, what’s the takeaway here? Next time we should nominate better voters? Good luck with that. I think we should nominate candidates who can energize the voters we have.
To all the infallible unblemished champions of the proletarian revolution who are shitting on “libs”:
According to the Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics and Western Political Theory in the Face of the Future, this is the definition of liberalism:
Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, right to private property and equality before the law.
In your own words, what do you think “lib” means? And if you’re going with my cited textbook definition, what’s so offensive to you about the tenets that are listed?
Either words’ definitions matter or they don’t, and if they don’t, then none of what you say matters.
Probably not the type of person you are directing the question towards, however, to me “Liberal” when used as a genuine marker of someone’s political philosophy is effectively someone who believes in the status quo, but with slightly more protections for individuals, or relatively minor changes to existing political processes. They refuse to believe that other market or political system options are worthy of attempting or simply do not consider them feasible.
As to the second part,
Either words’ definitions matter or they don’t, and if they don’t, then none of what you say matters.
Unfortunately, definitions change over time or simply aren’t accurate, homosexual used to inaccurately be defined as “sexual orientation disturbance” for example. That definition of liberal also covers things like the ““Classical Liberalism”” movement as liberal, they believe in COMPLETE market deregulation and capitalist “anarchy”, their version of “rights of the individual” is the rights of an individual to do whatever they want to when they have the money to do so, without allowing any government to intervene in any way. This can (and frequently does) include using money to discriminate against other people, that’s something worth fighting against.
Also FWIW, “Neoliberal” is defined by Oxford Languages as “favoring policies that promote free-market capitalism, deregulation, and reduction in government spending.”, sometimes when people refer to “libs” they mean neoliberals, and yeah, deregulation and free-market capitalism has been tried, it sucks and deserves to be shat on.
- an anarchist
Codified capitalism, anarchism, republicanism, and socialism are liberal philosophies that find their roots historically in the enlightenment. “Lib” isn’t the insult that tankies and MAGAs think it is.
FWIW, I advocate for democratic market socialism.
Libs embraced the Cheneys and told Bernie and Tlaib et al to go fuck themselves.
LibsCorporatist DNC embraced the Cheneys and told Bernie and Tlaib et al to go fuck themselves.
Yes, I’m aware of the “paradox of intolerance”.
You’re doing great comrade; the revolution is one more snarky internet comment and molotov sippy-cup away.
Oh dont worry, I’m done with the “revolution”. That’s never ever ever gonna happen.
This is you, then.
So, you’re triggered enough by my pushback about people not knowing what “liberal” means enough to try to make me
insertNegativeEmotionHere?Now you’re just a fucking asshole. Fuck off.
I fucking hate shitlib dictionary lawyering.
Just say you’re gonna fucking ignore what’s happening.
dictionary lawyering
So words don’t matter to you, got it.
Just say you’re gonna fucking ignore what’s happening.
I voted blue up and down the ballot in every election possible in my adult life since 2000, despite the corporatist fellating DNC. I’ve demonstrated. I’ve donated. I’ve written to congressmen. I was in a union earlier in my career.
I’ve been called worse than “shitlib”. Try harder.
Here’s how the corporatist DNC read your vote:
THEY LOVE ME!! THEY REALLY REALLY LOVE ME!!
Should I not have voted?
Dunno but you should at least grasp why lots of people think none of that shit works and hasnt for decades
“That shit” is far better than the alternative.
Generally it is used as a derogatory remark towards the flank of capitalist that often styles themselves ‘leftist’.
In a very reductive sense it means if you’re offended by being called it, then it means you.
In a very reductive sense it means if you’re offended by being called it, then it means you.
Wannabe pejoratives usually are overly reductive.
I just think the tankies and MAGA types don’t even know what it really means. Republicanism and Marxism are historically both liberal political philosophies that find their roots in the enlightenment.
I think they want to say “corporatist neoliberal”, but it’s too many syllables or requires too much thought. “Lib” makes for a nicer stone to throw.
I guess other things were more important.
Not having a genocide of PoC at home wasn’t one of them.
Removed by mod
48% of the popular vote went to Kamala.
Tell me more about this Libs didn’t vote thing.
Well, Trump got fewer total votes than last election and still won. So there’s that.
They literally haven’t counted all the votes yet.
Fascism is always a populist movement, by the time it’s on the ballot it’s already too late.
The so called left created the conditions for Trump by being the lesser evil instead of being better.
Fuck that noise. Victim blaming bullshit.
stick wheel victim .jpg
Yeah… the dems are the victims, sure. /s
Those poow wittle democwats and their multi billion dollar super PACS…victims of the intolerant left! /s
The so called leftLiberals created the conditions for Trump by being the lesser evil instead of being better.Liberalism is right-wing. That’s why we had two right-wing candidates who are slightly different levels of fascist.
