Anonymous #1 7w

oh brother THIS GUY STINKS

6

Anonymous #1 7w

I forget that people on here are actual like hardcore democrats. It’s been really interesting to see the lengths people will go to to defend the controlled opposition

-5

Anonymous #2 7w

I’m like 98% positive that you’re commenting in opposition to moderates and they’re still hating on you.

0

Anonymous #1 7w

I mean yea sorta?? It was my understanding beforehand that people voted democrat just to prevent republicans from getting into office, not out of a particular love for their policies or anything (which tend to favor the status quo). I was expressing my surprise that some people actually like establishment democratic policies for the contents of the policies themselves

1

Anonymous #2 7w

That’s the idea that’s presented over and over, but it’s not grounded in reality. Good politics isn’t sexy, it’s boring, and it’s supposed to be. The biggest failure from Dems has been a lack of hyping their successes. ACA, based. Billions of student loan forgiveness, based. Expanded EITC, based. Inflation Reduction Act, based. Infrastructure bill, based. People fucking love Dem polices broadly, they just don’t have a new media ecosystem shouting at them about it.

0

Anonymous #1 7w

I won’t deny that the democrats have done good things. My hesitation comes down to two issues, those being the democratic tendency to focus on the symptoms of the issue rather than the cause and my lack of choice in the matter. For example, the ACA is fantastic, but I really wish we had candidates who would oppose abuses by health insurance companies/their existence altogether. Student loan forgiveness is fantastic, but free college was bipartisan in the 1960s. (1/?)

1

Anonymous #2 7w

When an issue does come up that would ordinarily keep me from supporting a candidate, I still have to vote for them because the alternative is a republican. For example, Harris’s stance on Gaza would have kept me from voting for her. However, as a trans person, I don’t have that luxury because the alternative was DJT, who is actively perpetrating a trans genocide at this very moment. Like a marionette I was dragged to the polls out of an obligation toward my community’s safety. (2/?)

1

Anonymous #2 7w

This isn’t even something the democrats can necessarily fix. The nature of the system requires politicians to make compromises, even if they have to concede ground to abhorrent positions. Addressing the root causes of issues is deemed radical and unfeasible, and that very well might be the case in the current political structure. I just wish I had other choices (3/3)

1

Anonymous #2 7w

I don’t really disagree with most of this, other than the idea that addressing the root cause being viewed as radical. Universal Healthcare isn’t seen as radical, force the vote was though. And it’s because 1. The term is overly broad and voters interpretations of it are vastly different, making representatives advocacy vastly different. And 2. It would have been a waste of political capital in exchange for theatre that would have accomplished nothing. I believe liberal progressive/ Soc Dems

1

Anonymous #1 7w

Understood this. But Dem Socs and Maoists either didn’t understand the political reality or just didn’t care. That fight was wholly unnecessary and undermined the democrats ability to do anything other than have that infighting during pivotal points when they needed their energy focused elsewhere. And it happens with so many other topics that it begins to feel intentional. As soon as moderates bent to progressives on minimum wage, $15 was no longer good enough and Dems were attacked from within

1

Anonymous #1 7w

For not going for $25/hr then $30/hr minimum wage. And with major mouth pieces for Maoism like Hasan explicitly saying their goal is accelerationism and radicalizing moderates Soc Dems start to catch flak in the cross fire between the liberal and illiberal groups of the party. I abandoned the Soc Dem label years ago because of this very issue. It’s not a necessary label for liberalism to provide higher qol and living conditions, and it gets abused by malicious actors. I think we really need to

1

Anonymous #1 7w

Take a step back and contrast the gulf between progressive and populist. I don’t know that Soc Dems necessarily fit within the populists frame as well as the other two, and the other two seem to want to hide behind the progressive frame to deflect from valid criticism from the establishment. If we actually look at what Dem accomplish with a trifecta, I think it paints a much better picture of what it means to be establishment than the infighting that’s occurring with razor thin margins.

1

Anonymous #1 7w

Look u dont gotta tell me twice, I’m not gonna be skipping out on the voting. Accelerationism only works if people are on the same page about what happens after the collapse, and the US population clearly is not. What I do know for sure is this: the current economic system is unsustainable and it cannot be fixed through reform. Not only that, but trans liberation will never be truly realized under capitalism. People need to have a taste of socialist policies before they get on board, so (1/?)

1

Anonymous #2 7w

elections in this sense are useful. We are on the same page about that. Until people realize some very fundamental things, this is the course of action. Plus, there really is no need for acceleration. The structure of capitalism determines its eventual collapse (2/2)

1