Interestingly, because the US is politically conservative if the democrats pull something like a tea party and swing hard left we will end up with a... moderate leftist political party
All of the Trump ads and such going "BIDEN HAS BEEN TAKEN OVER BY THE RADICAL LEFT" have me like "God I fucking wish man." Lindsey Graham said that the other day and I fell out of my chair laughing.
Oh shit that reminds me.
So people have been having this problem with YouTube lately forcing Trump ads to play even if you have an ad block plugin. As far as running Firefox goes, I additionally have noscript, and haven't had any such ads play. So if you want to give the finger to Trump in a small way get that shit going for yourself.
Yes radical left joe Biden has been a fascinating take from the republicans
If only someone had been Plenty Bold enough to warn us this would happen no matter who won the nom
This whole board was saying that
The Republican game plan is not really a surprise.
Oh I was just making a joke on Mayor Pete saying exactly this like a year ago. Because it's funny and the best thing he contributed to the last year
It would appear even FOX is calling Biden's speech excellent, disproving any claims by Trump that he's mentally shot.
That the Republican propoganda machine is apparently schizophrenic when it comes to Trump is interesting. Says that some party leaders, donors, and lobbyist are doubtful about Trump's chances. If he loses I expect Trump to get George Dubyad.
They'll definitely try. I hope to God we don't let them.
Of course, I expect that if he loses, Day 1 sees him start the Trump News Network—Dubya had the grace to effectively vanish from the public eye; Trump will be a pain in their ass forever.
No, don't do this! I was sure Michigan was not a swing state and didn't work as hard as I should have four years ago.
Just another "no, don't do this!"
Indiana swung blue in 2008 for Obama. The INGOP's done a lot since then to try and make sure that won't happen again, but I've not memory-hole'd that election, and I don't think anyone who feels their state is a "safe" color should fuck around n find out (if you will).
IN going blue in 2008 seriously miscalibrated my political sensors
"and the morning stars I have seen
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
I really don't understand the value of withholding your vote on anything. What exactly is one trying to prove by not participating in an election?
I definitely don't get the idea of not voting as some kind of protest to the available candidates. Why would any system try to engage your concerns if you couldn't be bothered to vote to begin with?
If you really believe nothing matters or burn it all down, cool that's your choice not to participate, but then turning around and demanding why candidates don't reflect your beliefs...well that's why isn't it?
Even if all candidates are equally abhorrent to a voter, surely there is at least one thing that shifts your opinion?
I still think y'all would be much better off if you change your approach when a left-leaning person comes in here with doubts about voting for Biden because his policies in the past have hurt a whole lot of people. Saying "Vote for Biden because Trump will do bad things and if you don't you're also bad" won't work. In their eyes, Biden has already done a ton of damage and set the stage for our current situation, and insulting them because some of those things are a bridge too far definitely won't win them over.
You should instead say "Consider voting for Biden because he's adopted Bernie's policy on free college for students from families making under $125,000" or "Vote for Biden because he's listened and made his climate change policy much more aggressive, with additional spending and reducing his target date from 2050 to 2035" or other examples of where he's done this.
Will it be enough to sway them? Who knows!?! Probably not, but aren't y'all the ones saying you want every vote you can get? Why keep taking this approach of hostility that clearly isn't bringing people in over and over again.
You guys are quick to say he's moved left without giving examples and instead to just doomsay and insult. If you want the left on your side, change your approach and your messaging, because you guys are VERY hostile about any dissent toward Biden. It took me arguing for multiple pages earlier looking for examples of where he's moved left to even get one person to say anything specific, and then the ACTUAL policy that would be convincing to the left (the free public college one I mentioned above) I dug up for myself while trying to read up on the other policy (a very complicated, very centrist dem plan to help people with existing student loans that does provide some relief but is a definite half-measure).
Saying "I dunno read the website" or linking to the 100+ page Biden/Sanders task-force document without any analysis whatsoever will not bring people over.
Wait, I think I know this one: "It's not my job to educate you."
I’m sorry, but you aren’t winning voters like that either.
It would appear even FOX is calling Biden's speech excellent, disproving any claims by Trump that he's mentally shot.
That the Republican propoganda machine is apparently schizophrenic when it comes to Trump is interesting. Says that some party leaders, donors, and lobbyist are doubtful about Trump's chances. If he loses I expect Trump to get George Dubyad.
They'll definitely try. I hope to God we don't let them.
Of course, I expect that if he loses, Day 1 sees him start the Trump News Network—Dubya had the grace to effectively vanish from the public eye; Trump will be a pain in their ass forever.
Trust me, they'll suddenly become very interested in the crimes he committed while in office... or otherwise.
