Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Hill)   Rep. Ilhan Omar suggests maybe the Democrats try winning this time and focus their energy on getting "disaffected" voters to actually show up and vote this time rather than wasting their efforts trying to convince Republicans to leave the cult   (thehill.com) divider line
    More: Spiffy, Democratic Party, George W. Bush, Republican Party, Trump voters' Omar fires, John Kerry, President of the United States, Barack Obama, Joe Biden  
•       •       •

970 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 Sep 2020 at 3:05 AM (17 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

 
2020-09-27 2:08:23 AM  
26 votes:

puffy999: The time has come for us to flee.
SEPTEMBER 26, 2020
Karleigh Frisbie Brogan

What a name


Karleigh Frisbie and the Rats of NIMH.
 
2020-09-27 3:30:48 AM  
21 votes:
Stop trying to use the election to raise your own profile. All you do is convince people to vote against their own interest. "Oh Biden isn't liberal enough, a Democrat told me - why bother?"

Get more Democrats elected, and you will have a platform to seek greater changes. Infighting only robs you of the change you seek.
 
2020-09-27 1:42:59 AM  
20 votes:
Same tired false choice narrative.
It's not about getting red hats to change teams. It's about the large swath of people who don't like Trump and don't really want to vote for him but have been told for years about how Democrats want to destroy America.

There are more of them than there are die-hard progressives who need to be coddled in order to vote against Trump. The die-hard progressives have either decided to vote for the lesser evil in Biden or have taken their bat and ball and gone home and simply won't return. They've made up their mind. The people to get now are the wishy-washy ones, the rather ditsy ones.
 
2020-09-27 3:12:53 AM  
18 votes:
That's crazy talk, clearly more moving to the right is what's needed.
 
2020-09-27 12:47:58 AM  
18 votes:
The time has come for us to flee.
SEPTEMBER 26, 2020

Karleigh Frisbie Brogan

What a name
 
2020-09-27 11:46:33 AM  
8 votes:
any criticism of Biden helps trump. act accordingly.
 
2020-09-27 7:31:09 AM  
8 votes:
One thing is for sure, the split is coming. And the divorce is going to be ugly.

I just wonder how the conservative Democrats will make their bones when they realize they were the baddies the whole time.
 
2020-09-27 3:53:06 AM  
8 votes:

Heliodorus: wademh: Same tired false choice narrative.
It's not about getting red hats to change I teams. It's about the large swath of people who don't like Trump and don't really want to vote for him but have been told for years about how Democrats want to destroy America.

There are more of them than there are die-hard progressives who need to be coddled in order to vote against Trump. The die-hard progressives have either decided to vote for the lesser evil in Biden or have taken their bat and ball and gone home and simply won't return. They've made up their mind. The people to get now are the wishy-washy ones, the rather ditsy ones.

Stop biatching, it's a business deal. If you want to benefit from things they have, you have to give them what they want. Otherwise pound sand.


A business deal for their ever-so-precious tender vote? Vote for Biden or there is ZERO chance of enacting ANY change they desire. That's the deal. I'm saying this as a progressive:  Puerile Pouting Progressives (say that three times fast!) can go fark themselves. I'm done coddling them.
 
2020-09-27 3:52:51 AM  
8 votes:
The heck does a black lady from Minnesota know about disenfranchised voters?
 
2020-09-27 5:35:31 AM  
7 votes:

Likwit: This has nothing to do with centrist and far-left and everything to do with corporate donors. Don't buy the propaganda.

A majority of Dems, Independents and Republicans support legalizing marijuana and federal funding for maternity leave. A majority of Dems and Independents support a higher minimum wage, free or reduced tuition for state schools, M4A, and green energy initiatives. Why don't they try to grab as many votes as possible and add these popular policies to their platform?


Biden is doing this
 
2020-09-27 4:19:58 AM  
7 votes:

Likwit: A majority of Dems and Independents support a higher minimum wage, free or reduced tuition for state schools, M4A, and green energy initiatives.


Until they hear they have to pay for it
 
2020-09-26 11:52:01 PM  
7 votes:
She thinks that will work better than yelling at and blaming all third party and non-voters for this being their fault and they should be ashamed of themselves? Doesn't sound like the Democrats I know.
 
2020-09-27 12:01:58 PM  
6 votes:
biden doesn't owe any of you cretins anything. he put in the work. it's his turn to be president. the alternative is the literal end of the world. you owe your vote not only to biden, but the whole democratic party. no criticism will be tolerated. none. VOTE
 
2020-09-27 10:30:32 AM  
5 votes:

IRestoreFurniture: GoldSpider: IRestoreFurniture: GoldSpider: Night Train to Wakanda: GoldSpider: Creidiki: But then the Democrat would have to push policies that appeal to majority of to voters. You know, the kind of extreme socialism practised in the rest of the developed world.
Education, social security, health cafe.
The horror... The horror...

That explains Bernie's blowout victories.

We can't all be Buttigeig claiming victory with no results.

Who here is claiming that there are millions of Buttigieg voters just waiting for sufficient inspiration?

Yang himself stated that a large majority of his voters won't vote for Biden.

All seven of them?

Likewise for Buttigieg but you don't seem to mind using them as an example.


Your arguments are weak.

Have a good day.


I voted for Buttegeig. He lost. You didn't see me spend the ensuing months whining about how the "establishment" disenfranchised me or claiming I had a valid pretext for sitting the general election out.
 
2020-09-27 8:53:03 AM  
5 votes:
Another thread offering proof that moderates hate progressives more than fascists.
 
2020-09-27 8:32:31 AM  
5 votes:
But centrists will continue to look down on everyone, blame the voters for not showing up and wonder why they are relegated to a symbolic opposition party in the federal government.

It is the boomer attitude in action.
 
2020-09-27 7:29:04 AM  
5 votes:

qorkfiend: puffy999: Smackledorfer: When Dems reach right, they aren't trying to get David duke and the proud boys' vote. They are chasing the 90 million non-voters.

Some progressives believe the bulk of whatever portion of that 90 million can be convinced to vote is progressive. They also believe chasing them will cost few votes from the center.

Other people believe that the bulk of the influencable 90 million is moderate, and that chasing them will cost fewer hard left votes than they gain.

Both are right in specific locations, I'm sure. I don't know which strategy is the best; I do know anyone complaining they are too center for Dems or too leftist for Dems should show the fark up at a primary and be heard. I also know there is no logical explanation for Dems to deliberately choose the wrong strategy.

However corrupt you may find them, being in office is superior to losing.

I don't know how to convince the party to lean left more than center when their leftists can't win primaries.

The party doesn't need to shift to "free taxpayer abortions in every town over 500 people" or "no guns ever" like the myth seems to be, the one that a lot of these undecided voters may buy.

But the reality is this: we don't know farkall about "leftists winning primaries" when THE PARTY ITSELF IS OPPOSING THE LEFTISTS IN MOST CASES.
I'm not Bro-ing there. My Rep is DeFazio, a rather moderate Democrat, but a wise one who deserves to keep winning. He wins, seemingly in part by representing liberal Democrats as well as 80s style Oregon Republicans... But sadly the Democratic Party doesn't endorse the few right-leaning ideas he has, either, so instead of a guy who should have 70% of the vote each year, he's dragged into a fight.

"The party itself is opposing leftists"?

What the fark do you think a primary is, exactly?


An anti-electoral hoedown to see who can get the most compromising image of themselves taking a bite out of a corn a dog in Iowa?
 
2020-09-27 4:08:06 AM  
5 votes:
When Dems reach right, they aren't trying to get David duke and the proud boys' vote. They are chasing the 90 million non-voters.

Some progressives believe the bulk of whatever portion of that 90 million can be convinced to vote is progressive. They also believe chasing them will cost few votes from the center.

Other people believe that the bulk of the influencable 90 million is moderate, and that chasing them will cost fewer hard left votes than they gain.

Both are right in specific locations, I'm sure. I don't know which strategy is the best; I do know anyone complaining they are too center for Dems or too leftist for Dems should show the fark up at a primary and be heard. I also know there is no logical explanation for Dems to deliberately choose the wrong strategy.

However corrupt you may find them, being in office is superior to losing.

I don't know how to convince the party to lean left more than center when their leftists can't win primaries.
 
2020-09-27 3:41:58 AM  
5 votes:

the unabomber was right: She thinks that will work better than yelling at and blaming all third party and non-voters for this being their fault and they should be ashamed of themselves? Doesn't sound like the Democrats I know.


Boobies out of the gate you climbed right up on that cross didn't you. No delay just went right up there didn't you?
 
2020-09-27 3:24:46 AM  
5 votes:

wademh: Same tired false choice narrative.
It's not about getting red hats to change teams. It's about the large swath of people who don't like Trump and don't really want to vote for him but have been told for years about how Democrats want to destroy America.

There are more of them than there are die-hard progressives who need to be coddled in order to vote against Trump. The die-hard progressives have either decided to vote for the lesser evil in Biden or have taken their bat and ball and gone home and simply won't return. They've made up their mind. The people to get now are the wishy-washy ones, the rather ditsy ones.


Stop biatching, it's a business deal. If you want to benefit from things they have, you have to give them what they want. Otherwise pound sand.
 
2020-09-27 9:34:00 PM  
4 votes:

Sophont: DoctorFarkGood: If they don't think, with shiat being as shiatty as it is right now, that they should vote...

You have to make them think voting will change things.
Like Barack Obama did, whether or not you believe he followed through, he won on that message.
If things will be just as shiatty, but someone else will be in charge, who farking cares?

The party just doesn't want to go that route because the change people want will displease the party donors.


Remember picture where one candidate is reasonable, and the other is peeing on the undecided voter?

If you're telling me that people aren't voting because they've looked at a wannabe dictator and 200,000 dead Americans and decided BOTHSAME BOTHSIDESAREBAD... then they don't need voter outreach, they need a goddamn therapist.

Likwit: There's nothing disingenuous about it. Nonvoters don't vote regularly and there's no way to be sure they're going to vote this time.

And the Green Party getting more votes? That tell me that Stupid Voters are also a demographic.

Where is your evidence that leftward appeals will motivate people to actually show up? Sanders tried that twice, and people didn't show up.

You can't bet the house on unreliable people.
 
2020-09-27 3:54:45 PM  
4 votes:
One of the greatest reasons for voter apathy is that many people are simply turned off by politics which is mostly symptomatic of people who don't like listening to people argue. The trivial psychology is that this goes back to their time as children and feelings of insecurity when adults were arguing about things they didn't understand, or perhaps even understood to be illogical emotional fighting more intent to hurt someone they should care for with things they didn't even really believe.

But it doesn't have to be explicit childhood trauma. Most people just plain get turned off by others arguing and find most arguments petty and artificial. Politics are a natural victim of people who feel uncomfortable around other people arguing. And so they turn it off and avoid anything political and things with artificial drama.

Oddly, Trump has tapped into those who thrive on the drama, the ones who rush to see a fight and want to see a beating. Yes, pro wrestling fans, reality TV fans, people who want to see some group victimized, sometimes just to feed off the drama.

This is the fodder of fascism. It is an appeal to an ugly aspect of humanity. It's a better fit to the GOP than to modern Democrats.

A trap that some Progressives fall into is to similarly be driven by anger. A subset of Bernie supporters were emotionally driven by anger. The folks who often speak of guillotines are dancing with these emotions. One the one hand, the progressive stance is generally to be against capitol punishment, but guillotines and variants of Eat the Rich sprout up as if they were acceptable Progressive ideas.

They aren't. That's just being the flip side of the ugly populism Trump feeds, tribalism, US versus THEM, pick a team and we fight.

The hallmark of this disease is how everything becomes hyperpolarized, all or not, with me or against me. And no, not for the trite counters like for or against police killing unarmed black people. Like for M4A or wanting granny to die. For UBI or you're a pro-corporate stooge.

