And I’m so fucking tired of this “both sides” nonsense.
When the choice is between a politician you don’t like and a fucking fascist, the choice is clear. Well it should be. But there are people upset that there are “no good choices” so they just let the worst happen. No sense of self preservation, just complain that the choice that wasn’t fascism wasn’t good enough. It should be enough that it prevents fascism, but here we are, with people like you.
No, this is like there being two items in the menu, one that you don’t love and one that will poison you, and people have a hard time deciding for some reason.
The issue is in your analogy you’re upset at the people who just decide it’s not worth going to the restaurant at all. We need to give them an option they actually wouldn’t mind eating. Until then they’re just gonna keep deciding not to eat. That or we make voting compulsory.
What is that - the Democrat apologist all-purpose strawman? You just call every point of view you desperately want to dismiss out of hand a “both sides” position?
I didn’t “both sides” anything.
My point is very simple - if the Democrats want people to vote for their candidate, they have to offer a candidate people want to vote for.
It’s really just that simple.
And if they can’t be bothered to even do that, then that’s their fault and nobody else’s.
And yes - if course you believe that people who didn’t vote for the somewhat less objectionsble pro-genocide, pro-corporate, pro-billionaire slimeball are awful, stupid fuck-ups - that’s the official Democratic spologist line that gets trotted out just like clockwork every time the subject comes up, and the exact spin I was talking about.
But here’s a bit of news for you and the DNC and the rest of their apologists - it doesn’t fucking matter what you think. The simple fact is that, for whatever reason and entirely regardless of your views on the matter, some significant number of people who would otherwise have voted for the Democrat candidate if they’d been an actual leftist are going to say “fuck it” and stay home if you try to push a sleazy neo-lib hack on them instead. It doesn’t matter what you think about it - that’s what they’re going to do.
They might well be just as ignorant and short-sighted and awful as you self-affirmingly want to believe them to be, and it still doesn’t matter in the slightest, because that’s how they are and that’s what they’re going to do and that’s just the way it is.
And if you go ahead and try to pish a sleazy neo-lib hack on them anyway, then you’re a fucking moron ar best.
Your argument is they didn’t win because they didn’t win. Clearly that’s true, but it was also clearly a choice by the electorate and a stupid one. Could the democrats have done better - we can’t know. If they had moved progressive, they may have lost centrist votes. Should they have had a white male populist candidate? It likely would have helped, but is that really a good way to go? If we accept that the dems were a better option for the majority but lost, then it comes down to education, or more specifically: media control. The repubs win because of their control of mass media. It doesn’t really matter if the dems have the best candidate by far; the right wing media system will villainize them; and people like you will be programmed to say they are bad and not worth a vote.
And I’m so fucking tired of this “both sides” nonsense.
When the choice is between a politician you don’t like and a fucking fascist, the choice is clear. Well it should be. But there are people upset that there are “no good choices” so they just let the worst happen. No sense of self preservation, just complain that the choice that wasn’t fascism wasn’t good enough. It should be enough that it prevents fascism, but here we are, with people like you.
No, this is like there being two items in the menu, one that you don’t love and one that will poison you, and people have a hard time deciding for some reason.
The issue is in your analogy you’re upset at the people who just decide it’s not worth going to the restaurant at all. We need to give them an option they actually wouldn’t mind eating. Until then they’re just gonna keep deciding not to eat. That or we make voting compulsory.
lol
What is that - the Democrat apologist all-purpose strawman? You just call every point of view you desperately want to dismiss out of hand a “both sides” position?
I didn’t “both sides” anything.
My point is very simple - if the Democrats want people to vote for their candidate, they have to offer a candidate people want to vote for.
It’s really just that simple.
And if they can’t be bothered to even do that, then that’s their fault and nobody else’s.
And yes - if course you believe that people who didn’t vote for the somewhat less objectionsble pro-genocide, pro-corporate, pro-billionaire slimeball are awful, stupid fuck-ups - that’s the official Democratic spologist line that gets trotted out just like clockwork every time the subject comes up, and the exact spin I was talking about.
But here’s a bit of news for you and the DNC and the rest of their apologists - it doesn’t fucking matter what you think. The simple fact is that, for whatever reason and entirely regardless of your views on the matter, some significant number of people who would otherwise have voted for the Democrat candidate if they’d been an actual leftist are going to say “fuck it” and stay home if you try to push a sleazy neo-lib hack on them instead. It doesn’t matter what you think about it - that’s what they’re going to do.
They might well be just as ignorant and short-sighted and awful as you self-affirmingly want to believe them to be, and it still doesn’t matter in the slightest, because that’s how they are and that’s what they’re going to do and that’s just the way it is.
And if you go ahead and try to pish a sleazy neo-lib hack on them anyway, then you’re a fucking moron ar best.
Your argument is they didn’t win because they didn’t win. Clearly that’s true, but it was also clearly a choice by the electorate and a stupid one. Could the democrats have done better - we can’t know. If they had moved progressive, they may have lost centrist votes. Should they have had a white male populist candidate? It likely would have helped, but is that really a good way to go? If we accept that the dems were a better option for the majority but lost, then it comes down to education, or more specifically: media control. The repubs win because of their control of mass media. It doesn’t really matter if the dems have the best candidate by far; the right wing media system will villainize them; and people like you will be programmed to say they are bad and not worth a vote.
It doesn’t, though, and that’s the problem
Exactly. Copmala and the Democrats love rolling over for fascists.
Holocaust Harris was also a fascist
Removed by mod
Man, you people are just fascists now, you realize? You support genocide and accuse anyone who doesn’t of being an agent of the Judeo-Bolshevick plot.