|
Rigging the primaries in favor of party apparatchiks is just the world working according to immutable natural law. Suggesting that this blatant contempt for democracy is a bad strategy for winning democratic general elections is "pointless infighting"
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 19:27 |
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Left/liberal isn't infighting. If you're talking left of center politics, it's infighting. If you're talking the difference between socialism and social democracy, then yes. VitalSigns posted:Rigging the primaries in favor of party apparatchiks is just the world working according to immutable natural law. Again, the dumb poo poo strawmanning. Rigging primaries isn't good, but it's not exactly a shock. I never said that it was good or that it was something that shouldn't be fought, or that it was pointless infighting. If this thread is now about Democrat corruption and not strategic voting, change the title.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:If you're talking left of center politics, it's infighting. Why would "left of center politics" be a useful group in any way, and why on earth would you describe the democrats and liberals as being left of center? They're very clearly economically right and socially "eh". You need to drop this weird idea that the left and the democrats want the same thing or are on the same team or should even have anything to do with each other.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 19:17
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Why would "left of center politics" be a useful group in any way, and why on earth would you describe the democrats and liberals as being left of center? They're very clearly economically right and socially "eh". We're talking in the US. In the US, liberals are left of center. The democrats cover some centrists, and some liberals, and a small amount of leftists. Basically everyone not outright fascist. quote:You need to drop this weird idea that the left and the democrats want the same thing or are on the same team or should even have anything to do with each other. Saying that the left should, in a FPTP two-party system, work with the Dems when they need to, is not weird and it's hilariously out of touch that you think it is weird.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 19:25
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:We're talking in the US. In the US, liberals are left of center. The democrats cover some centrists, and some liberals, and a small amount of leftists. Basically everyone not outright fascist. No, the democrats cover centrists and liberals - two center-right groups. The "small amount of lefties" is there not because they're "covered" but because in the American two party system they're effectively forced to seek representation through one of two parties.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 19:33
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Saying that the left should, in a FPTP two-party system, work with the Dems when they need to, is not weird and it's hilariously out of touch that you think it is weird. Too bad Democrats prefer to rig primary elections in order to prevent this from happening aint it
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 19:36
|
|
|
large adult son posted:No, the democrats cover centrists and liberals - two center-right groups. The "small amount of lefties" is there not because they're "covered" but because in the American two party system they're effectively forced to seek representation through one of two parties. Yes everyone to the right of me is a centrist or a consertvative, there's only 3 points not a scale  No poo poo, leftists have to deal with Dems because the two party system. That's what I said. VitalSigns posted:Too bad Democrats prefer to rig primary elections in order to prevent this from happening aint it Yeah that's lovely, so what are you going to do about it? "Nothing" is a real answer, btw.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 19:39
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Saying that the left should, in a FPTP two-party system, work with the Dems when they need to, is not weird and it's hilariously out of touch that you think it is weird. how can the left "work with" the dems when the dems shut them out constantly? all dems want from us are our votes, and then to go away for a couple of years. they don't want to compromise with us, or consider our policies, or have anything to do with us. they just want our votes without having to do anything for them that's the whole point of this "lesser of two evils" bs
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 19:39
|
|
|
Condiv posted:how can the left "work with" the dems when the dems shut them out constantly? all dems want from us are our votes, and then to go away for a couple of years. they don't want to compromise with us, or consider our policies, or have anything to do with us. they just want our votes without having to do anything for them Again, you're naive. The democrats aren't a monolithic entity, however the people currently in national power in the party are certainly not our friends. That doesn't mean all dems are worthless. Just a lot of them. There's not a lot of ways to change that. One is to have a lot of money, but that doesn't really work because it's kinda antithetical to the cause. Another is to build enough power within the party that you can't be ignored or bullied without consequence. That takes a lot of effort. What are your other options?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Again, you're naive. The democrats aren't a monolithic entity, however the people currently in national power in the party are certainly not our friends. That doesn't mean all dems are worthless. Just a lot of them. that's why i'm advocating for not voting for the worthless dems in general elections. the ones that aren't our friends and backstab us at every turn. refusing to vote for them will hopefully cause them to lose office and power in the party, making it easier for us to build enough power in the party to not be ignorable like we currently are. seeing as the dems are rigging the primaries right now, that seems to be the best option voting-wise. of course, organizing within entryist orgs like the DSA and YDSA are vital too.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 19:46
