There’s only two fascist parties. One is slightly less fascist, that’s it.
No matter what you do, you will be pigeonholed into making the wrong choice.
It is not your fault.
Yeah I’m gonna just let the actively 10x as fascist party win because the other is a bad capitalist instead of actually doing anything
Imagine relentlessly defending attempts to appeal to red states and conservatives as a viable electoral strategy, and then refer to Sanders support on this map as ‘empty land’.
Imagine relentlessly defending attempts to appeal to red states and conservatives as a viable electoral strategy,
Isn’t focusing on liberal and swing states exactly what you criticize the DNC for?
In fact, here’s you explicitly praising the 50-state strategy.
So you’re… imagining yourself?
/u/ZombiFrancis can correct me if I’m wrong but I think what they’re saying is that the DNC was unable to redefine what is perceived as electable; tha tis, the stale notion that progressivism is not palatable to rural working class voters despite evidence to the contrary. Instead, we fall for the same old trope of watering down OUR vision and OUR policy platform that we KNOW must be done (e.g., climate change as just one), and end up just looking bland to these voters. We don’t stand for anything, except for the progressive caucus of this party.
So in short, we need a 50 state strategy; but a national vision that brings that all together and is adapted to modern times. Not this incessant pivot to the “center” that is arbitrarily defined by Republican lines in the sand.
It was a conversation from a year ago, so without context I believe I was speaking then about a viable strategy that worked: bringing a left wing policy (at the time healthcare reform) to the conservatives and red states.
The Democratic Party abandoned that strategy since. They still made overtures to appeal to conservatives and red states, but they’ve done it through adopting rightwing, divisive policies. And then they don’t even run a US Senate race is Nebraska.
/u/ZombiFrancis can correct me if I’m wrong but I think what they’re saying is that the DNC was unable to redefine what is perceived as electable;
That would contradict their statements in response to my criticism
And yeah, I still support my own point, now and from a year ago, because I don’t dismiss the support as empty land.
At any rate the criticism in both cases is the rejection of those ‘empty land’ folks. It is consistent. I supported it then and I support it now. What I don’t support is then turning around and dismissing those people and states as empty land. This isn’t rocket surgery.
the stale notion that progressivism is not palatable to rural working class voters despite evidence to the contrary.
It’s literally not, though. As I’ve said numerous times before, the “Do you want [GOOD THING]?” polling that people so often point to ignores that a very large proportion of the people who respond positively to that will walk it back the moment you introduce any sort of the things that conservatives hammer as a downside.
The answer is, mind you, not to water down progressivism - it’s to stop trying to fucking bend over backwards for areas that vote 95%+ (not joking, I lived near districts with those numbers) GOP every fucking election. While going immediately full-throttle far-left on every issue may not be ideal, Clintonesque ‘triangulation’ is a clear and distinct failure, and needs to be abandoned, despite the DNC’s reluctance to let it go. We do, as you said, need a coherent and firm vision we can push going forward.
But don’t be fooled into thinking there’s some easy way to reach out and ‘convert’ these rural working class voters. They have fundamentally different values than progressives.
Looks more like that comment is supporting Dean’s strategy of flipping purple states, not deep red ones.
But I’m here less to disagree than I am to witness in awe how you dove into that user’s history to dredge up something they said a full year ago, within 3 minutes of them posting their comment. I’m going to be very nice to you cause you fumkin scary lol
Lemmy has a search-by-user option. If you know political terms, it doesn’t take long to dig up someone’s opinions. Doubly so if you’ve had run-ins with them in the past and have a vague outline of their beliefs.
Looks more like that comment is supporting Dean’s strategy of flipping purple states, not deep red ones.
That’s the opposite of what the 50-state strategy is, though.
Yeah I assumed both that you were doing some power search and that the two of you have a bit of history :P
Finish the sentence and close the loop: “and then refer to Sanders support as ‘empty land.’” The comment makes sense as a complete thought. By cutting out the conclusion you definitely make it confusing.
…and did you just go through a years worth of my post history for a screenshot? I know you go through and downvote my post history, but man.
And yeah, I still support my own point, now and from a year ago, because I don’t dismiss the support as empty land.
What was the point of that?
