Bernie Sanders urges left to back Biden to stop ‘very dangerous’ Trump ( www.theguardian.com )

Leftwing senator advises ‘unification of progressive people in general’ because threat from Republican ex-president is too great

Progressive US voters must unite behind Joe Biden rather than consider any of his Democratic primary challengers because the threat of another Donald Trump presidency is too great, Bernie Sanders has said.

“We’re taking on the … former president, who, in fact, does not believe in democracy – he is an authoritarian, and a very, very dangerous person,” the senator and Vermont independent, who caucuses with Democrats, said on NBC’s Meet the Press. “I think at this moment there has to be unification of progressive people in general in all of this country.”

Sanders’ remarks came as Trump continued grappling with more than 90 criminal charges across four separate indictments filed against him for his efforts to forcibly nullify his defeat to Biden in the 2020 presidential race, his illicit retention of classified documents, and hush-money payments to porn actor Stormy Daniels.

Despite the unprecedented legal peril confronting him, Trump enjoys a commanding lead over his competitors in the Republican presidential primary, polls show.

And though polling for now shows Biden generally is ahead of Trump, that has not stopped Robert F Kennedy Jr and Marianne Williamson from mounting long-shot Democratic primary challenges – or third-party progressive candidate Cornel West from running.

Sanders himself was the runner-up for the Democratic nomination in the 2016 White House race won by Trump and in 2020, with West among his supporters. But Sanders this time quickly endorsed Biden’s re-election campaign, a decision which prompted West to accuse him of only backing Biden because he is “fearful of the neo-fascism of Trump”.

The senator responded to that criticism on Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union, saying, “Where I disagree with my good friend Cornel West is – I think, in these really very difficult times, there is a real question whether democracy is going to remain in the United States of America.

“You know, Donald Trump is not somebody who believes in democracy, whether women are going to be able to continue to control their own bodies, whether we have social justice in America, [whether] we end bigotry.”

Sanders didn’t elaborate, but his remarks seemed to be an allusion to the Trump White House’s creation of the US supreme court supermajority, which last year struck down the federal abortion rights that the Roe v Wade decision had established decades earlier.

That court also struck down race-conscious admissions in higher education as well as a Colorado law that required entities to afford same-sex couples equal treatment, among other decisions lamented by progressives.

“Around that, I think we have got to bring the entire progressive community to defeat Trump – or whoever the Republican nominee will be – [and] support Biden,” Sanders added on State of the Union.

Sanders nonetheless said he planned to push Biden to tackle “corporate greed and the massive levels of income and wealth inequality” across the US. On Meet the Press, he suggested he would urge Biden to “take on the billionaire class”.

Those comments came about four months after Sanders called on the US government to confiscate 100% of any money that Americans make above $999m, saying people with that much wealth “can survive just fine” without becoming billionaires.

notannpc ,

It would be cool if we had another candidate that didn’t suck instead of relying, once again, on voting for anyone but Trump.

Because I don’t think most people are voting FOR Biden, as much as they are voting AGAINST Trump.

Poggervania ,
@Poggervania@kbin.social avatar

It was the same in the 2016 Elections too. Most left-leaning people I talked to did not want Hillary in office, but they wanted Trump not in office more than Hillary - so a vote for Hillary it was.

Honestly, both parties fucking suck, and it sucks even more that our options are literally “right-leaning centrists” and “fascism”.

doctordevice ,

Neoliberals need to get this through their head: a sizeable minority of us do not like the Democratic Party and don’t believe we are represented by them, regardless of whatever empty rhetoric they spew. Sizeable enough that you can lose elections without us. We are not a long-term reliable voting bloc and you need to learn tactics other than bullying and fear-mongering to get your way.

To abuse a metaphor, Hillary Clinton and her primary shenanigans were the straw that broke my back. Donald Trump and what he represented was bad enough that I managed to muster enough energy to vote for Hillary in 2016 and Biden in 2020. But I’m tired, and if I’m able to muster the energy for 2024 it’ll be the last time. I’m done voting for people that I do not want to be my president. It doesn’t have to be a progressive, but give me someone I can stomach or you can leave me out of your election math.

And the tired refrain of “Biden is the most progressive president ever” isn’t a consolation prize, it’s salt in the wound.

Uranium3006 ,
@Uranium3006@kbin.social avatar

once the republican party dies, the democratic party is in big trouble for exactly this reason.

burntbutterbiscuits ,

He isn’t though. By a long shot. Biden is right of center

doctordevice ,

I agree, that’s why that phrase is salt in the wound. It’s said by neoliberals who themselves are right of center but don’t realize it. They seem to think it’s supposed to make progressives feel better.

affiliate ,

it’s interesting to think about the damage trump has done to the progressive movement simply by “commandeering” 3 election cycles in that way. because the consequences of him winning are so catastrophic, we’ll end up with 12 years of presidents that were either trump or centrists hailed as the best way to beat him. just to clarify, i’m not trying to downplay the damage he’s done in other ways, nor how terrible it would be if he were elected

i wonder how much easier it would have been to elect a progressive if the past 3 republican nominees had been evil in a more mild and traditional way.

abraxas ,

You say that, but Biden dominated the Primary in 2020. I wanted Warren. I’d have been ok with Bernie. But I have to admit, Biden just had so many more votes.

The US is filled with conservatives. Most Democratic voters are simply sane conservatives. Biden is their idea of a good candidate. An economic neoliberal that believes in modest safety nets and personal freedom when not at the expense of others. More importantly, he believes in compromise (something Democrats need because their constituents are not single-issue voters, and often have different opinions on the issues)

It would be cool if more people were more progressive in the US. But the media doesn’t really want to make that possible.

VolatileExhaustPipe ,

Even if you take the parliamentarian, electoralist position about the primary in 2020 then you have to look at the structures and power bases before you can (potentially rightful) stretch the result to opinions.

Party internal politics mean that there will often be votes being cast strategically influenced by functionaries, mandated people and the old guard.

SpaceCowboy ,
@SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca avatar

That’s all democracy ever is. A check to keep the worst people from being in power. Non-democracies don’t have this, you have to use violence to remove bad people from power. And most likely die trying to do it.

They really should tech in schools how voting really works. Figure out who the worst one is, and vote for the one that is most likely to beat the worst one. You never get everything you want in one election cycle, you have to keep on voting again and again and over a few decades you get some progress. It sucks but it’s better than the alternatives.

That’s why voting is a duty, it sucks, but you have to do it.

Zagorath ,
@Zagorath@aussie.zone avatar

Are you aware that voting systems other than First Past the Post exist?

emergencyfood ,

Are you confusing democracy with first-past-the-post voting? Democracy is rule by, or at least for, the people. First-past-the-post is a very old, simple and rather primitive way of choosing representatives that, as you said, is just a ‘check to keep the worst people from being in power’. Newer, more representative systems such as proportional representation and approval voting are better at choosing actually good parties / candidates.