Whatever you think about GOP stalwarts like Graham and McConnell, don't actually believe they like eating shit from Trump. When burning him down becomes to their practical advantage, they'll do so with glee. They're not stupid, and they're not true believers (in Trumpism, at least).
It would appear even FOX is calling Biden's speech excellent, disproving any claims by Trump that he's mentally shot.
That the Republican propoganda machine is apparently schizophrenic when it comes to Trump is interesting. Says that some party leaders, donors, and lobbyist are doubtful about Trump's chances. If he loses I expect Trump to get George Dubyad.
They'll definitely try. I hope to God we don't let them.
Of course, I expect that if he loses, Day 1 sees him start the Trump News Network—Dubya had the grace to effectively vanish from the public eye; Trump will be a pain in their ass forever.
Trust me, they'll suddenly become very interested in the crimes he committed while in office... or otherwise.
Whatever you think about GOP stalwarts like Graham and McConnell, don't actually believe they like eating shit from Trump. When burning him down becomes to their practical advantage, they'll do so with glee. They're not stupid, and they're not true believers (in Trumpism, at least).
Oh, I'm sure they will. Trump is too much a narcissist to go quietly into the night, and his base is well-primed to believe any attack against him is fake. We might very well get to see Trumpers tear the GOP apart, regardless of what happens to the man himself.
+5
Options
No-QuarterNothing To FearBut Fear ItselfRegistered Userregular
It would appear even FOX is calling Biden's speech excellent, disproving any claims by Trump that he's mentally shot.
That the Republican propoganda machine is apparently schizophrenic when it comes to Trump is interesting. Says that some party leaders, donors, and lobbyist are doubtful about Trump's chances. If he loses I expect Trump to get George Dubyad.
Depends on how the base reacts to Trump losing. If the base turned on Trump, Fox would dump his ass in a heartbeat.
I don't see them turning on him. As much as he despises them, he's one of them. A low info regressive troll.
The White House announced today they are going to have a funeral there for Trumps deceased brother. Because sometimes you want to take advantage of a dead relative, but you don't want to drive.
I can't help but think that this was just decided last night as Trump watched the sympathetic videos about Beau Biden. It was reported last night that Trump did watch the evenings events and was rapidly calling people demanding things for the RNC based on what he saw last night.
It would appear even FOX is calling Biden's speech excellent, disproving any claims by Trump that he's mentally shot.
That the Republican propoganda machine is apparently schizophrenic when it comes to Trump is interesting. Says that some party leaders, donors, and lobbyist are doubtful about Trump's chances. If he loses I expect Trump to get George Dubyad.
They'll definitely try. I hope to God we don't let them.
Of course, I expect that if he loses, Day 1 sees him start the Trump News Network—Dubya had the grace to effectively vanish from the public eye; Trump will be a pain in their ass forever.
Trust me, they'll suddenly become very interested in the crimes he committed while in office... or otherwise.
Whatever you think about GOP stalwarts like Graham and McConnell, don't actually believe they like eating shit from Trump. When burning him down becomes to their practical advantage, they'll do so with glee. They're not stupid, and they're not true believers (in Trumpism, at least).
Oh, I'm sure they will. Trump is too much a narcissist to go quietly into the night, and his base is well-primed to believe any attack against him is fake. We might very well get to see Trumpers tear the GOP apart, regardless of what happens to the man himself.
Yeah, they hate him but they can't go against him as long as he commands the base via his social media ranting. Even if he loses, that won't go away.
Especially since the right-wing machine helped Trump build a cult of personality in order to try and shore up their power. Now it's out of their hands to a large extent.
I don't buy the narrative that Trump's base is some special entity. It's a subsection of the regular Republican base. Once Trump is gone they will support whoever leads the GOP on whatever that platform is.
If Trump loses to Biden I can see some GOP infighting but nothing that's more than the standard refocus and power shift that (should) happen when a party loses an election.
+4
Options
SixCaches Tweets in the mainframe cyberhexRegistered Userregular
It would appear even FOX is calling Biden's speech excellent, disproving any claims by Trump that he's mentally shot.
That the Republican propoganda machine is apparently schizophrenic when it comes to Trump is interesting. Says that some party leaders, donors, and lobbyist are doubtful about Trump's chances. If he loses I expect Trump to get George Dubyad.
They'll definitely try. I hope to God we don't let them.
Of course, I expect that if he loses, Day 1 sees him start the Trump News Network—Dubya had the grace to effectively vanish from the public eye; Trump will be a pain in their ass forever.
Trust me, they'll suddenly become very interested in the crimes he committed while in office... or otherwise.
Whatever you think about GOP stalwarts like Graham and McConnell, don't actually believe they like eating shit from Trump. When burning him down becomes to their practical advantage, they'll do so with glee. They're not stupid, and they're not true believers (in Trumpism, at least).