Finish the sentence and close the loop: “and then refer to Sanders support as ‘empty land.’” The comment makes sense as a complete thought. By cutting out the conclusion you definitely make it confusing.
The clear implication is that your dreaded shitlib opposition is advocating the 50-state strategy when dismissing Sanders. Yet your criticism elsewhere is that your dreaded shitlib opposition is NOT advocating the 50-state strategy.
I’m sorry that you don’t like being called out for kettle logic?
…and did you just go through a years worth of my post history for a screenshot? I know you go through and downvote my post history, but man.
lmao. Lemmy has a search option. All I had to do was type in ‘50 state’ by user ZombiFrancis, since I vaguely remembered you simping for the 50 state strategy before. Sorry that you’re on record?
I’m flattered that you think I can read tens-of-thousands of words of your comment history inside ten minutes, but I promise, I read fast, but not that fast.
At any rate the criticism in both cases is the rejection of those ‘empty land’ folks. It is consistent. I supported it then and I support it now. What I don’t support is then turning around and dismissing those people and states as empty land. This isn’t rocket surgery.
I think you don’t understand what I initially said in this thread here, and have taken that personally.
At any rate the criticism in both cases is the rejection of those ‘empty land’ folks. It is consistent. I supported it then and I support it now. What I don’t support is then turning around and dismissing those people and states as empty land. This isn’t rocket surgery.
No, it’s not rocket surgery, yet you literally just restated the contradictory position without a hint of self-awareness. In one case, you acknowledge (and condemn) that your dreaded shitlib opposition aren’t working off the 50-state strategy; in this case, you pretend that your dreaded shitlib opposition are working off the 50-state strategy so you have an excuse to call them hypocrites.
They, by your own description, are not ‘turning around’ and dismissing those folks, because by your own description, they don’t support the 50-state strategy to begin with. But wouldn’t it be awful if you had to argue your points on the actual merits instead of accusing your enemies of being hypocrites as a replacement for putting in any sort of thought or substance to your usual reflexively reactionary takes?
I think you don’t understand what I initially said in this thread here, and have taken that personally.
Considering that I’m the one in this thread who’s objected to the map’s misleading nature by pointing out that most of it is empty land?
Your attempts at plausible deniability are, uh, not very plausible. Nor is your usual extensive intellectual disingenuity impressive.
Look, I know you’ve long ago tagged me the tankie and yourself as the chad, it’s whatever. But you need to stop calling yourself a shitlib.
Look, I know you’ve long ago tagged me the tankie and yourself as the chad, it’s whatever. But you need to stop calling yourself a shitlib.
I’m sorry that you’re incapable of differentiating mocking characterization of your views with self-identification. I’ll try to dumb it down for you next time, and not use any complex literary devices that an elementary schooler would be capable of recognizing.
Why would the dems even want to win, when their co-workers are doing a much better job of passing the fascist policies that they all agree on? Why settle for kamalacaust when trump will go even further?
Fucking Texas lmaoooo, O’Rourke??? Hahahahahaha
Sorry but voters don’t get a say in USA. They only can choose between the 2 that their bosses have chosen.
every comment in this thread along the lines of
“wElL yOu sHoUldVE vOtEd tHeN!!!1!”
fucking confounds me bc ig you guys either have a weird victim blaming kink or you have massively more faith in our electoral system’s veracity than i do.
bc ig
Libs want to feel like they’re “right” even while they don’t do shit but support fascism.
Be a lot easier to discuss how well things worked if everyone participated.
Be a lot easier to participate if anybody’s vote actually mattered. Literally worthless vote where I live.
I “wasted” my vote on Cornell West in the presidential category. Doesn’t matter at all.
Well, when you don’t vote you’re guaranteeing your opinion doesn’t matter. The math always works in favor of everyone voting.
i honestly am skeptical of western media’s narrative that everyone is complacent and doesn’t give a fuck. i’ve met a lot of people. every single one of them gives some sort of a shit about politics. it feels like homegrown astroturfing to keep anything from ever actually coming to a head. keep people feeling alone and isolated, hopeless. if 60-80% of americans are complacent, don’t participate civically, and are actively disengaged from the political process… then where are these people? i should be seeing them in droves right? but i’m not, and neither is anyone i know. my network isn’t really geographically limited either. anecdotal evidence regardless, sure, but still suss imo.
i’ve seen the statistics and polls, the election results and non-participant ratio, you don’t need to share those sources with me.
idk, maybe i’m fucking crazy and a conspiracy theorist. a wise man once said that there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.