Ensign_Crab ,

That’s all democracy ever is. A check to keep the worst people from being in power.

I think ours might be broken.

grayman ,

They should run Obama. Not that one. The other one. But Hillary would probably have her murdered.

norbert ,
@norbert@kbin.social avatar

At least she'd lose a few voters by doing it, not like some other clowns eh?

grayman ,

The whole thing is a circus. All clowns.

MisterFrog ,
@MisterFrog@lemmy.world avatar

There’s a lot of things to march on the street for, but too be honest as an outsider, national voting reform to bring in a truly democratic system (not first past the post…) needs to be at the top of the list.

So many things broken in your political system flows from it.

VolatileExhaustPipe ,

You know I’ve been here the whole time, you could leverage the same critique in 1998 and yet wouldn’t have gotten a proper voting reform. The point is for that you need a lot of power and that power you don’t get currently.

Your idea is: Lets create the system so that we get more power, to do that we need enough power to change the system. You see how that is a reverse order?

If that isn’t the way forward as strategic goal (since it was tried for decades and there was no success in changing it), what specific goals can you personally do to create power? Power that can benefit your community and possibly the world (just so that no nationalistic takes are posed as solutions).

DougHolland ,
@DougHolland@lemmy.ml avatar

Everywhere I go I’m usually the oldest person in the room, and I’ve been hearing that line since long before I’d ever heard of Donald Trump.

Always, the left has to support whatever bland middle-of-the-road candidate the Democrats put forward, candidates who seem idea-free and utterly without passion, because the Republicans have a terrifying candidate. Gotta take boring over terrifying.

And Bernie’s right. I ain’t arguing.

Sure is a bucket of swill we’re always forced to drink from, though.

sab ,
@sab@kbin.social avatar

I guess the important thing is that one should do other things in addition to voting for the bland somewhat shitty candidate that's at least better than the other guy.

Unionising and getting involved on the local level are two good starting points. Encouraging others to unionise and to get involved locally is also good.

Oh, and reading up on alternative election systems and teaching people about it would be good, but maybe too ambitious. Who wants to listen to anyone ramble on about ranked choice or whatever.

Rbon ,
@Rbon@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

This is the correct answer that so few of us realize. We as a people are able to do more than one thing at once. Yes, we should still vote for the lesser of 2 evils, AND we should also make progress to improve the system itself.

sik0fewl ,

I think yours are better points, but also: voting in the primaries. I'm sure Bernie would support a more progressive candidate as well!

Nihilore ,
@Nihilore@lemmy.world avatar

Just show them the CGP Grey videos, they’d short and entertaining way to introduce people to alternative voting systems

asteriskeverything ,

Just to clarify that this is something that happened often for primaries? That’s new to me, even the primaries for 2020 election it didn’t seem to have that outright pressure and just politicians and people in public eye endorsing one or the other.

The talk of even if you don’t like then vote for them cuz other is worse I only heard really leading up to presidential election.

For what it is worth though I do not watch the news or talking heads and never have, I always prefer reading articles, so maybe I’m just out of the loop on that part of our culture.

SkyezOpen ,

This is why I, at the time, was sort of happy that trump won. I hoped that dems losing what they thought was a sure win to an assclown like trump would make them shape up and put forward some actual candidates that the people could truly get behind. Instead they doubled down with milquetoast shitlibs. We’re never going to get out of this rut of voting for the lesser evil without ranked choice voting.

btaf45 ,

You don't understand how politics works if you thought that Convicted Sex Offender Treason Trump winning in 2016 would result in anything other than Biden winning the nomination in 2020. The first thing literally guaranteed the 2nd thing.

abraxas , (edited )

I know this is the wrong server to say it, but there were some things I liked about Hillary. I am still convinced that her gender played far more of a role in people’s hatred of her than they will ever be able to accept.

Yes, she’s still a neo-liberal, but she’s further left than most of the Democrats, and we consistently see that the supermajority of non-Republican voters are simply not as progressive as most of us are. Hillary had a well-conceived labor plan and respected unions. She liked the idea of single-payer, if not enough to spend too much political capital on it. She was left of Obama and of Biden, if still to the right of her “progressive” so-called roots.

Here’s my non-opinionated counterpoint. Trump bested Hillary on Labor when his plan was “kick out immigrants and deregulate coal so you get your dangerous job back”, and she had a 100 page labor plan that involved things like subsidized retraining of coal workers. The Democrats have learned that you will not win Labor by favoring them. A bad lesson.

VolatileExhaustPipe ,

and respected unions.

X: [Doubt]

Nonameuser678 ,
@Nonameuser678@aussie.zone avatar

Y’all really need to reform your voting system. We have a preferential system over here in Australia. It’s not perfect but it feels like our democracy is a lot more robust and diverse because of it.

Marketsupreme ,

Man wouldn’t that be great. Half the country wants ranked choice voting but the ones in power don’t actually represent us they represent who is paying them.

scroll_responsibly ,
@scroll_responsibly@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

the ones in power

If the “ones in power” represent those who are paying them… maybe the ones in power are the ones doing the paying?

Marketsupreme ,

That is exactly correct.

Enkrod ,

When you have two parties in power that would both lose from a more representative system, how do you go about getting better representation?

Jaysyn ,
@Jaysyn@kbin.social avatar

The Democrats passed RCV in Maine. The banned it in Florida.

These two things are not the same.

Enkrod ,

Oh I absolutely agree, one party wants a capitalist dystopia while the other pushes for a genocidal fascist hellscape with an out of control climate and the return of Jim Crow or worse.

Democrats are by far the better alternative, but can the Democratic National Convention be trusted to implement a voting system that would see them face competition from the left? Don’t rely on them, people need to push it hard in addition to voting.

AngryCommieKender , (edited )

Then be your own Goldie Wilson. Run yourself. Enough of my neighbors have told me that I should run, that I am even though I don’t believe I am qualified.

I’m running for city council, but if I win in 2026, the fascist that currently holds the chair, and constantly complains about it, won’t be attempting to actively harm the community the way they currently are.

Also if I win, and continue winning the 2 terms of city council, 2 terms of mayor, then I’m done, because I’ll be 60 at that point and served 16 years in government. At most they could get another term or two out of me as a state level senator or representative. I’m not sticking around past my 60s. Got too much to do.

feminalpanda ,
@feminalpanda@lemmings.world avatar

I think a big part is that progress is slow, I want it faster but as the old generation dies off we will get further left politicians but also right so hopefully with internet and general empathy we can overcome conservatives.

burntbutterbiscuits ,

I’ve stopped voting for the worst of two evils. I leave it blank.

