Donβt just vote Democrat, vote in the primaries.
If voting day was a holiday it would less of a problem
Or it won't and I'll complain online which is even better than voting, right?
Exactly. This times a million. We don't vote in primaries and then get all surprised that the Democratic candidates resemble the folks who voted in the primaries.
Yup, drag the fuckin party left.
Are we acting again like the DNC cares about people voting in primaries?
vote in the primaries.
When the party runs primaries at all, they interfere with them every chance they get. Saying "jUsT vOtE iN tHe PrImArIeS" without acknowledging this paints the results of the party's corruption as the will of the people.
That would be a nice idea, but what do you do when incumbents run unopposed in the primary
I figured that bit was obvious, I was speaking more towards the Dem leadership's hypocrisy. Again, absolutely not saying "don't vote both sides reeeeee"
Yeah didnβt the Democratic Party take credit for some shit Mamdani got done? Seemed pretty shitty since they tried to stop him from getting elected.
Yeah didnβt the Democratic Party take credit for some shit Mamdani got done?
They sure tried.
*cough*
*cough*
*coughcough*
those were two of the big ones I had in mind, yeah
Make sure you're pressuring the establishment Democrats in your jurisdiction and the people making campaign contributions.
Gang, this isn't complicated. You fight the Democratic establishment 364 days a year. On election day you pick the lesser evil, which hopefully all that fighting you did made much less evil. We have an archaic election system, and until that changes (work to change it), that's the best path forward.
In other words, voting isn't enough: it's merely the first step. After "your guys" are in power, you should bully them into keeping their promises and doing more
Remember when the vote blue no matter who people told us they were gonna move Biden left after he was elected?
Good times.
So progressive he broke a strike. So progressive he bragged about record oil production. So progressive he supported a genocide.
How do you bully people by guaranteeing your support for them unconditionally?
You only do that at the booth, and then you are vocal about the issues that matter to you. From social media to marching in the streets and everything in between
Ok then what? You yell from the rooftops βI strongly disapprove of what you are doing! I will still vote for you, but Iβm not happy about it!β
Politician: βOk good, youβre still voting for me. Well, back to the fundraising event.β
You only do that at the booth, and then you are vocal about the issues that matter to you.
yeah, I do that and I see the results. Constant abuse and accusations of being a trumper from the genocide wing. No change. Like you want.
you should bully them into keeping their promises and doing more
How?

Civics education is bad to nonexistent so they do not learn about the spoiler effect, let alone the inevitable math behind first past the post elections. People vote based on how they think the system ought to function instead of how it actually functions.
"If you don't accept genocide like I want, you don't understand how anything works!"
You like the system how it is because you get the results you want.
Because the US first past the post system ensures there's only two parties. So unless you can threaten one, you don't have input.
They don't even have FPTP. They have an electoral college. Basically more states have a larger voting power than others.
The US has both. FPTP elections, and the presidency controlled by unequal votes depending on state.
As a non-american, you aren't close enough to notice that the people who say this are taking advantage of the situation and have been for decades.
Gang, this isn't complicated. You make demands, but declare ahead of time you will not take any action to harm the Dems by not voting for them, and this give up all leverage. Then they continue to lock in GOP policies, that's tye best path forward.
Buddy, I read your dumb argument. You're surrendering on the only day that matters and wonder why you never win.
Centrists love to pretend that people who don't buy their shitty arguments are just too stupid to understand them.
He explicitly said that by declaring ahead of time that you will vote for whatever candidate they have no reason to change their establishment or respond to your "fighting" it. The only point of leverage that you have over them is not voting for them, which deprives them of the power and wealth that they're trying to seek by being elected. So, if you surrender that single point of leverage, then what does your fighting consist of?
I'd expect more than Reddit level comprehension from people on Lemmy
Yeah, but here we are with you replying to a snippet of my original point for some reason. That and othering instead of articulating a clear point. It's rough all over.
fight the Democratic establishment 364 days a year
just to be accused of supporting teh republicans? i mean i'll do it, but lets be honest: the democrat supporters aren't trying to have a good faith discussion about the shortcomings of the party.
You gotta fight from within. "I've voted Democrat and will continue to support the party, but [insert list of grievances]" plays a lot better than "I do not understand how US election work so I helped get Trump elected, now give me what I want".
Centrists interpret all criticism as βI do not understand how US election work so I helped get Trump elected, now give me what I wantβ and have never given a shit about how anyone actually voted.
Condescension will never be a substitute for policies people want, charismatic candidates, and a willingness to keep campaign promises. But since centrists don't have any of those, they go with what they have.