That doesn’t speak to my point at all. I’m saying you can’t tell how well a system works when it barely has half the participation it’s supposed to have, and is constantly fucked with. This is the direct result of Republican interference in Texas, no conspiracy theories required.
40% of voters in Texas didn’t vote in November.
Perhaps those that care about politics are the ones with which politics gets discussed? Unless you’re sitting down and going “so that trump, huh?” With every person you meet.
i do admit the bias of my sampling, but also at the same time:
Unless you’re sitting down and going “so that trump, huh?” With every person you meet.
yeah… i mean i do end up doing this much of the time? my time and labor is valuable… i’d rather not waste it on working with fascists, but i recognize i have the privilege of making that choice due to the kind of work i do.
if you lived during the reich would you not be like “so how ‘bout that hitler?” to every person you met??? i would???
Gen X in Texas at least doesn’t seem to vote much if at all.
Great, now we’re doing “land votes” takes just like conservative boomers posting minion memes on Facebook.
I’m so glad to see that the ‘left’ isn’t as fucking braindead as the ghouls on the right. /s
California, New York, and Illinois are land votes?
No, the vast majority of the map is empty land.
So you’re mad at the population distribution of the USA? I guess you gotta blame something for your gross candidate and pathetic loss.
… what
You do see California all blue, right? That’s 10% of the population of the US, just right there.
California, New York, and Florida are in no way just land.
-
Cali in this picture is quite distinctly pale and white in densely populated regions. Compare.
-
The message of the map is quite clearly not “Cali is voting for Bernie, look at how overwhelming that is!”, but using the physical size of the country and Bernie’s support in low-density states to portray him as winning an overwhelming victory, when Bernie’s frontrunner status at this point was a fairly slim plurality.
Bernie’s frontrunner status at this point was a fairly slim plurality.
Yes, he was the front runner. The dems chose a losing fascist instead. There are your braindead ghouls.
Yep. It would’ve been nice if more people who weren’t braindead ghouls chose to show up to the primaries and vote, but I guess they had more important things to do on that day, like jerking off.
-
But the land does vote.
That’s the whole issue with gerrymandering and the electoral college.
They’re talking about traitor lunatics who complain that a mostly red map (traitor lunatic counties) doesn’t result in a traitor lunatic victory. It’s the whole “people live in cities” joke.
I don’t get it actually. I think you are relying on me getting some of those terms and I am not.
Sorry.
Sorry about that. I was being cheeky but serious. Here it is in English:
They’re talking about Republicans/right wingers who complain when a mostly red looking map (Republican won counties) doesn’t result in a Republican victory. It’s the whole “people live in cities” joke.
So what happens is, these folks look at a map of the US that’s divided into counties and they see these enormous swaths of red, but a Democrat has won, and they—100% in earnest—say that it’s evidence that the election is stolen. That’s why we respond with “land doesn’t vote” and “people live in cities”.
Does that make more sense?
Yup yup!
The maps are as misleading as a Verizon coverage map. And Kornacki at the board saying it really only matters for the counties that have millions of votes vs all the tiny counties that come in immediately cause they have 10,000 people living there.
I think the problem is that we have accept these counties do matter though. A state being 3 blue and the rest red even if it’s where everyone lives is blue means that the land is voting. Very heavily too. And stuff like electoral votes being so many for this less populated land means we have to take it into account. So losing 1,000 battles but losing the war sounds like losing to me.
Okay but:
-
Bernie was never going to win the deep-red states on the strength of his primary polling.
-
Land doesn’t vote in the Dem primaries.
-
The implication of these maps is to present one candidate or party or idea as overwhelmingly popular, when it’s just color-by-the-numbers for largely empty space.
But it’s not empty space?
It is the low density states that make it so much easier for the Republicans to win especially when the Democrats avoid them and people call it empty.
Those states that are “empty” are always half of the electoral votes.
Also don’t do statistics for a thing we don’t have any data for we don’t know how he would have performed cause it’s not just simple math it’s real life and we never got to, nor will we ever know.
