|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:Actually I wish people weren't hosed to death at all, and that's why I won't support either party By doing nothing, I am the bestest ally
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 18:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 16:18 |
|
|
Oh we're doing this one then? OKa.p. dent posted:Yes, it's a single voter's fault the Democrats supported loving everyone to death Being silent is the best way to send a message.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 19:45
|
|
|
People replying to my post with nuanced responses to a non-nuanced reply are missing the point, in that I was giving a dumb reply to a dumb reply.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 19:53
|
|
|
This is a thread about voting strategy. Talking to people, in this thread, about their voting strategy is one thing. How the Dems address voter apathy and 3rd party support is election strategy, that's a different thing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 20:03
|
|
|
viral spiral posted:You do you know the democrats voted to give hundreds of millions to Trump and the military right Man it's amazing you managed to extrapolate my entire belief system from one sentence posts and that definitely is not at all you trying to make me into a strawman.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 20:09
|
|
|
viral spiral posted:well gee sir this is the first time i've seen you post I dunno you were just telling me what I was pretending or whatever,  Is this the "I'll try to take a stand in posts but act like I was just shitposting when called out on it" or what
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 20:21
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Actually it is, because you can't Jedi mind-meld the 4 million extra people who showed up in 2008 but lost faith over the years into voting again by getting really really mad on the Internet and browbeating a handful of people on message boards. Even if it works on that handful, and it won't, their votes are meaningless and the millions of other people are completely out of your control. Again, your confusing a discussion of voting strategy on a message board with election strategy of the party. If you're going to talk to individual people, you're talking voting strategy. If you're talking about how to get groups of people to vote, that's election strategy. If someone comes on here and is like "gently caress voting nothing matters" arguing with them certainly has a point. If you have a large problem with voter apathy, that's absolutely on the Dems to fix if they want to win elections.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 20:54
|
|
|
self unaware posted:lol that you think the voters unaware of game theory are the ones voting third party and not for the better baby bomber Wait are you making the argument that in a FPTP voting system voting third party is the correct way to game it? self unaware posted:if you voted Hillary or Trump you're part of the problem not the solution 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 21:30
|
|
|
self unaware posted:I'm making the argument that voting for Hillary or Trump does nothing but show your willingness to cede power to the status quo despite both of them being liars who have careers of unethical, immoral and illegal behavior. One is way worse than the other, one's platform is way worse than the other(unless you're one of those privileged I'm white it doesn't matter how they treat minorities fuckboys). Yes neither is a stellar person but you're talking about game theory, which means you have to pick the best option whether or not you enjoy it. You're basically undercutting your argument because you clearly don't know what others are talking about.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 21:48
|
|
|
self unaware posted:It's like clockwork, ask a liberal to defend voting for Hillary and they go into "game theory" and "there are only two options". As if the Democratic party isn't capable of figuring out what my vote for La Riva meant. It means you've checked out and they don't have to pursue your vote. They care about getting Dems out to vote, not winning La Rivans. FYI I'm a socialist, I'm just not an idiot about political analysis.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 22:13
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:*loses every level of government* *has voted for nobody elected to office in years* "Dems gonna get this message any day now!"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 22:17
|
|
|
Condiv posted:if they cared about getting dems out to vote they wouldn't try so hard to appeal to republicans. but even if what you were claiming is true, it's an idiotic strategy in a nation with a growing population of independent and disaffected voters. i guess your argument is that we should enable such stupid and self-destructive strategy by the dem party? Democrats have been winning special elections by getting Dems out to vote. They're not trying to appeal to Republicans, they're trying to appeal to idiot moderates, who actually do exist.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 22:19
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:So you're openly cheerleading for the Democrats to never learn from what happened to them 2009-2016? No, where did I do that?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 22:19
|
|
|
Condiv posted:actually you'll find that most of us have voted dem for a long time, and yet somehow dems never manage to get our message and keep sliding rightwards regardless Who said that was my strategy? Is everyone in the thread incapable of not dealing in strawmen?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 22:20
