you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 125 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (58 children)

Do I like seeing him fuck with Trump? Yes.

Is he a dirty neo liberal? Yes.

Would I support him in a primary for President in 2028? Probably not. I sure hope someone better shows up.

Would I support him if he won the Democratic primary? Yes. Assuming we get elections. Assuming the DNC hasn't fully fractured and a third party candidate cannot reasonably win.

Would he fix our country? No. See item 2.

Thank you for coming to my TED talk. Its not hard, people.

  • source
  • hideshow 58 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (46 children)

    Good take. Maybe the Kamala protest abstainers will have a fresh enough dose of Trumpism to remember that halfway-kind-of-decent-sometimes is better than literally-the-worst-possible-decision-at-all-times. I hope we still have elections. I hope we are not stuck with Newsom as the only choice. But if we are, he IS the only choice, and even though he's not nearly a progressive, he is far closer to it than whatever the GOP rolls out with in 3 years (whether it is Trump again, Trump Jr., Vance, or a new piece of shit far right authoritarian). We need to make sure he wins, and that means getting your asses to the booth. All of us. Even you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 46 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (14 children)

    Goddam. You guys sure love hoping someone else learns lessons. You ever hope democrats learn a little something?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • load more comments (13 replies)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I also have noticed that literally 0 of the "we can't vote for Democrats, stop voting for them, that is the way to progress" strategists have anything to say about candidates to support before the primary, protest organizations to join in the meantime, anything generally productive that is outside of the general election they're so gung-ho about giving their input to.

    Right now would be the time to be looking around for good midterm or primary candidates who aren't corporate whores, talking up third parties or reforms that would make third parties viable, all that kind of stuff. Nope. Just "let the Republicans win" in the general election, and then, crickets. And now occasionally popping up to shit on Gavin Newsom when he's tangling with Trump, like a romantic partner who is grabbing on your arm and screaming "stop it!" while you're in the middle of a fistfight. Just fuckin' helping, the lot of them, from morning till night.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (27 children)

    "halfway-kind-of-decent-sometimes"

    You mean the same person that refused to say "Genocide is bad, and we shouldn't support it"? The same person who proudly stood behind Biden when was bombing innocent people? The same person who put people in prison for marijuana, then laughed about it when talking about smoking herself? The same person who campaigned with the Cheneys?

    I think your definition of "halfway-kind-of-decent-sometimes" might be different than mine. All we're looking for is someone who isn't a monster, and she couldn't even pull that off.

    This is why the Democrats keep losing, and have such a low approval rating: They keep normalizing monsters, and can't figure out why the voters don't like that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (17 children)

    I mean someone who will not literally destroy our democracy to remain in power. The bare minimum.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (16 children)

    You mean the people from the DNC who pretty openly refuse to have fair elections? The same party that has shit on civil rights for decades? How is that not destroying our Democracy?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    You're right. Better to just actively or indirectly (through inaction) support the party that is currently actively revoking civil rights on a national scale, and planning to rig/end elections to stay in power indefinitely. That will fix the broken system.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    That will fix the broken system.

    That's what gets me about this whole thing. There's plenty of core of truth to the idea that the Democrats are very bad, although yes the alternative currently is infinitely worse. There are thousands of things that any given person could do to try to fix that or work for better things in American politics. Refusing to elect Democrats anymore, no matter what, is 0 of them, and will make things quite a lot worse.

    It's like punishing your child for bad grades by refusing to feed them anymore. One, it doesn't address the problem, two, it will make even the thing you say you are upset about and trying to fix, infinitely worse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    Functionally, things are the way they are because the people that want to change things for the better do not make up the majority of people yet. Plenty of the boomers are still happy with the status quo since most of it doesn’t directly impact them. Gen X even was more right leaning than the boomers in 2024.

    Just looking at the number of people that actually vote, neo-liberal boomers and Gen Xers will still be dictating policy for another decade at the least. If they aren’t progressive, most of the policy getting passed will not be either.

    This isn’t even taking into account the way that land has more power than people in the US either. Sparsely populated red states hold just as much power in the Senate as New York or California. The House is currently capped on the number of Representatives as well, meaning that those small red states are over represented and larger blue and purple states are underrepresented.

    The best shot at changing anything before another decade passes is by starting locally to each of us. We can try to do what New York City did and implement an alternative voting system in our own cities, that will help immensely to get more people like Mamdani in office. If we garner enough support at the city and local levels, we might even be able to be like Maine or Alaska and get an alternative voting system in place at the state level.

    Alternative voting systems are pretty much the only real way third parties will have a chance to get off the ground and have a seat at the table on a national level. The main reason for that is because it helps mitigate the spoiler effect; where your preferred candidate and the safe candidate knock each other out allowing your least preferred candidate to win elections.

    Want to help? Get the word out about alternative voting systems and organizations that promote them. Get involved locally.

    Underrepresented Fediverse Social Media Accounts:

    Involvement Links:

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (13 replies)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (8 children)

    Hard disagree. The voters very clearly do like monsters.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Some do, sure. But the two major parties have only put monsters on the ballot for the past few decades, so we don't really know how many would pick a non-monster given the chance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Parties didn't put those politicians on the ballot, voters did. The Democratic party got rid of smoke filled rooms and contested conventions in the 1970's and the Republican party followed suit in the 1980's.

    If you are disatisfied with the pols on offer, you have only to look to your neighbors.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    The voters are often just as behind at times as the politicians they put into office. The lion’s share of the voters are neo-liberal Boomers and Gen Xers, of which the Gen Xers are more conservative than the boomers as of 2024.

    We’re not going to look much different for ant least another decade unless suddenly a ton of Millennials and Zoomers show up to vote in record breaking numbers.

    Changing our voting systems locally and on the state level is the best chance we have at making a difference within the next 10 years, imo. It opens up access for third parties to grow and it lets progressive have a better chance of squeaking out wins against the neo-liberal incumbents.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Ranked choice voting is a good idea, but time will not save us. Millenians are shifting right, just a decade behind other generations.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    I think you’re right to be wary on waiting for time alone to save us. I think implementing ranked choice style of voting matters to prevent slipping further. Furthermore, pivoting to make blue states actually more progressive is what we need to do.

    I believe blue states have held back on doing more because the belief was that we needed to pass the reforms federally for funding purposes, but I believe now we need to do the opposite. We need to remove the debt limit for blue states, implement progressive reforms, and only then will other states want to follow our lead.

    Each blue state should focus on implementing Universal Basic Income, Universal Basic Services, Universal Healthcare, free public colleges, and expanding public housing options. For instance, I think many private apartments could be bought by the government for at cost and turned into publicly owned apartments that are not rented out for a profit.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    lol, you mean the same DNC that said "...the DNC charter’s promise of ‘impartiality and evenhandedness’ as a mere political promise—political rhetoric that is not enforceable in federal courts." ?

    The same party that openly rigged the past two elections for the candidates that they wanted?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Rigged how? Do you think they flipped votes? Who got more primary delegates? Sanders? Biden? Or Clinton?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    What do you think that quote means? Do you think the DNC would be saying that they don't have to play fair, if they were playing fair? Go read the court case. They were told by a judge that they were right, and that they didn't have to play fair.

  • source
  • parent