Man I’ve been voting Dem for 40 years. (edit - closer to 35 I guess)
So, what, Clinton ‘92 was first?
So you voted Cinton twice - won (?!)
Gore - lost
Kerry - lost
Obama twice - won (?!)
Hilary - lost (o shit)
Biden - won (yay)
Then you got to Harris and thought, “sure, we’re facing down the barrel of literal fascism, death of several amendments, public executions, and god knows what nightmare of a climate and - doggone it, now’s the time to not vote!”
? Wow. I’d be interested to know why, when it seemed like the stakes couldn’t be higher by any reasonable estimate, you thought now’s the time to stick it to the Dems.
EDIT: I see you did vote Harris, so - it appears I mistook “Dems have to do better” for “I’m not voting / I’m not voting Dem”.
Man I’ve been voting Dem for 40 years. Please go lecture someone else. I’m not in one of your classes.
I’m sorry that you think two sentences, one of which is a mirror of your’s, is a ‘lecture’.
I don’t give a fuck how long you’ve voted Dem, or what the fuck you think that proves. I care that when push comes to shove, people will stand against fascism, and not step aside because “Maybe this time it’ll teach the Dems a lesson 😊”
Sorry for not considering my life and the lives of numerous people I love, not to mention millions of others, a low price to pay to ‘send a message’ to some detached fucking party elites who will totally reform after losing to fascists just one more time.
Sorry that somewhere along the way you lost the plot, and began to consider the lives of minorities a currency you can spend freely as a form of communication with the aristocracy.
Sorry that somewhere along the way you lost the plot, and began to consider the lives of minorities a currency you can spend freely as a form of communication with the aristocracy.
Are you kidding me? Half my objection is that we’re apparently supposed to accept half measures (or no measures) now in the name of appeasement. Remember all that talk of trans rights on the campaign trail? Me neither. Remember all that talk of limiting Israel? Me neither.
Now, one of us is linking examples of his grievances which you are ignoring, and the other is using a lot of confrontational language but offering nothing but anger and personal attacks. I have to admit after seeing you around I expected better.
Remember all that talk of trans rights on the campaign trail?
Millions of dollars from Republican groups and figures are being poured into anti-transgender ads criticizing policies that support the trans community, despite these issues being among the least important concerns motivating voters heading into the 2024 election, according to a recent Gallup poll.
LGBTQ advocates fear the intensified campaign will sow fear and hate against a group that makes up less than 1% of the U.S. adult population, per an analysis of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data – and which already experiences high rates of discrimination and violence.
“After the election, trans Americans will have to deal with the dangerous fallout from the shameful lies and misinformation that far too many political candidates are intentionally spreading,” GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis said in a statement.
In the ads, former President Donald Trump’s campaign has said he will end transgender care in prisons and jails, and restrict access to gender-affirming care and transgender participation in sports, and more.
In interviews, Vice President Kamala Harris – who has been touted by some LGBTQ groups as being part of the most “pro-LGBTQ” administration – has said she will follow the law when it comes to transgender care and has expressed support for the Equality Act, a bill that would protect LGBTQ Americans from discrimination.
Harris has long been an outspoken advocate for same-sex marriage, officiating some of the nation’s first same-sex marriage ceremonies as district attorney in San Francisco. As vice president, she supported the Respect for Marriage Act, a landmark piece of bipartisan legislation to protect same-sex and interracial marriages.
She’s also expressed support for the Equality Act, a bill that would protect LGBTQ Americans from discrimination. The legislation would expand federal civil rights law to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination in areas such as public facilities, education, federal funding, employment, housing, credit, and the jury system.
Harris has said the “freedom to love who you love openly and with pride” is at stake this election.
Really, kind of obvious?
Oh wait - it doesn’t say trans. So, maybe she’s seekritly against any progress for trans rights? Hmm. I see your point. Trump definitely should have won.
See, I think that the campaign should have openly said we support LGBTQ+ issues. Well, I mean they did, but their ‘virtual silence’ on trans rights, or . . specifically not-well-off? Trans rights? . . Was apparently damning enough to let the fascists openly trash everything.