I hate to break it to you, but I'm left of Sanders. Understanding how our election system (poorly) functions is essential if we are ever going to fix it. Knowing is half the battle!
We have an archaic election system, and until that changes (work to change it), thatβs the best path forward.
Hey, I really don't like how you're murdering people, but I won't stop shopping at your store. I'm going to change it from the inside
"Hey I don't like that guy raping babies and blowing up school girls, but I'll just stand here and do nothing that could have stopped him, either"
When has the USA ever not been murdering people? You think not voting against the guy who murders more people is sending a message? Now we're into full on magic-based thinking.
You must have missed this part where you are making your voice heard by picking the least bad option, so here it is again:
On election day you pick the lesser evil, which hopefully all that fighting you did made much less evil.
Or maybe you're confused about how things ought to be versus how they actually are, that too was covered:
We have an archaic election system, and until that changes (work to change it), thatβs the best path forward.
On election day you pick the lesser evil
I cannot stomach voting for someone who sent billions to commit genocide with. That is my voice, and my opinion. What should I do with that on election day, you think?
Good job, the alternative that you and people like you chose by sitting around and doing nothing to prove your superiority is much better! Schoolgirls got bombed! The global markets were disrupted! Elon is a trillionaire! Environmental protections were removed and human lives were valued at 0 by the EPA! Trans people are openly punished and laws are being written to prevent them using public restrooms! Screwworms and measels are returning to the US! The entire planet hates the US (rightfully so and even more than they did before) and historic allies are turning against us! The US openly aligned with Israel and started a war for no reason!
I'm sure glad you couldn't bear the weight of voting, you're an inspirational beacon and the world thanks you for what you didn't do
You must have missed this part where you are making your voice heard by picking the least bad option
You like the part where the margin between "least bad" and "most bad" keeps narrowing.
Get called a trumper 364 days a year by people who love how much like trump the democratic establishment is constantly trying to become.
Fun story, my second-to-last straw with Reddit was being banned from r/democrats for saying Biden should not seek a second term (too old) and they need to hold a primary. I said this repeatedly starting about a year before the election and was called all manner of terrible things while accumulating loads of up and downvotes. When the time for a primary passed I pivoted my message to: Biden should retire (play up a medical issue) so we have the first female president and she has the incumbent bump for the election. I was banned with the message "Shut up, Biden is going to get a second term. Deal with it [inappropriate language]." twelve days before Biden dropped out.
Are they still refusing to admit Mamdani exists?
No, now they claim somehow that's proof their VBNMW nonsense works.
Despite Mandami showing it only goes one way
The best path forward is labor organization leading to a general strike, your vote is as worthless as your opinion
your vote is as worthless as your opinion
I love your idea of a labour union while openly telling someone's voice is useless.
My idea of a labor union doesn't involve a rigged voting system, fucking duh
By backing AOC and other progressives.
Lol fuck off
How is the United States not a democracy?
Your vote doesn't fucking matter, that's how
Is that why Trump won?
(1)In a democracy the people elect a representative of their ideology to govern them in fair elections
(2)Both parties in the US in the 21st century start wars on foreign countries, lie about policies, submit to corrupt lobbying
(3)Both parties in the US are not representative of the people of the US
(4)The US is not a democracy
Which of these is wrong?
(4) because both parties are elected to power by voters
It's a gradient. Did you get to decide who you're allowed to vote for? Do they represent your actual interests? Do you have a say over what happens in your city or your workplace?
Stuff like that
Congress very much decides what happens in cities and workplaces afaik
Well, most electors are honest about which President they vote for
Itβs so obvious the person who made this is on the left side of this picture.
Anyone who says "blue no matter who" is on the left side of this picture. And on the right politically.
I've started saying "Vote blue no matter who" to dems that think progressives can't win.
I'm a socialist and I support the Democratic party
Why? They hate you.
Not as much as Republicans would hate me
No you're not
You would know
Watch out guy,s, new wave of astroturfing incoming!!!
Ugh
"Don't punch us in the face"
"YOU WANT STABBING! I totally hate this or whatever by the way, vote facepunch no matter who."
Or, now here me out, Dems could run a platform people want to vote for?
That's the joke. The vote blue no matter who enables fascists, so saying it's what they fear is funny.
It is a bona fide depiction of what right wingers think their opposition is.
Technically, this could move in the opposite direction.
It just never does, for some reason.
It's almost like political hierarchies run by the Epstein class and centrists prefer conservatism over progress.
