Even though Harris is running as a moderate, progressives are likely to get blamed for her defeat.
  • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    418·
    2 months ago

    Harris is running as a moderate Republican.

    Liz Cheney gets to speak at her events, Muslim Democrats get escorted out by security and threatened with arrest.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      1·
      2 months ago

      You appear to blatantly not know the difference between democrats and republicans in my country. You’d be wise to sit this topic out in the future.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        1·
        2 months ago

        I’m from Iowa.

        The difference between Democrats and Republicans is that Democrats will merely watch while Republicans kill me.

  • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
    224·
    2 months ago

    Really the only difference between the two factions of the US one-party state, is that one is honest about their belief that a few capitalists should own the country and everyone else can starve, and the other is better at PR. Both Obama and Biden’s cabinet were hand-picked by citibank for example, and both parties staunchly support genocide, even though the democrats occasionally try to pander to the left on it.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      12·
      2 months ago

      Lol, you people have worms in your brains. Do your actually listen to yourselves?

      Your radicalized if you believe any of this.

      Inb4: “NO U!!1!”

  • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
    111·
    2 months ago

    This is why I feel we need the republicans to fail so badley they become irrelevant. We need to make it clear that extreme right ideology is a death sentence to a party.

    • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.mlEnglish
      5·
      2 months ago

      We don’t need to wait for Republicans to not exist to get representation in government. With state level electoral reform, people would ve be free to vote for those who best represent their interests secure in the knowledge their vote would still be counted against those they don’t want in office.

  • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
    156·
    2 months ago

    Blaming progressives for Harris’ defeat would be good for a “progressive” voting bloc. The only leverage a voting bloc could ever hope to have is a credible threat to withhold a vote. Usually, those on the US “left” are not perceived as credibky threatening to withhold their vote and they can be safely ignored.

    Of course voting is itself limited. If you want to develop political power for the good of humanity you need to do more than think about voting and stay far away from the Democratic Party.

    • Flocklesscrow@lemm.eeEnglish
      101·
      2 months ago

      It’s irrelevant since the DNC has total control over which candidate percolates to any position. In other words, the DNC ensures that any “threat” is already nipped before voters have any say at all.

      Look at 2016: Debbie Wasserman-Schultz sabotaged Bernie Sanders’ campaign in broad daylight and then flounced directly to the Hillary Clinton campaign to hide under her skirt. Total fucking impunity.

      I’m glad Millennials and younger people are aware of how the machinations really work, but it’s so, so disappointing to realize how many Democrats are really just 90s era Republicans.

        • Flocklesscrow@lemm.eeEnglish
          9·
          2 months ago

          President Biden unilaterally removed thet option by refusing to get with the program, either by design or unimpeded ego, until the 11th hour had passed, and VP Harris was in by default.

          Appalled? Yes. We should be.

      • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
        73·
        2 months ago

        Oh yes, the Democratic Party is an antidemocratic capitalist party that will fight democratization to its death. There is actually an even better example, which is lefties taking over the party in Nevada via their own official process, simply organizing people to jump through the hoops Dems had set up. In response, the Dems defunded the party and built shadow campaigns with the money, then changed its rules so they could remove the lefties.

        At the same time, Americans only understand politics in terms of electoralism. So the fact that they are doing the exact opposite of what a voting block should be doing to establish itself short circuits the pro-genocide “but actually it’s smart to vote blue no matter who” self-defeating logic.

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      1·
      2 months ago

      Blaming progressives for Harris’ defeat would be good for a “progressive” voting bloc

      You are fucking scum. Working full time in other threads to sow discord, working (I believe literal) overtime to get people to vote for a candidate that will directly lead to the deaths of Palestinians as if you give a single shit about them…

      Then here you are giving the fucking game away.

      You’re working overtime to push the one thing that you know will drive a wedge between the Democratic party and progressives.

      You say this is in order to force the Democrats to lose because you think this puts progressives in a better position going forward, but I’m not even sure I believe that.

      You’re trash. Fuck off please.

      Not that it matters. Trump wins, actual progressives will have more important things to worry about such as basic survival

      • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
        1·
        2 months ago

        You are fucking scum.

        Please do your best to engage in good faith and refrain from namecalling.

        Working full time in other threads to sow discord, working (I believe literal) overtime to get people to vote for a candidate that will directly lead to the deaths of Palestinians as if you give a single shit about them…

        Sorry but no I don’t get paid to have opinions against genocide.

        You’re working overtime to push the one thing that you know will drive a wedge between the Democratic party and progressives.

        Democrats doing genocide is what creates the wedge. I am trying to get you to not accept genocide rather than go to the other side and accept it. It is bad to normalize genocide.

        You say this is in order to force the Democrats to lose because you think this puts progressives in a better position going forward, but I’m not even sure I believe that.

        No, it is because I think it is bad for everyone for you and others to normalize genocide. I am simply responding to others’ questions and points when they say things like what it means to get blamed for defeat and so on. I do not think anyone here is being organized or strategic. But they are normalizing genocide.