StarServal ,
@StarServal@kbin.social avatar

I had this whole long post typed up but decided it all boiled down to this:

Fuck you. Give us better candidates. Populism is winning because you keep giving us disgusting ultimatums. Do better.

Bernie_Sandals ,

You know the Democratic Party isn’t a monolith right? It’s voters decide mostly who is in charge. If people want a candidate other than Biden they can vote for them in the primary.

Since no viable candidates have shown up, Biden is the best option for now

StarServal ,
@StarServal@kbin.social avatar

If they need to threaten voters with ultimatums, then they’re not doing good enough.

agamemnonymous ,
@agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works avatar

Cool, but we have FPTP elections, so the choice will always be the lesser evil of the two front runners. Of course a real alternative would be preferable, but until we have a fundamentally different voting paradigm, ultimatums are a mathematical certainty.

Wogi ,

They know that. They plan for it. They don’t want any actual liberals to run so the game is rigged against them from the start

Fuck them. They have absolutely no incentive to pass meaningful change and so the country will continue to swing further and further to the right, as bit by bit the conservatives sweep more of the government under their control.

The Democrats are contributing to the problem.

buddascrayon ,

It is true that the game is rigged. The DNC has a pretty good grip on its own primary process. That said, Bernie made pretty amazing headway into their ranks despite the rigging largely due to people actually engaging the process instead of sitting on their ass whining about how unfair the process it.

You don’t like how the system is being run, join any one of the many coalitions who’ve formed up to change it. Or start your own. And if you aren’t up do doing that much, then go the fuck to the poles and vote for who they choose because otherwise the GOP wins and takes over the god damned country in the name of racism, religious hegemony, and oligarchy.

Wogi ,

I’m a big fan of a different option

buddascrayon ,

Having a different opinion is fine, sitting there whining about how awful the Democratic party is well bemoaning the horrors that the Republican party is visiting upon our country and people while doing absolutely fucking nothing to help stop any of it is just pathetic.

Wogi ,

Option. Not opinion.

Throw all your weight behind the Democrats if you like, it will only delay an inevitable descent to the fascist religious hegemony the Republicans clearly want. The current state of the DNC is such that no meaningful legislation is possible, no leftward progress will happen.

The game is rigged against you. The ruling class like it that way. As long as you’re in the working class, if you’re playing by the rules they’ve set it for you, you’re playing to lose.

ReadFanon ,
@ReadFanon@lemmygrad.ml avatar

I’m sorry but the math on this doesn’t check out.

You’re saying that we must join coalitions whose intent is to change the system or we must vote for the Democratic nominee, otherwise we are supporting the GOP?

If not voting for the Democratic nominee is support for the GOP then how isn’t joining a coalition to undermine DNC power support for the GOP?

I don’t understand this logic.

AngryCommieKender ,

Oh they want liberals. Remember, liberals are just “moderates”, making them conservative-lite. The don’t want progressives. That’s why they buried Bernie

bonus_crab ,

it is a monolith though. Courts ruled after 2016 that the DNC can’t defraud voters or candidates because they aren’t required to have a fair primary. Their lawyers argued in court that they should be allowed to select a winner undemocratically, and won.

link

Natanael ,

That’s because the party isn’t a government institution, and candidates can run as independent (which does lower their chances, but the law don’t care about that part)

prole , (edited )
@prole@sh.itjust.works avatar

Not sure why this comment is downvoted, you’re not wrong. It might not be ideal, but it’s the truth

bloodfart ,

its because lemmy (and reddit) votes are just a “does this make you feel good” button.

AngryCommieKender ,

Then show up. You’d be better than what we’ve got. Lord knows that since 4 of my neighbors told me independently of each other that I should run for city council, I’m looking into running for city council, and I would be the first to tell you that I am not qualified, which seems to be exactly why they think I am qualified.

Bernie_Sandals ,

Already volunteering in local county politics to push my little slice of the democrats to be more radical, about a third of them already support Bernie in the rural south so I’d like to think it’s going well.

Will most likely run soonish but that’s a tall task down here.

AngryCommieKender ,

Good luck!

MoistMogwai ,

Not to mention, thanks to the electoral college there are only 5 to 8 states that actually get to decide who is President. My current State has voted for a Republican every year since 1964. I would have had to have been born in 1943 to have a fraction of my vote count nationally. I still vote, but I live in a State where I might as well write in someone I believe in for President. If Biden wins, that’s better than Trump, but it’s still so bad. As my body is breaking down at a job that doesn’t pay for a house I can’t afford, asking us to wait 4 years for someone better is insulting.

AngryCommieKender ,

Agreed, but with one caveat. You are the better candidate. Stop waiting for someone else to take the job, they all have imposter syndrome too, so fucking go for it and keep the fascists out at the local levels, not just the federal.

I am putting my money where my mouth is and self funding my campaign for city council in 2026.

StarServal ,
@StarServal@kbin.social avatar

I am absolutely not the better candidate. I’m not leadership material at all, and I’m probably as bad as Trump at receiving criticism. The difference is that I recognize my flaws.

the_post_of_tom_joad ,

You don’t want the job because of the incredible weight of responsibility? You have the ability to recognize your weaknesses? Shit man that’s better than I’ve seen in all my voting years. Im for StarServal in 2024

VolatileExhaustPipe ,

Who is your power base, who is your voting base and who does the organizing and networking for you?

AngryCommieKender ,

In my case it’s my neighbors. They’re the ones that thought I should run in the first place, and I already know more than half the district.

VolatileExhaustPipe ,

Definitely a start, but - depending on how many votes you need - politically a bit blurry. Wish you luck.

Do you know Jineology or Bookchin?

AngryCommieKender ,

Haven’t heard of those, but I’ll take a look.

nte ,

Why don’t you do better, democracy is not “them up there”, it needs everyone. You are as responsible as any one else. You know better, why aren’t you in the ballot?

gowan ,
@gowan@reddthat.com avatar

Populism is winning because we keep ignoring the working class and any state that is not on the coast or is IL.

seiryth ,

Could the democrats put someone under the age of 60 in place?

Trump is fucking awful. Republicans in general are awful and will set back that country another 20 years.

But Jesus, is an 80+ old guy the best the democrats have? He’s qualified, intelligent and experienced. But he’s also in an age bracket that’s easy to hang shit on, which is exactly what the Republicans need.

sentient_loom ,
@sentient_loom@sh.itjust.works avatar

At least under 70

prole ,
@prole@sh.itjust.works avatar

Could the democrats put someone under the age of 60 in place?

Can you wait 4 years while we narrowly avoid literal fascism? Jesus fucking Christ… We have the incumbent advantage, it would be foolish to give that up considering the clear and present danger that the alternative presents.