How could it in a dichotomy of progressivism vs conservatism? The suppressed side will always be the progressive side because progress will always threaten the elite that are propped up by the current system and the elites will almost always have unequal and overwhelming power relative to everyone else. The system is deeply flawed for you and I, but not for musk, gates, and Zuckerberg and as a result they will fight hard to keep things the same with their disproportionate amount of resources
Especially so when the flawed system is designed to create oligarchs, so even if all 900 or so billionaires died tonight theyβd rapidly be replaced (and likely lead to even more wealth concentration once the dust settles)
Extremists get their way, because they infiltrate a party of their choice and slowly move it towards their goals. They don't care if the party they root for is 100% exactly what they want, they just manipulate it and its members long enough until it does. The same could be done by the opposing side, yet somehow they decided to stay at home to "teach the dems a lesson", while waiting for the shining hero to save them all...
People might hate me for this, but i think it's not just the maga cult that is affected by the broken educational system and centuries of exceptionalist propaganda. Political parties don't change by doing nothing.
The same could be done by the opposing side
It absolutely is being done by the other side. Assuming you're describing the sides of Mossad, the CIA, the FSB, and the Guoanbu.
That said, I think you're seriously underselling the impact of strikes, boycotts, and walk outs. A party exists through it's people, and you can absolutely affect an organization when you form a large enough block that's willing to simply walk away from a corrupt and failing organization. That's a very effective way of bringing management to heel.
It absolutely is being done by the other side. Assuming youβre describing the sides of Mossad, the CIA, the FSB, and the Guoanbu.
No. Those guys are too busy influencing the Republicans and other right wing parties in the west. Although, i wouldn't be surprised if they used similar tactics, like massive bot nets and online propaganda to discourage the rest of the political spectrum from voting for other options.
That said, I think youβre seriously underselling the impact of strikes, boycotts, and walk outs.
That's part of the democratic process. You can do that, and still vote for the lesser evil. Not because it's right to vote for them, but to minimize suffering and make sure democracy still functions. Even voting for a different party would be preferable over not voting at all, despite your broken election system. At least that would give a statistical indication what people want from the government.
Instead, you now got a government that is actively trying to undermine the election process, builds internment camps for immigrants, which might be extended to political opponents pretty soon, is actively supporting a bunch of nutjobs to take over half the middle east, strips the government from all its money, threatens its allies with military action, destroys what little social security and education you guys had left, and empowers a new generation of feudalists to take over whatever will be left of the US. If it doesn't Balkanize before that...
Meanwhile, your leftists are accusing everyone not supportive of their non-voting strategy to be "genociders", and act surprised as to why they're losing even more ground in the battle.
They donβt care if the party they root for is 100% exactly what they want
You got 100% of everything you wanted as soon as the party made sure we didn't have a non-genocidal candidate to vote for. It's frankly disgusting watching the genocide-and-nothing-else wing of the party act like people who don't like murdering Palestinian children are unreasonable in any way.
Any excuse to avoid facing how voting for your shitty wing of the party got us here like you wanted.
Not until Mamdani is on the ballot. Then they will in a landslide
You did kind of tell us not to and its pointless.
We looked at your system and kind of agreed. What are you so fucking upset about?
So by you're logic, we'll never get all the way there. So we're safe.
The thing about this that really makes me ashamed of the democratic establishment is the depiction of the girl on the right vs on the left. This post is literally trying to marginalize progressives. Just look at lemmy, half the progressives here are cishet conputer programmers and Linux nerds in their 40s. This post is trying to enforce a harmful stereotype to make progressives seem like a smaller, less influencial, more radicalized group. It's already playing into bigotry: the progressive is shown as younger (ageism), with darker skin (racism), more "radical" views, as a drug addict., etc; enforcing the bias that progressives are somehow irresponsible young'uns with unrealistic world-views. Fuck this shit. Never thought I'd see something so obviously bigoted on Lemmy.
This mostly comes down to interpretation of the artists intent.
I think that it was the intent to lean into those stereotypes and emphasize that is what conservatives fear the most⦠these two groups calmly working together rather than opposing each other. Making it more subtle may not get their point across.
That's what I took away from it too. I don't see two different political spectrum people, it's people who have different concerns coming together and going "I care about this, you care about that, we can get to that with time, but we both agree, these assholes are against all of us and they gotta go."
One says "free Palestine, open borders" the other has a pride flag and a "science is real" button. But they both have "no kings" and "eat the rich" which is where they can align and take solidarity with each other against corporations and billionaires.
It's what politics are meant to be. We can debate the finer details after we take care of the people, but the well-being of everyone needs to come first no matter what.