-
Either Delaware has a population density to rival Kowloon Walled City, or this is a bit more than a “land votes” take
It’s tracing where candidates predominate, with blue and deep blue being Sanders - the impression is given, by the presence of blue across a large swathe of the country, that Sanders is winning an overwhelming victory. However, much of the area that is blue is not considerably populated; while Sanders enjoyed plurality support at this point in the primary (I remember it well, because I was so fucking excited and hopeful), it’s not even vaguely close to the implication of overwhelming support that the map gives off.
Let’s see the map for kamalacaust then? lmao.
The fuck does Harris have to do with what I’m saying?
People should have voted in primaries, then. I did. Both times. Clearly not enough did.
Elizabeth Warren should have dropped out before Super Tuesday
🐍
No, no, you see, if we just convince enough people NOT to vote in the primaries, the whole system will collapse!
The dems are doing a great job of convincing people not to vote. There’s really no better method than constantly nominating garbage candidates.
There’s really no better method than constantly nominating garbage candidates.
I said, and I quote:
No, no, you see, if we just convince enough people NOT to vote in the primaries, the whole system will collapse!
What the ever-loving fuck do you think a primary is
DO you think?
I’ve learned that an unsettling amount of people on Lemmy don’t know what a primary is and this really explains why primaries only have a 10% turn out most of the time.
The worst part is that people on Lemmy are more politically engaged than your average eligible voter. This is literally the top half of the population, in terms of political engagement and education.
God help us.
More engaged, yes. More educated, ehh. I don’t know about that. I’ve seen several and been involved in arguments where one, or in some cases both, parties learn policy from memes, other comments, or YouTube videos.
Not to mention the high volume of tankies and wannabe tankies there are on Lemmy. That’s the exact opposite of what I would define as educated.
As a non American I don’t see why the democratic party should have chosen a guy who deliberately chose to spend his entire career outside the democratic party.
Yeah, they didn’t choose Bernie. They would rather lose than promote even the tiniest progress. Just look at biden’s 4 years ffs.
Because their would be constituents wanted him.
Great, then mirror some of his policies. However were I a democratic politician, I simply would not reward a politician who has been outside the party structure for decades with endorsement for presidency. For me it would effectively be like skipping the queue.
For me it would effectively be like skipping the queue.
It’s not about whose turn it is. Arguably, that’s how we got Hillary Clinton in 2016, which was the failure that gave Trump a political career.
What it is about is representing your party members. And your party members supported Bernie Sanders.
I didn’t say anything about “turns”.
To become a high ranked member of the democratic party that is in consideration for the US Presidency, you have had to put in decades of political work and show loyalty to the party. You have had to work within the constraints of the party, even when you don’t 100% agree with them, and be considered as responsible by the public for bad decisions. Your career may have hit rocky patches because of choices the party made, despite them not being your personal beliefs.
To be Bernie Sanders was actually quite an easy political position, for the most part. He got to vote how he liked, did not have to sit under the party whip, and was only responsible for his own decisions. He did not have to do anything that was politically difficult, as he was never in power.
So my view on it is that there is just no reason why the democratic party should have gone along with him as their representative. If he wanted to have a chance at being the president, he needed to put in the political legwork, become a democrat, and have to go with the party whip sometimes, even if he didn’t personally believe in what he was voting for.
To have selected him would have meant that there was one less reason to be a democrat, as you could just be an opportunistic, populist independent.
I didn’t say anything about “turns”.
Yeah, you did. You likened it to skipping position in a queue. The whole point of a queue is to collectively manage turn order. It heavily implies that it’s someone’s turn next. Maybe you didn’t mean to, but that’s the obvious implication of the phrasing.
On the rest, we’re just going to start going in circles, so I’ll leave it there.
I didn’t say anything about “turns”.
For me it would effectively be like skipping the queue.
Death to the DNC never forget
People vote, not land.
Biden doubled Bernie’s votes in the 2020 primaries. Which Bernie was a part of because the DNC chose him to participate in.
Biden doubled Bernie’s votes in the 2020 primaries.
Yes. That’s why the dems lost.
Do you even know how or why that happened? Or just that it happened? If you dont then you cant talk about it.
Because Biden and Obama convinced more people to check his name on the ballots.
Yeah no. Decent to low effort try though.
