this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
290 points (83.7% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4906 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 148 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (5 children)

As a lifelong democrat, I find this to be very dangerous rhetoric. It sounds tonedeaf. Regardless of the candidate, being critical of politicians is a cornerstone of democracy.

I understand it's important to be a united front, but the need to seemingly bring dissenting voices into line is not a good way to do it. We cannot force people to say we have a perfect candidate for the sake of avoiding discussion.

Edit: a word

[–] [email protected] 26 points 8 months ago

We cannot force people to say we have a perfect candidate for the sake of avoiding discussion.

They seem to believe if something isn't discussed, the other side won't notice and / or discuss it either. That's delusional.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago

I don't think we have enough nuance in our politics to have that as more than an idyllic dream.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I disagree that's what's happening here. He's saying that you can be disappointed with Biden all you want, but not voting for him means we get trump and Project 2025 and fascism.

I don't know a single person that is stoked on Biden, but he's all we have right now. And we cannot let Trump get a second term.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Unfortunately, that’s not what Fetterman is saying.

Fetterman noted during an interview an uptick in Democrats who have become more critical of Biden lately, and said it’s only helping former President Trump.

“I don’t understand why,” Fetterman said, speaking on “Morning Joe” on MSNBC. “I don’t know what’s in it for you to do that whether you’re just chasing clout or you want to make it in the news or anything like that. But if you’re not willing to just support the president now and say these kinds of things, you might as well just get your MAGA hat, because you now are helping Trump with this.

He’s addressing other Democratic politicians, whom would probably be one of the last groups to not vote for Biden. He seems to think that Biden would fare better in November if Dems outright refuse to acknowledge the realities of unprecedented homelessness, Israeli war money, or being 81 years old. (Because forcing people to look to Republicans for a dissenting opinion on these subjects is a great idea.)

You should vote for Biden if you don’t want Trump, obviously. And vote for Fetterman over whomever if you don’t want whomever. But either Fetterman severely misspoke here, or his opinion goes way beyond that, and I can’t help but lose a lot of respect I had for him.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 8 months ago

This is buying into the Republican way of thinking, which is that you criticize someone's performance for any shortcoming you feel. A progressive stance is to elevate other people (There is more than one person in Government) who are doing things correctly without tearing down the current leader. It s the difference between a collaborative government and a competitive one. Within a (generally speaking) unified political block which values diversity of opinions, a collaborative approach is much more productive than a competitive one.

The strength of a movement is in the sum of the effort.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Oh, I totally agree everyone needs to vote for Biden based on how the system currently works. But what I disagree with is the insinuation that anyone disagreeing with Biden needs a MAGA hat. That's tonedeaf and bad for the party.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago

It's pretty much the party's only message anymore. Just shut up and be happy with the genocide that party leadership has decided that you must love.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That has been proven time and again to not work. You can't take the high road and expect to win.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Win what? Ultimately no one wins if we can't discuss areas for improvement even within one's own party.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Right, but winning an election where your own party already required you to shut up about anything where you disagree -- doesn't seem like a win?

I think there's this idea that if we keep the Dems in power, then we'll hit a point where we can return to discussion and fix issues within the party. But that's a false idea. There will always be an opponent, and the idea that we should all fall in line just to avoid fascism is, well, misguided at best -- because it's also fascism. We're already setting a precedent within the party to avoid dissidence. That's wild.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

With first past the post voting, a "win" is very simply avoiding the biggest loss.

Push and scream and lobby as much as you like, but at the end of the day, Biden only needs to be marginally less psychotic than Trump for him to be the preferred candidate.

The other side will fall in line behind Trump. So what choice is there?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Try criticizing Biden openly here or on Reddit. This is the party sentiment right now, open criticism is viewed as being equal to supporting Trump. It's nutty.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I don't think that's true, there's plenty of disagreement over Biden policies. It's when people try to play the both sides card, lumping Biden and Trump as both being senile or blaming the situation in Palestine on Biden that gets people riled up especially when people try to use those arguments to convince people to not vote.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

Yeah, that's one of my fears with this rhetoric. We keep reducing issues to bifurcations which is incredibly dangerous.