Oh, I'm sure they will. Trump is too much a narcissist to go quietly into the night, and his base is well-primed to believe any attack against him is fake. We might very well get to see Trumpers tear the GOP apart, regardless of what happens to the man himself.
Yeah, they hate him but they can't go against him as long as he commands the base via his social media ranting. Even if he loses, that won't go away.
Especially since the right-wing machine helped Trump build a cult of personality in order to try and shore up their power. Now it's out of their hands to a large extent.
You know what's really delicious? He's almost certainly going to blame them if he loses—when he isn't claiming fraud. They built this monster, and it's going to spend years encouraging the base to primary Republicans in favor of Trump's whackadoodles.
It would appear even FOX is calling Biden's speech excellent, disproving any claims by Trump that he's mentally shot.
That the Republican propoganda machine is apparently schizophrenic when it comes to Trump is interesting. Says that some party leaders, donors, and lobbyist are doubtful about Trump's chances. If he loses I expect Trump to get George Dubyad.
They'll definitely try. I hope to God we don't let them.
Of course, I expect that if he loses, Day 1 sees him start the Trump News Network—Dubya had the grace to effectively vanish from the public eye; Trump will be a pain in their ass forever.
Trust me, they'll suddenly become very interested in the crimes he committed while in office... or otherwise.
Whatever you think about GOP stalwarts like Graham and McConnell, don't actually believe they like eating shit from Trump. When burning him down becomes to their practical advantage, they'll do so with glee. They're not stupid, and they're not true believers (in Trumpism, at least).
Oh, I'm sure they will. Trump is too much a narcissist to go quietly into the night, and his base is well-primed to believe any attack against him is fake. We might very well get to see Trumpers tear the GOP apart, regardless of what happens to the man himself.
My only solace for the last four years is that he is a fat ass orange monkey's paw to the republican party.
Trump’s campaign stopped all advertising for a week to retool and came up with, “What if we spent a week calling Biden a cokehead incapable of speaking a sentence on the same website where Biden will be speaking in full sentences for anybody curious enough to check.”
Everything is always chaos, but they only have the same handful of stupid ideas (the ones that Trump will accept), so it’s a lot of spent energy to produce the same end result as if they’d done nothing at all, but frequently worse.
I’m not sure it matters, but it’s a clear pattern.
I can in reality vote for someone who is not Trump or Biden and doing so is not an endorsement for Trump.
It’s an endorsement insofar as it increases the likelihood of Trump winning.
Doesn't that swing both ways, though? It's not a vote for Trump so it increases the likelihood of Biden winning?
Not in a first-past-the-post electoral system.
Edit: It would be nice if we had a system where you could vote for candidate C. We don’t have that system right now.
The logic behind "if you're not voting for Biden you're voting for Trump" assumes that you're to the left of Biden, which is quite likely if you're objecting to voting for Biden for conscientious reasons. The opposite would only be true if you were someone to the right of Trump. And that, in fact, is another avenue the left have if they absolutely refuse to vote for Biden: figure out ways to encourage people on the right who would ostensibly be a Trump voter to, at a minimum, not vote for Trump. Getting two people who would have voted for Trump to not vote for him but still not vote for Biden (e.g. third party or abstaining) or just one to vote for Biden will cancel out your non-vote. So I say, if you're so adamant about refusing to play the game that you knock your piece off the board, at least please try your best to convince players on the other team to do the same.
Interestingly, because the US is politically conservative if the democrats pull something like a tea party and swing hard left we will end up with a... moderate leftist political party
All of the Trump ads and such going "BIDEN HAS BEEN TAKEN OVER BY THE RADICAL LEFT" have me like "God I fucking wish man." Lindsey Graham said that the other day and I fell out of my chair laughing.
Oh shit that reminds me.
So people have been having this problem with YouTube lately forcing Trump ads to play even if you have an ad block plugin. As far as running Firefox goes, I additionally have noscript, and haven't had any such ads play. So if you want to give the finger to Trump in a small way get that shit going for yourself.
Yes radical left joe Biden has been a fascinating take from the republicans
Calling their opponent "radical left" has been the default Republican strategy for about 20 years now. Every Democrat is a secret scheming socialist, just waiting to get enough power so they can make the USA into the USSR Venezuela. The Dems could have nominated Joe Manchin and the GOP would be saying the exact same thing.
Interestingly, because the US is politically conservative if the democrats pull something like a tea party and swing hard left we will end up with a... moderate leftist political party
All of the Trump ads and such going "BIDEN HAS BEEN TAKEN OVER BY THE RADICAL LEFT" have me like "God I fucking wish man." Lindsey Graham said that the other day and I fell out of my chair laughing.