Are you kidding me? Half my objection is that we’re apparently supposed to accept half measures (or no measures) now in the name of appeasement.
“The party that literally lost the election is trying to compromise with the party that won the election” should not be a fucking surprise to anyone who pays fucking attention to politics since the inception of parties or elections.
There are plenty of good ways to kick out Dems who are insufficient in opposition. Letting fascists win is not one of them.
Remember all that talk of trans rights on the campaign trail? Me neither. Remember all that talk of limiting Israel? Me neither.
What the fuck does that have to do with the opposition being literal fascists who should’ve been kept out of power?
Now, one of us is linking examples of his grievances which you are ignoring, and the other is using a lot of confrontational language but offering nothing but anger and personal attacks. I have to admit after seeing you around I expected better.
Your examples of grievances are… Dems infighting with progressives.
That justifies letting fucking fascists win?
That’s what we’re fucking discussing, here.
THAT’S not a vote I’ll be making again though.
That’s fucking you, right there, discussing casting a vote for a flawed neolib empty suit against a literal, open, fucking fascist.
What the fuck does that have to do with the opposition being literal fascists who should’ve been kept out of power?
Remember this?
Sorry for not considering my life and the lives of numerous people I love,
I’ve got people who I love too. I’ve also got people who I don’t love, but who I’m just friends with.
Your examples of grievances are… Dems infighting with progressives.
My examples are that if we can hold Dems accountable for anything at all (which apparently we can’t without really, really pissing some people off) I’d think it would at least be for allowing the continuous rightward shift of the overton window, which they have actively promoted over the course of my entire adult life by their continuous fighting against progressive elements of their own party while simultaneously appeasing conservatives. I don’t really see how that could be any clearer, but I’m sure you’ll reply angrily about some unrelated thing, or otherwise impugn my intelligence, memory, or integrity. (or block me for not kowtowing)
They have dangled the “but the Republicans really can’t win this time” in front of us for decades. And yet, the exact same Republican threat (but worse!) exists the next time. Every time.
And I agree about the presence of that threat. I disagree that fighting against progressive politicians and their policies will do anything but continue to enable it.
“The party that literally lost the election is trying to compromise with the party that won the election”
Also, during Kamala’s campaign they were the party in power. They still sold themselves to R instead of D.
That justifies letting fucking fascists win?
Sorry for all the edits.
So here is the crux of our disagreement.
They are going to get my vote in 2026. They can have that by default, and they will need it to have a chance in 2028.
But, you find it unreasonable that I just want them, in the next 3.5 years, to give me a reason to vote for them that is NOT derived from how bad R is? That’s just a bridge too far for me to ask of my elected representatives?
I’ve got people who I love too. I’ve also got people who I don’t love, but who I’m just friends with.
Okay? Did letting the fascists win help them more than the alternative, or hurt them more than the alternative?
I await with baited breath your answer. /s
I’m fucking disabled. I have relatives who are undocumented. Neither party is going to represent my interests adequately. But I still recognize which is going to be fucking worse.
My examples are that if we can hold Dems accountable for anything at all (which apparently we can’t without really, really pissing some people off) I’d think it would at least be for allowing the continuous rightward shift of the overton window, which they have actively promoted over the course of my entire adult life by their continuous fighting against progressive elements of their own party while simultaneously appeasing conservatives.
Holy fucking shit, are you kidding me?
You said you’ve been voting Dem for 40 years. If that’s true, then you should be acutely aware of just how far left the Dems have come since the height of neolib lunacy in the 1990s.
I don’t really see how that could be any clearer, but I’m sure you’ll reply angrily about some unrelated thing, or otherwise impugn my intelligence, memory, or integrity. (or block me for not kowtowing)
You don’t see how… a demonstrably untrue point that you did not previously express… could be any clearer.
Okay.
They have dangled the “but the Republicans really can’t win this time” in front of us for decades. And yet, the exact same Republican threat (but worse!) exists the next time. Every time.