Hell we used to have that. Not that long ago the biggest flip flop for politics was abortion vs gay rights and that was kind of it as far as the big stage "swing items" for a lot of people. But as these politicians ignored the needs of the people they've spun up more bullshit to keep people distracted while continuing to ignore more of the needs and wants of the people.
We have to come together as an American community to give standard of living to everyone and take our needs back from the fat cats absorbing the countries wealth for yachts and data centers.
Thatβs what I took away from it too. I donβt see two different political spectrum people
I see a caricature of the left from a centrist who hates them.
If centrists ever stop fighting progressives and not republicans, republicans might have something to fear.
I swear the depictions are put together by the right as a way to show how "druggie, blue haired people" are trying to take over, belittle and make them seem small. Its a horrible and incorrect stereotype.
I mean, you're not wrong about most of it. But I don't code, and am a very irresponsible progressive.
I'mma vote for the lesser of two evils. What I won't do is fist bump a republican liteα΅α΅ like they didn't torpedo every fucking progressive they could. I remember south carolina, biden was dead in the water and suddenly "centrists consolidated" and he was a fucking front runner.
Yay.
Election season.
People telling me to vote blue no matter who like I havenβt been doing that since I was 18.
And Iβm fucking old.
Not to mention the arguments. People just mad everywhere.
I love politics and donβt hate this stupid game Iβm forced to play and always lose.
What a stupid world.
Bricks.
They fear bricks.
No its, vote blue no matter who* only applicable if the said blue candidate is not progressive
and the whole fucking time we are voting in primaries, itβs all βprogressive candidates canβt win the electionβ and astroturfed lies and slander using democratic funds to hurt itself in its own confusion. want my vote? field candidates that i would vote for.
and no kings is performative at best
want my vote? field candidates that i would vote for.
I hope you still go to the polls and write-in if you don't like either candidate.
i voted harris for president, but at this point i am so disgusted with how the democrats are acting that i will vote third party if needed.
I do. I want it on record that I won't vote for right wing Democrats.
Funniest part is when Del libs tell me that the left won't vote for a woman - because I voted for De La Cruz.
Get infinite Fettermanβs with this one weird trick.
Believing in politicians is a foolβs errand.
Elect people who are scared of you.
More dem slop, they still don't understand why they can't win elections. I'd point it out for them, but they'd just scream 'blue no matter who' instead of listening.
It benefits the security state for a Dem to take the helm and lull the masses back to sleep with sweet words while continuing 99% of Trump's policies
Nah I'm sticking third party. Not like the Dems care about my state anyway or that anyone worth a damn would run in the primaries here.
Nuremberg trials.
The gallows.
Consequences to their actions.
These are things that centrist democrats have demonstrated that they are wholly uninterested in pursuing.
And they must be replaced whole cloth by insurgent left progressive candidates that grassroots organize, refused big dollar donors and door knock directly with the votors and make personal connections with them so bullshit campaign ads and mailers don't work.
Local DSA groups are where the organizing can happen.
"ANY BLUE WILL DOβ’"^*^
*Terms an conditions apply.
ANY BLUE WILL DOβ’ β TERMS AND CONDITIONS
By repeating, accepting, endorsing, or being shamed into the phrase βAny Blue Will Do,β you agree to the following Terms and Conditions.
1. Binding Obligation of the Voter
You agree that βAny Blue Will Doβ creates a total, unconditional, irrevocable, morally compulsory obligation to support any candidate designated by the Democratic Party, its consultants, donors, cable news surrogates, or random accounts with flag emojis.
Support may include voting, donating, volunteering, defending the candidate online, pretending the platform is βactually pretty progressive,β and explaining to younger voters why asking for healthcare is helping fascism.
2. Definition of βBlueβ
For purposes of this Agreement, βBlueβ means any candidate, officeholder, nominee, former Republican, ex-CIA analyst, prosecutor, donor-friendly mayor, or person who has appeared on a Democratic ballot line.
Notwithstanding the above, βBlueβ shall not include leftists, socialists, labor candidates, anti-war candidates, or anyone who causes donors to say βdeeply concerning.β
3. Institutional Discretion
The Democratic Party reserves the sole, exclusive, perpetual, and non-reviewable right to decide when βAny Blue Will Doβ applies.
This determination may be made before, during, or after the election; in a closed-door meeting; through a leaked memo; or retroactively after the wrong kind of Democrat wins.
4. Primary Election Exceptions
Although βAny Blue Will Doβ may appear to imply neutrality among Democrats, nothing shall prevent the Party from promoting, funding, endorsing, defending, or quietly coordinating for any candidate deemed sufficiently Normal.