Biden wins a second term, and the Dems will have 4 years to choose a younger candidate to run next time.That is when we need to fight to make sure we don’t end up with another 80 year old, or with someone like Kamala Harris as our next choice.

SnowBunting ,

Agreed 💯

PixelatedSaturn ,

Yes, but Biden, he is a liability. I don’t believe any of those idiot stories about dementia or anything, but he is old. Campaigns are really demanding even for non geriatrics. If he slips too much and he will slip a lot, because that is what he was known for even in his best years, this could mean Trump. Having Trump again would be a disaster.

prole , (edited )
@prole@sh.itjust.works avatar

And what kind of optics do you think there’d be if the Democratic party pulled their incumbent candidate, and then what? Run Kamala Harris? No, not her?

So they pull both the incumbent candidate, and his (not super old) running mate? And replace them with whom?

You might not personally think that those actions are signs on weakness and/or disunity within the party, but people largely do. People have entire careers surrounding shaping those optics. This is important shit.

Maybe if there was already a young Democrat/progressive that the party and base has been coalescing around to be Biden’s successor. Right now, we have nobody.

PixelatedSaturn ,

The train has passed for that of course. Unless something happens to Biden in which case … they will have to do exactly that: find someone. What are the optics that the whole party has no one else, but a really old man anyway?

Before Biden announced it would be possible to get someone else.

the_post_of_tom_joad ,

8 years of Biden then 8 years of someone like Kamala Harris? This is the future were hoping for? Pardon me but that sounds horrifying.

I mean it is probably the long term plan of the dnc, along with another fascist bugaboo they ratfuck into the general election.

Here’s how i think it will go, based on the last few elections: If Trump is no longer a threat they’ll elevate desantis or someone similar and they’ll again ask us to “fight fascism” and “fight for democracy” by swallowing any desire to vote 3rd party and side with them, the “lesser of 2 evils”, once more.

If they succeed, they sit on their hands and continue their disastrous platform of “standing by the door and aggressively hand wringing” at the fascists while they march through.

This is the only thing they will ever do while they are one of only 2 (fully corrupted) political parties.

To think otherwise is to ignore recent history

rez_doggie ,

Acab yeah that means harris

ZeroEcks ,

Didn’t they just wait 4 years already? How many times do they have to wait 4 years?

prole ,
@prole@sh.itjust.works avatar

Yeah we had 4 years to come up with a better candidate, and we didn’t.

Totuustorvi ,

Can someone put into words why it seems impossible to find/nominate a proper (democrat) candidate out of the whole USA population?

Ever since Obama and maybe even before, it has been so difficult. What stops the good people from advancing.

hydrospanner ,

What stops the good people from advancing.

Democracy is, at its core, a popularity contest.

It’s a lot easier and more effective to be popular with deception and favors than by responsibility and moral fiber.

Therefore the only politicians who are able to succeed to the point that they get to the national level are those who have learned how the game works and play it with a combination of deceit and favors.

I’m not saying democracy is bad…in fact, of the various systems it competes with, it’s one of the best…but that doesn’t mean it’s flawless, and this is one of its many flaws.

VolatileExhaustPipe ,

Why are democratic countries that aren’t the USA manage to generate a wide set of qualified candidates which aren’t close to death (both Trump, Biden, Clinton, Sanders, Reagan, Bush)?

hydrospanner ,

First, my comment made no mention of age, only compromised morals.

To answer your question, though, I feel it’s a combination of population size, demographics, scale of representation, and the nature of the way the respective systems have evolved (both naturally and intentionally)

  • Population: The US has lots and lots of people spread out over a wide area. Lots of people mean that there’s lots of qualified people, and it follows that the older you get, the more time you’ve spent in this arena, therefore the more experience and connections you have.
  • Demographics: Simply put, Baby Boomers. There’s more of them than there are of anyone else, and they tend to elect their own.
  • Scale of Representation: US elected officials at the national level represent a huge number of constituents. This means that getting elected is more about appealing to a broad spectrum of voters, to the point that it’s often more about just being objectionable to the fewest voters. This is Joe Biden’s greatest strength: nobody really really likes the guy, but he’s someone that (among his base) not too many people actually dislike, or at least not enough to withhold their vote. It’s boring but effective within the situation, like trap hockey. Representation of such a wide and diverse group of people means that politicians won’t champion any agenda that might put off voters. A vote is a vote regardless of whether it’s lukewarm or zealous, and a thousand “meh” votes are drastically more valuable than a hundred fanatical votes.
  • The Nature of the Beast: like it or not, America has a two party, first past the post, winner take all system. This means that the game is very closed-ended, full of binary/Boolean strategy: A or B, vote or don’t vote, win the state completely or don’t win it at all. This ties in with the previous point and makes a campaign and election even more about being as inoffensive as possible.

So for a winner take all, nationwide race like president, the way the Xs and Os work out is that your party’s best odds come with someone who’s got lots of connections, is widely recognized, and whom the fewest people in your base will dislike enough to not vote for them. In the vast majority of cases, that means an old candidate who’s had decades of experience and network building, who has no controversial positions, odd personality quirks, etc., and who is just a hair more likeable to moderates than whomever the other party puts out there.

The only time in recent history this hasn’t been the case was 2016, in which Trump pulled more votes out of his base and the far right than anyone gave him credit for…and maybe 2000, although a decent argument could be made there that Clinton’s stigma hobbled Gore’s campaign just enough. With SCOTUS help.

Thus, you get usually old (experienced, well known), usually male, usually white, usually straight, usually at least vaguely religious, usually rather boring candidates.

authed ,

I’d vote for Bernie but not Biden

s20 ,

Okay. As a moral standpoint, I understand that. Hell, I support it.

But from a pragmatic standpoint… what good does that do?

ReadFanon ,
@ReadFanon@lemmygrad.ml avatar

From a pragmatic point, what good does voting for Biden do?

s20 ,

Nope. I asked first. Answer or don’t, don’t pull that childish shit.

ReadFanon ,
@ReadFanon@lemmygrad.ml avatar

Not voting for Biden means that Biden is one vote further away from being president.

Now it’s your turn.

s20 ,

Yeah, no, sorry, that’s still not an answer, unless you’re trying to say Trump would be better.

I repeat: how does that help?

ReadFanon , (edited )
@ReadFanon@lemmygrad.ml avatar

It helps because it signals to the DNC that they will not simply automatically win by default with their shittiest, most rightwing nominees because the other option is slightly worse on a couple of fronts.

It shows that people do not see them as a viable alternative to the GOP unless they actually become an alternative to the GOP.

There’s a reason why Trump won last time and it’s this attitude of entitlement that you’ve embodied which is at the core of this.