That level of rhetoric drives people away from politics, that level of rhetoric suppresses the overall vote. People are turned off by the polarization. And that's a huge group of people. They are hard to reach because they have become distrustful of politicians because so so many of them adopt the rhetoric of vilification at every opportunity. They do so because, being human, they feed off the emotion of the crowd and vilification gets some ginned up in a big way. Think of a Trump rally. But it isn't clear it's a measure of ultimate voters.

Biden did bring out more voters than Hillary. Some of that was people who really fear a 2nd term for Trump.

How many are attracted to his avoidance of demonizing any and everyone who doesn't support him completely?
 
2020-09-27 1:51:26 PM  
4 votes:
Insurgent:

You're killing it in this thread.  Keep it up.
 
2020-09-27 12:43:57 PM  
4 votes:

jaytkay: Elections are about making the best real-world choice.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 12:25:58 PM  
4 votes:
jaytkay is right the democratic party doesn't owe you sexist bros JACK shiat you racist farks

vote or die LITERALLY
 
2020-09-27 12:18:04 PM  
4 votes:
if you aren't voting for biden, well, you're a racist piece of shiat that deserves to die. no exaggeration
 
2020-09-27 9:14:12 AM  
4 votes:

middlewaytao: "No just or good state can be created out of mindless averaging of complex theories of what is just or good. These centrists, these hipsters, must come to understand that statecraft is not a subject for neophytes, it is not one at which you can cheat your way through. Positions must be thought over and well-considered, because should you succeed in implementing an ill-considered theory or policy, real people in the real world are injured by it. It is irresponsible to do anything less. "

https://benjaminstudebaker.com/2013/01​/04/intellectual-hipsters-centrists/


What a steaming pile of misunderstanding. It's hard to take seriously those who insist on mischaracterizing those that they refuse to listen to, and those who falsely lump diversity of opinion into simplistic pigeon-hole caricatures.
 
2020-09-27 8:42:12 AM  
4 votes:

What the hell was that: The primaries were full of different candidates. They didn't show up then, why are they gonna show up now? The thing we know about Republicans who voted for Trump is that they did vote.

I'm not saying don't try, but let's not pretend they didn't have options before.


Because 2/3rds of the entire country didn't even get the chance to vote in the primaries before Biden became the defacto nominee. My state's primary wasn't until June for example. He was in 5th place, he was losing until 2nd and 4th place dropped out to support him. The voters barely got a say.
 
2020-09-27 4:18:18 AM  
4 votes:

Smackledorfer: When Dems reach right, they aren't trying to get David duke and the proud boys' vote. They are chasing the 90 million non-voters.

Some progressives believe the bulk of whatever portion of that 90 million can be convinced to vote is progressive. They also believe chasing them will cost few votes from the center.

Other people believe that the bulk of the influencable 90 million is moderate, and that chasing them will cost fewer hard left votes than they gain.

Both are right in specific locations, I'm sure. I don't know which strategy is the best; I do know anyone complaining they are too center for Dems or too leftist for Dems should show the fark up at a primary and be heard. I also know there is no logical explanation for Dems to deliberately choose the wrong strategy.

However corrupt you may find them, being in office is superior to losing.

I don't know how to convince the party to lean left more than center when their leftists can't win primaries.


The party doesn't need to shift to "free taxpayer abortions in every town over 500 people" or "no guns ever" like the myth seems to be, the one that a lot of these undecided voters may buy.

But the reality is this: we don't know farkall about "leftists winning primaries" when THE PARTY ITSELF IS OPPOSING THE LEFTISTS IN MOST CASES.
I'm not Bro-ing there. My Rep is DeFazio, a rather moderate Democrat, but a wise one who deserves to keep winning. He wins, seemingly in part by representing liberal Democrats as well as 80s style Oregon Republicans... But sadly the Democratic Party doesn't endorse the few right-leaning ideas he has, either, so instead of a guy who should have 70% of the vote each year, he's dragged into a fight.
 
2020-09-27 4:03:26 AM  
4 votes:

Clearly Canadian: I love this thread already.

I'll just ask it, because no one's asked it yet. If the people who would seriously vote for Trump would change their minds, why does he still poll where he does?

Everyone who thinks courting the middle works clearly refuses to read even one single about why people vote for Treason in the first place. They refuse to read up about why so many democrats sat out the 2016 election. They have their projections about reality, and reject any other possibilities or research. Just like the rest of the right.


What?

The goal is to get those people who don't vote.

Literally the only people who seem to want to get Trump voters themselves are idiots like Biden, but they're not in this thread.
 
2020-09-27 3:48:58 AM  
4 votes:
Somebody who voted for Trump is a voter. You know they're paying attention to politics and going to the polls. If you flip them, its -1 for Trump and +1 for you.

Meanwhile, most non-voters don't know the first thing about the political process and the whole thing makes them feel confused and uncomfortable. If they haven't felt any engagement after four straight years of Trump destroying the country then there's no way you're going to pick them up off of the sidelines in the last five weeks of a campaign, and even if you do, it's only a +1 in your column.
 
2020-09-27 3:23:46 AM  
4 votes:
Yeah get the kids off mom's couch long enough to vote.  That plan worked out swimmingly for Bernie's blowouts of hillary and biden.

Oh wait.
 
2020-09-27 2:35:55 AM  
4 votes:

the unabomber was right: She thinks that will work better than yelling at and blaming all third party and non-voters for this being their fault and they should be ashamed of themselves? Doesn't sound like the Democrats I know.


"Everyone who didn't vote for us in 2016 is an evil, racist monster!  All you evil, racist monsters had damn well better vote for us in 2020!!"
 
2020-09-28 11:19:42 AM  
3 votes:

Sophont: AdmirableSnackbar: Count Bakula: AdmirableSnackbar: Count Bakula: I Like Bread: Bith Set Me Up: Bennie Crabtree: Pete gets a seat at the table because he is exemplary of the future leaders of the USA, in so many different ways. His appearance on that debate stage was necessary and proved to the world that the Dems can be both LGBTQ representatives *and* conservative enough to not rock the boat in other countries when they work together.

DNC: "Pay no attention to the homophobic smears against Alex Morse."

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020​/09/02/coordinated-homophobic-attack-a​lex-morse-denounced-progressive-challe​nger-falls

Habitual liar Nancy Pelosi: "It only seems like we're shutting down the left because we protect our incumbents. It's just what we do."
Also habitual liar Nancy Pelosi: "I endorse primary challenger Joe Kennedy."

Five smart votes for this? The rule is that you can't work with candidates challenging House incumbents. Kennedy challenged a Senate incumbent. Pelosi and the DCCC don't run the Senate.

The massive manipulation of social media by bad actors, foreign and domestic, makes it hard to remember that many of you guys are just simpletons who are so passionate about politics that you feel no need to know anything about it.

Maybe you should stop deliberately missing the point, things might make a bit more sense to you if you try to engage people honestly instead of...whatever this is.

"His point stands despite every piece of supporting evidence being factually inaccurate." Hard-hitting stuff. Really showed me.

None of what he said was factually inaccurate. You were simply trying to absolve Pelosi for her farkups and demanding that everyone else do the same.

As usual, they can't defend their actions, so they must pretend criticism is illegitimate.


I explained it in some detail: what you believe to be a blanket ban on primary challenges to incumbent Democrats is a DCCC rule that has nothing to do with the senate. You can criticize Pelosi for endorsing Kennedy without inventing charges of hypocrisy based on your decision to stop reading news articles before getting through the headline.
 
2020-09-28 9:47:05 AM  
3 votes:

AdmirableSnackbar: Count Bakula: I Like Bread: Bith Set Me Up: Bennie Crabtree: Pete gets a seat at the table because he is exemplary of the future leaders of the USA, in so many different ways. His appearance on that debate stage was necessary and proved to the world that the Dems can be both LGBTQ representatives *and* conservative enough to not rock the boat in other countries when they work together.

DNC: "Pay no attention to the homophobic smears against Alex Morse."

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020​/09/02/coordinated-homophobic-attack-a​lex-morse-denounced-progressive-challe​nger-falls

Habitual liar Nancy Pelosi: "It only seems like we're shutting down the left because we protect our incumbents. It's just what we do."
Also habitual liar Nancy Pelosi: "I endorse primary challenger Joe Kennedy."

Five smart votes for this? The rule is that you can't work with candidates challenging House incumbents. Kennedy challenged a Senate incumbent. Pelosi and the DCCC don't run the Senate.

The massive manipulation of social media by bad actors, foreign and domestic, makes it hard to remember that many of you guys are just simpletons who are so passionate about politics that you feel no need to know anything about it.

Maybe you should stop deliberately missing the point, things might make a bit more sense to you if you try to engage people honestly instead of...whatever this is.


"His point stands despite every piece of supporting evidence being factually inaccurate." Hard-hitting stuff. Really showed me.
 
2020-09-28 9:04:42 AM  
3 votes:

Murkanen: wademh:

So someone else was preaching the same ignorant "Lets all pretend we're friends and ignore all of the very horrible and dangerous things you're doing because discussing them might hurt your feelings" bullshiat you've been posting in this thread, while completely ignoring that your approach is what made Trump possible and given the Republicans a 6-3 majority control of the Supreme Court.

So I'm going to ask you the same thing I asked him: What is it about the state of America today, and the very real consequences it will now face because of your naive belief that merely accepting conservatives as they are will magically turn them into good people, that has you convinced it's the people saying "We really shouldn't legitimize and befriend terrible people" who are wrong?


It's so easy for you to fabricate lies about what I write when you don't quote me. Your posts deserve no further reply.
 
2020-09-27 4:04:45 PM  
3 votes:

Z-clipped: Count Bakula: Yes, representative democracy requires convincing people to support things

"Why won't someone convince me to save myself and my country?"


Democrats: "We promise band-aids and aspirin for all!"
Non-voters: "I don't see how that helps me pay for my chemotherapy."
Dems: "Oh, I guess you don't want any aspirin, which is better than no aspirin. Good job voting against your own interests, you spoiled brat!"

Someday, when you've paid attention to politics as long as I have, you'll understand that without real solutions (and by that I mean what will actually solve a problem, not half-measures that only prolong suffering but "at least we can get them done"), identifying problems is cheap talk. Joe and Donnie may be strumming your pain with their fingers but ultimately they just want to take you to the green room for some unreciprocated oral.
 
2020-09-27 3:56:44 PM  
3 votes:

austerity101: Count Bakula: Z-clipped: Count Bakula: Your goals may be noble, but that's a disingenuous, Boehner-esque method of negotiation. Unless you have the kind of leverage Boehner had - and you do not - it gets you laughed out of the room.

"You don't have the leverage to get us off this track," says man about to be run over by freight train. "You should be satisfied that we've moved a few inches toward the rail". 

Farking idiots.

Yes, representative democracy requires convincing people to support things, even ifyou know that those things are life-or-death-level important. It's either that, or you seize power undemocratically and implement those necessary solutions. Being correct does not magically give you that power.

So what are the Democrats doing to convince progressive to vote?


The things they're doing include platforming $15 minimum wage, public option, sick leave/parental leave, free college and student loan relief for some.

As you can see in my above exchange with misanthropicsob and someone who restores furniture, some progressives find these measures insufficient and consider any compromise on one or all of these issues unacceptable. I assume this is an overcorrection of the unfortunate Democratic tendency to preemptively compromise with Republicans.
 
2020-09-27 3:48:16 PM  
3 votes:
Pete gets a seat at the table because he is exemplary of the future leaders of the USA, in so many different ways. His appearance on that debate stage was necessary and proved to the world that the Dems can be both LGBTQ representatives *and* conservative enough to not rock the boat in other countries when they work together. Which is a bad sign for human rights and transnational law, but a good sign for the USA's ability to weather a decade of "illiberal democracy" while having LGBTQ bankers, ambassadors, and military personnel. These things matter.

