Political Discussion

[Joe Mac]

Yes, but those are wins for Democrats not for most Americans.

And I think here is largely your problem. The democrats are fundamentally a centre right social Democratic Party. There was a line in a post above about you all being on the same side. You’re actually not. Not even close. But because of the utterly bizarre two party system the democrats are a centre right social Democratic Party that also has to make space for everyone else who isn’t just plain right wing.

The Labour Party in Britain is currently dangerously drifting into this posting under Keir “no policies” Starmer. It’s almost as if no one has figured out that ignoring the working classes in economic and social policy for 40 years is the single biggest root cause of the current drift to the hard right.

 

[Hemotep]

And I think here is largely your problem. The democrats are fundamentally a centre right social Democratic Party. There was a line in a post above about you all being on the same side. You’re actually not. Not even close. But because of the utterly bizarre two party system the democrats are a centre right social Democratic Party that also has to make space for everyone else who isn’t just plain right wing.

The Labour Party in Britain is currently dangerously drifting into this posting under Keir “no policies” Starmer. It’s almost as if no one has figured out that ignoring the working classes in economic and social policy for 40 years is the single biggest root cause of the current drift to the hard right.

Absolutely. Although I'm not sure I'd add the word social in that descriptor because they share very little in common with social democratic parties, even those that lean right.

And the Dems here fall for it every time the Republicans call them socialists by lurching more to the right each time thinking they they'll finally prove they aren't and all it does is push both parties further to the right.

 

[Joe Mac]

Absolutely. Although I'm not sure I'd add the word social in that descriptor because they share very little in common with social democratic parties, even those that lean right.

And the Dems here fall for it every time the Republicans call them socialists by lurching more to the right each time thinking they they'll finally prove they aren't and all it does is push both parties further to the right.

Perhaps. I also think that it is the natural ground for a large part of the party’s core. There really needs to be the emergence of a third spur to the left in American politics. Given your current system it is extremely unlikely.

 

[Bull Shannon]

It says so much about the state of "democracy" and "choice" in this government that our primaries are such a foregone conclusion. The left isn't even pretending there's anyone as viable as Biden, and the right has a field of candidates who are basically alternates for the minuscule possibility Trump ends up in prison or disqualified.

It's not even simply as bad as "there's just two parties;" we the people aren't being given options within those two boxes.

 

[ayayrawn]

It says so much about the state of "democracy" and "choice" in this government that our primaries are such a foregone conclusion. The left isn't even pretending there's anyone as viable as Biden, and the right has a field of candidates who are basically alternates for the minuscule possibility Trump ends up in prison or disqualified.

It's not even simply as bad as "there's just two parties;" we the people aren't being given options within those two boxes.

Vote for the genocide enabler or the insurrectionist currently on criminal trial. Joke country.

 

[Joe Mac]

To clarify my remark, I meant "all" more in the sense of "those of us who regularly post in this thread and are currently engaged in this discussion." Even when we have differing priorities or philosophies on how to achieve those priorities, we still generally desire a similar end state.

Do you think? I see a definite philosophical divergence on here between people on here that increasingly can no longer be contained in the broad church of “fuck Trump”.

 

[Bull Shannon]

Do you think? I see a definite philosophical divergence on here between people on here that increasingly can no longer be contained in the broad church of “fuck Trump”.

Not trying to speak for everyone, but from what I see we all agree about the problem(s) and wish for a similar end state (stable democracy, a safe and healthy populace, fascists in prison), but differ philosophically on how to react to the problem and how to reach that end state. That may seem like a broad middle part of the sandwich, but if you boil it down I think the differences in that middle part aren't incredibly drastic.

More broadly speaking, it's something which has troubled me about American politics for decades now: The things we all can agree on far outstrip the things we can't agree on, and politicians (especially the right) exacerbate and politicize those differences (religion and who we choose to love should not be on the table in these conversations, but it is) in order to obfuscate the common ground and humanity on either side.

 

[threesunrises]

WTAF????

MSN

 

[Nee Lewman]

And I think here is largely your problem. The democrats are fundamentally a centre right social Democratic Party. There was a line in a post above about you all being on the same side. You’re actually not. Not even close. But because of the utterly bizarre two party system the democrats are a centre right social Democratic Party that also has to make space for everyone else who isn’t just plain right wing.

The Labour Party in Britain is currently dangerously drifting into this posting under Keir “no policies” Starmer. It’s almost as if no one has figured out that ignoring the working classes in economic and social policy for 40 years is the single biggest root cause of the current drift to the hard right.

We're on the same side as in we are anti-Trump and hogtied to the other candidate. I am not a democrat and have been registered independent since 1994 or something. Weird thing in NC, that means I can pick the primary I want to vote in. I remember in college, we registered republican to fuck with their primaries.

 

[Hemotep]

We're on the same side as in we are anti-Trump and hogtied to the other candidate. I am not a democrat and have been registered independent since 1994 or something. Weird thing in NC, that means I can pick the primary I want to vote in. I remember in college, we registered republican to fuck with their primaries.

Same here.

 

[Nee Lewman]

I don't think @ayayrawn is saying they are going to sit out, I think they are saying they understand why folks will sit out. I could be wrong though.

I wish there were a viable other candidate. I wish the dems would run someone else or someone had the balls to do it despite what the dems think should happen.