The Party may intervene against left-wing candidates through endorsements, donor pressure, debate exclusion, ballot challenges, super PACs, whisper campaigns, consultant networks, or sudden concerns about electability.
Such actions shall not violate βAny Blue Will Do,β because leftists should have known what the phrase meant.
5. Electability Clause
You agree that βelectabilityβ means whatever the Party needs it to mean at the time.
A moderate losing by six points proves the country is center-right.
A leftist losing by six points proves progressive politics are permanently toxic.
A moderate winning narrowly is a mandate for bipartisan austerity.
A leftist winning decisively is a local anomaly.
6. Vote-Shaming Rights Reserved
The Party, its affiliates, surrogates, influencers, and emotionally exhausted liberals reserve the right to shame, scold, guilt, condescend to, or morally indict you for any failure to provide enthusiastic support.
This right survives all prior mistreatment, broken promises, ignored policy demands, abandoned constituencies, donor triangulation, union-busting, war funding, anti-immigrant pivoting, or sabotage of your preferred candidate.
Your obligation to vote blue remains in full force regardless of whether the Party has made any effort to earn your vote.
7. No Reciprocal Duty
Nothing in this Agreement creates any reciprocal obligation on the part of the Democratic Party to support candidates, policies, platforms, movements, voters, unions, tenants, students, debtors, the uninsured, the unhoused, the anti-war left, or anyone who has ever said the word βmaterial.β
The voterβs duty is mandatory.
The Partyβs duty is aspirational, symbolic, non-binding, means-tested, subject to committee review, and likely dead on arrival in the Senate.
8. Platform Disclaimer
Any platform, promise, slogan, campaign speech, town hall answer, website bullet point, or βwe hear youβ statement is non-binding promotional material.
The Party may abandon, dilute, reframe, study, means-test, postpone, sunset, privatize, or blame the parliamentarian for any stated policy objective.
No voter shall infer from campaign rhetoric the existence of an actual commitment.
9. Leftist Candidate Contingency
In the event that a leftist wins a Democratic primary, βAny Blue Will Doβ may be suspended, modified, inverted, or replaced with:
βWe need a serious candidate.β
βThis district is more moderate than people think.β
βWe have concerns about temperament.β
βThey havenβt built relationships.β
βThe tweets are problematic.β
βThis is not the right time.β
βWe need someone who can win.β
The Party may further reserve the right to remain neutral, quietly assist the opponent, withhold funding, or discover a sudden principled objection to party loyalty.
10. Consultant Protection Clause
No provision of this Agreement shall endanger the sacred right of consultants to be paid millions of dollars to lose winnable races while advising candidates to say nothing, offend no donors, avoid popular economic policies, and appear in diners wearing rolled-up sleeves.
Consultant compensation shall not be contingent on winning elections.
11. Donor Supremacy Clause
In the event of a conflict between voters and donors, donors shall prevail.
In the event of a conflict between the platform and donors, donors shall prevail.
In the event of a conflict between democracy and donors, a task force shall be convened after the election.
12. Unity
You agree that βunityβ means left-wing voters supporting the nominee chosen by the Party.
You further agree that βdivisionβ means left-wing voters asking for anything in return.
Calls for unity may be issued immediately after the Party has spent months calling your candidate unelectable, dangerous, unserious, divisive, unrealistic, toxic, radical, online, or insufficiently grateful.
13. Harm Reduction
You acknowledge that harm reduction is extremely important and shall be invoked whenever the Party requires your vote.
You further acknowledge that harm reduction shall not require the Party to reduce harm when doing so would inconvenience donors, police unions, defense contractors, pharmaceutical companies, fossil fuel interests, private insurers, landlords, or anyone described as a βstakeholder.β
14. Democracy Preservation Clause
You agree that democracy is on the ballot in every election.
You further agree that democracy may be preserved through ballot access litigation, superdelegate influence, donor consolidation, debate manipulation, primary interference, and stern editorials about the dangers of populism.
Any contradiction shall be resolved in favor of the Party.
15. Waiver of Expectations
By accepting these Terms, you waive any expectation that your vote, organizing, small-dollar donations, canvassing, or repeated emergency mobilization shall entitle you to policy concessions, appointments, accountability, respect, or basic recognition as part of the coalition.
You may be thanked in fundraising emails.
16. Amendment Rights
The Democratic Party reserves the right to amend these Terms at any time without notice.
Amendments may be announced by think tank memo, anonymous senior aide quote, cable news panel consensus, donor retreat, consultant Substack, or sudden redefinition of what βrealisticβ means.
Continued existence under Republican threat shall constitute acceptance of all amended Terms.