If you’re so set upon preventing another Trump presidency then recent history is a lesson for you, or at least it should have been, and attempting to browbeat people into voting for detestable DNC nominees is a failed strategy when you should be pushing the DNC for compromise with people further to the left of you rather than demanding that people further to the left of you capitulate simply because you feel that they ought to become you have a false sense of moral righteousness.

You want my vote for the democratic nominee? Then uphold the values of bourgeois electoralism and earn it.

s20 ,

Okay, that’s a much more cohesive answer, thank you! I can follow that, and I can see a line of moral reasoning. From a moral standpoint, not only do I support you, I mostly agree with you. I’m sure we’d disagree on some finer points, but from a big picture standpoint, cool.

Now. All that in mind. How can I use that to keep a fascist rapist who empowers other fascist rapists out of the highest office in the land? If there’s a way, please let me know. As far as I can see, I can take a very reasonable moral stand, or I can help stop orange soda Hitler from being in office, but I can’t do both. Please show me how I’m wrong.

btaf45 ,

I’d vote for Bernie but not Biden

You will do what Putin wants which is the opposite of what Bernie wants. Got it Ivan.

authed ,

Lol… As if Putin as anything to do with it

oldbaldgrumpy ,

I don’t feel like Biden or Trump should be our next President.

cybermass ,

I would love to see AOC run but I’m not even American so I’m just watching the dumpster fire from a distance

oldbaldgrumpy ,

I can’t see AOC as president. I feel like she’s the face of the far left. She will probably better serve her party there.

Tronn4 ,

Why or how the F is trump still even a candidate

Snipe_AT ,
@Snipe_AT@lemmy.atay.dev avatar

There’s no way he makes it as the actual candidate.

I’m a republican and I can say that I and plenty of others like me will be voting blue if that absolute disgrace becomes the primary candidate.

prole ,
@prole@sh.itjust.works avatar

Are you a billionaire tycoon? Just curious…

I’m having trouble coming up with any other reason why a person would voluntarily describe themselves as “republican” in 2023.

It’s not just Trump. The Republican party is rotten to the core. Maybe it’s time to reevaluate things.

SamboT ,

What a way to start a conversation. Try imagining the person on the other end of the computer and try again.

prole ,
@prole@sh.itjust.works avatar

I don’t follow…? I was just asking a question. Legitimately curious.

SamboT ,

You are legitimately curious to know if they are a billionaire tycoon?

If you have a question for a self-proclaimed republican then ask it. Don’t pretend to inquire with them for an opportunity to insult them. That’s not respectful.

imPastaSyndrome ,

Try imagining the person on the other end of the computer and try again.

yup

Dashi ,

I say this as a Democrat that used to be a republican. You think our side is all sunshine and rainbows? Neither side is perfect it really is the option of the least bad candidate and that is the issue. The two party system is a failure but it’s what we have.

Yes in my opinion the democrats are better than the Republicans but that doesn’t mean they are without fault. Everyone has an agenda and can make mistakes we are human after all.

prole ,
@prole@sh.itjust.works avatar

I didn’t really say anything about the Democratic party in my comment. Not sure why you brought them up. No whataboutism needed here.

Conservatives are continually voting against their interests when they vote R. Period. End statement.

the_post_of_tom_joad ,

Hmm, i think that the Democrat voters are as well. I knew exactly what i would get with Biden, hated him the most during the primaries, and yet, voted for him knowing he didn’t have my best interests at heart.

And this election i am expected to do that twice? Against that same convict? who tried and will try again to seize power forever?

I’ve held my nose long enough. I can’t breathe.

prole ,
@prole@sh.itjust.works avatar

Yeah, constantly having to fight off fascism is fucking exhausting.

It’s by design. Once the people become apathetic enough, or get “outrage fatigue”, that’s when fascism can slink in and wrap its filthy little tendrils around our political discourse.

It fucking sucks. I’m with you. I’m tired.

Snipe_AT ,
@Snipe_AT@lemmy.atay.dev avatar

I have thought about your comment for a little bit and would like to respond candidly.

I am just a regular person who has a differing belief about what constitutes a well-functioning government. There are possibly more views that we agree upon than disagree.

At this exact moment,(because everyone’s beliefs are constantly changing with new ideas and information), the views I expect we differ on are: capitalism has been more socially beneficial than destructive, we should have a smaller more efficient government, and we should prevent erosion of the constitutional right to bear firearms.

The views I expect that we agree on are: capitalism has not been properly regulated with regards to the environment (global warming was certainly caused by us), the ability to have an abortion should be codified in law, we should prevent the erosion of constitutional rights like free speech, privacy, and the ability to freely travel, while socialized healthcare will be very expensive and increase everyone’s tax burden, it will also be well worth the cost.

I am a republican because I believe that my political viewpoints align with those of republicans. But I am not blind to the charlatans that have disgraced not only the republican party but also the broader American institution. I take comfort in the fact that I did not vote for Trump in either instance, choosing instead to vote for Biden when that time came.

As for why I voluntarily “describe” myself as a republican because I genuinely believe that people discussing opposing views contributes to incrementally uncovering truth (which is often in the middle) and also serves to stave off the seemingly natural pull of humans to develop tribalism described by the phrase ‘us vs them.’

Hadriscus ,

Cut the middleman, just vote CPUSA already

AngryCommieKender ,

While I tend to agree with your sentiment, I would really prefer people followed Washington’s advice. No parties. He believed that partisan politics would be the downfall of the US, and given the last 239 years of evidence, I would have to agree.

Hadriscus ,

I didn’t know that. What would the US political landscape look like without parties ?

AngryCommieKender ,

No freaking clue. We promptly ignored him and became a two party system almost immediately after he left office.

dangblingus ,

Despite the fact that it’s a statistical likelihood that voting R is voting against your class, T is still far and away the most popular pick for R leadership.

TeenieBopper ,

Look. Am I going to vote for whoever the democratic nominee is? Yeah.

Am I going to be saying the democratic party is generally also racist, transobobic, capitalist, and don’t really give a shit about you? Also yes.

The republican party being more racist, transobobic, and capitalist doesn’t mean the democratic party isn’t. And I’m sick of people pretending otherwise.

Aceticon ,

The system is rigged, hence the only choice is between evils.

No wonder american politicians are constantly harping about how the US is such a “Great Democracy” - it’s to compensate just how much the mathematically rigged for political duopoly american system fails to represent the will of the average citizen, unlike an actual Democracy.