Bernie gets a seat at the table because he worked his Independent ass off for it and, at the end of his career, finally had gone as far as an Independent ever has, and needed to choose a party to go any farther. Bernie is a legend and the Dems are correct to include his ability and connections. He really does prove that "Ind" is not the same as "Republican". And Bernie knows every real and imaginary path to power that Independents have.

I don't quite get the arguments where it is an either/or choice and having both at the table is somehow hypocritical. Do you guys also argue that Sauron should have won Middle earth, because Gimli and Legolas were in the Fellowship of the Ring?
 
2020-09-27 12:57:05 PM  
3 votes:

Count Bakula: IRestoreFurniture: misanthropicsob: Count Bakula: Likwit: This has nothing to do with centrist and far-left and everything to do with corporate donors. Don't buy the propaganda.

A majority of Dems, Independents and Republicans support legalizing marijuana and federal funding for maternity leave. A majority of Dems and Independents support a higher minimum wage, free or reduced tuition for state schools, M4A, and green energy initiatives. Why don't they try to grab as many votes as possible and add these popular policies to their platform?

I'm sure it's been covered ITT, but everything on your list except M4A and marijuana legalization is currently in the Democratic platform.

Also not free or reduced tuition. You have to "qualify" to get that.

Let's not forget that little thing called fracking.  Which apparently the Dems are tires OK with.


Fire water for all!

Then don't open the negotiation with "you must do some of these things." Your position is "do all of these things, with no means-testing, and do none of the things I do not support," and you'll brook no compromise.

Your goals may be noble, but that's a disingenuous, Boehner-esque method of negotiation. Unless you have the kind of leverage Boehner had - and you do not - it gets you laughed out of the room. It's a credit to Bernie Sanders and AOC that, by not acting like you wish they would, they've gotten some of this stuff into the platform.


Lol.

I get it.  You're the "real" progressive.
 
2020-09-27 12:12:46 PM  
3 votes:

IRestoreFurniture: the centrists tactic of shiatting on anyone not in lock step


Those centrists assailing you in your imagination sure are terrible!

I am continually shocked that this has to be explained - elections are not about your feelings.

You don't have a personal relationship with the candidates. They aren't going to love you or hate you. The people on Facebook and Fark saying mean things aren't making policy. You aren't voting for them.

Grow up. Elections are about making the best real-world choice.
 
2020-09-27 11:32:49 AM  
3 votes:

IRestoreFurniture: jaytkay: IRestoreFurniture: If you're going to blame people whose vote you apparently couldn't win, maybe you need some introspection.

If you can't grasp the consequences of putting Republicans in the White House, well, good luck in life. You need it. Your cognitive impairments must make life difficult.

Perhaps you should look at your actions and their consequence on the occupant of the white house.


I hate fark mobile...


Because I did.  And as far as I'm concerned, the centrists tactic of shiatting on anyone not in lock step, did, with certainty cost them more votes than "or Buster's"

You still can't see that can you?

For every imagined "bro" you vanquished with your witty and healing repartee, it likely turned away 2 votes you could have had.

Hint, nobody likes being told that their political identify is racist and misogynists, when it isn't.
 
2020-09-27 11:31:55 AM  
3 votes:

IRestoreFurniture: Perhaps you should look at your actions and their consequence on the occupant of the white house.


Look at me with all my power. Look at me manipulating Donald Trump.

Truly you have a dizzying intellect.
 
2020-09-27 11:13:47 AM  
3 votes:

IRestoreFurniture: If you're going to blame people whose vote you apparently couldn't win, maybe you need some introspection.


If you can't grasp the consequences of putting Republicans in the White House, well, good luck in life. You need it. Your cognitive impairments must make life difficult.
 
2020-09-27 10:54:00 AM  
3 votes:

wademh: Same tired false choice narrative.
It's not about getting red hats to change teams. It's about the large swath of people who don't like Trump and don't really want to vote for him but have been told for years about how Democrats want to destroy America.

There are more of them than there are die-hard progressives who need to be coddled in order to vote against Trump. The die-hard progressives have either decided to vote for the lesser evil in Biden or have taken their bat and ball and gone home and simply won't return. They've made up their mind. The people to get now are the wishy-washy ones, the rather ditsy ones.


Thread should have been closed at this.
 
2020-09-27 9:46:47 AM  
3 votes:

Sophont: Another thread offering proof that moderates hate progressives more than fascists.


It's not hate, it's disrespect.There are only two ways to earn political respect: votes and bullets.
 
2020-09-27 9:13:42 AM  
3 votes:

Sophont: Another thread offering proof that moderatesprogressives hate progressives moderates more than fascists.


FTFY.  Of course the "progressives" we're talking about here are Fark ProgressivesTM.  Actual progressives, like Bernie, don't have to be convinced to vote Nazis out of office.
 
2020-09-27 8:05:19 AM  
3 votes:
Real populism is a left wing thing, always has been. It is literally lifting all boats. This is how you defeat republicans.

It allowed democrats to dominatethe federal government from the 30's to the late 70's when they rejected it. It was hugely popular.
How Post-Watergate Liberals Killed Their Populist Soul - The Atlantic

It is also the roots of the democratic party.

"When Thomas Jefferson and James Madison founded the party in 1792, their goal was to oppose Alexander Hamilton's plan to centralize power in a financial aristocracy tied to the state. In place of Hamilton's vision of an America in which a few capitalists managed most business, leaders of the new party envisioned a political economy in which fighting monopoly and the concentration of power would foster the creation of independent, self-governing citizens."
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/​a​rchive/2017/02/antimonopoly-big-busine​ss/514358/

Giving the right to the opportunity to steal and pervert that mantle into something else has been the democrats biggest mistake.

What republicans and other authoritarians play with is more accurately called Sado-populism.

Timothy Snyder Speaks, ep. 4: Sadopopulism
Youtube oOjJtEkKMX4
 
2020-09-27 4:23:24 AM  
3 votes:
That totally worked for Bernie in the primary.  Let's try it again in the general!
 
2020-09-27 3:32:21 AM  
3 votes:
Sure, they could try to mobilize large numbers of people who are less-motivated to vote, but is that really worth giving up the prospect of extending the hand of friendly partnership to disaffected members of a party who want to cut the hand off and feed it to their dogs?
 
2020-09-27 3:25:00 AM  
3 votes:

wademh: Same tired false choice narrative.
It's not about getting red hats to change teams. It's about the large swath of people who don't like Trump and don't really want to vote for him but have been told for years about how Democrats want to destroy America.

There are more of them than there are die-hard progressives who need to be coddled in order to vote against Trump. The die-hard progressives have either decided to vote for the lesser evil in Biden or have taken their bat and ball and gone home and simply won't return. They've made up their mind. The people to get now are the wishy-washy ones, the rather ditsy ones.


It's so depressing that there are even that many factions in this country when to any clear minded observer it's more like

1) crazy inept huckster grifter know nothing fool
Vs
2) All in all, remember, like, 2015?  Shiat was pretty cool,right?
 
2020-09-27 2:06:52 AM  
3 votes:
But no, they'll just tell those voters that they're just as bad as the MAGAts.

And eventually, they will be just to spite them.
 
2020-09-28 2:04:02 PM  
2 votes:

AdmirableSnackbar: Count Bakula: AdmirableSnackbar: Count Bakula: I explained it in some detail: what you believe to be a blanket ban on primary challenges to incumbent Democrats is a DCCC rule that has nothing to do with the senate. You can criticize Pelosi for endorsing Kennedy without inventing charges of hypocrisy based on your decision to stop reading news articles before getting through the headline.

And you missed the point whereby Pelosi always backs the conservative Democrat and always has terrible things to say about progressive candidates and policies.

Your fallback is a BS rule that has nothing to do with the situation, but that does not explain why Pelosi would support a conservative challenger to a progressive Democratic Senator when she could have simply kept her mouth shut and not continued to divide the party.

Pelosi endorsed AOC and Ilhan Omar this year. Are they conservative Democrats, or is this another thing you don't know shiat about?

Pelosi "endorsing" (although let's be clear, her endorsement would only serve to hurt them) AOC and Omar doesn't make up for her pushing Joe Kennedy over a progressive sitting Senator or backing Richard Neal's blatant homophobic slurs against his rival.

But great job at trying to stray as much from the subject of the conversation as possible just to prove a shiatty point about nothing.


What it "makes up" for is up to you. The facts are not. You claimed Pelosi "Pelosi always backs the conservative Democrat," and that's a lie. Tell fewer lies, and you won't have to fall back on this ridiculous "my point was..." pretzel logic.
 
2020-09-28 9:32:29 AM  
2 votes:

Count Bakula: I Like Bread: Bith Set Me Up: Bennie Crabtree: Pete gets a seat at the table because he is exemplary of the future leaders of the USA, in so many different ways. His appearance on that debate stage was necessary and proved to the world that the Dems can be both LGBTQ representatives *and* conservative enough to not rock the boat in other countries when they work together.

DNC: "Pay no attention to the homophobic smears against Alex Morse."

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020​/09/02/coordinated-homophobic-attack-a​lex-morse-denounced-progressive-challe​nger-falls

Habitual liar Nancy Pelosi: "It only seems like we're shutting down the left because we protect our incumbents. It's just what we do."
Also habitual liar Nancy Pelosi: "I endorse primary challenger Joe Kennedy."

Five smart votes for this? The rule is that you can't work with candidates challenging House incumbents. Kennedy challenged a Senate incumbent. Pelosi and the DCCC don't run the Senate.

The massive manipulation of social media by bad actors, foreign and domestic, makes it hard to remember that many of you guys are just simpletons who are so passionate about politics that you feel no need to know anything about it.


Maybe you should stop deliberately missing the point, things might make a bit more sense to you if you try to engage people honestly instead of...whatever this is.
 
2020-09-28 9:24:32 AM  
2 votes:

I Like Bread: Bith Set Me Up: Bennie Crabtree: Pete gets a seat at the table because he is exemplary of the future leaders of the USA, in so many different ways. His appearance on that debate stage was necessary and proved to the world that the Dems can be both LGBTQ representatives *and* conservative enough to not rock the boat in other countries when they work together.

DNC: "Pay no attention to the homophobic smears against Alex Morse."

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020​/09/02/coordinated-homophobic-attack-a​lex-morse-denounced-progressive-challe​nger-falls

Habitual liar Nancy Pelosi: "It only seems like we're shutting down the left because we protect our incumbents. It's just what we do."
Also habitual liar Nancy Pelosi: "I endorse primary challenger Joe Kennedy."


Five smart votes for this? The rule is that you can't work with candidates challenging House incumbents. Kennedy challenged a Senate incumbent. Pelosi and the DCCC don't run the Senate.

The massive manipulation of social media by bad actors, foreign and domestic, makes it hard to remember that many of you guys are just simpletons who are so passionate about politics that you feel no need to know anything about it.
 
2020-09-27 10:47:00 PM  
2 votes:

Sophont: DoctorFarkGood: If you're telling me that people aren't voting because they've looked at a wannabe dictator and 200,000 dead Americans and decided BOTHSAME BOTHSIDESAREBAD... then they don't need voter outreach, they need a goddamn therapist.

Your opinion doesn't matter. Theirs does.
They think both sides may as well be the same because neither is going to give them any help. It's not between a guy peeing on them and a reasonable candidate. It's them being peed on and both candidates ignoring them.
Wishing it were some other opinion is how you lose.


"Neither side is going to give them any help" What the fark are you talking about? Hell, that's exactly the BSAB garbage I was talking about.

DoctorFarkGood: Where is your evidence that leftward appeals will motivate people to actually show up? Sanders tried that twice, and people didn't show up.

