Election Day is still a month away, but more than 700,000 Americans have already voted across at least 30 states. There are signs emerging of the advantage Democrats have in motivating their voters – a trend that’s played out in polling all summer long.

In several states with key Senate or governor races this fall, Democrats make up a larger share of voters requesting ballots so far than they did at this point in 2024.

In Iowa, Democrats have made 67% of ballot requests, up from 54% at this point in 2024. In Pennsylvania, it’s 66%, up from 62%, and in Maine it’s 57%, up from 53%. And according to data from the North Carolina State Board of Elections, 42% of ballot requests are from Democrats, up from 36% at this point two years ago.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -44 points 6 days ago (24 children)

If they win they will proceed to pave the way for the next version of trump

  • source
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 40 points 6 days ago* (11 children)

    What's the alternative? Voting for the next version of Trump directly? I'm all for changing our system, but as it stands the only real viable options are team Trump, and Team Mightnotdoenough. I am not thrilled with the latter either, but it seems less than ideal to let the perfect be the enemy of the less bad.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 6 days ago* (5 children)

    Agreed. Don't get me wrong: the second these midterms are over I'm going full steam on pushing to reform Democrats away from the Schumers and Fettermans and so on. But until then, we gotta get as many of these Republicans out of office..

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -12 points 6 days ago (3 children)

    After decades of failure you would think democrats would start to lose faith in the idea of reform. There is no reforming a system thats working exactly as designed,and they have safeguards in place to prevent structural change

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 6 days ago (2 children)

    Just gonna point out that the proto-maga IE the Tea Party dipshits have their roots in things like the 90s rightwing militia movement and they arguably didn't gain full control of the Republican party until 2016 IMO even if they were a massive faction. Hell historically the faction that would evolve into the New Deal Democrats had its roots in various 1800s labor movements and didn't get to notability until the 1930s same general deal for the Square Deal Republicans just a bit earlier.

    Reform of this scale takes ages since you basically need to reach a saturation point, which basically requires constant pressure a bit like an inline fuel filter if the pressure stops the filter drys up. But I have noticed change since 2016 more specifically with younger libs who I wouldn't call economic progressives by any means being supportive of things like universal healthcare, expansion of welfare, demilitarization, and shrinking the police state. The problem is we have probably only reached 25 percent saturation at best, which means unless people get real comfortable with a lot of murder of the old guard it's gonna take awhile still to see active improvement.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 days ago (1 child)

    Tea Party was not an organic movement. It was an intentional shift to move the entire country to the right. As the Republicans move further to the right, it allowed Democrats to move further to the right with them. And the same thing is happening with Trump right now. As the GOP moves further to the right, the DNC will be in lockstep right behind them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Regardless of it being inorganic it still took time for the process to work. My point was just to do with the timescales of these things, arguably the biggest hint of the Tea Party being inorganic was that it took a short period of time relative to say the New Dealers or Square Dealers who both took about 40 years to establish. Mind you social media tends to accelerate things but expecting instant change is a tad bit foolish, especially when we have to push a boiler up a hill the entire time.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -13 points 6 days ago (4 children)

    Its those same democrats you are supporting that will give us the next version of Trump.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 6 days ago (3 children)

    That response seems to be functionally identical to the one I responded to already. Am I missing something?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 days ago (2 children)

    Dude wants trump, he just doesn't want to admit it. So he's framing it as "if we don't reelect trump the Democrats will give us trump and that's bad"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 5 days ago (1 child)

    I don't want Trump any more than you do, but it's Democrats that have given us Trump both times. By failing to address the material needs of the working class and as the RNC continues to move further to the right the DNC will be in lockstep behind them

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

    The way this is phrased infuriates me, because it's disengenious bullshit that just so happens to remove responsibility for the people who couldn't get off their behinds and do the absolute minimum to stop fascism. The Democrats did not "give us Trump." They LOST TO TRUMP, because not enough people voted for them. These are not the same thing. They are Trump's opposition. The reason why Trump got more votes than his opposition is because more people in this country are conservative (as well as the way the electoral college is set up.) The Democrats not being leftist enough is not the reason Trump won, he won because the country is full of rascists and people who only give a shit about politics when gas costs too much.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 6 days ago*

    If the new candidates from DSA don't distance themselves from the establishment; and instead they compromise their positions in order to push forward symbolic legislation that does nothing, yeah, I'm afraid you might be right.

    It is honestly better we have these DSA candidates continue to be seen as outsiders in the house and Senate and ride off the accomplishments of state DSA executives like Mamdani.

    It's better to enter the 2028 election with little association with the current democratic party establishment. And point to the success of local DSA candidates. Then we can truly have a hostile takeover of the party with a strong presidential candidate and state wide representatives. Which right now, looks like it's AoC or nothing. It's really the only path I see that would make you incorrect.

    And Angie Nixon winning in Florida would really light the path to that being something that is actually accomplishable. If she wins. I will have more hope for this country than I have ever had.

    If she doesn't. Well, I will keep trying. At least until I'm taken to a camp.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 4 days ago (3 children)

    What did you guys do to stop Trump? Throw some soup on the Mona Lisa?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    What did you do to stop Trump? Vote for the people that paved his way to win?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 child)

    Yes, I did the one thing that actually could've stopped Trump, that is voted for his opposition.
    I mean if you can't even do that little then you have no business talking shit. Your handle is literally "Class Struggle," maybe you ought to change that if you're not going to actually engage in the struggle against the upper class.
    The last fifty years have demonstrated to me that if I wait around for "the left" to get me universal healthcare, an end to war, or a living wage then I'll be waiting forever.
    So yes, I vote in every election, you know why? Because I actually want this shit to happen while I'm still alive.

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

    A bit soon for that. The next Trump will arrive in the 2040s.

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

    If another neoliberal democrat gets elected in 2028. The "next Trump" will be president in 2032.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 days ago

    Yes, but there still needs to be a good amount of time for people to move on from Trump and support what comes next. For example, I see the next Trump being far more brutal - they'll view TACO'ing out as a sign of weakness, and seek to correct Trump's mistakes by murdering everyone who won't bend the knee.

    Take the whole E Jean Carroll thing, for instance. Right now, it's all tied up in court. The next Trump, I predict, would opt to have some people disappear E Jean Carroll. Maybe shoot some of the judges who ruled against the next Trump, too. And then, the replacement judge will rule that the next Trump did nothing wrong while a heavily armed trooper holds a gun to the judge's head.

    Pretty sure that's what we have to look forward to in the next few decades.

  • source
  • parent