JustZ ,
@JustZ@lemmy.world avatar

Nah, we almost had Bernie. We had FDR. We will prevail again.

norbert ,
@norbert@kbin.social avatar

This right here folks, goddamned right. Organize, talk to your friends, and go vote every single election, participate. Get involved, canvas for local people you like, run for something; you'd be surprised how many city council seats or streets commissioner slots are completely vacant. The deck is stacked against us, the Republican party has been cultivating their bigoted base for 70 years and it's moved the entire country significantly right. We need to begin doing the same thing now if we want to win against the strain of Christo-fascism/Corporatocracy growing here in the U.S. There are only three boxes: soap, ballot, and bullet. We obviously all love using our soapbox, I'd recommend trying the ballot as well. The other box likely ends badly for a lot of people and should be avoided while the other two are still options. If we organize and vote we can absolutely drag the country back to left.

Did you guys hear about that black guy that became mayor of the racist little town simply by filling out the paperwork? We need more of that energy.

AngryCommieKender ,

Was there ever a resolution to that? Seriously the FBI should have been arresting the assholes that were preventing the Mayor from doing his job.

traches ,

…. You watch republicans force kids to detransition and say “yeah but the dems are just as bad”?

Like I get that they’re not perfect but holy fuck shit jesus are the republicans a bunch of ghouls. Not a single candidate even acknowledged that climate change is happening at their debate; I got kids who will have to grow up in this world dude.

Both sides my ass, only one is trying to make gilead a reality and just because the other doesn’t pass leftist purity testing doesn’t put them on the same level as actual fascists.

Lols , (edited )

you missed the word ‘more’

its right here in this sentence (ill make it bold for you):

The republican party being more racist, transobobic, and capitalist doesn’t mean the democratic party isn’t.

the word ‘more’ in that sentence means they’re in fact not saying dems are just as bad, or on the same level as actual fascists, theyre explicitly and literally saying democrats are not as bad

easy mistake to make, hope this helps

traches ,

Kinda doing some heavy lifting don’t you think? One side is banning books written by minorities and replacing them with pragerU propaganda, the other is…. not doing that? And you’re painting them with the same brush?

Lols ,

And you’re painting them with the same brush?

you missed the word ‘more’

its right here in this sentence (ill make it bold and italicised for you, and put arrows around it):

The republican party being -> more <- racist, transobobic, and capitalist doesn’t mean the democratic party isn’t.

the word ‘more’ in that sentence means they’re in fact not painting democrats and republicans with the same brush, theyre explicitly, literally and unambiguously saying democrats are not as bad

‘democrats are not as bad as republicans’ is not painting them with the same brush

likewise, ignoring racism and transphobia or demanding others do so because its your team doing it is not protecting minorities, its actually just accepting racism and transphobia as the price of doing business, which is horrible

easy mistake to make, hope this helps

traches ,

We’re staring down the barrel of theocratic fascism and you’re purity testing the only viable alternative.

They’re saying “they’re both sons of bitches but one is more so than the other”, that’s painting them with the same brush.

It’s like saying “someone with a billion dollars is more wealthy than someone with a million” - like yeah it’s semantically true but it completely disregards magnitude. Plenty of people make a million by working hard and paying taxes, but you only make a billion by fucking people over.

Lols ,

ignoring racism and transphobia or demanding others do so because its your team doing it is not protecting minorities, its actually just accepting racism and transphobia as the price of doing business, which is horrible

ignoring or defending exploitation of the poor because its your team doing it is not helping the poor, its actually just further ignoring, defending and normalising their exploitation

It’s like saying “someone with a billion dollars is more wealthy than someone with a million” - like yeah it’s semantically true but it completely disregards magnitude. Plenty of people make a million by working hard and paying taxes, but you only make a billion by fucking people over.

your comparison of ‘democrats actively pushing discriminative and explotative policies’ to ‘poor millionaires who got their millions by just working very hard and who arent hurting no one’ is hilariously tone deaf, thank you

traches ,

During the civil war, the north was still pretty fucking racist. In the 60s, people were routinely fired for being gay and same sex marriage was unthinkable.

Do you know what the Overton window is?

The millionaire thing was an example that apparently you missed the point of. Doctors, pilots, and other people in high-skill, well paying professions routinely clear a million in net worth on W2 income as honestly as you can in this country. The difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars is about a billion dollars. To say that billionaires and millionaires are both wealthy, but billionaires are just more wealthy, is semantically accurate but completely misrepresents the magnitude of difference between the two.

Lols ,

During the civil war, the north was still pretty fucking racist.

careful there, thats basically saying the south and north were just as bad

It’s not the fucking same.

you missed the word ‘more’

its right here in this sentence (ill make it bold and italicised for you, and put arrows around it which i will similarly bolden and italicise):

The republican party being -> more <- racist, transobobic, and capitalist doesn’t mean the democratic party isn’t.

the word ‘more’ in that sentence means they’re in fact not saying democrats and republicans are the same, theyre explicitly, literally and unambiguously saying democrats are not as bad

hope this helps

AngryCommieKender , (edited )

Then run. I am. Not because I wanted to, it wasn’t my idea. My neighbors keep telling me that I should. If I can take the seat away from the fascist that currently holds it, in the 2026 election, I’ll consider that the only real win I need.

Gnubyte ,

Isn’t Biden 80 years old?

This is a misplay but if you look at the numbers Kennedy is losing to Biden in polls by a large 50% margin but also I’ve never heard of this site so beware its credibility:

projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/…/national/

I’m not keen on Biden continuing at his age. Because you’re voting for his vice president at that age.

I don’t think Biden could beat Trump again. Every person who got laid off during Bidens administration will have something to say about it in the voting booth. Democrats need to push up a better candidate.

randon31415 ,

The left people want won’t win the presidency until they at least win a governorship or a senate seat. The last time we had a radical departure from those that came before them in the white house (politically speaking, not skin color) we had a 4 year long Civil War backlash.

AS004 ,

The last time we had a radical departure from those that came before them in the white house (politically speaking, not skin color) we had a 4 year long Civil War backlash.

Are we ignoring the New Deal Dems or what, now? They were a major departure from everybody else before and Roosevelt even threatened to pack the Court when they tried to rule some of his policies unconstitutional.

randon31415 ,

Well, there was a war involved with that as well, but I would argue that the New Deal was a compromise moderate position to the alternative of complete communist revolt, which was starting to sweep the globe at the time.

blazera ,
@blazera@kbin.social avatar

he's had a whole term and shown he's not planning on stopping Trump. He's still walking free after all the treason and assaults on democracy.

s20 ,

I mean, yeah! Trump’s facing 91 felony charges at my last count, and been indicted at least 4 times, but sure. Ain’t nobody doin’ nothin’.

blazera ,
@blazera@kbin.social avatar

None of these are actual consequences. Like i said, he is still walking free.

Ertebolle ,

So you'd prefer it if Biden just, like, did a little fascism and sent a bunch of goons to drag Trump off to Guantanamo or wherever?

blazera ,
@blazera@kbin.social avatar

Prosecute him sooner than the entire length of watergate to nixons resignation. God the trials dont even start until next year.

sab ,
@sab@kbin.social avatar

...because Nixon resigned and was pardoned, dodging the entire legal process?