|
|
|
Condiv posted:that's why i'm advocating for not voting for the worthless dems. the ones that aren't our friends and backstab us at every turn. refusing to vote for them will hopefully cause them to lose office and power in the party, making it easier for us to build enough power in the party to not be ignorable like we currently are. seeing as the dems are rigging the primaries right now, that seems to be the best option voting-wise. of course, organizing within entryist orgs like the DSA and YDSA are vital too. If your choice is between a worthless dem and a non-worthless progressive, yeah gently caress them. If it's between a worthless dem and an even worse Republican, you vote for the dem. You can choose not to but I don't know how that makes sense. *This only matters in close races.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Yeah that's lovely, so what are you going to do about it? Boy you just love defending the status quo, huh?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 19:49
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:If your choice is between a worthless dem and a non-worthless progressive, yeah gently caress them. and by voting for said worthless dem, i ensure i will never get any choice but a worthless dem. your suggestion doesn't make the slightest bit of sense if we want things to change the worthless dems need to be purged from the dem party to make room for the left Condiv fucked around with this message at 19:54 on May 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 19:52
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:If your choice is between a worthless dem and a non-worthless progressive, yeah gently caress them. Let me apply Game Theory to this premise, political wonks love  Game Theory right?*feeds your post into the Game Theory machine, cranks handle* OK turns out game theory says the worthless Democrats' optimal strategy given this input is to rig primaries against progressives because they are assured of the all the votes no matter what. Hey look that's what's happening right now.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 19:56
|
|
|
Condiv posted:and by voting for said worthless dem, i ensure i will never get any choice but a worthless dem. your suggestion doesn't make the slightest bit of sense if we want things to change Yes, but electing more republicans isn't how you do that. We on the left have SOOOOOOO much progress to make in terms of primaries.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 19:59
|
|
|
When I mentioned people understanding game theory earlier I meant it fairly sarcastically since as VitalSigns says, game theory means the Democrats need only be 1% less evil than the Republicans and subvert Democracy in any way you can if you tell them ahead of time you will always vote for the lesser evil under all circumstances. Doing anything else would be silly if you don't actually care about progressive causes. Our terrible system pretty much encourages people to be put in a bad choice and I'm not really sure what the solution is since we can see the entire thing is collapsing around us and no one knows what to do other than try and cling to whatever job they have.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 19:59
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Yes, but electing more republicans isn't how you do that. We on the left have SOOOOOOO much progress to make in terms of primaries. no we don't. the dems have decided to freeze us out of the primaries the primaries aren't the answer. getting the worthless dems out of power at any cost is, and then we can finally reform the party. it's too bad the worthless dems decided to go full on oligarch instead of reforming themselves, which will just make things worse, but them's the breaks.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:01
|
|
|
 "Let's play Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma. Now before we play I have to tell you that I am desperate to cooperate and I will cooperate every single time even if I know you're going to defect" "Okay then I'm defecting every time." "You son of a! . . . sold"
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:02
|
|
|
Condiv posted:no we don't. the dems have decided to freeze us out of the primaries This is grade a bullshit. The problem is voters, not any one freezing anyone out. Yes it matters on the margins but democratic voters are nowhere near enough engaged in primaries and nowhere near willing enough to use primaries to keep bad dems in line.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:08
|
|
|
i mean, the dems themselves have shown they are not interested in keeping republicans out of power if it means the left gains power. that's why they give every leftist no backing in general elections. or candidates that are adjacent to leftists. it's also why they are running people who were republicans just 2 years ago as democrats. the establishment is only interested in gaining power, even if that means stabbing the left in the back and forfeiting elections to the republicans. and yet you guys demand that we let them stab us in the back and support them unequivocally while they do it. it's foolish to the extreme to support the dems unequivocally while they hand seats to the republicans to avoid the left getting any more powermcmagic posted:This is grade a bullshit. The problem is voters, not any one freezing anyone out. Yes it matters on the margins but democratic voters are nowhere near enough engaged in primaries and nowhere near willing enough to use primaries to keep bad dems in line. no, the problem is being frozen out. hoyer, pelosi, etc are mobilizing the dem party itself to freeze out anyone but their chosen candidates in primaries. we just learned that. and voting for their candidates only reinforces the dems' idea that oligarchy is good. so it's not bullshit at all. don't vote for lovely dems in the general
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:09
|
|
|
Holding the voting public responsible en masse isn't meaningful or productive. If we can manipulate the electorate as a whole, we don't need the Democratic Party at all. I'm sorry but as a general rule if you're saying "Well people should just..." you're not doing politics.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:11