Hey Micheal, corporate needs you to tell the difference between these two pictures.
Who said Lefts didn’t vote for Harris?
Are you manufacturing this? Where are the exit polls?
Might a better reason for why Fascism won with this election be that Democrats, including Biden, Harris, the DNC, and the consulting class, failed to campaign to their own base, and even more than their base since most Americans, Dems and Reps, approve of progressive policies?
Projection man
Biden got ~81m votes in 2020, Harris only got ~67m. >14m fewer people voted for her.
Trump also dropped by ~2m, only getting ~72m this time around vs. ~74m in 2020.
Trump didn’t win because of a giant right-wing national shift, he won because of voter apathy on the left.
There was certainly a right wing shift. The DNC did their very best (e.g. Cheney) to capture republican voters rather than represent the workers.
You need to seperate out the political machine from the populace.
The DNC did make a right-ward play to try and peel centrist/moderate voters who identify as Republicans but didn’t necessarily want to vote for Trump. They did this on the (now we know false) assumption that their base would turn out automagically.
But again, Trump won with fewer votes this time around than he lost in 2020 to Biden with. He didn’t gain standing, the only reason he was victorious was because those left of centre failed to show up to the polls. Voter apathy doesn’t denote a right-wing shift; it denotes a shit political platform.
Voters are still voting rather progressively on state-wide ballot measures, the people haven’t gotten more conservative - despite what the (elite-owned) media narrative would have you believe. Every datapoint and infographic regarding voter demographics is based on %s of voters, rather than absolute demographics.
I have to admit that I haven’t delved into the exit polls and analyzed which social groups migrated right or not.
But one thing that’s different about the 2024 election compared to 2020 is that COVID wasn’t happening to the same degree. There were a ton more mail-in ballots 2020 due to social distancing, which helped both parties as a bump in votes.
Why use 2020 as a data point though? Why not 2016? Why not 2012 and 2008? Might those elections be slightly different because a 1-in-100-year pandemic wasn’t happening?
If you compare those numbers, does the Dems’ numbers compare to those elections?
I want to say someone on Lemmy already posted the numbers recently in one of these posts. From what I recall, Dems’ votes returned close to pre-COVID levels albeit a degree lower, yet Reps’ votes were above pre-COVID levels. Why?
Might the explanation be the societal shift towards the right?
And how can you not see the national shift to the right in how the Democrats speak to rallies and voters? We are considerably more right-wing as a country than ever in the recent decades. This election was a Republican primary with how Kamala ran on pre-Trump conservative values and policies.
Maybe apathy exists on the Left because it is increasingly the case that Democrats don’t represent them anymore.
I used 2020 as a comparison for a few reasons;
- It was the most recent result prior to the 2024 election, so it will have the most comparable demographics.
- voting infrastructure from the COVID-era is still largely in place, allowing for more early and postal voting than pre-COVID. So earlier years are less comparable.
- presidential elections are just as much about voting against the worse candidate, if not more-so, than voting for a preferred one.
- both 2020 and 2024 could be seen as referendums on Trump’s policies, presidency and suitability for a second term.
Rather than looking at percentages, the individual counts are more important as they tell the underlying story.
The DNC’s GOTV campaign absolutely failed to motivate their base and undecided voters. Perhaps that was somewhat intentional, as a lot of the former GOP aligned ‘never-Trump’ campaign financiers have shifted to the Dems and have used their new-found influence to nudge the party’s platform rightward. The Cheney endorsements certainly didn’t do them any favours!
But looking at how even deep-red states have voted in support of abortion rights, shows that the general US populace is generally slowly drifting leftward - despite what the corporate-owned media narrative would have you believe.
I’ll agree with you on the 2020 voting laws carrying forward (although I haven’t looked into the state laws, especially the red ones to see if those have been repealed yet because that’s what tends to happen).
Also agreed on the DNC’s and Harris’ messaging. I also blame Biden because if we wanted to prepare to fight against Trump in the election where he was his most popular, the Dems would have ran an actual primary.
Definitely agreed too on the general sentiment of Americans supporting leftist policies. We see this with Bashear in Kentucky, and recently the middle wage and abortion policies in Missouri. Although you might be able to balance that by Florida’s outcome with their referendums as well as California.
Ultimately it comes down to messaging and optics. Democrats need to figure out a way to package progressive policy in a way that capture the imaginations and hopes of their base while at the same time not scaring those towards the center into believing those same policies are socialist or communist.