HW was a step back from Reagan. McCain and Romney from Bush.
And I agree about the presence of that threat. I disagree that fighting against progressive politicians and their policies will do anything but continue to enable it.
In case you missed my last edit (which is understandable):
That justifies letting fucking fascists win?
Sorry for all the edits.
So here is the crux of our disagreement.
They are going to get my vote in 2026. They can have that by default, and they will need it to have a chance in 2028.
But, you find it unreasonable that I just want them, in the next 3.5 years, to give me a reason to vote for them that is NOT derived from how bad R is? That’s just a bridge too far for me to ask of my elected representatives?
First, that it presumes that them not giving you a reason to vote for them that doesn’t sum up to “Literal fascists are bad” is, itself, a reason not to vote for them.
It is fucking not.
Votes are not a love letter. They are a strategic decision about the future of the country, made as one voice in an ocean of voices, few of whom are in total agreement with you. And if your decision ends up “Well, literal fascism is really bad… but I don’t think I’ve been woo’d enough by the non-fascists”, then you are putting a stamp of apathetic approval on fascism murdering large numbers of disadvantaged groups because of some bizarre sense of political vanity.
That is not a moral choice. It is not a reasonable choice. It’s not much more than saying that the lives of minorities are worth less than your feelings. Yes, including those that you love, and those that you are friends with.
Second, it is not unreasonable to want more out of your representatives. But it is also important to recognize how and when to get more out of your representatives. For example, building a credible third-party or interest group, or primarying some dipshit neoliberal’s ass out. Both of those require extensive groundwork.
Part of the issue, I think, is that the ultra-fucked FPTP system of the US which has led us to our two-party system has simultaneously robbed any opposition to the two parties of any sense of coalition-building or bargaining. Hence the spate of perennial four-year ‘also-ran’ presidential candidates we have to deal with.
Third, the presidency, in particular, has accumulated a wealth of unreasonable powers. Beyond questions of policy, it is vital to keep the presidency out of the hands of literal fascists because it is precisely the branch which they can do the most damage with. If the fascists had gained the House and Senate, and maintained the judiciary, we would still be at far less risk had we had some empty fucking neolib suit in the White House. Sinking a Dem Senator or Rep is far less concerning, in this light, than sinking a Dem presidency.
Fourth, despite the constant claims of speaking for the people, progressives have shown, time and time again, that we do not have the votes to win elections on our own in this fucking country. Most of the country is not as left-leaning as you or I. We have a lot of fucking work to do before “Listen to us or else!” is anything but a threat to let literal fucking fascists win.
Which means, ugly as it is, we need to be in coalition with the fucking neolibs. Primary their asses, by all means. But if the general election comes down to a Republican president or a Dem president, you better fucking be voting blue even if it’s some goddamn ghoul like Pelosi. Having the country return the more right-wing option does not signal to anyone that they should go left; it signals that the country desires to go further right, and both parties will respond as such.
if you actually believe that, you would be demanding the dnc to reach across their own damn aisle tword the progressives, funny that you always demand the opposite.
It’s possible to tell the DNC to reach across the aisle, while acknowledging that they’re still the better of the two current options even if they don’t.
We have a phrase for when enforcing your demands hurts you the most: cutting off your nose to spite your face. Letting the actual fascists win hurts us more than the people you’re trying to strong-arm.
Actually that is what I demand they do, but at that part where I finish my big speech with, “. . . right, everybody??” And turn around, you people are not there. And then they direct me to the centrists who did show up and I have to do it again.
Here’s my super-radical-super-extreme position:
Letting fascists into power is unconscionable
Sorry that you think that fascism is something that can be allowed if it teaches the ‘do-nothing libs’ a sufficient lesson.
Man I’ve been voting Dem for 40 years. (edit - closer to 35 I guess) Please go lecture someone else. I’m not in one of your classes.
PS: We already got the fascism! New bogeyman needed!
So, what, Clinton ‘92 was first?
So you voted Cinton twice - won (?!)