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:This is grade a bullshit. The problem is voters, not any one freezing anyone out. Yes it matters on the margins but democratic voters are nowhere near enough engaged in primaries and nowhere near willing enough to use primaries to keep bad dems in line. Didn't the DCCC throw its full weight behind an anti-choice anti-gay anti-healthcare guy who voted against Obamacare in a safe blue seat that polls way to the left of him on all those issues and manage to drag him across the finish line with a 1% win over a progressive challenger? There's plenty of blame to go around, but claiming that money, power, influence, advertising, and connections have no ability to sway a race even by a couple of points is really unsupportable I think.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:12
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:The problem is voters This is smoothbrain thinking at its finest
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:13
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Didn't the DCCC throw its full weight behind an anti-choice anti-gay anti-healthcare guy who voted against Obamacare in a safe blue seat that's way to the left of him and manage to drag him across the finish line with a 1% win over a progressive challenger? It's part of it but if the voters really cared and were activated to punish bad dems, non of that would matter. Just like it doesn't matter in republican primaries.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:13
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:A lot of this thread has simply been leftist/liberal infighting hey buddy i would like you to explain how libs vs left is infighting or, failing that, why you're using liberal and leftist interchangably
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:15
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:We're talking in the US. In the US, liberals are left of center. The democrats cover some centrists, and some liberals, and a small amount of leftists. Basically everyone not outright fascist. Do you see the inherent issue with this sentence as an indicator of political utility?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:15
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:If you're talking left of center politics, it's infighting. libs arent left of center Jaxyon posted:We're talking in the US. In the US, liberals are left of center. nope
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:15
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:It's part of it but if the voters really cared and were activated to punish bad dems, non of that would matter. Just like it doesn't matter in republican primaries. This is the exact same justification Republicans use for voter suppression because if voters "really cared and were activated" none of the things they're doing would have any effect. Elections are won and lost on the margins, building in an institutional advantage of even a couple of points is massively anti-democratic, it doesn't matter that you failed to suppress 49.9% of the vote if you won by 0.2%
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:16
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:This is grade a bullshit. The problem is voters, not any one freezing anyone out. Yes it matters on the margins but democratic voters are nowhere near enough engaged in primaries and nowhere near willing enough to use primaries to keep bad dems in line. could this possibly be because dem primaries are rigged as gently caress?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
"Everyone who isn't a fascist should vote for the oligarchy party" is an unironic position in tyool 2018.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:18
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:This is the exact same justification Republicans use for voter suppression because if voters "really cared and were activated" none of the things they're doing would have any effect. Guess what? They are right. That doesn't mean we shouldn't fight against it but voters are directly responsible for the government they get. More people DIDN'T voted than voted for Hillary OR Trump. BENGHAZI 2 posted:could this possibly be because dem primaries are rigged as gently caress? They are not rigged. Centrist establishment democrats have an advantage but voters have to take responsibility and not vote for poo poo candidates.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:18
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Guess what? They are right. That doesn't mean we shouldn't fight against it but voters are directly responsible for the government they get. More people DIDN'T voted than voted for Hillary OR Trump. "Republicans are right that voters are to blame when Republicans disenfranchise them" is quite the take.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Guess what? They are right. That doesn't mean we should fight against it but voters are directly responsible for the government they get. dude, hoyer was trying to bully candidates out of primary races. well before a single vote was cast. you cannot blame this bullshit on voters! the primaries are rigged and we are not getting a fair shake from the start! sure, the guy who turned in the recording of hoyer trying to bully him out of the race will stay in, but how many candidates forfeited early cause they were convinced by the dem party that the dem party would make sure they never had a chance? again, this isn't a problem that voters can magically solve. if the dems push out all primary challengers but the establishment pick, then voters don't have a choice period. and for every candidate the dems push out, voters have less of a chance to actually make an impact on the system. so stop blaming voters for the sins of the democratic party! quote:They are not rigged. Centrist establishment democrats have an advantage but voters have to take responsibility and not vote for poo poo candidates. "voters! it's your responsibility to keep the dem party from forcing candidates out of the primary before it even begins!! take responsibility you lazy asses!!!"
