Why is it so common to blame the third party vote for democrats losing in 2016? It sounds like if the democrats would take an anti-war stance like the green party does, they would have won most of those votes too?
Seems more appropriate to expect the party to reflect the population rather than the other way around.
It’s the Schrodinger’s Tankies. Simultaneously so insignificant as a voting block that it’s a waste of time to appeal to them, and so influential that it’s exclusively their fault when the dems lose.
Yeah. This is why some Democrats get called Blue MAGA and I don’t think they get it.
They treat lefties like the same kinda scapegoat the Republicans treat anyone not white. It’s an easy “other” group that can be considered outside the main group and fighting them is “the good moral duty of the Democratic Party.”
I sometimes wonder if that division and push for the center-left to be apathetic towards the further left is part of the Russian Psy-op that they are so afraid of cause that’s the only reason I can think of a party like this ignoring their youngest, poorest, or most emotional bases, that courting on the right makes them win.
That’s also falling for scapegoats. The call is coming from inside the house, and it has been for over three decades.
The center is apathetic and hostile to the left because they’re not the left. They’re not courting leftwingers because they don’t want them. They keep reaching across the isle because they fundamentally agree with their basic beliefs. It’s why Sorkin dreams about President Mitt Romney (D). The grand Neoliberal turn is disintegrating, and is being besieged by MAGA from the right and progressives from the left, and both the dems and the GOP are consistently moving right because while they find MAGA brutish and uncouth, they’re appeasable, whereas the demands from the left are fundamentally unacceptable to them.
Why is it so common to blame the third party vote for democrats losing in 2016? It sounds like if the democrats would take an anti-war stance like the green party does, they would have won most of those votes too?
Seems more appropriate to expect the party to reflect the population rather than the other way around.
It’s the Schrodinger’s Tankies. Simultaneously so insignificant as a voting block that it’s a waste of time to appeal to them, and so influential that it’s exclusively their fault when the dems lose.
Yeah. This is why some Democrats get called Blue MAGA and I don’t think they get it.
They treat lefties like the same kinda scapegoat the Republicans treat anyone not white. It’s an easy “other” group that can be considered outside the main group and fighting them is “the good moral duty of the Democratic Party.”
I sometimes wonder if that division and push for the center-left to be apathetic towards the further left is part of the Russian Psy-op that they are so afraid of cause that’s the only reason I can think of a party like this ignoring their youngest, poorest, or most emotional bases, that courting on the right makes them win.
That’s also falling for scapegoats. The call is coming from inside the house, and it has been for over three decades.
The center is apathetic and hostile to the left because they’re not the left. They’re not courting leftwingers because they don’t want them. They keep reaching across the isle because they fundamentally agree with their basic beliefs. It’s why Sorkin dreams about President Mitt Romney (D). The grand Neoliberal turn is disintegrating, and is being besieged by MAGA from the right and progressives from the left, and both the dems and the GOP are consistently moving right because while they find MAGA brutish and uncouth, they’re appeasable, whereas the demands from the left are fundamentally unacceptable to them.
Wasn’t Green Party seen sitting at a table with Putin?