Gore - lost
Kerry - lost
Obama twice - won (?!)
Hilary - lost (o shit)
Biden - won (yay)
Then you got to Harris and thought, “sure, we’re facing down the barrel of literal fascism, death of several amendments, public executions, and god knows what nightmare of a climate and - doggone it, now’s the time to not vote!”
? Wow. I’d be interested to know why, when it seemed like the stakes couldn’t be higher by any reasonable estimate, you thought now’s the time to stick it to the Dems.
EDIT: I see you did vote Harris, so - it appears I mistook “Dems have to do better” for “I’m not voting / I’m not voting Dem”.
Withdrawn.
I’m sorry that you think two sentences, one of which is a mirror of your’s, is a ‘lecture’.
I don’t give a fuck how long you’ve voted Dem, or what the fuck you think that proves. I care that when push comes to shove, people will stand against fascism, and not step aside because “Maybe this time it’ll teach the Dems a lesson 😊”
Sorry for not considering my life and the lives of numerous people I love, not to mention millions of others, a low price to pay to ‘send a message’ to some detached fucking party elites who will totally reform after losing to fascists just one more time.
Sorry that somewhere along the way you lost the plot, and began to consider the lives of minorities a currency you can spend freely as a form of communication with the aristocracy.
Are you kidding me? Half my objection is that we’re apparently supposed to accept half measures (or no measures) now in the name of appeasement. Remember all that talk of trans rights on the campaign trail? Me neither. Remember all that talk of limiting Israel? Me neither.
Now, one of us is linking examples of his grievances which you are ignoring, and the other is using a lot of confrontational language but offering nothing but anger and personal attacks. I have to admit after seeing you around I expected better.
Really, kind of obvious?
Oh wait - it doesn’t say trans. So, maybe she’s seekritly against any progress for trans rights? Hmm. I see your point. Trump definitely should have won.
See, I think that the campaign should have openly said we support LGBTQ+ issues. Well, I mean they did, but their ‘virtual silence’ on trans rights, or . . specifically not-well-off? Trans rights? . . Was apparently damning enough to let the fascists openly trash everything.
“The party that literally lost the election is trying to compromise with the party that won the election” should not be a fucking surprise to anyone who pays fucking attention to politics since the inception of parties or elections.
There are plenty of good ways to kick out Dems who are insufficient in opposition. Letting fascists win is not one of them.
What the fuck does that have to do with the opposition being literal fascists who should’ve been kept out of power?
Your examples of grievances are… Dems infighting with progressives.
That justifies letting fucking fascists win?
That’s what we’re fucking discussing, here.
That’s fucking you, right there, discussing casting a vote for a flawed neolib empty suit against a literal, open, fucking fascist.
Remember this?
I’ve got people who I love too. I’ve also got people who I don’t love, but who I’m just friends with.
My examples are that if we can hold Dems accountable for anything at all (which apparently we can’t without really, really pissing some people off) I’d think it would at least be for allowing the continuous rightward shift of the overton window, which they have actively promoted over the course of my entire adult life by their continuous fighting against progressive elements of their own party while simultaneously appeasing conservatives. I don’t really see how that could be any clearer, but I’m sure you’ll reply angrily about some unrelated thing, or otherwise impugn my intelligence, memory, or integrity. (or block me for not kowtowing)
They have dangled the “but the Republicans really can’t win this time” in front of us for decades. And yet, the exact same Republican threat (but worse!) exists the next time. Every time.
And I agree about the presence of that threat. I disagree that fighting against progressive politicians and their policies will do anything but continue to enable it.
Also, during Kamala’s campaign they were the party in power. They still sold themselves to R instead of D.
Sorry for all the edits.
So here is the crux of our disagreement.
They are going to get my vote in 2026. They can have that by default, and they will need it to have a chance in 2028.
But, you find it unreasonable that I just want them, in the next 3.5 years, to give me a reason to vote for them that is NOT derived from how bad R is? That’s just a bridge too far for me to ask of my elected representatives?
Okay? Did letting the fascists win help them more than the alternative, or hurt them more than the alternative?