I’m not familiar with the California referendum in question, but Florida saw over 57% vote in favour of extending abortion rights.
The only reason it lost was because it required at least 60% to pass; instead Florida now gets to experience the tyranny of minority rule.
And you assume it’s the left because? Not everyone who voted for Biden in 2020 was a leftist, and most weren’t.
As in to the left of the (imaginary) political centre; not self-identifying Leftists. This cohort includes centrists, moderates, liberals and leftists amongst others.
That’s not what left means, but whatever.
It was Fascism vs. Fascism Lite
You obviously don’t understand what fascism is. I recommend Umberto Eco’s essay "Ur-Fascism"as a good primer. Maybe read that before you make anymore ignorant comments like this one.
It’s asshats like you that put us here, congrats!
BluE MaGa amiright?
Don’t get mad at me. It’s not my fault the Democratic Party ignored a good portion of the country to pick up a handful of disaffected conservatives instead of courting any sort of progressive base. Which rightly blew up in their faces and helped make Harris deeply unpopular candidate to many.
Fucking Dick Cheney endorsed Harris. That easily pushed more left leaning people away from Harris. Dick Cheney, the guy who pushed the US to invade Iraq to get those pesky WMD’s… And we’re still dealing with the fallout of that decision.
I’m still irritated at “most lethal military” she said repeatedly.
Democrats aren’t great. At all. But to call them fascists is just ridiculous. They’re just liberal capitalists.
Removed by mod
Yeah, you have to scratch them first in the larval form.
Shit like this is why Trump won.
I voted.
But something like 16 million fewer Americans voted this year compared to 2020. That’s an insanely large number of people who simply didn’t vote.
Thats why Trump won.
Those people didn’t vote because people like you convinced them there was no difference and therefore no point in voting.
I just checked the current vote counts because everyone is repeating election night totals, which hadn’t yet accounted for a lot of votes that were still being tallied. The current difference between 2020 and 2024 is about 5.7 million votes. And they’re still not done counting in a few states. Trump won because the majority decided fascism is pretty cool, actually.
Thanks for updated numbers
It’s the truth, plain and simple. Your refusal to see it is part of the problem
Democrats are Republicans Lite. MAGA are fascists.
And Democrats tried to appeal to MAGA instead of their own voting base.
May as well not vote, right?
I voted, but millions of Americans did not. That’s why Trump won. That, and the Democrats ignoring their base in favor of picking up a handful of disaffected conservatives.
I wonder if the constant “both sides” bullshit has something to do with why millions of Americans didn’t vote
So why would you not vote fascism lite? If you have two viable choices, and one is a worse version of the other, what possible benefit do you get for not increasing the odds of the less bad one? Fascism lite is taking the foot off the accelerator on fascism, which gives more opportunities to correct course. Fascism full flavor is flooring the pedal, and only makes it harder to do that. Voting for neither does not reduce the chances of one of the two winning.
The reason usa has fascism is because the only alternative is fascism lite.
And the reason those are our alternatives is that leftists are stingy with their vote. It’s called “incremental change” and it means you don’t turn your nose up at every imperfect candidate.
It’s just a wiiitle genocide!!!
So now you get a triple scoop of genocide, how is that better?
I’m over pointing fingers and playing holy than thou.
The people who plan to build a Hungarian-style autocratic government are in power now, and they’re hoping the left is exhausted and tired of fighting this shit for a decade.
This shit is going to be dangerous, and we’re going to have to motivate people to push back hard than even. Pointing fingers just divides us and makes us even weaker.
That’s a bummer because progressives couldn’t be bothered to stop an erasure of minorities and lgbt alongside a subjugation of women.
Quite simply, either you align with them or you can get fucked.
At least that’s how it’s currently playing out.
Removed by mod
“But mom! I got a gun for self defense, how was i supposed to know that you’d be declared property even though they were screaming it at the top of their lungs?”
Its awesome that my post got removed because they can’t admit that they were DEAD WRONG TO HAVE BEEN CENSORING THOSE CALLING FOR ARMING UP FOR SELF-DEFENSE.
FUCK YOU, MODS
Arming for self defense wont matter when the women in your life aren’t legally allowed to have a bank account.
It will be death by a thousand cuts, but at least you’ll have your guns?
Whatcha gonna do about it? And what does “at least you’ll have your guns” mean? Explain.
It means your guns won’t do shit when the law decides your mom is declared property.
The guns won’t change anything because the people making those laws not only have guns but also have the police, the legislative, the judiciary, the military and the executive branch.
Good luck fighting an apc full of military-decked police officers with your ar 15.
Libs couldn’t bother to stop a genocide to stop a fascist
Shortsighted progressives decided that people they dont know halfway around the world were more important than their friends and family.