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:21
|
|
|
Condiv posted:dude, hoyer was trying to bully candidates out of primary races. well before a single vote was cast. you cannot blame this bullshit on voters! the primaries are rigged and we are not getting a fair shake from the start! sure, the guy who turned in the recording of hoyer trying to bully him out of the race will stay in, but how many candidates forfeited early cause they were convinced by the dem party that the dem party would make sure they never had a chance? You're making excuses for voters. Voters in CA will have a great choice between a terrible, centrist senator and many good progressive candidates but she's winning in the polls by A LOT. Voters in NY have another chance to knock over Cuomo who is basically a republican who is working to destroy any chance of progressive change in the state and yet he's way up in the polling. If voters couldn't care enough to vote pieces of poo poo like Feinstein and Cuomo out in the most progressive states in the country in races that the DCCC has nothing to do with, that is the root of the problem.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:26
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:You're making excuses for voters. Voters in CA will have a great choice between a terrible, centrist senator and many good progressive candidates but she's winning in the polls by A LOT. Voters in NY have another chance to knock over Cuomo who is basically a republican who is working to destroy any chance of progressive change in the state and yet he's way up in the polling. If voters couldn't care enough to vote pieces of poo poo like Feinstein and Cuomo out in the most progressive states in the country in races that the DCCC has nothing to do with, that is the root of the problem. loving  those lazy voters! how dare they not go and prevent hoyer from bullying all the non-establishment candidates out of the race! face it mcmagic. you were wrong. this is not a problem that is magically solved by voters being more vigilant. it is a problem that is categorically unsolvable by voting for lovely centrists in the GE.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:27
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Yes everyone to the right of me is a centrist or a consertvative, there's only 3 points not a scale No, you said the party "covers" leftists. It doesn't, it covers liberals and centrists because they're the ones who guide it and create its policies. Leftists are hostages. No, not everyone to the right of me is a centrist or conservative, but neither do the 2 parties have to be on opposing sides of the political spectrum. You're looking into the Overton window and saying that the center-left-right configuration that is in play right now is the actual one when it isn't, it's just a function of how much the window is pulled to the right. The Dems are, in general, a socially liberal and economically right wing party. They're too pro-business and too pro-capitalist to be anything else.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:29
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Boy you just love defending the status quo, huh? No. Where did I do that? Condiv posted:and by voting for said worthless dem, i ensure i will never get any choice but a worthless dem. your suggestion doesn't make the slightest bit of sense if we want things to change By not voting for the worthless dem, you do nothing. You'll get one of the two people running. That's how elections in the US work. It sucks, but pouting doesn't change that. Worth noting, the dem isn't "worthless", they're just lovely. Unless you're saying there's no actual difference between a hardcore regressive and a lovely dem, which is super dumb. Your using language to try and imply that though. VitalSigns posted:Let me apply Game Theory to this premise, political wonks love *fires up the Idealotron*By voting for the Random 3rd Party I have fixed the system and now the Democrats are the party of full communism.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:31
|
|
|
Condiv posted:loving I just pointed out races where there are good progressive candidates who haven't been pushed out of the race by anyone and centrist fuckheads are still going to win. You're ignoring that problem.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:31
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:By not voting for the worthless dem, you do nothing. You'll get one of the two people running. That's how elections in the US work. It sucks, but pouting doesn't change that. Well voting for one of them is actively obstructing any chance of facilitating long term change and the other is voting republican.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 19:27 |
|
|
This thread has cushioned itself from the reality that leftists are years away from being a real player in national politics because you can't get mad that Bernie didn't win and then follow like 3 progressive races and then say "gently caress it Dems are worthless I'm voting for RCP and posting on the internet"
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 20:35
|
|