Oh shit that reminds me.
So people have been having this problem with YouTube lately forcing Trump ads to play even if you have an ad block plugin. As far as running Firefox goes, I additionally have noscript, and haven't had any such ads play. So if you want to give the finger to Trump in a small way get that shit going for yourself.
Yes radical left joe Biden has been a fascinating take from the republicans
Calling their opponent "radical left" has been the default Republican strategy for about 20 years now. Every Democrat is a secret scheming socialist, just waiting to get enough power so they can make the USA into the USSR Venezuela. The Dems could have nominated Joe Manchin and the GOP would be saying the exact same thing.
if only
0
Options
AbsalonLands of Always WinterRegistered Userregular
edited August 2020
Maybe off-topic, playing it safe
Absalon on
0
Options
ElJeffeNot actually a mod.Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPAmod
Clarification. To me, a "tent" is not directly analogous to a Capital Letter political party. I view a "tent" as a collection of people who generally agree with each other WRT overall political beliefs and philosophy. Thus it makes no sense to ask leftist to join the centrist liberal tent. Ask them to pitch their tent on this side of presidential elections based on depressing pragmatism, but that's mostly it. Maybe convince some to keep that tent here to influence the Dem party.
I am highlighting this post as the ur example of an offtopic post. Anyone posting anything like this going forward will be definitely infracted and possibly kicked.
If you are kicked from an election thread, you are kicked from all 2020 election threads going forward.
I understand that your every thought is a precious and cherished snowflake, but if you must post it for all the world to see, find a different venue in which to do so.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
I’m an ER nurse on the frontlines of the COVID fight in the US city first hit hardest
I’m also a transgender woman
I’m also a mother who hasn’t seen her six year-old son in person since January because of how Republicans have handled this virus
I’ve never voted for Joe Biden in my life. I’ve supported far more progressive candidates for the last 12 years, including Sanders, Warren, Harris, and O’Rourke. Even donated to their campaigns.
And if you think I’m not going to vote for Biden in November, you’re out of your mind. I want to stop seeing coworkers getting sick and dying. I want to stop feeling like a second class citizen in places run by Republicans. I want to hug my goddamn kid. I know what my vote means.
I hope anyone abstaining from voting on principle knows what their protest means for me, too.
I don't buy the narrative that Trump's base is some special entity. It's a subsection of the regular Republican base. Once Trump is gone they will support whoever leads the GOP on whatever that platform is.
If Trump loses to Biden I can see some GOP infighting but nothing that's more than the standard refocus and power shift that (should) happen when a party loses an election.
I don't think it's that simple. Trump is not going to go quietly into obscurity, his campaign has control of the official GOP money machine afaik and (I think in many ways most importantly) the reaction of the right-wing media to Trump's win has been to feed and grow his personality cult on the right. They spent a lot of time building it up around him specifically and I'm not sure that's going to fade completely or that he's going to let it fade.
The centrist are always going to be somewhat less nightmarish than the fascists and the political elite that form the majority of Democrat trend towards centrism, therefore you're basically just going to get centrist Dems as an option forever because they know you have no choice, until you are able to leverage support to force them to move left.
The only leverage you have is your vote so by casting it in support of a centrist you're basically throwing your influence away. You're caving instantly.
You're basically proposing a nuclear option, where even if you "win," you still lose, because you've effectively won a burning piece of rubble. You can win 100% influence over a party simply by running as an independent. But it doesn't help you if that party doesn't have any power for you to influence.
The way you leverage a party is to prove yourself useful by giving them some breathing room so that they can afford to take some risks. This means voting for Biden at the top, but aggressively supporting democrats in down ticket races, and actively lobbying for your platform in a way that doesn't threaten their chance of winning.
I mean, look at the Brett Kavanaugh hearings. The democrats largely did the right thing, and not only did it not make any difference, but we ended up losing several Senate seats as a result. So now we're in an even worse position to prevent another Brett Kavanaugh from happening. The vast majority of people who voted for democratic Senators opposed Brett Kavanaugh, but the tiny percent who didn't were enough to sway the election, and the progressive leftists either weren't able or weren't willing to save them. Joe Manchin is a total shithead for supporting Kavanaugh. But if he hadn't done that, then he would have replaced by a republican, who would have been worse.
Or, let's look that the Lamont/Lieberman Senate race. Lieberman was the former democratic VP candidate, meaning he had a lot of influence over the party, but he managed to lose the primary to an underdog liberal candidate.