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:If a party appeals to idiot moderates by doing idiot moderate things then why do socialists want to vote for it? Most socialists I know do not want to. They just understand how politics works. Well, some do.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:When you gloated over the Democrats not learning anything from 4 million voters dropping out between 2008 and 2016? Except, that's not what that is. That's me pointing out that the voting 3rd party thing doesn't seem to be working either. OwlFancier posted:Then why do they? Because I live in reality and people get hurt by politics in reality. The problem is a FPTP 2 party system. I can't ignore that because I don't want it to be like that. I can't tell my friends in vulnerable groups to take one for the team because I am taking an ideological stand. My job is to vote for the least work option in close elections, because one of those 2 is going to win, because that's how politics works right now in the US. I don't like it, but that doesn't change that. I also work towards electoral reform and primarying from the left, because that's how you change the fundamentally broken system. I don't have the privilege of saying "well not a socialist, gonna go 3rd party and let Trump win because my societal position is such that I won't be much affected by either him or Hillary"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 22:28
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Like either you vote for democrats and get poo poo or you vote for republicans and get more poo poo. Why vote for poo poo? Why accept voting for poo poo? Unless you're getting your poo poo together for the revolution, not sure where you're going with this.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
Condiv posted:well, my plan was instead to vote for dems that are good, and not vote for dems that are bad, so as to hopefully purge the party of the bad dems. i call it strategic voting It's great to be ideologically pure, but ocassionally you have to suck it up and vote for a mediocre/bad dem if the results of losing warrant it. If you're a middle class white person, maybe no results warrant it BENGHAZI 2 posted:By supporting the people who gently caress people to death, I'm an even better one Wait is this in defense of not voting, or voting? OwlFancier posted:You can't change it if you keep offering uncondtional support to whoever has the blue rosette on. Because why are you going to get electoral reform if you achieve your end state of just electing any democrat that's on the ballot? Why are you going to get left candidates if literally anyone can show up and get the votes because people have to give them? I've made this argument in the past. The issue is that the party doesn't look at your vote like this. If all you do is vote lesser evils, no you won't change the party. You need to vote lesser evils AND work at changing the party from the ground up. That takes work and that's why most internet posters end their involvement at protest voting. quote:Like, why are you a socialist if you think that oligarchs will just hand over power because you ask nicely while supporting everything they do? You don't get better wages by asking the boss for some but refusing to withdraw your labour. If dems want votes you have to make them work for them, because votes are the only thing they give a poo poo about, votes are their money, votes are their power, votes are what they need from you, you don't give them over freely and expect anything back in return do you? A voter strike has different results than a labor strike. If I don't vote in a close state and Trump wins, I have actively hosed people HARD, rather than given them a lesser loving. I'd prefer no loving(har har) but that's not one of the two options. quote:Why on earth do you treat democrats like some sort of ally or equal? I don't. They occasionally ally but ideologically they're going to be liberals, and not leftists, until the party shifts(if ever).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Also where's this weird loving idea that people can't vote against their immediate interest and that anyone who doesn't vote dem because they're poo poo is clearly some kind of champagne swilling ultrabooj in disguise? Is it so weird to think that maybe people who need real change in their lives rather than platitudes can look at the situation and think "well I'm never going to get it by voting for megabucks mc cuntface with the blue pin on, so I'm going to vote against them as well as the republicans" Because 90% of the time when I'm arguing this on facebook it's a white upper middle class person saying "hillary and trump are functionally the same" and that's because to them, they are. If you're an exception, wonderful, but most aren't.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 22:39
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:I mean you're positing thAt not supporting the people who are loving us to death is bad, so by supporting them you're actually good OOh I can do this too! You're posting that by supporting the people loving you harder, eventually you'll stop getting hosed. But the middle part in there is hazy and not very detailed.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 22:42
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:If they don't look at your vote like that, the issue is that you have not denied them enough votes. In a system where the majority of people don't vote, I would suggest this is already their error. A party should fear its voters. You can argue "well it's a two party system so that's never going to happen" in which case, perhaps the preferred goal is to render it no longer a two party system? By taking votes from either of the other parties? That's not how the system works. If you want to change the electoral progress, change it, but don't fool yourself that simply voting 3rd party every once in a while is doing that. Currently there are things preventing third parties from progress that require more change than not voting for Dems and hoping.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 22:48
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:100% of the time when you're arguing it you're fuckin retarded You're a moron if you think they're functionally the same. This is a lie you're telling yourself because either A) you aren't reading enough or B) it justifies your ideology BENGHAZI 2 posted:I'm explicitly not supporting any of the people loving me to death though And because of how politics works, you may be effectively doing it anyway. This is why you should try to learn things.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 22:49
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:Who says that's all people are doing Nobody, but that poster specifically said withholding votes was a strategy. At this time, until laws are changed, that's not a winning strategy at all, and actively fucks over people.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 22:51
|
|
|
