John Slayne Posted April 3 Posted April 3 7 hours ago, Rep2000 said: You do realize that losing the 2016 election is why we have this ****** up SC for *generations* in 2024, right?! Right?! you're right but people are not to blame for DNC's terrible choice for the candidate. if Dems wanted to beat Trump they should've picked a better opponent, but i think centrists and right-wing Democrats would rather have Trump as a president than a progressive. 1
byzantium Posted April 3 Posted April 3 2 minutes ago, John Slayne said: you're right but people are not to blame for DNC's terrible choice for the candidate. if Dems wanted to beat Trump they should've picked a better opponent, but i think centrists and right-wing Democrats would rather have Trump as a president than a progressive. This is precisely it. Democrats are more scared of the idea that progressives represent than a Trump presidency. At the end of the day, the wealthy are just looking out for their own. 1 4
Thesedays Posted April 3 Posted April 3 (edited) On 4/2/2024 at 9:25 AM, beautiful player said: And she's right, as usual. You can strategically vote for someone while disagreeing with them. People don't like to hear it though. I've literally never seen ANYONE not like to hear, "You can vote for someone while disagreeing with them". Ironically, people who say that are usually the ones who get mad once they hear, "Yes, I know, but genocide is unforgivable to me, and I would never vote for someone directly supporting and funding that." The mad bunch, who'll try to shame you, tends to be the ones that do not accept genocide is something some can't support under any circumstance. Either way, whether this sack of **** Clinton is right or wrong is entirely beside the point. Anyone with a brain cell knows Hillary isn't on a TV late show in an election year to ~tell the truth but as a Dem Party figurehead who is supposed to encourage voters. Now, this in itself is already stupid because she remains one of the most despised figures in US politics and won't convince anyone of anything except her blind loyalists, who don't need any convincing. BUT if we're to ignore that, it's still weird people who want Biden to win are clapping for what she's saying. If you want Biden to win, shouldn't you want Dem Party figurehead arguments to be EFFECTIVE? Do any of you think this dumbass argument will convince any undecided voter? If that's what they got, Biden supporters should be very concerned. Edited April 4 by Thesedays 1 1
Thesedays Posted April 3 Posted April 3 On 4/2/2024 at 9:29 AM, Illuminati said: The lesson from 2016 defeat was that a third party vote achieved nothing and neither did the boycotts, so yes she is right. People also didn't blame enough those who didn't vote for Hillary but still complained about Trump being elected. Liberals when they want to convince leftists of supporting the Dem Party: "don't you want MORE AOC? Don't you want MORE Ilhan Omar?" (possibly completely ignorant to the fact the Dem Party actively boycott candidates like these and that they hold little to no power in the party either way and are despised by most elected Dems. Or possibly aware of that but being opportunistic). Also Liberals when they want to convince leftists of supporting the Dem Party: "did ANYTHING good happen during the Trump years??" (The Squad only exists because of the progressive push during the Trump years) Anyways, all these points are stupid anyway, but I still find it funny how they're so contradicting.
Thesedays Posted April 3 Posted April 3 On 4/2/2024 at 11:53 AM, 19SLAYty9 said: im pro ceasefire obviously but this isn't an issue that will change in 4 years. Progress takes time. We need to show up in every primary and general even when it sucks. I guess you're entirely unaware of the conflict, which is 1) concerning because it's your tax dollars funding it and 2) weird when talking about strategies to get it to stop. But basically, if a ceasefire takes 4 year there'll be no need for a ceasefire because everyone in Gaza will be dead. If it extends till the end of the year, that already means almost everyone there will die, either from hunger or from bombs. So please, do inform yourself.