This is exactly the scenario that you would hope for, where the democratic party backs the liberal candidate over the centrist one. But guess what? It didn't help. Lieberman decided to fuck things up, and run as a third party independent. And he won. The voters didn't pick Lieberman because he was the "safe" candidate, or because he had major party backing. They picked Lieberman because they preferred a right-of-center candidate over a left-of-center candidate, period. And that's why he we don't have a public option, because we needed Lieberman's vote to overcome the filibusterer, and Lieberman didn't want one.
What would have happened if Lieberman didn't run? Well, most likely, the republican candidate would have painted himself as a moderate and won instead. And then we wouldn't have gotten the 60th vote, and we wouldn't have an ACA at all. There's no winning move here. Not because of the party, but because of the voters. But I will say that the republican would have been even worse.
You're trying to influence a party, when you should be trying to influence voters. And I don't mean, "Argue with people on Penny Arcade who already agree with your ideals but don't see them as politically viable." Try working with a political lobbying group to reach out to actual moderates who still aren't on board with your beliefs. Because you won't get on anything you want until you convince them, and convincing them is a lot harder than you think.
Eh you’ll be amazed how quickly they forget about him; he’ll do some interviews on Fox I’m sure but that kind of thing’s easy for them to ignore if they want to
Like what, trump’s going to be a big fundraiser for the NRCC post-presidency? Doubtful
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
I really don't understand the value of withholding your vote on anything. What exactly is one trying to prove by not participating in an election?
I definitely don't get the idea of not voting as some kind of protest to the available candidates. Why would any system try to engage your concerns if you couldn't be bothered to vote to begin with?
If you really believe nothing matters or burn it all down, cool that's your choice not to participate, but then turning around and demanding why candidates don't reflect your beliefs...well that's why isn't it?
Even if all candidates are equally abhorrent to a voter, surely there is at least one thing that shifts your opinion?
Essentially because if politicians can count on my vote just for having a D next to their name, there is no incentive for them to support the policy I want.
I don’t support not voting; everyone should turn in a ballot even if it’s blank. But supporting candidates who don’t endorse the policy you want will just get you more of those candidates
The republican base seems to get this, and demands that their candidates endorse the stuff they support. As a result, there is far more support in the legislature for their base’ agenda
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
If Trump loses (which increasingly looks like it's going to take a miracle to overcome the fucking they're doing to the election), he's just going to go start TrumpTV. It'll attract enough of his base to be successful and Republicans will have to continue to contend with his horseshit.
I would have though losing would finally get rid of Trump, but jesus, he's handled this pandemic about as bad as can be, and his approval numbers are the same as they ever were. Dude will be a major voice on the right until the day he dies.
I really don't understand the value of withholding your vote on anything. What exactly is one trying to prove by not participating in an election?
I definitely don't get the idea of not voting as some kind of protest to the available candidates. Why would any system try to engage your concerns if you couldn't be bothered to vote to begin with?
If you really believe nothing matters or burn it all down, cool that's your choice not to participate, but then turning around and demanding why candidates don't reflect your beliefs...well that's why isn't it?
Even if all candidates are equally abhorrent to a voter, surely there is at least one thing that shifts your opinion?
Essentially because if politicians can count on my vote just for having a D next to their name, there is no incentive for them to support the policy I want.
I don’t support not voting; everyone should turn in a ballot even if it’s blank. But supporting candidates who don’t endorse the policy you want will just get you more of those candidates
The republican base seems to get this, and demands that their candidates endorse the stuff they support. As a result, there is far more support in the legislature for their base’ agenda
This doesn't seem right no.
Biden moved left after he got the votes and won the primary. There are ways to communicate what you want besides just the binary decision of whether to vote.
Eh you’ll be amazed how quickly they forget about him; he’ll do some interviews on Fox I’m sure but that kind of thing’s easy for them to ignore if they want to
Like what, trump’s going to be a big fundraiser for the NRCC post-presidency? Doubtful
If he's not arrested for god, name something at random immediately after he leaves office, I can totally see him getting Bannon'd by trying to grift money out of people for a fake Republican fundraising operation.
Or, let's look that the Lamont/Lieberman Senate race. Lieberman was the former democratic VP candidate, meaning he had a lot of influence over the party, but he managed to lose the primary to an underdog liberal candidate.
This is exactly the scenario that you would hope for, where the democratic party backs the liberal candidate over the centrist one. But guess what? It didn't help. Lieberman decided to fuck things up, and run as a third party independent. And he won. The voters didn't pick Lieberman because he was the "safe" candidate, or because he had major party backing. They picked Lieberman because they preferred a right-of-center candidate over a left-of-center candidate, period. And that's why he we don't have a public option, because we needed Lieberman's vote to overcome the filibusterer, and Lieberman didn't want one.