Obama's campaign.
Had Sanders had the DNC behind him, he'd be president today. But the DNC was behind Hillary, and now Biden. Whatever your opinion on the fairness or legality of it all, you must agree that Sanders didn't have the DNC behind him.



Blaming the DNC doesn't change that, by your numbers, it's at best a 50/50 chance. And Obama's appeal was his personal charisma, not any degree of progressiveness.

I've said my piece, and you clearly have your mind made up, so /Night.
 
2020-09-27 10:17:20 PM  
2 votes:

Sophont: DoctorFarkGood: If you're telling me that people aren't voting because they've looked at a wannabe dictator and 200,000 dead Americans and decided BOTHSAME BOTHSIDESAREBAD... then they don't need voter outreach, they need a goddamn therapist.

Your opinion doesn't matter. Theirs does.
They think both sides may as well be the same because neither is going to give them any help. It's not between a guy peeing on them and a reasonable candidate. It's them being peed on and both candidates ignoring them.
Wishing it were some other opinion is how you lose.

DoctorFarkGood: Where is your evidence that leftward appeals will motivate people to actually show up? Sanders tried that twice, and people didn't show up.

Obama's campaign.
Had Sanders had the DNC behind him, he'd be president today. But the DNC was behind Hillary, and now Biden. Whatever your opinion on the fairness or legality of it all, you must agree that Sanders didn't have the DNC behind him.


He'S nOt EvEn A dEmOcRaT!
 
2020-09-27 9:33:17 PM  
2 votes:
wademh:

So someone else was preaching the same ignorant "Lets all pretend we're friends and ignore all of the very horrible and dangerous things you're doing because discussing them might hurt your feelings" bullshiat you've been posting in this thread, while completely ignoring that your approach is what made Trump possible and given the Republicans a 6-3 majority control of the Supreme Court.

So I'm going to ask you the same thing I asked him: What is it about the state of America today, and the very real consequences it will now face because of your naive belief that merely accepting conservatives as they are will magically turn them into good people, that has you convinced it's the people saying "We really shouldn't legitimize and befriend terrible people" who are wrong?
 
2020-09-27 6:46:14 PM  
2 votes:

Z-clipped: jaytkay: Z-clipped: But I can't help but think that maybe it wouldn't be the worst thing for America in the long run if he were to win, because he may be the only cattle prod capable of moving these centrist farksticks off their little ignorant cloud

That strategy sure worked terrifically in 2000 and 2016. Let us return to the beautiful Eden that was created by those elections.

Uhh... the number of Democrats who identify as "Liberal" or "Very Liberal" has grown from 27% to 47% since 2000.  So... yeah... the "strategy" of conservative neoliberal Democrats failing to win elections (and failing to provide progressive policy when they ARE elected) is "working" exactly as I said.  And the more of you pricks who feel the pinch and are forced to abandon your little bubble of Clinton Era nostalgia, the more AOCs, Omars, Tlaibs and Pressleys we'll see in congressional seats.


And the Supreme Court will be tilted conservative about 8:1 and the states will be even more gerrymandered to maintain the Republican hold on the US and state houses.
We'll be living Idiocracy or Handmaids Tale and you'll be crying "We are so winning!!!!"
 
2020-09-27 3:50:00 PM  
2 votes:

I Like Bread: IRestoreFurniture: Lol.

I get it.  You're the "real" progressive.

I've had that twerp favorited for months. How's that saying go? "If one person calls you a horse..."?

[Fark user image image 348x126]


And I have you favorited as someone who thinks highly of Tulsi Gabbard, which says a lot about who you judge to be progressive.
 
2020-09-27 3:49:10 PM  
2 votes:

PlaidJaguar: Insurgent: biden doesn't owe any of you cretins anything. he put in the work. it's his turn to be president. the alternative is the literal end of the world. you owe your vote not only to biden, but the whole democratic party. no criticism will be tolerated. none. VOTE

Get bent, fascist.


psssst....
 
2020-09-27 2:59:52 PM  
2 votes:

Christian Bale: Does Fark greenlight every single article where someone suggests the Democrats shrink the size of the party so they can lose more elections?


You think asking Democrats to stop chasing Republican voters, who have made it clear they'd rather see you dead than vote for you, is going to shrink a party that only has ~25% of the voting population supporting them?
 
2020-09-27 2:39:23 PM  
2 votes:

DoctorFarkGood: The problem with getting non-voters to vote is that they don't vote.


Have you considered talking to them to find out what it would take to get them to vote?
 
2020-09-27 2:05:13 PM  
2 votes:
  

voodoolady: Heliodorus: wademh: Same tired false choice narrative.
It's not about getting red hats to change teams. It's about the large swath of people who don't like Trump and don't really want to vote for him but have been told for years about how Democrats want to destroy America.

There are more of them than there are die-hard progressives who need to be coddled in order to vote against Trump. The die-hard progressives have either decided to vote for the lesser evil in Biden or have taken their bat and ball and gone home and simply won't return. They've made up their mind. The people to get now are the wishy-washy ones, the rather ditsy ones.

Stop biatching, it's a business deal. If you want to benefit from things they have, you have to give them what they want. Otherwise pound sand.

Ok, it's a business deal. We have one group who has indicated that they want to "do business," in this analogy, to vote. And another group who hasn't. There is a group that apparently doesn't vote (is this the progressive wing?) Why should the nominee cater to them when apparently they don't want to do business? I can offer you everything you could possibly want for an item, but if you don't want to sell, that would be wasting my time.


That's conservatives that democrats fark over progressives for. Ask not president Hillary Clinton. But keep biatching about how progressives won't make a business deal.


Here's this about Bernie: "And yet despite a virtual tie in Iowa, a narrow victory in New Hampshire and a big triumph in Nevada, the first three nominating contests reveal a fundamental challenge for Mr. Sanders's political revolution: He may be winning, but not because of his longstanding pledge to expand the Democratic base.
The results so far show that Mr. Sanders has prevailed by broadening his appeal among traditional Democratic voters, not by fundamentally transforming the electorate." (from: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02​/24/us/politics/bernie-sanders-democra​tic-voters.html ) He didn't bring in non-voters.

So why should we try to appeal to a group of non-voters? How will convincing non-voters to support Biden help Biden win an election?

I didn't ...


As much as moderates wan't to pretend it is true, Bernie isn't an absolute leader of progressives. Like all candidates people don't give a shiat what he personally thinks or cares about outside of how much it pushes their agenda forward. It's like people think of him as a potential representative of their values

jook: Heliodorus: wademh: Same tired false choice narrative.
It's not about getting red hats to change I teams. It's about the large swath of people who don't like Trump and don't really want to vote for him but have been told for years about how Democrats want to destroy America.

There are more of them than there are die-hard progressives who need to be coddled in order to vote against Trump. The die-hard progressives have either decided to vote for the lesser evil in Biden or have taken their bat and ball and gone home and simply won't return. They've made up their mind. The people to get now are the wishy-washy ones, the rather ditsy ones.

Stop biatching, it's a business deal. If you want to benefit from things they have, you have to give them what they want. Otherwise pound sand.

A business deal for their ever-so-precious tender vote? Vote for Biden or there is ZERO chance of enacting ANY change they desire. That's the deal. I'm saying this as a progressive:  Puerile Pouting Progressives (say that three times fast!) can go fark themselves. I'm done coddling them.


GFY.

Moderates and conservatives have always demanded everything from progressives with bullshiat promises of 'in the future once we have everything we want then we can discuss maybe giving you something...potentially' , just like in this thread. So go fark yourself.
 
2020-09-27 1:18:49 PM  
2 votes:

middlewaytao: Real populism is a left wing thing, always has been. It is literally lifting all boats. This is how you defeat republicans.

It allowed democrats to dominatethe federal government from the 30's to the late 70's when they rejected it. It was hugely popular.
How Post-Watergate Liberals Killed Their Populist Soul - The Atlantic

It is also the roots of the democratic party.

"When Thomas Jefferson and James Madison founded the party in 1792, their goal was to oppose Alexander Hamilton's plan to centralize power in a financial aristocracy tied to the state. In place of Hamilton's vision of an America in which a few capitalists managed most business, leaders of the new party envisioned a political economy in which fighting monopoly and the concentration of power would foster the creation of independent, self-governing citizens."
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/a​rchive/2017/02/antimonopoly-big-busine​ss/514358/

Giving the right to the opportunity to steal and pervert that mantle into something else has been the democrats biggest mistake.

What republicans and other authoritarians play with is more accurately called Sado-populism.

[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/oOjJtEkK​MX4]


Author Thomas Frank: How Liberals Turned On The Working Class
Youtube 151glS2WDNw
 
2020-09-27 1:00:41 PM  
2 votes:
pdieten:

Successful politicians tend to keep a certain amount of flexibility in what they believe in and fight for during campaigns, in an attempt to ensure they are staying in step with what they believe is a winning coalition. If you routinely find that politicians' promises aren't meeting your expectations, you should at least stop to consider the possibility that, no matter how many people you think agree with you, it might actually be you who are out of step with the mood of the wider electorate. This is an election for all of the US, and it is an awful lot bigger place than your home area, your friends and acquaintances, and the commenters on this website.

this is some insightful, profound expert analysis.
 
2020-09-27 12:59:48 PM  
2 votes:
It's almost as if turnout from voters enthusiastic about bold Dem policy deliverables is always key for Dems.

/and it's almost as if failing to deliver so many times the past forty years has painted them into a corner
//only one way out - return to being a legit opposition party by repping the vast working class
///that's intersectional af so don't even with the hurrrr. you can't pass sufficient social policy reforms w/o the working class vote.
 
2020-09-27 12:40:16 PM  
2 votes:

GregInIndy: Talking to any of the idiots that claim to be on the left but are somehow unable to go vote against Trump is a waste of air.

Do whatever you want. We'll get rid of him without your help. Makes it all the easier to go back to ignoring your stupidity afterward.

"But they're both the saaame!"

They're not. Fark you.


I don't know a single person who believes that both parties are the same.  At least not any Democrats.


Where do you get this shiat?  If a person is pushing *both sides are bad* they're not a Democrat, simply by their statement alone.  Using people like to disparage actual Democrats with a different idea of where the party should be headed (you know, democracy) is damaging the party more than any rando on the internet.
 
2020-09-27 11:29:37 AM  
2 votes:

jaytkay: IRestoreFurniture: If you're going to blame people whose vote you apparently couldn't win, maybe you need some introspection.

If you can't grasp the consequences of putting Republicans in the White House, well, good luck in life. You need it. Your cognitive impairments must make life difficult.


Perhaps you should look at your actions and their consequence on the occupant of the white house.
 
2020-09-27 11:26:19 AM  
2 votes:

jaytkay: Sophont: gyruss: Sophont: Another thread offering proof that moderates hate progressives more than fascists.

It's not hate, it's disrespect.There are only two ways to earn political respect: votes and bullets.

These useless leftists better vote for us even though we aren't going to offer them anything. Now let's  see what we can offer disaffected Republucans for their votes!

Those who think punishing the Democrats with their wasted votes/non-votes will bring us a progressive utopia don't deserve any more respect than any Trump voter.

They're toddlers who believe stamping their little feet will make Mommy let them eat candy and cake for dinner every night.

They brought us 3 new, young Supreme Court justices who will be wrecking our lives for decades.


Shouldn't have nominated the centrist.
 
2020-09-27 9:24:53 AM  
2 votes:

Laobaojun: Huh. Someone who succeeded in the two party trainwreck who understands this chart. I am sincerely surprised.
[Fark user image image 850x627]


Because they were the ones who put in the effort to vote and shiat all over it
 
2020-09-27 9:18:38 AM  
2 votes:
Huh. Someone who succeeded in the two party trainwreck who understands this chart. I am sincerely surprised.
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 8:39:47 AM  
2 votes:
Reaching out to people who despise you for made up reasons is a waste of time. They have to voluntarily reenter the world of reality.
 
