this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
639 points (95.2% liked)

Political Memes

5446 readers
3279 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Democratic political strategy

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 3 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (2 children)

"The progressive alternative would split the Democratic vote"

But people keep talking about electors voting for the Democrats not by choice, but because it's the only option left of the Republicans. If there are so many people who do it (or don't vote due to a lack of option) like people keep repeating, then removing the Democrats from the equation shouldn't be an issue, right? Budget or not, people choose where they put a checkmark.

What I'm getting at is that I don't think there's as much appetite for a progressive party in the USA as some people like to believe. There's a far right party and a conservative party and, even though nature doesn't like a void, no one bothers actually trying to fill up the empty space on the left. Hell, Sanders and AOC keep getting elected yet even they aren't trying to get a Progressive party started, AOC is a Democrat and Sanders is an "independent" that keeps showing up at Democrat's events.

[–] immutable@lemm.ee 3 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

We have data so that we don’t have to go with our guts

You can check out the vote totals

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries

I would argue the 2016 is a better reflection, in 2020 there was a sort of coordinated drop out of centrist candidates on Super Tuesday as the establishment wing of the party threw their weight behind Biden.

But in either case the answer is that the Democratic Party is basically a coalition party of centrist Dems that seem to be fine with shifting further and further to the right and more progressive voters. In 2016 it was pretty evenly split so there is appetite just not enough for a viable party.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

Ok, where's the Progressive party then? If the existing parties are leaving such a huge part of the population without a party (based on what people are saying) then it should be a guaranteed win, right? Why don't the progressives Democrats (and left wing independents) get together and tell the rest of the Democrats to fuck off? Sanders has a ton of support, you just proved it!

[–] immutable@lemm.ee -1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I’d refer you back to my first comment that explains the structural incentives and disincentives that prevent an alternative to the Democratic Party from emerging

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Nope, it doesn't explain why you've got progressives that would rather live with the status quo instead of saying "You know what, fuck you guys, we're done." when the party clearly works against them. Hell, there isn't even a movement comparable to the tea party! I'm more and more convinced that it's all just a show and they're just happy the way things are and would rather keep things as is than potentially lose their seat by actually fighting against the status quo.

[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago

Oh shit, he knows too much

[–] immutable@lemm.ee 0 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

If there’s something in particular in that original analysis you disagree with feel free to point it out.

Progressive voters can’t vote for progressive candidates that don’t exist. My analysis explains why progressive candidates / parties don’t emerge in this system.

When there are progressive candidates progressive voters vote for them, while centrist Dems say they won’t (that’s exactly what Clinton supporters said they would do if sanders won the nomination)

What exactly do you think “you know what, fuck you guys, we’re done” looks like in the absence of progressive candidates? Maybe the presidential candidate getting 20M fewer votes? That literally just happened.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying it doesn't explain why progressive Democrats that are popular and get elected don't get together and form their own party or even movement inside the party. Blame money all you want, they would find donors and would probably be a strong grassroots movement.

[–] hypnotoad__@lemmy.ml 2 points 22 hours ago

I think the space doesn't get gobbled because people prevent it from being gobbled, like OP says

If the game weren't rigged, the space wouldn't exist

This is the exact, desired outcome by the billionaires. Us arguing over how this is our fault for not voting correctly.