What would have happened if Lieberman didn't run? Well, most likely, the republican candidate would have painted himself as a moderate and won instead. And then we wouldn't have gotten the 60th vote, and we wouldn't have an ACA at all. There's no winning move here. Not because of the party, but because of the voters. But I will say that the republican would have been even worse.
I'm not sure about that, the last Republican Senator in Connecticut was Weicker (1988) and my god do people still curse his name to this day. I actually didn't know Lamont challenged Liberman from the left back then. That would have made me more excited to vote for him as Governor. In any case research I did seems to show that Lieberman presented himself as something he wasn't to pretend he was more anti-war than Lamont and used that to win. So I don't think the message is exactly that the republican would have won for the democrats being too liberal. To be fair this is in Connecticut and we are pretty blue.
I really don't understand the value of withholding your vote on anything. What exactly is one trying to prove by not participating in an election?
I definitely don't get the idea of not voting as some kind of protest to the available candidates. Why would any system try to engage your concerns if you couldn't be bothered to vote to begin with?
If you really believe nothing matters or burn it all down, cool that's your choice not to participate, but then turning around and demanding why candidates don't reflect your beliefs...well that's why isn't it?
Even if all candidates are equally abhorrent to a voter, surely there is at least one thing that shifts your opinion?
Essentially because if politicians can count on my vote just for having a D next to their name, there is no incentive for them to support the policy I want.
I don’t support not voting; everyone should turn in a ballot even if it’s blank. But supporting candidates who don’t endorse the policy you want will just get you more of those candidates
The republican base seems to get this, and demands that their candidates endorse the stuff they support. As a result, there is far more support in the legislature for their base’ agenda
This doesn't seem right no.
Biden moved left after he got the votes and won the primary. There are ways to communicate what you want besides just the binary decision of whether to vote.
Republican voters vote very consistently.
Biden is moving left (evidently against preference) to consolidate his base; he’s doing that because he thinks people like me need to be persuaded to vote (and donate, and volunteer) for him. If he thought no one would ever “withhold their vote” (as though it’s owed to him or something) he wouldn’t be doing that
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
I really don't understand the value of withholding your vote on anything. What exactly is one trying to prove by not participating in an election?
I definitely don't get the idea of not voting as some kind of protest to the available candidates. Why would any system try to engage your concerns if you couldn't be bothered to vote to begin with?
If you really believe nothing matters or burn it all down, cool that's your choice not to participate, but then turning around and demanding why candidates don't reflect your beliefs...well that's why isn't it?
Even if all candidates are equally abhorrent to a voter, surely there is at least one thing that shifts your opinion?
Essentially because if politicians can count on my vote just for having a D next to their name, there is no incentive for them to support the policy I want.
I don’t support not voting; everyone should turn in a ballot even if it’s blank. But supporting candidates who don’t endorse the policy you want will just get you more of those candidates
The republican base seems to get this, and demands that their candidates endorse the stuff they support. As a result, there is far more support in the legislature for their base’ agenda
This doesn't seem right no.
Biden moved left after he got the votes and won the primary. There are ways to communicate what you want besides just the binary decision of whether to vote.
Republican voters vote very consistently.
Biden is moving left (evidently against preference) to consolidate his base; he’s doing that because he thinks people like me need to be persuaded to vote (and donate, and volunteer) for him. If he thought no one would ever “withhold their vote” (as though it’s owed to him or something) he wouldn’t be doing that
Essentially because if politicians can count on my vote just for having a D next to their name, there is no incentive for them to support the policy I want.
I don’t support not voting; everyone should turn in a ballot even if it’s blank. But supporting candidates who don’t endorse the policy you want will just get you more of those candidates
The republican base seems to get this, and demands that their candidates endorse the stuff they support. As a result, there is far more support in the legislature for their base’ agenda
The republican base does no such thing, the republican lobbying groups do.
Likewise, the republican base might listen listens to the lobbying groups, not the other way around.
Which is why so much of the republican base will vote for things that go against their own self-interests -- because the lobbying groups spent hundreds of millions of dollars on marketing.
The base doesn't write the agenda. The lobbying groups write the agenda, and then they convince the base that this is what they wanted all along. Often, they use Orwellian strategies that resemble brainwashing, so that the base turns a complete 180 without realizing it.
Posts
Oh I was just making a joke on Mayor Pete saying exactly this like a year ago. Because it's funny and the best thing he contributed to the last year
They'll definitely try. I hope to God we don't let them.
Of course, I expect that if he loses, Day 1 sees him start the Trump News Network—Dubya had the grace to effectively vanish from the public eye; Trump will be a pain in their ass forever.
Might wanna catch up before hitting reply :razz:
IN going blue in 2008 seriously miscalibrated my political sensors
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
No :hydra:
I definitely don't get the idea of not voting as some kind of protest to the available candidates. Why would any system try to engage your concerns if you couldn't be bothered to vote to begin with?