2020-09-27 8:26:14 AM  
2 votes:

middlewaytao: Real populism is a left wing thing, always has been. It is literally lifting all boats. This is how you defeat republicans.

It allowed democrats to dominatethe federal government from the 30's to the late 70's when they rejected it. It was hugely popular.
How Post-Watergate Liberals Killed Their Populist Soul - The Atlantic

It is also the roots of the democratic party.

"When Thomas Jefferson and James Madison founded the party in 1792, their goal was to oppose Alexander Hamilton's plan to centralize power in a financial aristocracy tied to the state. In place of Hamilton's vision of an America in which a few capitalists managed most business, leaders of the new party envisioned a political economy in which fighting monopoly and the concentration of power would foster the creation of independent, self-governing citizens."
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/a​rchive/2017/02/antimonopoly-big-busine​ss/514358/

Giving the right to the opportunity to steal and pervert that mantle into something else has been the democrats biggest mistake.

What republicans and other authoritarians play with is more accurately called Sado-populism.

[YouTube video: Timothy Snyder Speaks, ep. 4: Sadopopulism]


So you disagree with Rep. Ilhan and think the Democrats should devote all their energy to recapturing the rural southern voters who were the anchor FDR's New Deal coalition?
 
2020-09-27 6:02:52 AM  
2 votes:

Codenamechaz: MegaLib: Likwit: This has nothing to do with centrist and far-left and everything to do with corporate donors. Don't buy the propaganda.

A majority of Dems, Independents and Republicans support legalizing marijuana and federal funding for maternity leave. A majority of Dems and Independents support a higher minimum wage, free or reduced tuition for state schools, M4A, and green energy initiatives. Why don't they try to grab as many votes as possible and add these popular policies to their platform?

Biden is doing this

1. So far, only Harris supports decriminalizing marijuana. Biden only supports legalizing medical marijuana and wants to leave recreational use up to the states, so no Biden is not doing this.

2. The Biden campaign's stated position on Medicare 4 all is "Just expand obamacare" along with a bunch of nonsense tax credits when people are looking for something like other civilized nations have.

3. Biden's campaign site has no stated position on Maternity leave. If they've said anything, I've yet to find it from a cursory google search

4. His things with tuition and schooling has a lot of caveats and means testing to it. At the very least there's mention of support of relaxing bankrupcy rules (the same ones he helped get created in the first place as a senator...)

5. His green energy stuff is mostly a lot of vague claims, but will remain to be seen.

He's got some decent stuff in there, but don't lie about his actual positions.


Umm, that account's job is to portray a democrat as Republicans see them.
 
2020-09-27 6:02:19 AM  
2 votes:

MegaLib: Likwit: This has nothing to do with centrist and far-left and everything to do with corporate donors. Don't buy the propaganda.

A majority of Dems, Independents and Republicans support legalizing marijuana and federal funding for maternity leave. A majority of Dems and Independents support a higher minimum wage, free or reduced tuition for state schools, M4A, and green energy initiatives. Why don't they try to grab as many votes as possible and add these popular policies to their platform?

Biden is doing this


You do realize he has a website with all of his policies on it, right? Someone can debunk your lies with 33,000,000 results in 0.63 seconds.

"I'm going to go after employers who don't pay the minimum wage" - Dogshiat.
"I'm going to increase the affordability of higher education" - Maybe good, but too vague.
"I'm going to protect the ACA." - Dogshiat.
"We're going to build a green energy economy by 2050 (??!)" - Fatfark PolTabber's Saturday morning beer shiat.

If he can beat Trump with that, I'll be ecstatic. But if he loses we know a major reason is that he refused to go against corporate donors and support policies that American people want and need.
 
2020-09-27 5:59:27 AM  
2 votes:
MegaLib: Likwit: This has nothing to do with centrist and far-left and everything to do with corporate donors. Don't buy the propaganda.

A majority of Dems, Independents and Republicans support legalizing marijuana and federal funding for maternity leave. A majority of Dems and Independents support a higher minimum wage, free or reduced tuition for state schools, M4A, and green energy initiatives. Why don't they try to grab as many votes as possible and add these popular policies to their platform?

Biden is doing this


1. So far, only Harris supports decriminalizing marijuana. Biden only supports legalizing medical marijuana and wants to leave recreational use up to the states, so no Biden is not doing this.

2. The Biden campaign's stated position on Medicare 4 all is "Just expand obamacare" along with a bunch of nonsense tax credits when people are looking for something like other civilized nations have.

3. Biden's campaign site has no stated position on Maternity leave. If they've said anything, I've yet to find it from a cursory google search

4. His things with tuition and schooling has a lot of caveats and means testing to it. At the very least there's mention of support of relaxing bankrupcy rules (the same ones he helped get created in the first place as a senator...)

5. His green energy stuff is mostly a lot of vague claims, but will remain to be seen.

He's got some decent stuff in there, but don't lie about his actual positions.
 
2020-09-27 5:30:51 AM  
2 votes:

Enigmamf: Stop trying to use the election to raise your own profile. All you do is convince people to vote against their own interest. "Oh Biden isn't liberal enough, a Democrat told me - why bother?"

Get more Democrats elected, and you will have a platform to seek greater changes. Infighting only robs you of the change you seek.


Well spoken.  A+
 
2020-09-27 5:10:53 AM  
2 votes:

Naido: the unabomber was right: She thinks that will work better than yelling at and blaming all third party and non-voters for this being their fault and they should be ashamed of themselves? Doesn't sound like the Democrats I know.

"Everyone who didn't vote for us in 2016 is an evil, racist monster!  All you evil, racist monsters had damn well better vote for us in 2020!!"


It's pretty much true, though.
 
2020-09-27 4:03:33 AM  
2 votes:

the unabomber was right: She thinks that will work better than yelling at and blaming all third party and non-voters for this being their fault and they should be ashamed of themselves? Doesn't sound like the Democrats I know.


The primaries were full of different candidates. They didn't show up then, why are they gonna show up now? The thing we know about Republicans who voted for Trump is that they did vote.

I'm not saying don't try, but let's not pretend they didn't have options before.
 
2020-09-27 4:02:28 AM  
2 votes:

Heliodorus: wademh: Same tired false choice narrative.
It's not about getting red hats to change teams. It's about the large swath of people who don't like Trump and don't really want to vote for him but have been told for years about how Democrats want to destroy America.

There are more of them than there are die-hard progressives who need to be coddled in order to vote against Trump. The die-hard progressives have either decided to vote for the lesser evil in Biden or have taken their bat and ball and gone home and simply won't return. They've made up their mind. The people to get now are the wishy-washy ones, the rather ditsy ones.

Stop biatching, it's a business deal. If you want to benefit from things they have, you have to give them what they want. Otherwise pound sand.


Ok, it's a business deal. We have one group who has indicated that they want to "do business," in this analogy, to vote. And another group who hasn't. There is a group that apparently doesn't vote (is this the progressive wing?) Why should the nominee cater to them when apparently they don't want to do business? I can offer you everything you could possibly want for an item, but if you don't want to sell, that would be wasting my time.

Here's this about Bernie: "And yet despite a virtual tie in Iowa, a narrow victory in New Hampshire and a big triumph in Nevada, the first three nominating contests reveal a fundamental challenge for Mr. Sanders's political revolution: He may be winning, but not because of his longstanding pledge to expand the Democratic base.
The results so far show that Mr. Sanders has prevailed by broadening his appeal among traditional Democratic voters, not by fundamentally transforming the electorate." (from: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/0​2/24/us/​politics/bernie-sanders-democratic-vot​ers.html ) He didn't bring in non-voters.

So why should we try to appeal to a group of non-voters? How will convincing non-voters to support Biden help Biden win an election?

I didn't support Biden in the primary and am more than a little annoyed that I have to be voting for him for president when there were so many other great candidates, but I don't think the better strategy is to go after people who haven't shown that they care about voting.
 
2020-09-27 3:33:44 AM  
2 votes:
But that's a winning strategy.
 
2020-09-27 3:31:10 AM  
2 votes:

the unabomber was right: She thinks that will work better than yelling at and blaming all third party and non-voters for this being their fault and they should be ashamed of themselves? Doesn't sound like the Democrats I know.


Bernie lost, again.  Get over it.
 
2020-09-27 12:04:10 AM  
2 votes:
She's got a point.

Trumpets are a cult.  They won't learn.
 
2020-09-28 12:29:40 PM  
1 vote:
wademh:

It's so easy for you to fabricate lies about what I write when you don't quote me. Your posts deserve no further reply.

That bolded, underlined text with your name?  That's a link to your post.  If you click it the post becomes visible, or you are taken directly to it in a new tab. How you hadn't figured that out yet after all these years is a mystery.

Now you're free to answer the question instead of whinging like a smacked child because you've been made aware how ridiculous your position is in the face of what's been happening in the US the last 40 years.
 
2020-09-27 9:56:23 PM  
1 vote:

DoctorFarkGood: If you're telling me that people aren't voting because they've looked at a wannabe dictator and 200,000 dead Americans and decided BOTHSAME BOTHSIDESAREBAD... then they don't need voter outreach, they need a goddamn therapist.


Your opinion doesn't matter. Theirs does.
They think both sides may as well be the same because neither is going to give them any help. It's not between a guy peeing on them and a reasonable candidate. It's them being peed on and both candidates ignoring them.
Wishing it were some other opinion is how you lose.

DoctorFarkGood: Where is your evidence that leftward appeals will motivate people to actually show up? Sanders tried that twice, and people didn't show up.


Obama's campaign.
Had Sanders had the DNC behind him, he'd be president today. But the DNC was behind Hillary, and now Biden. Whatever your opinion on the fairness or legality of it all, you must agree that Sanders didn't have the DNC behind him.
 
2020-09-27 9:20:38 PM  
1 vote:

Sophont: If things will be just as shiatty, but someone else will be in charge, who farking cares?


If you can't tell the difference between getting justices like RBG instead of Blackout Brett and Handmaid Amy...I don't know what to say. It's like talking to livestock.
 
2020-09-27 8:26:17 PM  
1 vote:

austerity101: DoctorFarkGood: The problem with getting non-voters to vote is that they don't vote.

Have you considered talking to them to find out what it would take to get them to vote?


I was pointing out the Irony of campaigning for the doesn't vote vote. 'Candidate who campaigned on winning the non-voter vote gets no votes in election.' Sounds like an Onion article.

There's no magic, properly progressive platform that's going to suddenly motivate millions of people to vote. Be nice if there was one. But there isn't.

You can try to lead the horse to water all you want, but like the old saying goes, you can't make 'em drink. Same with non-voters. If they don't think, with shiat being as shiatty as it is right now, that they should vote... they're probably not going to vote.

If you want to keep trying to convince them, more power to you. But don't expect a miracle.
 
2020-09-27 7:22:38 PM  
1 vote:

jaytkay: Z-clipped: jaytkay: Z-clipped: But I can't help but think that maybe it wouldn't be the worst thing for America in the long run if he were to win, because he may be the only cattle prod capable of moving these centrist farksticks off their little ignorant cloud

That strategy sure worked terrifically in 2000 and 2016. Let us return to the beautiful Eden that was created by those elections.

Uhh... the number of Democrats who identify as "Liberal" or "Very Liberal" has grown from 27% to 47% since 2000.  So... yeah... the "strategy" of conservative neoliberal Democrats failing to win elections (and failing to provide progressive policy when they ARE elected) is "working" exactly as I said.  And the more of you pricks who feel the pinch and are forced to abandon your little bubble of Clinton Era nostalgia, the more AOCs, Omars, Tlaibs and Pressleys we'll see in congressional seats.