        You’re trash. Fuck off please.

        Please do your best to avoid namecalling.

        Not that it matters. Trump wins, actual progressives will have more important things to worry about such as basic survival

        I have already organized under several presidents, including Obama, Trump, and Biden. This “Trump sandwich” is revelatory. Of those three, it has been most difficult under Obama and Biden, as well as due to the local policies of Democrats.

        Because I apparently need to explain it, this does not mean I am saying Trump is simply “better” or you should vote for him. Remember, I don’t subscribe to “lesser evil” votes for genociders.

    • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
      812·
      2 months ago

      Too bad it’s not gonna matter, since if Trump wins, America will only have elections in the same sense that Russia does.

      • Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml
        72·
        2 months ago

        I heard this in 2016 as well, and famously, trump was voted out of office the very next election 🤔

        • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
          75·
          2 months ago

          He attempted a coup to stay in power and very nearly succeeded. He’s trying even harder this time, with many MAGAs having been placed in position to sabotage the election. Fuck your delusional head-in-the-sand dismissal of the danger he poses!

          • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
            72·
            2 months ago

            and very nearly succeeded

            How can you say this? Do you think that there’s some artifact in the Capitol that grants the power of Legitimate Governance? Do you think a dipshit protest-turned-walking-tour where the cops only saw fit to fire on like one person and only a couple of cops were killed by the rioters is enough to reverse an election in the country that is the global superpower? The country that overthrows governments abroad with much greater violence every few years?

            Is it possible that a couple of politicians would have been beaten to death? Yeah, in a somewhat different world, but the rioters did not begin to approach doing anything in the same dimension as a “successful coup”. There was no connection between what they did and what a group would need to do to take over the country, and imagining there was even anything in the Capitol that could be used for a bit of leverage (like if some pols got caught), that still wouldn’t be a coup and the feds would send SWAT in to blow some brains out.

            It’s just classic American aggrievement politics, the hogs put on a show for you so now it’s “1/6” like it’s a new 9/11 combined with the fucking burning of the White House in 1814. It was never going to amount to anything on the magnitude that you’re asserting, or even several orders of magnitude below it. There is no conflict in which like 6 people die (multiple from rank stupidity) that can connect even notionally to the outcome of overthrowing the most powerful country in the world!

            Well, unless it’s like a judicial coup or some other situation where people are exercising their political power directly, to be fair. But it’s not like Trump was doing the smarter thing and using executive orders to lay the ground for toppling the government, and even then there are so many barriers he’d need to get over that he didn’t even have the cognitive capacity back then to grapple with.

            • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
              2·
              2 months ago

              Well, unless it’s like a judicial coup or some other situation where people are exercising their political power directly, to be fair. But it’s not like Trump was doing the smarter thing and using executive orders to lay the ground for toppling the government

              Sure would be awkward if fascists with more cognitive capacity spent the last 4 years developing and publishing a strategy to do basically exactly that, to take advantage of the record breaking appointment of sympathetic federal judges, including a SCOTUS majority.

              They laughed at the idea of Hitler becoming fuhrer too.

      • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
        54·
        2 months ago

        That would be improvement so no chance lol. If Trump wins America will only have elections in the same sense that America does.

        Idk how this shit can be called “democracy” even formally, with how population density, massive gerrymandering, elector college, supreme court, disenfranchisement of vast population groups, swing states and differences in states in general influence it. And probably like a million little details i don’t even know, every time i learn a new fact about US “democracy”, any fact, it just point out a new argument why it isn’t a democracy at all.

        • ltxrtquq@lemmy.mlEnglish
          41·
          2 months ago

          At some point you just aren’t voting for people who don’t represent you and your beliefs, which is kind of what democracy is all about.

          • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
            21·
            2 months ago

            And so the candidates who are even further away from your beliefs win and decide the circumstances of your life. Democracy rewards those who cast a vote, for the winning candidate, with a say in their representation.

            Someone will represent you, faithfully or not, come inauguration. You can either mitigate the inevitable damage by voting for the capitalist stooge who believes in human rights, or you can live with the capitalist stooge who wants to be a fascist dictator and has the support of an entire political party, several billionaires, and foreign dictators.

            So long as our democracy is propped up on FPTP elections, voting lesser evil isactually kind of what it’s all about.

            • ltxrtquq@lemmy.mlEnglish
              21·
              2 months ago

              You can either mitigate the inevitable damage

              At some point we need to admit that harm reduction still means harm. At the very least, we shouldn’t berate people for looking for alternatives when the options presented would both cause unnecessary damage.

              • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
                1·
                2 months ago

                We admit that the whole time, that’s why we use the term “harm reduction” When one option would cause substantially more damage than the other, we should absolutely berate people for pushing totally ineffective alternatives that accomplish little other than increasing the probability of the worse option.

                My heart goes out to those who want a no-evil option, believe me I’m one of them. But at some point we need to admit the alternative to lesser evil is greater evil.