Hope you can tell your wife/ girlfriend /sister you had the moral high ground when she’s declared property.
I like how you immediately use whataboutisms instead of addressing the problem that is the genocide she was actively conducting.
How about you start with why the genocide is a good thing and harris absolutely must not change her position instead of trying to guilt trip people. oh right… because genocides are actually horrible, and harris could have absolutely changed her position. oh well.
The DNC was most certainly not going to change their positions on the thing mentioned. Im not naive enough to believe abstaining or voting 3rd party would actively change anything for the better.
In fact, doing those things absolutely made things worse.
Again, congrats or your moral high ground. I hope youre lgbt friends are stoked lol
A: “Hey, why didnt you help to stop the rising tide of erasure in the United States?”
B: “People halfway around the world are more important to me than you are.”
You’ll note how you failed to even remotely answer the question i posed everyone:
what prevented harris from shifting positions on gaza if it could have won her the election?
Everything else in your post is the same nonsense you dweebs have been spewing for months.
The DNC was most certainly not going to change their positions on the thing mentioned.
Again why
It doesn’t matter why, and frankly, it’s weird that you think i have inside knowledge of the DNC policy choices.
That was their policy choice, and they stuck to it.
I get it, genocide is absolutely terrible, and it shouldn’t be happening anywhere.
You decided that genocide of palestinian people is worse than the genocide of lgbt and minorities and the subgjugation of women in the United States.
The real question is: why did you decide that people you dont know were more important than people you do know?
I know what i chose. I chose to support the people around me - the people i love and care about.
You chose strangers over the people you care about.
I hope you can look at your lgbt friends and the women you care about in the face and tell them you care about them less than people you dont even fucking know.
You chose the worst of the options.
And weirdly enough, you are happy about it.
And this entire statement doesnt even bring into account that you essentially chose the option that will crank the wheel of genocide (you know, that thing you supposedly hate?) even further.
Hey buddy, um, your, uh, your chauvinism is hanging out.
Nothing says chauvinism like wanting women to keep their autonomy.
Maybe tell the guy who voted 3rd party/abstained.
Nothing says chauvinism like saying, “meh, what’s a few hundred thousand lives of brown people on the other side of the world to me.”
Chauvinism is a term used to describe sexism.
The DNC would rather lose with a neoliberal than win with a progressive. If they want to get there shit together they have to win with the working class and ordinary people.
They can’t be elitist centrists. They’ll lose every election if they do. The future is now old man
If they go further left they lose every moderate or right leaning Democratic voter don’t they? Why would you want your voter base to get smaller
So is it that leftists are too small a group to be worth making political concessions to, or are they a large enough group to have an effect on elections?
Why do Democrats feel entitled to the support of the left when they don’t offer anything to the left?
That’s the problem they’re both. They’re that kick you always need to keep the right wing nuts at bay. But this election the American far left became nuts too and lost their common sense. Anyways enjoy your king
I’m not really a fan of my king, the queen before him was far more likeable.
Pithy remarks aside, I don’t see how the far left can be blamed for Harris losing given the pretty sizable margin by which she lost. And why would leftists be motivated to vote for a party that not only doesn’t offer them anything in terms of policy, but actively courts so called ‘moderate’ Republicans?
Hogwash. The left-right split is way less significant today than the populist-establishment split. Of all the candidates in the 2020 primary, only Bernie, the furthest left, had high approval ratings amongst Republican voters. This isn’t the 1990s.
To attract people who took one look at this steaming pile of economic dystopia, the parties that both support it, and walked away.
I’m not even talking about the loud ones that claimed to walk away but voted Harris out of conscience and harm reduction.
For someone that wants to live in society and not a bunch of rugged individuals at each other’s throats for oligarch scraps, it is very difficult to look at this cesspool and have hope or engage without feeling filthy and even more hopeless.
That could change if today’s neoliberals were supplanted by anti-corporatists messaging that it isn’t government’s job to get out of the market’s way, but to regulate and straightjacket the market economy into serving society as the lowly tool of society that an economy ought to be.
The people demanding there be winners and losers in an embarrassingly wealthy society ought to go live in the forest with nothing but a knife to see if they win or lose. A society supports one another.
The left didn’t vote against fascism, but also the center didn’t. And the right, obviously.
Lmao lib shit tally:
Bullshit corporate media reference, check. Blaming the minority for the failure of the party, check Believing politics happens once every four years, check.
Maybe the left didn’t vote because there was only right wing parties to vote from.
Extremely right wing - Republican
Slightly centre right - Democrats
The oligarchs’ vision for ‘choice’