And the Supreme Court will be tilted conservative about 8:1 and the states will be even more gerrymandered to maintain the Republican hold on the US and state houses.
We'll be living Idiocracy or Handmaids Tale and you'll be crying "We are so winning!!!!"


You missed the scare quotes, I see.  It's not progressives farking things up that led to Trump.  It's your wing of the party's 40-year-long demand for compromise with conservatives, instead of having a spine. 

You're making a fool of yourself in this thread.
 
2020-09-27 6:15:34 PM  
1 vote:

Naido: DoBeDoBeLurk: So, you see, children, Donald Trump was right when he said Ilhan Omar needed to sit down and shut up. But he was right for the wrong reasons. It's rude to mention someone is Muslim or an immigrant in this context. What you should try to do, really, is avoid mentioning her at all. Address her words as if they came out of the people on the internet who agree with her, and if at all possible erase her from the narrative. Then your motivation couldn't possibly be racist or misogynist. Bonus points if you treat progressives as predominantly white and male, and illegitimate on that basis!

We're so scared the imaginary center will abandon us that we're running away screaming from working class voters who would like some help. This has somehow become a radical statement, even though the behavior of people arguing from the center only confirms it. Helping people is off the table, we need to zoom out multiple decades and then offer to take the teeny-tiniest of steps towards maybe getting people some help sometime in the next generation, while yelling loudly all the time that we're helpless and weak and this is the best we can do. When this is supposed to be the "good" choice, is it any wonder most of our voting population prefers to switch off?

And, no this is not just another privileged white male on the internet who may not even exist. This is someone with an immigrant grandfather of a nationality and income bracket that would've laded him in a concentration camps these days, who is terrified that neither political party seems to be able to do anything about that, and disgusted every time they are asked to quiet down and accept it.

My grandfather actually did that American Dream thing and went from working in the fields to owning his own business, and I know how freaking hard that is because most of his kids and grandkids and now great-grandkids weren't able to follow. My own upward mobility is severely limited because my father got Agent Orange dumped on him fighting a stupid war in Vietnam, and I'm still paying his dues with my malfunctioning body that can't get decent healthcare. I'm not fooling around. I can see the disintegration of this country from my studio apartment, which I am in because the financial crisis ate all the savings we'd put into a house. And we consider ourselves incredibly lucky, with our high-deductible health insurance, ability to survive on a single income, and essential job.

I am privileged enough to vote for Biden knowing I'll probably still be okay (for a given value of "okay") if he can't do anything to help me. A lot of others aren't. Now we have to decide what we're going to do about that, with the specter of a total disconnect from democracy looming on the right.

That's not going to go away if Rep. Omar and I, and everyone like us, shuts up. It's not my job to be quiet and let you pretend. It's not hers either.

Excellent comment.

They need to stop building their message around making sure they don't scare anyone, and start leading.  Yes, there's risk involved.  But even if Biden wins based on vestigial popularity, it doesn't mean the other thing is working.

One of our parties is going to stop being about business-as-usual with minor tweaks, start leading, and clean the other party's clock.  Doesn't even matter where they're trying to lead; when something isn't working and you're desperate, you'll try almost anything.  Would be nice if people were being led to some actual help


I said it up thread and I'll say it again. This has to do with donors more than anything. Democrats are trying to please donors first and help people second. That's why their only selling point is "we're not Trump." That's more than enough for people who understand that Trump is doing everything with no takesies-backsies, but for most people it has no visible effect on their everyday lives (yet). Republicans can do anything because their main platform plank is "throw tax money at corporations and let them do whatever the fark they want." That's how they've forced Dems into the "just try not to lose" strategy.

But if you point out that we should stop voter shaming and trying to reach the disillusioned working class, you're a Russian or a pie in the sky socialist or something. fark every Fark "liberal." Hard.
 
2020-09-27 5:41:16 PM  
1 vote:
So, you see, children, Donald Trump was right when he said Ilhan Omar needed to sit down and shut up. But he was right for the wrong reasons. It's rude to mention someone is Muslim or an immigrant in this context. What you should try to do, really, is avoid mentioning her at all. Address her words as if they came out of the people on the internet who agree with her, and if at all possible erase her from the narrative. Then your motivation couldn't possibly be racist or misogynist. Bonus points if you treat progressives as predominantly white and male, and illegitimate on that basis!

We're so scared the imaginary center will abandon us that we're running away screaming from working class voters who would like some help. This has somehow become a radical statement, even though the behavior of people arguing from the center only confirms it. Helping people is off the table, we need to zoom out multiple decades and then offer to take the teeny-tiniest of steps towards maybe getting people some help sometime in the next generation, while yelling loudly all the time that we're helpless and weak and this is the best we can do. When this is supposed to be the "good" choice, is it any wonder most of our voting population prefers to switch off?

And, no this is not just another privileged white male on the internet who may not even exist. This is someone with an immigrant grandfather of a nationality and income bracket that would've laded him in a concentration camps these days, who is terrified that neither political party seems to be able to do anything about that, and disgusted every time they are asked to quiet down and accept it.

My grandfather actually did that American Dream thing and went from working in the fields to owning his own business, and I know how freaking hard that is because most of his kids and grandkids and now great-grandkids weren't able to follow. My own upward mobility is severely limited because my father got Agent Orange dumped on him fighting a stupid war in Vietnam, and I'm still paying his dues with my malfunctioning body that can't get decent healthcare. I'm not fooling around. I can see the disintegration of this country from my studio apartment, which I am in because the financial crisis ate all the savings we'd put into a house. And we consider ourselves incredibly lucky, with our high-deductible health insurance, ability to survive on a single income, and essential job.

I am privileged enough to vote for Biden knowing I'll probably still be okay (for a given value of "okay") if he can't do anything to help me. A lot of others aren't. Now we have to decide what we're going to do about that, with the specter of a total disconnect from democracy looming on the right.

That's not going to go away if Rep. Omar and I, and everyone like us, shuts up. It's not my job to be quiet and let you pretend. It's not hers either.
 
2020-09-27 5:07:30 PM  
1 vote:

Z-clipped: misanthropicsob: Count Bakula: free college and student loan relief for some.

Yes. The some part makes this insufficient considering the extreme limitations put on the "some."

Proposing a reasonable (if somewhat conservative) bar for what  "some" means, and then allowing Republicans to poison it into complete inefficacy has been the bread and butter of the Democratic Party since 1980.


Sure. But if you assume - and based on the liberal use of the phrase "conservative Democrats," you seem to - that centrist Democrats don't want to offer free college for anyone, offering it to some is a compromise with those who want it for all. That's what austerity101 wants - compromise with the left on policy - and there it is. We could always get less, if you prefer that.
 
2020-09-27 4:26:26 PM  
1 vote:

Z-clipped: dylanthomas: wademh: Same tired false choice narrative.
It's not about getting red hats to change teams. It's about the large swath of people who don't like Trump and don't really want to vote for him but have been told for years about how Democrats want to destroy America.

There are more of them than there are die-hard progressives who need to be coddled in order to vote against Trump. The die-hard progressives have either decided to vote for the lesser evil in Biden or have taken their bat and ball and gone home and simply won't return. They've made up their mind. The people to get now are the wishy-washy ones, the rather ditsy ones.

It's so depressing that there are even that many factions in this country when to any clear minded observer it's more like

1) crazy inept huckster grifter know nothing fool
Vs
2) All in all, remember, like, 2015?  Shiat was pretty cool,right?

Except it really wasn't, unless you were white and financially comfortable.


I don't care who you are, you were better off then as opposed to now.
 
2020-09-27 4:14:41 PM  
1 vote:

Count Bakula: And I have you favorited as someone who thinks highly of Tulsi Gabbard, which says a lot about who you judge to be progressive.


Was I talking to you, snowflake?

It's probably a bridge too far to ask exactly what glowing endorsement I made of Tulsi, other than berating Fark's troglodytes who invade Tulsi topics with, "SHADDAP AND MAKE WITH THE BIKINI PICS." But I'm sure a woke feminist ally such as yourself would never have been one of those people.
 
2020-09-27 4:14:40 PM  
1 vote:
Democratic leadership clearly understands the concept of giving people things in return for support, but they're only willing to do it with wealthy donors for money, not people for votes.
 
2020-09-27 3:43:26 PM  
1 vote:

IRestoreFurniture: Lol.

I get it.  You're the "real" progressive.


I've had that twerp favorited for months. How's that saying go? "If one person calls you a horse..."?

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 3:15:50 PM  
1 vote:

misanthropicsob: GoldSpider: misanthropicsob: GoldSpider: misanthropicsob: GoldSpider: I voted for Buttegeig. He lost. You didn't see me spend the ensuing months whining about how the "establishment" disenfranchised me or claiming I had a valid pretext for sitting the general election out.

Buttigieg wasn't the establishment and not a placeholder for Joe Biden? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Ahh that's right, he was in on the fix!

He's getting a seat on the team for his efforts.

So did Bernie.

He did? Last I heard, Bernie got one plank of a task force that was supposed to make progressive recommendations but was actually neutered by the lobbyists also put on the task force.


He's always a victim, isn't he.
 
2020-09-27 2:59:29 PM  
1 vote:

misanthropicsob: GoldSpider: misanthropicsob: GoldSpider: I voted for Buttegeig. He lost. You didn't see me spend the ensuing months whining about how the "establishment" disenfranchised me or claiming I had a valid pretext for sitting the general election out.

Buttigieg wasn't the establishment and not a placeholder for Joe Biden? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Ahh that's right, he was in on the fix!

He's getting a seat on the team for his efforts.


So did Bernie.
 
2020-09-27 2:39:25 PM  
1 vote:
Does Fark greenlight every single article where someone suggests the Democrats shrink the size of the party so they can lose more elections?
 
2020-09-27 2:36:55 PM  
1 vote:

MadHatter500: This thread demonstrates why Democrats can continue to advertise not being an organized political party.


No it doesn't. At its core, the problem is Democrat's don't have an identity that Republicans have. The umbrella of the Democrats is its greatest strength and weakness. They try to speak for all, but if your message has to pander to so many different groups, it's difficult to get unity.
 
2020-09-27 2:32:05 PM  
1 vote:

Z-clipped: pdieten: AdmirableSnackbar: jaytkay: AdmirableSnackbar: jaytkay: IRestoreFurniture: the centrists tactic of shiatting on anyone not in lock step

Those centrists assailing you in your imagination sure are terrible!

I am continually shocked that this has to be explained - elections are not about your feelings.

You don't have a personal relationship with the candidates. They aren't going to love you or hate you. The people on Facebook and Fark saying mean things aren't making policy. You aren't voting for them.

Grow up. Elections are about making the best real-world choice.

Way to prove his point.

Says the child who is still mad at Hillary for not personally holding his hand and begging for him to bestow his sacred and pure vote upon her.

Is...is that how you think voting works?

Successful politicians tend to keep a certain amount of flexibility in what they believe in and fight for during campaigns, in an attempt to ensure they are staying in step with what they believe is a winning coalition. If you routinely find that politicians' promises aren't meeting your expectations, you should at least stop to consider the possibility that, no matter how many people you think agree with you, it might actually be you who are out of step with the mood of the wider electorate. This is an election for all of the US, and it is an awful lot bigger place than your home area, your friends and acquaintances, and the commenters on this website.

The current progressive agenda isn't about "political preference" or being "in step with the coalition".  It's about fixing actual problems that are literal crises that could sink this nation's economy in the next 10-20 years.  If you're a Democrat arguing to pump the brakes on things like broad student loan forgiveness, single-payer healthcare, free state university tuition, and the Green New Deal, you are essentially telling the bottom 50% of the economic ladder "fark you, I got mine."  And if you're not supporting local candidates running on justice reform, you're sending an even clearer, and less savory message.