Thesedays Posted April 3 Posted April 3 On 4/2/2024 at 5:58 PM, GhostBox said: She's her own person. She allowed to do things 💀 I love how the arguments go from "YOU GUYS SHOULD VOTE FOR BIDEN IF YOU LOVE DEMOCRACY AND IF YOU DON'T AND HE LOSES, THAT'S YOUR FAULT" to "So what if Hillary goes on TV and say **** that's harmful to the Party she claims she wants to win? She is her wn person and can do whatever she wants." lol 1 1
Thesedays Posted April 3 Posted April 3 22 hours ago, thesegayz said: Because the UN is right about everything Literally, this is Vietnam for Israel. again, on topic, being a single issue voter for the "genocide" in Gaza is about as stupid as the religious right doubling down on abortion. Problem is, one side wins, while the other side willing elects a person who will do more damage in Gaza than "Genocide" Joe. go touch grass The UN, Amnesty International, some of the biggest genocide scholars in the world. Now what are your sources for it NOT being a genocide? Biden? Please do not be shy and share it with us. 1
loveisdead9582 Posted April 3 Posted April 3 If it weren't trump running against Biden, I think that a viable third party candidate could actually win. That said, splitting the vote like last time didn't work out for Hilary so it is a bit rich coming from her. I wish it was two other candidates but that is not our reality.
Thesedays Posted April 4 Posted April 4 3 hours ago, Kassi said: Nothing to do with this topic. Actually, everything to do with this topic. It's an important context to take into consideration when reading your political opinions. If you admire Nancy Pelosi or think she is "progressive," then it shows you're entirely satisfied with the status quo and with center-right politics. Which is you're right. However, with this needed context, no one will take you seriously when you're talking about strategies to shift the country to a more humane, left-wing position since that's not a legit goal of yours. 3
Kassi Posted April 4 Posted April 4 8 minutes ago, Thesedays said: Actually, everything to do with this topic. It's an important context to take into consideration when reading your political opinions. If you admire Nancy Pelosi or think she is "progressive," then it shows you're entirely satisfied with the status quo and with center-right politics. Which is you're right. However, with this needed context, no one will take you seriously when you're talking about strategies to shift the country to a more humane, left-wing position since that's not a legit goal of yours. Every position your favorite progressive has, Nancy has had decades prior. - Gay rights in the 80s - Single Payer Healthcare in the 90s - Anti-war in the 00s - Climate change in the 10s She's a Democrat from San Francisco… be for real. So no, it's not about her. It's about people who can't do basic math getting overly emotional about voting for someone who's not their perfect avatar — and trying to pass that off as wisdom. 1 2
rp662 Posted April 4 Posted April 4 1 hour ago, Thesedays said: Do any of you think this dumbass argument will convince any undecided voter? Very rich coming from the third party voters. How are YOU convincing others to vote third party? What is the political platform and causes that third party voters are voting for? What are their goals and aspirations? To take down dems and Biden? The anti-Biden/Dems girls of ATRL literally post negative Biden/Dem threads daily like clockwork yet I have not seen a SINGLE thread this election season dedicated to them promoting RFK JR or whoever their third party is candidate, why? What do third party voters actually stand for? Just say you want dems to loose and get to canvassing door to door for RFK JR because you won't actually be convincing any undecided voter either with no action. 3 1 2
Communion Posted April 4 Posted April 4 (edited) 15 minutes ago, rp662 said: How are YOU convincing others to vote third party? Who says that someone voting 3rd party is trying to actively shame and try and bully others into voting similarly? It sounds like you are deeply insecure in your own political convictions and are confused over people who view politics as ideological and hold those views strongly. ...do you not have an idea of what policies you actually ideologically support? The entire conversation about Biden has been ideological voters telling you what policies they'd need Biden to support to vote for him. Because y'all want us to vote for him. You have every right to vote for him. I'm not going to. That's seemingly upsetting to you. But yet you don't seem able to reconcile with the facts of how to get us such voters to vote for Biden. Do you not have similar policies you want your politicians to have? What do you think the purpose of politics... is? Edited April 4 by Communion 3
Sun Posted April 4 Posted April 4 3 hours ago, John Slayne said: why does she think anyone still cares about her opinion? Maybe because 66M people voted for her? Lol