What's your point here?

gamermanh ,
@gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

So should we just skip due process?

Trump’s a shit and probably deserves that treatment, but that’s still not what we do here

blazera ,
@blazera@kbin.social avatar

Due process for anyone else is a hell of a lot faster. I was mad after the first month of Bidens term with no prosecution announcement. We're just now beginning the process that will continue to be long and drawn out.

gamermanh ,
@gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

It’s almost like these are a large amount of major crimes with a shitton of information to sift through

Oh, and it’s a former president, so the work is likely being checked over exhaustively to ensure there isn’t something wrong with it

blazera ,
@blazera@kbin.social avatar

You are describing a trial to me. The trial is going to be long winded as youve described. The trial doesnt start for another year. Just to game an election year.

legion02 ,

You clearly don’t know how the court system works. The current time table is actually pretty aggressive.

blazera ,
@blazera@kbin.social avatar

In no way is 4 years after a crime aggressive

s20 ,

So… The current administration should, what, put a hit out on him?

donuts ,
@donuts@kbin.social avatar

Maybe the last few years of Trump's fascist authoritarian rhetoric have confused you, but the President does not, and never should, prosecute crimes. Despite its obvious flaws, we have a legal system for a reason.

snooggums ,
@snooggums@kbin.social avatar

The prosecutors at the Department of Justice arr members of the Executive Branch under the President.

The President should not be unilaterally deciding who to prosecute for political reasons, but he is overseeing the prosecution of crimes as the head of the Executive Branch.

blazera ,
@blazera@kbin.social avatar

Maybe you werent paying attention during trumps terms to know the president has control of the attorney general and department of justice. Its how trump avoided consequences for the shit with russia and extorting ukraine. The executive branch does prosecute crimes, they just dont oversee the trial. And bidens DoJ have not been prosecuting crimes.

spaceghoti ,

No he doesn’t. He’s not supposed to, and that’s what the careerists were trying to stop. The DOJ and Attorney General are part of the Executive cabinet but they answer to Congress, not the President. The President has his own White House counsel, the AG does not serve as his personal lawyer.

blazera ,
@blazera@kbin.social avatar

This just is not true, the president chooses the AG and has authority to terminate them. They are part of the presidential cabinet and are legal advisors to the president. They are wholly under the executive branch.

spaceghoti ,

www.justice.gov/ag

The Judiciary Act of 1789 created the Office of the Attorney General which evolved over the years into the head of the Department of Justice and chief law enforcement officer of the Federal Government. The Attorney General represents the United States in legal matters generally and gives advice and opinions to the President and to the heads of the executive departments of the Government when so requested.

That doesn’t mean the AG is the President’s personal lawyer. That’s the Office of Counsel to the President.

federalregister.gov/…/counsel-to-the-president

The Counsel’s Office also helps define the line between official and political activities, oversees executive appointments and judicial selection, handles Presidential pardons, reviews legislation and Presidential statements, and handles lawsuits against the President in his role as President, as well as serving as the White House Contact for the Department of Justice.

blazera ,
@blazera@kbin.social avatar

I havent said anything about him being Biden's lawyer, Biden's not on trial. Im talking about their jobs as public servants. I wanna give a clear example of what I mean but it's hard to come up with a better example than what Trump's done, of a crime being committed and knowing who did it. I dunno say some crazy guy kidnaps the vice president or something, they get caught...and then nothing happens because the AG refuses to prosecute them. That's just plain dereliction of duty. But the checks and balance for the AG is the president that appoints and can terminate them. If that AG is terminated, then it was just all on the AG for being bad. But if the AG is still around, then the president has to partake in that blame, and the check is you dont reelect them.

MoonRaven ,
@MoonRaven@feddit.nl avatar

This is why the 2 party system is fucking bad. In the Netherlands we have a wide range of parties we can vote for, no need for strategic votes like this.

ezterry ,

It’s a symptom of the winner takes all election system… Its most stable with one or two major parties. The hope for more parties is one reason some of us push for instant runoff elections, but it “confuses” people so its not had the traction I’d like.

Tak ,
@Tak@lemmy.ml avatar

The US can’t support more than two parties with how the elections are run. Instead the primaries have to filter down the varied candidates into compromises

Pipoca ,

Britain uses the same system and has some successful third parties like the Scottish National Party.

Regional third parties tend to dramatically outperform national ones. Because FPTP does best with 2 candidate elections, but those 2 candidates don’t have to be in the same party across every district.

For presidential elections - yeah. You run a third party candidate like Nader, you get Bush. You run Perot, you get Clinton.

Tak ,
@Tak@lemmy.ml avatar

How is it the same system?

Sean ,
@Sean@liberal.city avatar

@Tak @Pipoca both the US and the UK have fptp single member districts for national legislature, so the expectation would be that in the UK parliament they'd only have Labour and Tories, no 3rd parties representing regional issues, just wings of the duopoply serving that purpose. But the difference isn't derived in that both have FPTP, but that the US has a media environment that propagates binary choices, BBC still strives for viewership but not the extent that US MSM does via oversimplification

Tak ,
@Tak@lemmy.ml avatar

Doesn’t that not include basically anything else but that factor and then labeled as the same thing for the sake of argument? How does that relate to funding, regulation, power structures, and much more nuanced factors?

The US has always been a two party system from the start back before there was a BBC. Are we going to say Fox news created the original contention of federalists and antifederalists?

SkyeStarfall ,

It seriously gives some really bad incentives.

Yes, voting for Biden is better… But it also very much allows the Democrats to abuse the situation and put whoever they want on there. Because the alternative will always be worse. And so you’re destined to always having an acceptable president, but never a great one that people really want.

We have a parliament here and, yeah, it’s so much better in basically every way. I can actually vote for what I want and not have to worry that it’s not strategic. Because I’m the end it will just empower the party and thus give them more negotiating power.

fushuan ,

We also have more than 2 parties in Spain, however the way votes are counted it’s better to vote for the big parties than the local ones. Literally, voting your local party and them supporting the big “left” party will amount less seats than just voting the big party. Usually people vote locally but since we have the looming danger of the extreme right party, people have been focusing on the big left, just to ensure that we don’t get Vox.

Still having more than 2 parties promotes discussion and makes it really difficult for a party to go rogue.

Aceticon , (edited )

The Netherlands has proportional vote, that’s why.

With electoral circles instead of PV, mathematically the two largest parties get way more representatives than the percentage of the public votes they get, and the bigger the electoral circles and fewer the representatives the worse it gets.