If you really believe nothing matters or burn it all down, cool that's your choice not to participate, but then turning around and demanding why candidates don't reflect your beliefs...well that's why isn't it?
Even if all candidates are equally abhorrent to a voter, surely there is at least one thing that shifts your opinion?
I’m sorry, but you aren’t winning voters like that either.
Whatever you think about GOP stalwarts like Graham and McConnell, don't actually believe they like eating shit from Trump. When burning him down becomes to their practical advantage, they'll do so with glee. They're not stupid, and they're not true believers (in Trumpism, at least).
Oh, I'm sure they will. Trump is too much a narcissist to go quietly into the night, and his base is well-primed to believe any attack against him is fake. We might very well get to see Trumpers tear the GOP apart, regardless of what happens to the man himself.
Depends on how the base reacts to Trump losing. If the base turned on Trump, Fox would dump his ass in a heartbeat.
I don't see them turning on him. As much as he despises them, he's one of them. A low info regressive troll.
I can't help but think that this was just decided last night as Trump watched the sympathetic videos about Beau Biden. It was reported last night that Trump did watch the evenings events and was rapidly calling people demanding things for the RNC based on what he saw last night.
Yeah, they hate him but they can't go against him as long as he commands the base via his social media ranting. Even if he loses, that won't go away.
Especially since the right-wing machine helped Trump build a cult of personality in order to try and shore up their power. Now it's out of their hands to a large extent.
Republican convention starts Monday right?
Nothing goes as smoothly as big changes 3 days before showtime I’m sure.
If Trump loses to Biden I can see some GOP infighting but nothing that's more than the standard refocus and power shift that (should) happen when a party loses an election.
I’m all for it.
You know what's really delicious? He's almost certainly going to blame them if he loses—when he isn't claiming fraud. They built this monster, and it's going to spend years encouraging the base to primary Republicans in favor of Trump's whackadoodles.
My only solace for the last four years is that he is a fat ass orange monkey's paw to the republican party.
Everything is always chaos, but they only have the same handful of stupid ideas (the ones that Trump will accept), so it’s a lot of spent energy to produce the same end result as if they’d done nothing at all, but frequently worse.
I’m not sure it matters, but it’s a clear pattern.
The logic behind "if you're not voting for Biden you're voting for Trump" assumes that you're to the left of Biden, which is quite likely if you're objecting to voting for Biden for conscientious reasons. The opposite would only be true if you were someone to the right of Trump. And that, in fact, is another avenue the left have if they absolutely refuse to vote for Biden: figure out ways to encourage people on the right who would ostensibly be a Trump voter to, at a minimum, not vote for Trump. Getting two people who would have voted for Trump to not vote for him but still not vote for Biden (e.g. third party or abstaining) or just one to vote for Biden will cancel out your non-vote. So I say, if you're so adamant about refusing to play the game that you knock your piece off the board, at least please try your best to convince players on the other team to do the same.
Calling their opponent "radical left" has been the default Republican strategy for about 20 years now. Every Democrat is a secret scheming socialist, just waiting to get enough power so they can make the USA into the USSR Venezuela. The Dems could have nominated Joe Manchin and the GOP would be saying the exact same thing.
I can has cheezburger, yes?
if only
I am highlighting this post as the ur example of an offtopic post. Anyone posting anything like this going forward will be definitely infracted and possibly kicked.
If you are kicked from an election thread, you are kicked from all 2020 election threads going forward.
I understand that your every thought is a precious and cherished snowflake, but if you must post it for all the world to see, find a different venue in which to do so.
I’m also a transgender woman
I’m also a mother who hasn’t seen her six year-old son in person since January because of how Republicans have handled this virus
I’ve never voted for Joe Biden in my life. I’ve supported far more progressive candidates for the last 12 years, including Sanders, Warren, Harris, and O’Rourke. Even donated to their campaigns.
And if you think I’m not going to vote for Biden in November, you’re out of your mind. I want to stop seeing coworkers getting sick and dying. I want to stop feeling like a second class citizen in places run by Republicans. I want to hug my goddamn kid. I know what my vote means.
I hope anyone abstaining from voting on principle knows what their protest means for me, too.
I don't think it's that simple. Trump is not going to go quietly into obscurity, his campaign has control of the official GOP money machine afaik and (I think in many ways most importantly) the reaction of the right-wing media to Trump's win has been to feed and grow his personality cult on the right. They spent a lot of time building it up around him specifically and I'm not sure that's going to fade completely or that he's going to let it fade.