Bernie was clearly ahead until the DNC gave all the other candidates marching orders to drop out and endorse a senile old man in severe cognitive decline to prevent any movement to the left that would threaten the legalized bribery the democratic party grows fat on.we could have had FDR 2.0 instead we got reagan and nixon’s bastard love child a second time because biden was such a sad excuse of an incoherent puppet he made jimmy carter look good and even as though a second carter administration would have been preferable.
Oh so you’re saying more people voted for Biden because Biden convinced more people to vote for him?
What a travesty! Its too bad we didn’t…
What is it you’re suggesting…
Utilize Spoiler Candidates to shift the election in your favor?
Everything in our political system is blatantly corrupted by money. The study princeton did a while back showed that the amount of influence one has on any piece of legislation is directly related to how much wealth you have with regular working class people having a statistically irrelevant near zero influence on any policy regardless of how popular or unpopular it may be.
It is extremely naive to believe that a group of sociopaths who believe as though their wealth grants them divine provenance to manipulate society as they see fit with total impunity would for some reason see our election system as too sacred to exert the same influence upon.
In Germany the supreme court decided that electronic voting is unconstitutional because it is impossible to differentiate between legitimate results and fraudulent ones for anyone who isnt a cybersecurity/ IT expert and that is the reality, people with money are willing to do anything to manipulate whatever benefits them and do not give a shit about anything we believe they should.
The DNC was responsible for the policy that removed money from politics until the conservative stacked SCOTUS overturned it in 2010. The DNC have reversing Citizens United as a core platform stance.
We need to get 60 DNC Senators in there, or we simply need to remove conservatives to less than 40, both GOP and conservative IND, and we will see real progress. We haven’t had more than 50 in over 12 years, we havent given the DNC supermajority without caucus since 1979.
After LBJ dropped out of the race in ‘68 and then Bobby kennedy was assassinated after winning the California primary the Democratic party has consistently shifted right every single election cycle. So much so that this last election they touted endorsements from neo con war mongering dynasty families like the bushes and Cheneys.
The DNC are funded by the same exact big money interests as the Rnc. They work to ensure that no candidate who aims to move the party even a millimeter to the left or give anything resembling economic democracy a platform, will be nominated. Neo liberal western democracy intentionally aims to exclude economically democratic policies. And this makes it a defacto class dictatorship. We will never vote our way out of this, we have had 57 years of the ratchet effect and the type of change we need kow is revolutionary. But too many voters still believe propaganda coming from astro turfed corporate sources and think if they just get out and vote things will be better next time. It’s called “ballot box socialism” and it will never happen because those with the real power, the capital, will never allow it to happen unless they are motivated through violence which is the only means by which any leftward progress has ever been made. We can hold hands and sing cumbaya all we want but we will still be barraged with tear gas and rubber bullets.
The DNC with only 58 for 72 days managed to beat a Republican filibuster and expand lifesaving healthcare to tens of millions of Americans. The DNC with a slim 50 majority via Reconciliation passed the absolutely massive Inflation Reduction Act as their budget. The Citizens United decision by the Conservative SCOTUS allows unchecked campaign spending by corporations and PACs because it overturned a bill written and passed by the DNC. When Democrat presidents are in we fund the IRS and audit the Rich.
The DNC is our progressive party. The DNC works for the people.
The “inflation reduction act” did jack shit for real world inflation. The reality is that every empire experiencing economic decline always lies to the working class about the true measure of inflation to keep the passive income graby train rolling and prevent the working class from rioting/ fomenting revolution.
The inflation statistics we are feed are figured out by the world bank and IMF and then relayed to their associating national banks and financial institutions like wall street and the fed. They use consumer price index to determine these figures which is flawed for a multitude of reasons but most importantly being that CPI is an inadequate measure of inflation considering it fails to take into account fhe primary cause of inflation; the devaluation of a currency due to the increase in circulating supply and increased national debt. This is something the price of gold does exceedingly well. And this is the reason that 70 years ago in 1955 my grandfather bought a house in an Ivy League college town for $2500 on a minimum wage of 75¢/hr after moving to the UsA 5 years earlier at the age of 18 and today it would take a minimum wage worker 30 years of saving half their paycheck to afford even the most dilapidated piece of junk property on the market. Maybe for 7 years of saving half the salary you could buy an empty lot that meets requirements to be developed into a single family home but then you’ll need yo work for all the tooling and materials.