Don't be surprised if they are totally uninterested in voting for your latest status-quo-seeking, neoliberal candidate.  It's not their job to support your lifestyle and political flights of fancy.  They're busy trying to pay rent and feed themselves and buy medicine for their sick kids.


I don't know what centrists want, other than to win elections against Republicans.  It's clear that they, personally, don't *need* anything.  This is 100% about who they like and don't like to see on TV, and who they think *other* people will like.

They don't need anything, and no one knows what they want, in terms of policy (other than vague "better" something).  They have given us candidates that, unless you're the kind of person who will go dig up a platform on the internet, no one can say with any certainty what *they* want to do.

That's a problem.  Other people who are voting are hurting and personally *need* help. They're dying for someone to give it to them.  And they know the system that we've had can't deliver it.

Two groups matter:  people who voted for Obama then Trump.  They're farking desperate for help, and these people seemed to want to change the system that we had, not to be advancing within it for 30 years.  Desperate people do desperate things.  Go ahead and scream "racist!" at them.  Think it'll help?

The other group saw the 2016 campaign as the worst shiat sandwich ever served up.  "One of these people is going to be president?  And I should go vote for one of them?  Not this time."  Yet again, it seems our only tactic for reaching them is "Trump sucks!"  Because no one was saying *that* in 2016.  I think we'll get a lot of those this time, now that they've seen Trump in action, but who knows?  Then what do we offer those people, substantively and definitively, in 2022 and 2024?

I'm not sure what centrists really want, I don't think these voters do either, but it's clear that they don't *need* anything
 
2020-09-27 2:23:50 PM  
1 vote:

Persnickety: Sophont: Another thread offering proof that moderatesprogressives hate progressives moderates more than fascists.

FTFY.  Of course the "progressives" we're talking about here are Fark ProgressivesTM.  Actual progressives, like Bernie, don't have to be convinced to vote Nazis out of office.


Unless you think "Fark Progressives" represent the majority of progressives, there's no reason to focus on them. If they're a minority of self-labeled progressives, they aren't the ones messing with our elections, and so it makes more sense to ignore them and focus on actual progressives.  If they're the majority, well, then you're going to have to engage them somehow if you want their votes, so you can set your self-righteousness aside and try to garner some of them, or you can be stubborn and entitled and lose.
 
2020-09-27 1:50:28 PM  
1 vote:

pdieten: AdmirableSnackbar: jaytkay: AdmirableSnackbar: jaytkay: IRestoreFurniture: the centrists tactic of shiatting on anyone not in lock step

Those centrists assailing you in your imagination sure are terrible!

I am continually shocked that this has to be explained - elections are not about your feelings.

You don't have a personal relationship with the candidates. They aren't going to love you or hate you. The people on Facebook and Fark saying mean things aren't making policy. You aren't voting for them.

Grow up. Elections are about making the best real-world choice.

Way to prove his point.

Says the child who is still mad at Hillary for not personally holding his hand and begging for him to bestow his sacred and pure vote upon her.

Is...is that how you think voting works?

Successful politicians tend to keep a certain amount of flexibility in what they believe in and fight for during campaigns, in an attempt to ensure they are staying in step with what they believe is a winning coalition. If you routinely find that politicians' promises aren't meeting your expectations, you should at least stop to consider the possibility that, no matter how many people you think agree with you, it might actually be you who are out of step with the mood of the wider electorate. This is an election for all of the US, and it is an awful lot bigger place than your home area, your friends and acquaintances, and the commenters on this website.


The current progressive agenda isn't about "political preference" or being "in step with the coalition".  It's about fixing actual problems that are literal crises that could sink this nation's economy in the next 10-20 years.  If you're a Democrat arguing to pump the brakes on things like broad student loan forgiveness, single-payer healthcare, free state university tuition, and the Green New Deal, you are essentially telling the bottom 50% of the economic ladder "fark you, I got mine."  And if you're not supporting local candidates running on justice reform, you're sending an even clearer, and less savory message.

Don't be surprised if they are totally uninterested in voting for your latest status-quo-seeking, neoliberal candidate.  It's not their job to support your lifestyle and political flights of fancy.  They're busy trying to pay rent and feed themselves and buy medicine for their sick kids.
 
2020-09-27 12:53:42 PM  
1 vote:

AdmirableSnackbar: jaytkay: AdmirableSnackbar: jaytkay: IRestoreFurniture: the centrists tactic of shiatting on anyone not in lock step

Those centrists assailing you in your imagination sure are terrible!

I am continually shocked that this has to be explained - elections are not about your feelings.

You don't have a personal relationship with the candidates. They aren't going to love you or hate you. The people on Facebook and Fark saying mean things aren't making policy. You aren't voting for them.

Grow up. Elections are about making the best real-world choice.

Way to prove his point.

Says the child who is still mad at Hillary for not personally holding his hand and begging for him to bestow his sacred and pure vote upon her.

Is...is that how you think voting works?


Successful politicians tend to keep a certain amount of flexibility in what they believe in and fight for during campaigns, in an attempt to ensure they are staying in step with what they believe is a winning coalition. If you routinely find that politicians' promises aren't meeting your expectations, you should at least stop to consider the possibility that, no matter how many people you think agree with you, it might actually be you who are out of step with the mood of the wider electorate. This is an election for all of the US, and it is an awful lot bigger place than your home area, your friends and acquaintances, and the commenters on this website.
 
2020-09-27 12:51:48 PM  
1 vote:

IRestoreFurniture: misanthropicsob: Count Bakula: Likwit: This has nothing to do with centrist and far-left and everything to do with corporate donors. Don't buy the propaganda.

A majority of Dems, Independents and Republicans support legalizing marijuana and federal funding for maternity leave. A majority of Dems and Independents support a higher minimum wage, free or reduced tuition for state schools, M4A, and green energy initiatives. Why don't they try to grab as many votes as possible and add these popular policies to their platform?

I'm sure it's been covered ITT, but everything on your list except M4A and marijuana legalization is currently in the Democratic platform.

Also not free or reduced tuition. You have to "qualify" to get that.

Let's not forget that little thing called fracking.  Which apparently the Dems are tires OK with.


Fire water for all!


Then don't open the negotiation with "you must do some of these things." Your position is "do all of these things, with no means-testing, and do none of the things I do not support," and you'll brook no compromise.

Your goals may be noble, but that's a disingenuous, Boehner-esque method of negotiation. Unless you have the kind of leverage Boehner had - and you do not - it gets you laughed out of the room. It's a credit to Bernie Sanders and AOC that, by not acting like you wish they would, they've gotten some of this stuff into the platform.
 
2020-09-27 12:23:06 PM  
1 vote:

AdmirableSnackbar: jaytkay: IRestoreFurniture: the centrists tactic of shiatting on anyone not in lock step

Those centrists assailing you in your imagination sure are terrible!

I am continually shocked that this has to be explained - elections are not about your feelings.

You don't have a personal relationship with the candidates. They aren't going to love you or hate you. The people on Facebook and Fark saying mean things aren't making policy. You aren't voting for them.

Grow up. Elections are about making the best real-world choice.

Way to prove his point.


Says the child who is still mad at Hillary for not personally holding his hand and begging for him to bestow his sacred and pure vote upon her.
 
2020-09-27 12:20:32 PM  
1 vote:

jaytkay: IRestoreFurniture: the centrists tactic of shiatting on anyone not in lock step

Those centrists assailing you in your imagination sure are terrible!

I am continually shocked that this has to be explained - elections are not about your feelings.

You don't have a personal relationship with the candidates. They aren't going to love you or hate you. The people on Facebook and Fark saying mean things aren't making policy. You aren't voting for them.

Grow up. Elections are about making the best real-world choice.


Way to prove his point.
 
2020-09-27 12:11:31 PM  
1 vote:

dylanthomas: wademh: Same tired false choice narrative.
It's not about getting red hats to change teams. It's about the large swath of people who don't like Trump and don't really want to vote for him but have been told for years about how Democrats want to destroy America.

There are more of them than there are die-hard progressives who need to be coddled in order to vote against Trump. The die-hard progressives have either decided to vote for the lesser evil in Biden or have taken their bat and ball and gone home and simply won't return. They've made up their mind. The people to get now are the wishy-washy ones, the rather ditsy ones.

It's so depressing that there are even that many factions in this country when to any clear minded observer it's more like

1) crazy inept huckster grifter know nothing fool
Vs
2) All in all, remember, like, 2015?  Shiat was pretty cool,right?


Except it really wasn't, unless you were white and financially comfortable.
 
2020-09-27 11:38:58 AM  
1 vote:

misanthropicsob: Count Bakula: Likwit: This has nothing to do with centrist and far-left and everything to do with corporate donors. Don't buy the propaganda.

A majority of Dems, Independents and Republicans support legalizing marijuana and federal funding for maternity leave. A majority of Dems and Independents support a higher minimum wage, free or reduced tuition for state schools, M4A, and green energy initiatives. Why don't they try to grab as many votes as possible and add these popular policies to their platform?

I'm sure it's been covered ITT, but everything on your list except M4A and marijuana legalization is currently in the Democratic platform.

Also not free or reduced tuition. You have to "qualify" to get that.


Let's not forget that little thing called fracking.  Which apparently the Dems are tires OK with.


Fire water for all!
 
2020-09-27 11:34:42 AM  
1 vote:
This thread demonstrates why Democrats can continue to advertise not being an organized political party.
 
2020-09-27 11:34:04 AM  
1 vote:

Count Bakula: Likwit: This has nothing to do with centrist and far-left and everything to do with corporate donors. Don't buy the propaganda.

A majority of Dems, Independents and Republicans support legalizing marijuana and federal funding for maternity leave. A majority of Dems and Independents support a higher minimum wage, free or reduced tuition for state schools, M4A, and green energy initiatives. Why don't they try to grab as many votes as possible and add these popular policies to their platform?

I'm sure it's been covered ITT, but everything on your list except M4A and marijuana legalization is currently in the Democratic platform.


M4A should be a non negotiable.
 
2020-09-27 11:10:24 AM  
1 vote:

jaytkay: Sophont: gyruss: Sophont: Another thread offering proof that moderates hate progressives more than fascists.

It's not hate, it's disrespect.There are only two ways to earn political respect: votes and bullets.

These useless leftists better vote for us even though we aren't going to offer them anything. Now let's  see what we can offer disaffected Republucans for their votes!

Those who think punishing the Democrats with their wasted votes/non-votes will bring us a progressive utopia don't deserve any more respect than any Trump voter.

They're toddlers who believe stamping their little feet will make Mommy let them eat candy and cake for dinner every night.

They brought us 3 new, young Supreme Court justices who will be wrecking our lives for decades.


If you're going to blame people whose vote you apparently couldn't win, maybe you need some introspection.
 
2020-09-27 11:07:35 AM  
1 vote:

Sophont: gyruss: Sophont: Another thread offering proof that moderates hate progressives more than fascists.

It's not hate, it's disrespect.There are only two ways to earn political respect: votes and bullets.

These useless leftists better vote for us even though we aren't going to offer them anything. Now let's  see what we can offer disaffected Republucans for their votes!


Those who think punishing the Democrats with their wasted votes/non-votes will bring us a progressive utopia don't deserve any more respect than any Trump voter.

They're toddlers who believe stamping their little feet will make Mommy let them eat candy and cake for dinner every night.

They brought us 3 new, young Supreme Court justices who will be wrecking our lives for decades.
 
2020-09-27 10:27:16 AM  
1 vote:

Smackledorfer: I also know there is no logical explanation for Dems to deliberately choose the wrong strategy.


You've never heard of a $port$ figure purpo$efully throwing a game becau$e $omebody paid them to lo$e? The Democratic Party ha$ donor$ to think about.
 
2020-09-27 10:22:41 AM  
1 vote:

GoldSpider: IRestoreFurniture: GoldSpider: IRestoreFurniture: GoldSpider: IRestoreFurniture: Bernie got 43% of dem primary votes in 2016.