I await with baited breath your answer. /s
I’m fucking disabled. I have relatives who are undocumented. Neither party is going to represent my interests adequately. But I still recognize which is going to be fucking worse.
Holy fucking shit, are you kidding me?
You said you’ve been voting Dem for 40 years. If that’s true, then you should be acutely aware of just how far left the Dems have come since the height of neolib lunacy in the 1990s.
You don’t see how… a demonstrably untrue point that you did not previously express… could be any clearer.
Okay.
HW was a step back from Reagan. McCain and Romney from Bush.
Okay?
In case you missed my last edit (which is understandable):
Sorry for all the edits.
So here is the crux of our disagreement.
They are going to get my vote in 2026. They can have that by default, and they will need it to have a chance in 2028.
But, you find it unreasonable that I just want them, in the next 3.5 years, to give me a reason to vote for them that is NOT derived from how bad R is? That’s just a bridge too far for me to ask of my elected representatives?
There are multiple problems here.
First, that it presumes that them not giving you a reason to vote for them that doesn’t sum up to “Literal fascists are bad” is, itself, a reason not to vote for them.
It is fucking not.
Votes are not a love letter. They are a strategic decision about the future of the country, made as one voice in an ocean of voices, few of whom are in total agreement with you. And if your decision ends up “Well, literal fascism is really bad… but I don’t think I’ve been woo’d enough by the non-fascists”, then you are putting a stamp of apathetic approval on fascism murdering large numbers of disadvantaged groups because of some bizarre sense of political vanity.
That is not a moral choice. It is not a reasonable choice. It’s not much more than saying that the lives of minorities are worth less than your feelings. Yes, including those that you love, and those that you are friends with.
Second, it is not unreasonable to want more out of your representatives. But it is also important to recognize how and when to get more out of your representatives. For example, building a credible third-party or interest group, or primarying some dipshit neoliberal’s ass out. Both of those require extensive groundwork.
Part of the issue, I think, is that the ultra-fucked FPTP system of the US which has led us to our two-party system has simultaneously robbed any opposition to the two parties of any sense of coalition-building or bargaining. Hence the spate of perennial four-year ‘also-ran’ presidential candidates we have to deal with.
Third, the presidency, in particular, has accumulated a wealth of unreasonable powers. Beyond questions of policy, it is vital to keep the presidency out of the hands of literal fascists because it is precisely the branch which they can do the most damage with. If the fascists had gained the House and Senate, and maintained the judiciary, we would still be at far less risk had we had some empty fucking neolib suit in the White House. Sinking a Dem Senator or Rep is far less concerning, in this light, than sinking a Dem presidency.
Fourth, despite the constant claims of speaking for the people, progressives have shown, time and time again, that we do not have the votes to win elections on our own in this fucking country. Most of the country is not as left-leaning as you or I. We have a lot of fucking work to do before “Listen to us or else!” is anything but a threat to let literal fucking fascists win.
Which means, ugly as it is, we need to be in coalition with the fucking neolibs. Primary their asses, by all means. But if the general election comes down to a Republican president or a Dem president, you better fucking be voting blue even if it’s some goddamn ghoul like Pelosi. Having the country return the more right-wing option does not signal to anyone that they should go left; it signals that the country desires to go further right, and both parties will respond as such.
if you actually believe that, you would be demanding the dnc to reach across their own damn aisle tword the progressives, funny that you always demand the opposite.
It’s possible to tell the DNC to reach across the aisle, while acknowledging that they’re still the better of the two current options even if they don’t.
We have a phrase for when enforcing your demands hurts you the most: cutting off your nose to spite your face. Letting the actual fascists win hurts us more than the people you’re trying to strong-arm.
Actually that is what I demand they do, but at that part where I finish my big speech with, “. . . right, everybody??” And turn around, you people are not there. And then they direct me to the centrists who did show up and I have to do it again.
Right, that’s why I’m an inveterate opponent of Mamdani and a staunch supporter of Pelosi. You caught me.