17. Enforcement
This Agreement shall be enforced exclusively against voters to the left of the nominee.
No enforcement mechanism shall apply to conservative Democrats, corporate Democrats, swing-district moderates, billionaire donors, retired generals, anti-choice incumbents, oil-state senators, police-union candidates, or anyone who says βkitchen table issuesβ while opposing the policies that would help people afford kitchens or tables.
18. Remedies
If you violate this Agreement by withholding support, criticizing the nominee, supporting a primary challenger, asking for concessions, mentioning Gaza, saying βuniversal healthcare,β objecting to means-testing, or pointing out that the Party did the opposite of what it demanded from you, remedies may include:
vote-shaming, accusations of privilege, accusations of Russian influence, lectures about 2016, screenshots of Supreme Court decisions, demands that you βgrow up,β comparisons to Republicans, and fundraising emails addressed to βFriend.β
These remedies apply regardless of whether your criticism is accurate.
19. Entire Agreement
These Terms constitute the entire agreement between the Democratic Party and the voter, superseding all prior hopes, movements, promises, platforms, speeches, donations, canvassing shifts, and moments when you briefly believed this relationship might become less abusive.
By proceeding, you acknowledge that βAny Blue Will Doβ means any blue will do for you, not for them.
20. Acceptance
By voting, not voting, considering voting, discussing voting, posting, lurking, donating, organizing, complaining, or failing to clap loudly enough, you agree to be bound by these Terms and Conditions.
No purchase necessary.
No refunds.
Void where democracy is practiced.
Iβve seen less verbose comments from cowbee.
Yeah I probably need a better presentation, but as stock its got legs I think.
I know you wrote this whole thing yourself because thatβs just who you are but it gives off massive ai vibes.
Yeah I need to work shop it. Like the point was to be overly verbose, but I don't think the presentation works. I like the idea though even though maybe I didn't stick the landing. Anything in particular that gave off AI vibes? Most of this is just me regurgitating accusations I've made of you. Actually, now thinking about it, I should have slipped an easter egg in there for you to find later.
This is a hilarious bit if you actually read contracts
Working up a gif version
Fascists are not scared of being voted out lmao.
With patience, you when. If your stance is unchanging, and you just chip away, taking every little bit of power as you can, constantly angling for a best strategic position, you will win.
Fascist will always have a chance, they're not scared of being out voted. They're scared of the working class digging their asses out of their heads and realizing what's up.
That being said, absolutely still vote.
at GITMO they refuse to show this pic to inmates because itβs considered torture.
Good job OP, you earned your label.
Ok who you gonna vote for?
De La Cruz
If the candidate is a progressive, will you?
Thank you for admitting that "vote blue no matter who" means "vote only for centrists."
Implying the zoomer isn't also atheist?
Probably, but maybe not as vocally as the cishet ally with a "SCIENCE IS REAL" bumper sticker on her ass.
The chad nonbinary anarcho-socialist knows that science is a real methodology and not a belief system to stand behind, and doesn't need to broadcast it.
I'm pretty jaded and cynical about the whole thing at this point, but I also don't have a better idea. Idk, just do whatever you think is right.
Vote "Someone turns off the simulation" 2028
Fascists are scared of a lot of things, but this isn't one of them. One camp uses a degree of class analysis, while the other is aggressively identitarian and thinks class politics are the hallmark of a bad person who'll abandon marginalized groups.
Both rely chiefly on electoral wins to get the outcome they want. This alliance is a paper tiger.
Yeah, one of the few things fascists don't fear is voting blocs, because they're just interested in seizing power by any means necessary.
If you want to know why lefties lose you need only look at the comments critical of this post.
It's absolutely valid to be displeased by how center or right-leaning the "left-wing" candidates are. But you have to accept that only supporting your perfect candidate is just going to keep pushing all candidates to the right as they lose.
Uh no, declaring you'll vote for any candidate slightly less right wing than Hitler allows all candidates to go right.
That's the entire idea behind "no matter who." The intended outcome is two identical nazi parties.
There can be a strategic approach with more nuance than either you or the graphic are expressing. I live overseas but have to vote in California as it was the last state I was resident. I haven't voted for Dems (only independents) since 2008. If my residence were in Ohio or Florida, I would vote blue. Some localities offer the luxury of protest voting without the risk of shooting yourself in the foot. That said, if Democrats can be secure in pragmatists voting for the lesser evil, they have absolutely no reason not to be evil themselves.
Itβs absolutely valid to be displeased by how center or right-leaning the βleft-wingβ candidates are.
But you aren't.