 

[Joe Mac]

We're on the same side as in we are anti-Trump and hogtied to the other candidate. I am not a democrat and have been registered independent since 1994 or something. Weird thing in NC, that means I can pick the primary I want to vote in. I remember in college, we registered republican to fuck with their primaries.

Well yes but that’s implied. I mean more generally I’m seeing wildly divergent views politically and philosophically that can’t simply be contained within that as a single group solely on the basis of fuck trump and thus we have the issue with the democrats.

 

[Nee Lewman]

Well yes but that’s implied. I mean more generally I’m seeing wildly divergent views politically and philosophically that can’t simply be contained within that as a single group solely on the basis of fuck trump and thus we have the issue with the democrats.

I think we are seeing folks finally giving up on the dems. I hope there is a grassroots movement to either split the party or a faction becomes a force for the next election. I think if Trump wins and we survive whatever stupid happens as a result that we will do it. I'm unsure what happens if Biden wins.

 

[ayayrawn]

I don't think @ayayrawn is saying they are going to sit out, I think they are saying they understand why folks will sit out. I could be wrong though.

I wish there were a viable other candidate. I wish the dems would run someone else or someone had the balls to do it despite what the dems think should happen.

I live in a state that's going to go 15 points Trump no matter what, and has no chance of swaying the general outcome, so as it stands currently, I'm probably just leaving the presidential square blank. I'll still show up to give my input on everything else.

I'm unsure what happens if Biden wins.

Joe keels over or resigns from age partway into his term. Kamala becomes first woman president. She loses by at least* 6 points to whoever runs against her in 2028.

 

[Nee Lewman]

I live in a state that's going to go 15 points Trump no matter what, and has no chance of swaying the general outcome, so as it stands currently, I'm probably just leaving the presidential square blank. I'll still show up to give my input on everything else.


Joe keels over or resigns from age partway into his term. Kamala becomes first woman president. She loses by at least* 6 points to whoever runs against her in 2028.

I mean, to each their own, but i couldn't in good conscious do that. If enough people do that, it's enough to over come the win. I have to vote for the least offensive most viable candidate on the ticket.

 

[Hemotep]

I live in a state that's going to go 15 points Trump no matter what, and has no chance of swaying the general outcome, so as it stands currently, I'm probably just leaving the presidential square blank. I'll still show up to give my input on everything else.


Joe keels over or resigns from age partway into his term. Kamala becomes first woman president. She loses by at least* 6 points to whoever runs against her in 2028.

This is one of those things that pisses me off so much. We don't get to vote for the VP and I find Harris to be an atrocious candidate. There are so many brilliant and capable women who he could have chosen and he picked the unlike cop that had the absolutely dumbest ideas in her campaign out of all the Dem candidates.

Best of the better but still not my dream picks, I'd like him to pick Barbara Lee if he wants to support a deserving black woman with lots of experience. If he's thinking of 2028, then I'd love to see Gretchen Whitmer, who's the only person I can think of who has a chance of winning for the Dems in 28. Of course much could change in 4 years. For some outside the box candidates, I think he should pick someone like Patricia Hill Collins, Carmen Twillie Ambar, or Yasmin Cader. Plenty more who would be great.

Obviously he's not going to ditch Harris, but it would be nice if he did.

 

[ayayrawn]

I mean, to each their own, but i couldn't in good conscious do that. If enough people do that, it's enough to over come the win. I have to vote for the least offensive most viable candidate on the ticket.

In a state like NC (I think that's where you are), I can understand that. It's well within the zone of being a purple state. That vote could make a difference.

In 2020, Trump had 600,000 more votes than Joe in KY. He's only gotten more unpopular since then, so whether I fill in the bubble next to his name or not would purely be symbolic. I am in a position where I can (in pretty good conscious) say fuck both of these dudes with no bearing on the nationwide result.

Again, I'm still showing up to vote for everything else. But really at this point, it's everyone's prerogative to be involved way beyond just voting. It only gets you so far.

 

[Djxfactor511]

This is one of those things that pisses me off so much. We don't get to vote for the VP and I find Harris to be an atrocious candidate. There are so many brilliant and capable women who he could have chosen and he picked the unlike cop that had the absolutely dumbest ideas in her campaign out of all the Dem candidates.

Best of the better but still not my dream picks, I'd like him to pick Barbara Lee if he wants to support a deserving black woman with lots of experience. If he's thinking of 2028, then I'd love to see Gretchen Whitmer, who's the only person I can think of who has a chance of winning for the Dems in 28. Of course much could change in 4 years. For some outside the box candidates, I think he should pick someone like Patricia Hill Collins, Carmen Twillie Ambar, or Yasmin Cader. Plenty more who would be great.

Obviously he's not going to ditch Harris, but it would be nice if he did.

Obviously not a POC, but do people still like Katie Porter? I was a big fan of her whiteboard, but admittedly I haven't heard much from her lately.

 

[RenegadeMonster]

Obviously not a POC, but do people still like Katie Porter? I was a big fan of her whiteboard, but admittedly I haven't heard much from her lately.

I haven't heard anything from her lately. I'd forgotten about her.

 

[Hemotep]

I haven't heard anything from her lately. I'd forgotten about her.

She's running for Feinstein's empty Senate seat, but is currently in second place in the polls. She is one of those candidates that I love 50% of what she does and the other 50% cancels it out. So better than many but still not someone I'd love to see in the White House. She'd probably be good in the Senate, even though I'd rather an actual progressive in one of the California seats after years of Feinstein's awfulness.