viral spiral posted:It's pretty funny to watch Jaxyon and botany insist that neoliberal dems are owed our votes viral spiral posted:botany and Jaxyon telling us the party of superdelegates cares about democracy now Watching you repeatedly strawman because you can't argue honestly is pretty funny
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
Also don't lump me with Botany
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i'm gonna go ahead and assume that everyone who's waddling into the thread to say "push left in the primary, that's the right place for it!" is a centrist that doesn't want any progress cause every single one of them so far completely ignore when it's brought up that the dems are rigging the primaries. i mean, they wouldn't run and hide from that truth if they actually wanted to push the party left right? Assume whatever you want, you're a moron who doesn't follow politics. What, did you think Dems are going to let you push your candidates with no resistance? Dumbass.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2018 23:55
|
|
|
This thread is largely a waste because it's just people poo poo posting strawmen, but here's my view: 1. In close elections, you vote the lesser evil. Even if they're not great, one or the other will win. It makes obvious sense to choose the least worst option. 2. In slam-dunk elections, vote whomever you want. Send a message, whatever, by definition your vote doesn't affect the outcome. While doing 1 & 2: a. Work on reforming the election system to kill FPTP b. Work on reforming the election system to allow 3rd parties a real chance c. Work on other reforms(voter suppression, fighting ID, felony disenfrachisement etc) d. primary insufficiently left Dems from the left to while we're still in a 2 party system to try and influence the main party e. get involved in local politics, to try and gain influence None of this will be easy, or without effort, and some of it may not even be possible. I know it sucks. That's why a lot of us drink. or Z. Explain on the internet how you'd like it to be, and how unfair it is and claim to be the wokest.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2018 00:00
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:"Push left in the primary, dumbass." Yeah it's pretty dumb. "Lets primary from the left" "but it's haaaaaard"
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2018 00:08
|
|
|
Some high profile elections, the Democrats are backing more centrist candidates because they think they will have broader appeal. Many MANY other elections you can successfully run from the left. Or are you saying that it's literally impossible to run from the left, that all democratic elections are rigged? That dems are hyper competent? Condiv posted:i expect them to not be putting their thumbs on the scale during primaries yes. i'm not a dumbass for expecting them to follow democratic principles Would you prefer naive? Of course the party will try to flex it's muscle, this isn't some fantasy.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2018 00:10
|
|
|
Sanguinia posted:Primary pushing and voting strait down the party line no matter the cost never got anybody anything except the Republican party control of almost every state and the entire federal government including the most fascist president in modern history, amirite? Gerrymandering and voter suppression don't matter, because those are things that happen to minorities.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2018 00:13
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Someone tried this argument before. It's perfectly acceptable to think the dems are competent at kneecapping leftism within their own party and yet incompetent at winning elections. You can hold both views without them conflicting. You can, but it wouldn't match with reality. Dems are doing fine winning special elections in places they shouldn't and also allowing leftists to win in primaries. The way you change the party is either A) have an insane amount of money or B) win enough lower offices to eventually change the face of the party. Condiv posted:then the party and its followers shouldn't be naive enough to expect me to support the candidates they're forcing through the primaries The party isn't naive. You stopped voting for them, they'll work on GOTV likely democrat voters. You're not that. Naive is thinking that politics has a party that isn't dirty.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2018 00:18
|
|
|
Condiv posted:dems do these too though Probably. In recent times? It's overwhelmingly the Republican party.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2018 00:19
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:They've been winning elections due to backlash against Trump. That is almost entirely the reason why; even if the Democrats did literally nothing (aside from put someone on the ballot) they'd be winning most of these elections. And many republican gains were due to voter suppression and Obama backlash. It's not news that the political landscape changes with each election. Ytlaya posted:I don't get what you're so opposed to here. There is nothing wrong with people expressing opinions on stuff like this, and nothing about doing so means they don't take other political action (and for all you know they have some personal reason they can't take much other political action, and people should still be free to express their opinions regardless of how much time they spend volunteering or whatever). There's also some benefit to people even talking about stuff like how the Democratic Party stacks the odds against the left in primaries; it's good for people to be aware of this stuff, and many people aren't. But even if there weren't any concrete benefit, it's still fine for people to talk about it. It doesn't hurt anyone. And it's just as useless when a bunch of liberals complain about the dumb things Trump says, but for some reason I don't see the same push-back against that (unless it happens to include an attack against the radical left or something else that is concretely bad, like complimenting anti-Trump Republicans). What, do you think I'm silencing discussion? I'm arguing on the internet. I'm not a moderator. A lot of this thread has simply been leftist/liberal infighting with massive strawmen so that people can feel good about themselves. The reality of politics is way more depressing and hopeless.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 16:18 |
|
|
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
|
|