But you have to accept that only supporting your perfect candidate
Stop framing a candidate that supports genocide as 'not your perfect candidate' just because any genocide supporter is your perfect candidate.
I absolutely love how this objectively true statement gets ratio'd every single time on here. Like I know 163 children who are so happy people can sniff their own farts in a safe-ish country.
Like their deaths are literally on the hands of the over privileged fuck nuts that claim they're superior by :: checks my notes:: sitting at home and doing fuck all nothing.
"Objectively true" lol cope
According to fucking who? Dems also support Israel dumbass
Remind me, but I don't think Harris and Walz were campaigning on building a resort in Gaza after Trump campaigned on funding Israel.
Like, you can correlate support all you want, but one side was not even close to the other. I also don't think Harris and Walz were going to wage an illegal war on Iran, thus crippling the world economy. But hey, that's just me. I'm sure we're all better off with Trump as President, right?
Your dumbass opinion is the problem. "I'm not going to vote for this person because their healthcare plan doesn't go far enough" while letting the other person win as he completely guts whatever healthcare you have left. So instead of something, you'd rather nothing.
This is why America is fucked, and I just kick my feet up and watch.
You act like anyone who opposes your only policy is a nonvoter because you will never listen to anyone not named netanyahu.
Or we can complain about candidates without people acting like itβs a whole propaganda campaign.
The people I know that didnβt vote arenβt people I would consider the left, or the person on the right. Most of them liked rfk ffs. They are non political and ignorant. They might stand by social issues but they donβt actually understand or know politics.
If you want to know why lefties lose

Found the person who doesn't vote but bitches about their representation anyway.
Uhhh... Who wants to tell this idiot I'm not American.
Anyone? It'll be hilarious.
Your candidates are not merely imperfect, they are monstrous and should be summarily executed
Genocide isn't mere "imperfection" just because you love anyone who commits it.

Lol good luck with that
Republicans are usually the only people I see echo this.
Siri define 'the ratchet effect'
Downvoted for being right
See, Kamala is the 'least harm' candidate because she [checks notes] will literally continue Bidens genocide while pivoting to the right to bring in those mythical undecideds. Slay kween.

So step back and look back 't the last 50 years of American politics and ask yourself: when has it stopped moving to the right
Centrists will never understand that there are people who don't like genocide.
Purity testing is a good thing, it keeps shit out of our milk and corrupt assholes out of our elected offices
"Purity test" means "I have no standards and I demand you abandon yours."
Oh boy, the Republican consultants are here to convince people to vote blue no matter who. That way, some milquetoast Dem candidate will get annihilated by the Republican candidate again.
See how stupid that makes me sound?
Can you people just once actually engage with counter-arguments rather than trying to sweep people's points under the rug by saying, oh you're a bot, oh you're a shill, oh you're Chinese or Russian or Republican or NSA or FBI or you're the deep state, holy fuck. You sound like someone from /pol/. Protip: refusing to address the argument and instead say that junk makes it look like you have no real argument. I'm starting to think you're the real bot here, bot! Haha see I called you a shill, that means your argument is invalid
Insert screaming accusations of being a Tankie / Russian Bot / Secret Trump Supporter
We all need to vote in the primaries like it's our job.
When the party permits primaries to happen.
When we can rely on centrists to vote blue even when the primary winner is one of the progressives they hate almost as much as they hate the idea of a living Palestinian, then they can tell us to vote blue no matter who, and not one fucking second before.
We saw the disgusting racist attacks the centrist wing made against Mamdani. Centrists haven't changed one bit since they formed a PAC to get McCain elected because they didn't want a Black man to be their nominee. Centrists are "vote blue no matter who" only until they don't get 100% of everything they want, then they revert back to "party unity my ass" and campaign for shit like Cuomo.
The message here is the same as always from centrists: Shut up and fall in line because we hate you and always will.

Yeah no. You wanna know why so many progressives are getting nominations this cycle? It's because we didn't "vote blue no matter who" last year and the corpocrats are kind of realizing they're gonna have to budge to actually get people to the polls again. Vote for the person you... want to vote for.
Itβs because we didnβt βvote blue no matter whoβ last year
If you want to draw a line from not voting blue to more progressives getting nominations then you have to skip the inconvenient side effect of having a fascist child rapist felon as president who's not going to allow a free election.
Well done.
Didn't say it was preferable or even good, but it is the reason the DNC is tepidly allowing outspoken socialists on their ticket when just ten years ago they were collaborating with Trump to take out Sanders. They can sense that corporate support is going away and that their voters wont bother to show up if the candidates are no different than the last guy
Didnβt say it was preferable or even good, but it is the reason the DNC is tepidly allowing outspoken socialists on their ticket when just ten years ago they were collaborating with Trump to take out Sanders.