I love that this guy helmed the convention in working from home business casual. You sir are someone we should all aspire to.
pleasepaypreacher.net
You're basically proposing a nuclear option, where even if you "win," you still lose, because you've effectively won a burning piece of rubble. You can win 100% influence over a party simply by running as an independent. But it doesn't help you if that party doesn't have any power for you to influence.
The way you leverage a party is to prove yourself useful by giving them some breathing room so that they can afford to take some risks. This means voting for Biden at the top, but aggressively supporting democrats in down ticket races, and actively lobbying for your platform in a way that doesn't threaten their chance of winning.
I mean, look at the Brett Kavanaugh hearings. The democrats largely did the right thing, and not only did it not make any difference, but we ended up losing several Senate seats as a result. So now we're in an even worse position to prevent another Brett Kavanaugh from happening. The vast majority of people who voted for democratic Senators opposed Brett Kavanaugh, but the tiny percent who didn't were enough to sway the election, and the progressive leftists either weren't able or weren't willing to save them. Joe Manchin is a total shithead for supporting Kavanaugh. But if he hadn't done that, then he would have replaced by a republican, who would have been worse.
Or, let's look that the Lamont/Lieberman Senate race. Lieberman was the former democratic VP candidate, meaning he had a lot of influence over the party, but he managed to lose the primary to an underdog liberal candidate.
This is exactly the scenario that you would hope for, where the democratic party backs the liberal candidate over the centrist one. But guess what? It didn't help. Lieberman decided to fuck things up, and run as a third party independent. And he won. The voters didn't pick Lieberman because he was the "safe" candidate, or because he had major party backing. They picked Lieberman because they preferred a right-of-center candidate over a left-of-center candidate, period. And that's why he we don't have a public option, because we needed Lieberman's vote to overcome the filibusterer, and Lieberman didn't want one.
What would have happened if Lieberman didn't run? Well, most likely, the republican candidate would have painted himself as a moderate and won instead. And then we wouldn't have gotten the 60th vote, and we wouldn't have an ACA at all. There's no winning move here. Not because of the party, but because of the voters. But I will say that the republican would have been even worse.
You're trying to influence a party, when you should be trying to influence voters. And I don't mean, "Argue with people on Penny Arcade who already agree with your ideals but don't see them as politically viable." Try working with a political lobbying group to reach out to actual moderates who still aren't on board with your beliefs. Because you won't get on anything you want until you convince them, and convincing them is a lot harder than you think.
Like what, trump’s going to be a big fundraiser for the NRCC post-presidency? Doubtful
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Essentially because if politicians can count on my vote just for having a D next to their name, there is no incentive for them to support the policy I want.
I don’t support not voting; everyone should turn in a ballot even if it’s blank. But supporting candidates who don’t endorse the policy you want will just get you more of those candidates
The republican base seems to get this, and demands that their candidates endorse the stuff they support. As a result, there is far more support in the legislature for their base’ agenda
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
I would have though losing would finally get rid of Trump, but jesus, he's handled this pandemic about as bad as can be, and his approval numbers are the same as they ever were. Dude will be a major voice on the right until the day he dies.
This doesn't seem right no.
Biden moved left after he got the votes and won the primary. There are ways to communicate what you want besides just the binary decision of whether to vote.
Republican voters vote very consistently.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
If he's not arrested for god, name something at random immediately after he leaves office, I can totally see him getting Bannon'd by trying to grift money out of people for a fake Republican fundraising operation.
So basically this trope:
I'm not sure about that, the last Republican Senator in Connecticut was Weicker (1988) and my god do people still curse his name to this day. I actually didn't know Lamont challenged Liberman from the left back then. That would have made me more excited to vote for him as Governor. In any case research I did seems to show that Lieberman presented himself as something he wasn't to pretend he was more anti-war than Lamont and used that to win. So I don't think the message is exactly that the republican would have won for the democrats being too liberal. To be fair this is in Connecticut and we are pretty blue.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-lessons-of-todays-stu_b_64332
Biden is moving left (evidently against preference) to consolidate his base; he’s doing that because he thinks people like me need to be persuaded to vote (and donate, and volunteer) for him. If he thought no one would ever “withhold their vote” (as though it’s owed to him or something) he wouldn’t be doing that
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Lots of baseless speculation here imo
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
The republican base does no such thing, the republican lobbying groups do.
Likewise, the republican base might listen listens to the lobbying groups, not the other way around.
Which is why so much of the republican base will vote for things that go against their own self-interests -- because the lobbying groups spent hundreds of millions of dollars on marketing.
The base doesn't write the agenda. The lobbying groups write the agenda, and then they convince the base that this is what they wanted all along. Often, they use Orwellian strategies that resemble brainwashing, so that the base turns a complete 180 without realizing it.