(Further, voters own behaviour changes to one of “useful vote” rather than “choosing those who better represents them”, plus tribalism becomes way more extreme when there is only a black & white choice - so lots of votes are driven by team loyalty - all of which makes it even worse)

(Also smaller parties dissapear, both because they can’t secure funding and because their members lose hope of ever making a difference. The closest you get to “small parties” in the US are independents, running for a very specific electoral circle only and whose voice is a drop in the ocean in a place like the US Congress)

The US has single representative very large electoral circles for Congress and double representative State-sized electoral circles for the Senate, so their system is rigged to pretty much the max it can and the result is a power duopoly.

I lived in The Netherlands and now I live in a country where the system is somewhat less so (smaller electoral circles, multiple representatives per circle) and even here you see the two largest parties getting and extra 10-20% each representatives in parliament compared to the popular vote (the governing party has 56% of parliamentary seats on 42% of votes cast) whilst the smaller parties have half as many representatives as their popular vote (in other words, every vote for a smaller party counts less than half as much as a vote for a large party, which is hardly democratic).

Most so-called “democratic” nations have this kind of rigged system, but places like the US and Britain take it to the extreme, so it’s unsurprising that when the economic supercycle is at the point where the many start hurting, in the absence of true choice you get instead the internal takeover of the rightmost of the party dupoly by the Trumps and Boris Johnsons of this world offering an ultra-nationalist far-right populist mix of othering, scapegoating and simple “solutions”.

(Funilly enough if you compare The Netherlands with Britain, whilst even now the far-right is stuck at maybe 20% in the former, in the latter it took over the Tory Party from the inside - which is far easier than convince half the population to vote for them - and hence has been in power for almost a decade with an absolute majority).

Lols ,

in theory, in practice strategic votes still matter for the actual government because parties can just decide not to work with someone and the biggest party gets first picks for the coalition

meaning that in practice, having the biggest party still matters massively, and in a mostly right wing country, the right gets to vote for who best represents them, while the left still has to vote strategically if they want to take actual administrative positions

tryptaminev ,
@tryptaminev@feddit.de avatar

I’d like to disagree. strategic voting means you shift your vote to what you suppose to be more majority carrying, which usually tends to go for centrists with quite some neoliberal positions. And they usually manage to put through the same shit as the right on economic issues, or implementing authoritarian attacks on civil rights, like mass surveilance.

It is the same thing in the US. There is the far right extremist republicans and the right wing democrats (by european standards) because they try to cover the supposed center, and everyone left of that still votes for them. So in the end they still get no health care, no social security, lots of warmongering, bad schools and institutionalized racism…

In Germany we get the same bs with people voting social democrats “strategically”, that end up pushing for neoliberal economic policies and authoritarian social policies.

Lols ,

im not sure what youre disagreeing with

4RYAZ ,

Problem is trump would certainly be better than any other politician, but What we need is someone better than trump.

Blackmist ,

If your whole selling point is “Yeah, things are still gonna be shit for you, but at least we’re not Nazis!” then at some point you’re going to lose again.

Yeah, life is going to be no better under the Republicans either, but some people’s lives will be significantly worse, and for some voters, that’s enough.

“He’s not hurting the people he needs to be hurting.” That’s an actual quote from an actual Trump voter. That’s what you’re dealing with. For some, happiness is a zero sum game. They’ll quite happily suck down a spoonful of warm shit if some other sucker has to suck down two.

cabron_offsets ,

The problem is corollary to your point (which doesn’t diminish your point in the least). Most people are rational actors. They won’t eat shit. That’s why the republican traitor filth will never win the popular vote. The problem is the fucking bullshit electoral college. The shit eaters have an undue advantage. The electoral college is tyranny.

Blackmist ,

That may be so, but isn’t the result always a little bit closer to 50/50 than most of us are comfortable with?

The fate of the most powerful country on Earth hangs on the whims of a tiny percentage of voters in swing states. If you live somewhere like Houston your vote does not matter. That state is going red and always will. It’s batshit insane that a state can be 48/52 and that just counts exactly as if it was 0/100.

sentient_loom ,
@sentient_loom@sh.itjust.works avatar

The real problem is that they’re all traitorous filth. Trump is objectively worse, but he also doesn’t hide it, and that appeals to people.

Sanders was the only legit alternative in literally decades but now he has to be subservient to Biden.

There is no solution on the horizon. I agree that people should vote Biden… but in truth Biden should be replaced with an actual leader. That won’t happen. And while the Democrats remain almost as evil as the Republicans it’s gonna be a hard sell.

Sean ,
@Sean@liberal.city avatar

@sentient_loom @cabron_offsets Sanders has been put into a trance of feeling "heard" by Biden while being neutered in any chance of delivering real material benefit to the people. His career as being a truth-speaker from outside the elite, he's shot his shot to do some real good and will probably retire next year.

killa44 ,

I mean, he is old af too.

davi ,

and still more progressive than democrats have ever been and will ever be.

Noughmad ,

Most people are rational actors

Have you met any people?

Syrc ,

If your whole selling point is “Yeah, things are still gonna be shit for you, but at least we’re not Nazis!” then at some point you’re going to lose again.

Exactly what happened in Italy. Why is the left all over the world unable to present an actually competent and charismatic candidate?

fadingembers ,
@fadingembers@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

Because the capitalist class still controls them, curtailing any candidates that would be a threat to their power.

t_jpeg ,

Literally. When the capitalist class are the ones funding the majority if political parties in your country, you are left with either voting for a really right wing candidate or a slightly less right wing candidate.

Blackmist ,

“It comes from a very ancient democracy, you see…"

“You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?”

“No,” said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, “nothing so simple. Nothing anything like so straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people.”

“Odd,” said Arthur, “I thought you said it was a democracy.”

“I did,” said Ford. “It is.”

“So,” said Arthur, hoping he wasn’t sounding ridiculously obtuse, “why don’t people get rid of the lizards?”

“It honestly doesn’t occur to them,” said Ford. “They’ve all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they’ve voted in more or less approximates to the government they want.”

“You mean they actually vote for the lizards?”

“Oh yes,” said Ford with a shrug, “of course.”

“But,” said Arthur, going for the big one again, “why?”

“Because if they didn’t vote for a lizard,” said Ford, “the wrong lizard might get in.”

hangonasecond ,

What’s this from?

wanderingmagus ,

Ultimate Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, Douglas Adams

gibmiser ,

Sounds like one of Douglas Adams’ Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy books

the_post_of_tom_joad , (edited )

I’m sure you’ve heard this before but it bears repeating that what we call the left is actually the left section of the right wing. There are no left wing parties with a majority anywhere in the world

AngryCommieKender ,

Then run yourself. Be your own Goldie Wilson. I am, though that is because my neighbors keep telling me to run for city council.

OprahsedCreature ,
  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • [email protected]
  • All magazines