That means something.

Yes.  You purposely left out the second part of my post.

I think anyone here who stands up and declares that Clinton and Trump were equally bad would rightly catch shiat.

And...who did that?

Bernie voters who sat out or voted third party.


You mean the smaller amount that clinton voters who didn't vote for obama?

That's your reasoning for shiatting on a large part of and trying to foment a schism in the party?

Here's a nickels worth of free advice:

If someone didn't vote for clinton, they were never going to vote for clinton.  You didn't lose any votes that were never yours int he first place.
 
2020-09-27 10:19:30 AM  
1 vote:

IRestoreFurniture: GoldSpider: IRestoreFurniture: GoldSpider: IRestoreFurniture: Bernie got 43% of dem primary votes in 2016.

That means something.

Yes.  You purposely left out the second part of my post.

I think anyone here who stands up and declares that Clinton and Trump were equally bad would rightly catch shiat.

And...who did that?


Bernie voters who sat out or voted third party.
 
2020-09-27 10:17:23 AM  
1 vote:

IRestoreFurniture: GoldSpider: Night Train to Wakanda: GoldSpider: Creidiki: But then the Democrat would have to push policies that appeal to majority of to voters. You know, the kind of extreme socialism practised in the rest of the developed world.
Education, social security, health cafe.
The horror... The horror...

That explains Bernie's blowout victories.

We can't all be Buttigeig claiming victory with no results.

Who here is claiming that there are millions of Buttigieg voters just waiting for sufficient inspiration?

Yang himself stated that a large majority of his voters won't vote for Biden.


All seven of them?
 
2020-09-27 10:15:53 AM  
1 vote:

GoldSpider: Night Train to Wakanda: One thing is for sure, the split is coming. And the divorce is going to be ugly.

I just wonder how the conservative Democrats will make their bones when they realize they were the baddies the whole time.

A Democratic Party split would REALLY show those Republicans what for!


Then stop working to alienate a large part of it.
 
2020-09-27 10:12:46 AM  
1 vote:

recombobulator: That totally worked for Bernie in the primary.  Let's try it again in the general!


This makes me laugh "please, don't criticise the Dems or biden because it's going to make trump win and if you do you're a Trumper"


But feel free to keep shiatting on the actual people whose votes you need.


Seems like a poor tactic.
 
2020-09-27 10:02:49 AM  
1 vote:

GoldSpider: Night Train to Wakanda: One thing is for sure, the split is coming. And the divorce is going to be ugly.

I just wonder how the conservative Democrats will make their bones when they realize they were the baddies the whole time.

A Democratic Party split would REALLY show those Republicans what for!


Let's just keep voting for Democrats because they've been so effective at stopping a totalitarian from usurping the checks and balances of the federal government.
 
2020-09-27 9:43:21 AM  
1 vote:

GoldSpider: Creidiki: But then the Democrat would have to push policies that appeal to majority of to voters. You know, the kind of extreme socialism practised in the rest of the developed world.
Education, social security, health cafe.
The horror... The horror...

That explains Bernie's blowout victories.


We can't all be Buttigeig claiming victory with no results.
 
2020-09-27 8:47:17 AM  
1 vote:

Kick The Chair: [Fark user image image 425x258]


The people that chose to not vote last time will likely choose to not vote this time. They are even more stupid than republicans.
 
2020-09-27 6:33:29 AM  
1 vote:

puffy999: Smackledorfer: When Dems reach right, they aren't trying to get David duke and the proud boys' vote. They are chasing the 90 million non-voters.

Some progressives believe the bulk of whatever portion of that 90 million can be convinced to vote is progressive. They also believe chasing them will cost few votes from the center.

Other people believe that the bulk of the influencable 90 million is moderate, and that chasing them will cost fewer hard left votes than they gain.

Both are right in specific locations, I'm sure. I don't know which strategy is the best; I do know anyone complaining they are too center for Dems or too leftist for Dems should show the fark up at a primary and be heard. I also know there is no logical explanation for Dems to deliberately choose the wrong strategy.

However corrupt you may find them, being in office is superior to losing.

I don't know how to convince the party to lean left more than center when their leftists can't win primaries.

The party doesn't need to shift to "free taxpayer abortions in every town over 500 people" or "no guns ever" like the myth seems to be, the one that a lot of these undecided voters may buy.

But the reality is this: we don't know farkall about "leftists winning primaries" when THE PARTY ITSELF IS OPPOSING THE LEFTISTS IN MOST CASES.
I'm not Bro-ing there. My Rep is DeFazio, a rather moderate Democrat, but a wise one who deserves to keep winning. He wins, seemingly in part by representing liberal Democrats as well as 80s style Oregon Republicans... But sadly the Democratic Party doesn't endorse the few right-leaning ideas he has, either, so instead of a guy who should have 70% of the vote each year, he's dragged into a fight.


"The party itself is opposing leftists"?

What the fark do you think a primary is, exactly?
 
2020-09-27 5:32:13 AM  
1 vote:
Many of the same people who say Biden should move left to get more votes are also the same people who attack Biden for moving to the left just to get more votes. (Or pretend that he hasn't done enough)

You can't have it both ways.

If you want people to move to your side praise them when then do it some instead of attacking them for it.
 
2020-09-27 5:24:52 AM  
1 vote:

tirob: Omar, FTFA:   "For every moderate, suburban Republican on the fence about Trump, there are lines of cooks, homeworkers, dishwashers, cashiers and farm workers who would vote a straight Democratic ticket if they were just given a reason to do so."

Not if they're not registered to vote they wouldn't.

If Omar wants to go out and register voters, fine.  But if she wanted more of the people she talks about to influence the upcoming election, she should have gotten out there and inspired people to register many months ago.  As it is, the next presidential election these people could possibly influence is the one in 2024--that is, if we still have a republic by then.


"If they were just given a reason to do so."

If you don't have a reason now you never will.
 
2020-09-27 5:12:08 AM  
1 vote:

Boo_Guy: That's crazy talk, clearly more moving to the right is what's needed.


Surprised you got any funny votes for this tired drap.
 
2020-09-27 4:50:35 AM  
1 vote:
Omar, FTFA:   "For every moderate, suburban Republican on the fence about Trump, there are lines of cooks, homeworkers, dishwashers, cashiers and farm workers who would vote a straight Democratic ticket if they were just given a reason to do so."

Not if they're not registered to vote they wouldn't.

If Omar wants to go out and register voters, fine.  But if she wanted more of the people she talks about to influence the upcoming election, she should have gotten out there and inspired people to register many months ago.  As it is, the next presidential election these people could possibly influence is the one in 2024--that is, if we still have a republic by then.
 
2020-09-27 4:26:26 AM  
1 vote:

puffy999: But the reality is this: we don't know farkall about "leftists winning primaries" when THE PARTY ITSELF IS OPPOSING THE LEFTISTS IN MOST CASES.


The party didn't do shiat to block or disenfranchise them in Michigan in 2020. Am I wrong? If so, how did that go down, exactly?

Usps conspiracy? Votes not counted?

If you can't explain that, your claim is bullshiat.
 
2020-09-27 4:23:35 AM  
1 vote:

gaspode: You have to do both. You need all of the left and the majority of the middle, because you can be shiatsure the right will turn out for evil.

So you have to work with the progressive wing, compromise, give, listen to us. You will get better policy out of it and you will win long term. You also have to try to persuade the 'middle' of the truth, that the left and mid-left agenda is MUCH better for them and theirs.

I mean the reality is on your side here, your policies (both the ones I and those with me on what the US sees as far-left and those that are more 'mainstream dem') are hugely better for ordinary people than anything the right will ever do.. so its right and proper to message that, and the target includes a large chunk of people who have for years been fooled into voting rightwards.


In Michigan Bernie beat Hillary. Bernie lost to Biden.

Trump wins with the purple states or he loses.

Unless you believe the Midwest has a silent progressive majority, it appears fully embracing the left is not a path to victory. Yes, the primary vote isn't perfectly representative of the general election, but Michigan had mail in voting. If progressives couldn't mail in a ballot why believe they are a voting group we can get in the general?

I say this as an increasingly frustrated progressive. My folks either don't give a fark at the end of the day, or they are fewer in number than I'd like. That's the only reasonable conclusion.

If we didn't have the electoral college I would agree going heavy progressive would be the path to victory.

Lastly, Biden did move left to satisfy Bernie himself to some extent. Is my voting group so fickle that they don't even follow his guidance when he throws support behind Biden? Based on Fark commenters... Yes, yes they are. They are people who cannot accept they aren't the majority. They are people who are so obsessed with clean hands and purity they will throw away three farking scotus seats to avoid being sullied, and STILL talk about how both sides are the same, even while covid is a mess and blm protests are all over.

They are fickle bastards and by all appearances it would be a mistake to prioritize them.
 
2020-09-27 4:22:55 AM  
1 vote:

Scythed: Somebody who voted for Trump is a voter. You know they're paying attention to politics and going to the polls. If you flip them, its -1 for Trump and +1 for you.

Meanwhile, most non-voters don't know the first thing about the political process and the whole thing makes them feel confused and uncomfortable. If they haven't felt any engagement after four straight years of Trump destroying the country then there's no way you're going to pick them up off of the sidelines in the last five weeks of a campaign, and even if you do, it's only a +1 in your column.


The people who voted for Obama and then Trump, the kinds of people who made the difference in the state's that mattered?  Do you suppose they're "centrist"?  I think they're the people who are trying to vote against business as usual.

Nearly every working person in the country, of any race, knows that what we're doing now isn't working.  It's become obvious even to idiots.  They were trying to stop the cycle of "everything is pretty much ok, let's just tinker".

Republicans are going to learn, politically not substantively, from the populism wave on both "sides".  And they're going to have candidates who aren't Trump-level morons to carry their message.  And Democrats will react to that, and look like the business as usual party again.

It's not going to work.  We keep waiting for Republicans to decide what they are then working from there to decide what *we* are, what we can get away with, how to sell *just enough* (precious little) of what we want.  People can see it, and it's going to become *less* effective, not more.

We need to decide what we are, and let Republicans respond.  This is the last Trump we're going to get who doesn't know what they're doing.  The next one's gonna kill us if we keep doing this
 
2020-09-27 4:08:38 AM  
1 vote:
This presumes that the non voter class could be swayed by left policies.
 
2020-09-27 3:52:54 AM  
1 vote:
I love this thread already.

I'll just ask it, because no one's asked it yet. If the people who would seriously vote for Trump would change their minds, why does he still poll where he does?

Everyone who thinks courting the middle works clearly refuses to read even one single about why people vote for Treason in the first place. They refuse to read up about why so many democrats sat out the 2016 election. They have their projections about reality, and reject any other possibilities or research. Just like the rest of the right.
 
2020-09-27 3:40:44 AM  
1 vote:
But then the Democrat would have to push policies that appeal to majority of to voters. You know, the kind of extreme socialism practised in the rest of the developed world.
Education, social security, health cafe.
The horror... The horror...
 
2020-09-27 3:30:41 AM  
1 vote:
I appreciate the squad.  They are the best
 
2020-09-27 3:28:09 AM  
1 vote:
Omar could lead the disaffected. The Dems should let her make local-level promises to them that they will keep. The disaffected don't believe in the national leaders? Maybe they will believe in themselves, if they were given resources. And hand as much to them before the election as possible. Hell, loan federal fleet vehicles to punk bands and campus clubs that need help staying off the bus and agree to carpool for groceries during Covid, as long as they use the fleet vehicles to also register voters and get the vote out on election day. Just farking do stuff like that, since it is tangible, and now, instead of promises, promises, promises...
 
2020-09-27 3:08:19 AM  
1 vote:
I second that.
 
Displayed 136 of 136 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.