They're not "allowing" anything. They're still doing everything they can to block progressive candidates. It's just stopped working.
Itβs because we didnβt βvote blue no matter whoβ last year
You 100% fucking did. That's why Mikie Sherrill and Abigail Spanberger are governors.
We had a choice between Sherrill and Ciattarelli. I think even in spite of how useless she's been and how she's been handling Delaney Hall, we made the better choice.
no thnx, thats how you end up with bluemaga and the uniparty
Why am I zero percent surprised that the account calling Ukrainians Nazis also wants to put the Republicans in charge?
Get mean vote green
Yeah, theyβre terrified of Fetterman, Manchin, Schumer, etc.
What's the difference?
Changing the majority party means even if there are shit heads, we won't be having votes to make everything worse. The reason Trump gets away with all his shit is because Johnson is there to cover for him in the house and Thune in the Senate. Even Schumer would do a better job than Thune, with a few assholes in the party.
Even if you don't like the shit heads like Fetterman, Manchin or Lieberman, they give the party a majority to put a stop to the rightward ratcheting of our politics. The time to get rid of them is during primaries, that's how you turn the ratchet back.
But they donβt. They donβt give the democrats a majority if they keep voting with republicans.
And we saw how Obama sat on his hands for two years while Dems had a supermajority. Then when republicans had control of congress, gee golly gosh, the mean republicans wonβt let us have single payer. Now take this health care plan written by The Heritage Institute and like it.
And NAFTA. And the Biden crime bill. And the Clinton welfare reform.
Theyβre just republicans with blue ties and pride flag pins.
As though any centrist wouldn't gleefully vote for any of those as long as they were running against someone who wanted to raise the minimum wage.
A totally real humanβ’
Who's the artist? If anyone knows
AI with edits, or they didn't want to credit themselves.
A fucking robot
Future dictator surely approves!
You mean Jill Stein, the lich who shambles oit of her crypto every 4 years to spend Russian money and steal votes away from the Democratic candidate?
She's a ducking Russian troll, dude.russia pays her.
The people mad at this post, unironically and without any self awareness, also get mad about "both sides ism" and complain that the left isn't a unified front.
Well, it's slop. I can't blame people for feeling revulsion
Definitely intended it to agitate.
Democrats are alright. Maybe not the national ones but the ones that help out locally
If voting worked, they wouldn't let you do it.
The Republicans sure are trying to prevent it right now for November. Because they know it still works.
The SAVE America Act Is A Throwback To Jim Crow Voter Suppression
If voting worked, they would do everything to discourage people from voting. Oh, wait...
the genocide wing either doesn't realize or doesn't care that their actions do exactly this. And then they blame the voters they insisted they didn't need when they lose to the other genocidal candidate they're happy with.
Not voting leads to extremist parties gaining ground, because extremists will always vote for their option. Which in turn leads to people suffering under their policies at best, and at worst to situations like Nazi Germany. Which makes the whole genocide argument look kinda performative.
If you want people to vote for you, act like they're people with agency and not just vending machines that dispense votes when you kick them hard enough.
Or keep losing. You seem to like losing.
Good idea, commenters. Lets keep fighting each other about the perfect candidate for an election that already happened. Surely this will change the situation were in
You got your perfect candidate as soon as no one who opposed genocide was running.
What about someone who opposes genocide but was on the Epstien list? Also perfect by your comment.
So someone who opposes genocide but agrees with racial segregation and removing homosexual rights is a perfect in your book?
You bigot
Lets keep fighting each other about the perfect candidate
I genuinely wonder what you think a primary involves.
Like, do all the candidates just hug it out?
I genuinely wonder what you think a primary involves.
It involves installing a pro-genocide candidate without asking anyone.
for an election that already happened
Good job just leaving half a sentence out to fit your narrative. Very cool
@lemmy.world
This is the place to be on the interweb when Reddit irreversibly becomes a meme itself and implodes
If you are existing mods from r/dankmemes, you should be mod here too, kindly DM me on either platform
The many rules inherited from
go to feed...
@lemmy.world
This is the place to be on the interweb when Reddit irreversibly becomes a meme itself and implodes
If you are existing mods from r/dankmemes, you should be mod here too, kindly DM me on either platform
The many rules inherited from
go to feed...
Unless the candidate is a progressive, then the establishment Dems won't endorse them (unless the progressive wins, then suddenly they totally supported the progressive all along)
(no, I'm not saying don't vote, just frustrated by the fucking hypocrisy)
save