But anyway; for the first 172 years of the US dollar as a standardized currency the price of gold only fluctuated 95% from $18 to $35 and that was all mostly in one adjustment which was a calculated move by FDR To prevent hyper inflation by doubling the currency supply and prevent further economic losses caused by the Great Depression. But in the 54 years since nixon permanently ended the gold standard and topled the first domino that led tk the current age of American austerity for the working class the price of gold has increased in direct tandem with the national debt. Increasing from $35 an ounce to $3360 last i looked which is an increase of approximately 9600% and in the same time frame the national debt has increased from $400 billion to $37 trillion or 9300% this because gold is the true measure of inflation, it was the first currency ever used outside rudimentary barter and trade economies and the value of all currencies in circulation today are intrinsically tied to the value of gold. You can not game the system by trading currencies for other currencies where gold is cheaper and then making profit, the value of gold across all circulating currencies is equal to the exchange rate of every currency to the value of gold.
Now in 1938 when FDR first implemented a minjmum wage 88 years ago it was set at 25¢/hr or 14.9 ounces of gold a year for full time 40 hr/weekly labor. Today this would be about $24.25/hr or $50,000/year which is more than the highest minimum wage for California corporate fast food workers at $20/hr or 12.3 ounces of gold a year. In 1945 it was raised to 40¢/hr which would be 24 ounces of gold a year or $80,000/ $38.45 today. In 1950 it was 75¢/hr or 45 ounces of gold which today would be $151,000 per year or $72/hr in 1956 it was raised again to $1/hr which would be 60 ounces of gold annually or $202,000 $96/hr and in 1968 it was raised a 7th and final time since minimum wage was implemented before nixon would bring nixon shock wtoooo the American economy and allng with reagan bush and clinton decimate and destroy the middle working class, but it was raised to $1.60/hr with gold still at $35/ ounce that is 95 ounces of gold a year or $317,000 annually/ $153/hr for 2080 hours per year.
The reality here is that the US dollar was intentionally devalued to eradicate the progress made by the labor and civil rights movements in the 40’s 50’s and 60’s as well as FDR’s new deal policies that created a thriving working class and saw the richest 10% of Americans with a combined share of 20% of the wealth compared to the almost 70% they currently have with 1% owning 44.6 trillion dollars in wealth (enough to give every american man woman and child in the bottom 99% a check for over $65,000 while still Leaving approximately $6,000,000 for each of the 3.4 million richest people) But this was the way they lowered the cost of labor for all the jobs that could not be outsourced to the third world for 90-95%+ reduction in cost. Nixon and Reagan as well as bush senior also destroyed education standards. Roger freeman who was advisor to bush said “we are on the verge of having a highly educated proletariat, this is dynamite! We need to be more selective about who we allow to go through higher education” and going into the 1980’s classes like wood and auto shop, home economics, financial literacy, music and art all Disappeared with the implicit goal of turning the American working class into a class of consumers unable to repair their own belongings as well as obedient workers, just smart enough to run the machines that make the wealthy their passive income but not intelligent enough to understand the nature of the system exploiting them. Then Reagan signed CAFTA which would become NAFTA under clintons neo liberal administration and the vast majority of the good blue collar manufacturing jobs in America that many of our parents and grandparents relied on to built their wealth and bought their homes with. And the 7 satellite roles for each of those manufacturing positions were all outsourced to the third world for a few pennies on the dollar. And almost overnight a thriving middle class turned into a low paid service industry of wage and debt slaves living paycheck to paycheck with no emergency savings.
So biden did jack shit for inflation rent for a 2 bedroom in the town i grew up in averages $3000 go 15 miles south or north and you can get something for $22-2400 but minimum wage is $15 and most jobs aren’t paying much more than that. Even double or triple it and it’s still a garbage paycheck to paycheck existence unless you want tk live with 2-4+ strangers from craigslist or ruin relationships with childhood friends to save a few bucks(or rather be able to make ends meet)
The underlying truth here if you dig down deep enough and do the math, it cost more to purchase and maintain enslaved human beings 160+ years ago before reconstruction during the 30 years on average they survived than minimum wage workers anywhere in the USA are currently paid. We were fed a social contract growing up that if you work hard you will be fairly rewarded for it and get to retire at the age of 60 but today that us no longer the case. I stead of being incentivized to perform labor by the fact that the wages offered provided one with a better standard and quality of life today workers are silently coerced into working with a looming threat of homelessness starvation and loss of dignity and that is just not motivating.
Nothing will change until a large percentage of the work force refuse to participate which will be met with state sponsored violence and show the truth that we are not free.
And as far as the ACA, yeah I do benefit from it and my states expanded medicaid coverage but that was already like over 12 god damned years ago and that is the most democrats have done in my entire lifetime. Federal minimum wage hasn’t been adjusted in going on 17 years which is the longest it’s gone unadjusted since the 1938 FLSA was passed with most adjustments happening once every 4 years and a majority of adjustments occurring within a year of the previous adjustment. How how long will we be told to look at one minimal step in the right direction from 3-4 terms ago meanwhile every time the right gets a hold of power they push things as far to the right as possible decorum be damned and then when dems get control again it’s a snail’s pace if any movement at all. It’s 5 steps backwards and MAYBE 1 step forward. And yeah Obama gave us the aca but he also persecuted edward snowden, julian assange, chelsea manning, dropped more drones than any other administration. Obama was a reaganite neo liberal war monger just like every other POTUS we have had since LBJ
The DNC is a not a progressive party, they are a corporate funded astro turfed party controlled by tje same wall street military and prison industry profiteers that fill Republicans pockets. Their lawyer argued that the dnc is under zero obligation to uphold the will of voters and they can decide who they want to nominate in a dingy dimly lit cigar smoke filled back room without any input or direction from voters who spent money on their preferred campaign. And that is definitely 100% not progressive or Democratic in any way shape or form.
Based
*Acided.
But Biden won lol the 2016 election is a way better example. Sanders did worse in 2019
YES! The 2016 election had like a 3 Million vote difference, Bernie 13M to Hillary 16M.
2020 was 9 to 19, what an absurd hill to die on.
why wouldn’t they? Bernie’s interests are aligned completely opposite to the interests of whatever groups that keep at least half of those democrats in their seats. That became much more clear when they happily voted no to Bernie’s “ban weapon sale to Israel” motions.
Good question.
If Democrats were reasonable, objective people (which they are not), they’d probably look at the fact that the state of Missouri passed a $15 minimum wage, required paid sick leave, AND legalized abortion in the same election where they elected Republicans.
And then take that as a lesson of maybe what they should be doing in order to win back red states.
But they won’t.
They’re in the pocket of the rich and couldn’t care less about people who work for a living.
This is so confusing. Which party, if any, was supporting those measures? How’d they get on the ballot?
We are one of the last states that can still do ballot initiatives. That’s how weed happened anyway.
It’s a bit silly sometimes though, the citizens put initiatives on the ballot that Rs hate and then vote in all the Rs expecting them to implement the stuff in good faith.
If you consider the bigger picture it’s not silly at all.
Democrats spent four years, two of them with the same amount of power that Donald Trump has, letting people get significantly poorer and aiding a genocide. Then, they fronted an openly demented candidate who had a meltdown on national TV. Then, they let the brain-dead candidate crown a candidate who couldn’t even beat Tulsi Gabbard in a primary. After that, they spent three months of campaign time offering no policy changes, but just telling people to ‘be joyful’. Then, after that, Harris publicly affirmed she wouldn’t do anything differently than Biden had.
TLDR: Democrats made voters hate them just that much. You can’t tell tens of millions of people working 100 hours a week at three jobs just to afford a roach-infested studio that you’re not going to make their lives better. Sure, Dems say they support better things, but no one believes them anymore.
Yeah, people decided to try something else or more of the same as people do. That intersection was new republicans shouting they could strong arm the world a better place but kissed that it was a better place only for the wealthy.
People need change when the world is changing but their social contracts all stayed the same.
I really don’t get how people don’t see all this as signs that the average American is drowning and desperately need compassion instead of apathy.
Jeb! is willing to overlook this transgression
Sorry, it’s spelled JEB!
Your lack of enthusiasm has been logged. Please clap.
1! = 1
2! = 2
3! = 6
4! = 24
…
JEB! = +∞