Thesedays Posted April 4 Posted April 4 1 hour ago, Kassi said: Every position your favorite progressive has, Nancy has had decades prior. - Gay rights in the 80s - Single Payer Healthcare in the 90s - Anti-war in the 00s - Climate change in the 10s She's a Democrat from San Francisco… be for real. Single-payer healthcare in the 90s is great. Does she support universal healthcare now or supports any politician that does? No. Anti-war in the 00s? Wow, how great. What's her position on pro-war Dem politicians like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden? More importantly, where does she stand when the subject is Israel and the ceasefire? We don't need politicians who supported the right things decades ago but do not now. If you want to be taken for a ride, that's your choice, but don't think we're all stupid. Anyway, the fact she's a Democrat from San Francisco -- a deep blue city with the highest amount of billionaires per capita in the world alongside homeless tent cities that spread as far as the eyes can see -- is an excellent metaphor for the dystopic ****** up an institution that is the current Democratic Party. 3
Thesedays Posted April 4 Posted April 4 27 minutes ago, Sun said: Maybe because 66M people voted for her? Lol Darling, the majority of people that voted for her do not care for her. Take a look at her favorable rating according to Pew Research. 3
Thesedays Posted April 4 Posted April 4 (edited) 1 hour ago, rp662 said: Very rich coming from the third party voters. How are YOU convincing others to vote third party? What is the political platform and causes that third party voters are voting for? What are their goals and aspirations? To take down dems and Biden? If you guys want a good picture of how broken and beyond repair US democracy is, no need to look at Trump. Just read this liberal above upvoted by several users treating people as if they were spoiled princesses wanting something impossible just because they are against pro-genocide candidates. Literally being against genocide and refusing to vote for genocide candidates is enough for you to be mocked by liberals in the "land of the free" USA in 2024. And lol at them being so ignorant about politics and so wholly devoted to Dem Party loyalty that he'd think RJK Jr. would be the candidate for anyone who cares about left-wing issues. Either way, I am not a completely clueless person, and I know US democracy is broken and it won't be fixed through this election or through federal elections in general, so no, I'm not really interested in convincing anyone to vote 3rd party and never claimed I was. As opposed to you, who's claiming voting for Biden is essential. So yeah, good job shooting yourself in the foot because, again, you're using the most ineffective strategy there is. Congrats! You're unaware of the reality of the country, unaware of anything that's not Dem Party-related, unbothered by genocide, and working against YOUR OWN claimed goals of electing Biden, lol. 1 hour ago, Communion said: Who says that someone voting 3rd party is trying to actively shame and try and bully others into voting similarly? It sounds like you are deeply insecure in your own political convictions and are confused over people who view politics as ideological and hold those views strongly. It's interesting to me that there's such a lack of curiosity and so much obtuseness that they can't even argue with what's actually being said, instead choosing a straw man they literally took out of their asses. Like, if you care so much about the election, try and educate yourself. At best, there's clearly a severe reading comprehension problem here. Imagine reading several posts where people are pointing out several things they disapprove of in Biden/his party (most notably, his ongoing support and funding of a genocide) and replying with "but what do you guys want?? Why don't you state these things?? It's a mystery to me!! You're going to vote for RFK Jr., right?". Like sis, can't you read? Edited April 4 by Thesedays 1 3
ClashAndBurn Posted April 4 Posted April 4 2 hours ago, rp662 said: Very rich coming from the third party voters. How are YOU convincing others to vote third party? What is the political platform and causes that third party voters are voting for? What are their goals and aspirations? To take down dems and Biden? The anti-Biden/Dems girls of ATRL literally post negative Biden/Dem threads daily like clockwork yet I have not seen a SINGLE thread this election season dedicated to them promoting RFK JR or whoever their third party is candidate, why? What do third party voters actually stand for? Just say you want dems to loose and get to canvassing door to door for RFK JR because you won't actually be convincing any undecided voter either with no action. If you want an actual answer, RFK Jr is a **** candidate that leftists despise, and for good reason.
GraceRandolph Posted April 4 Posted April 4 7 hours ago, Kassi said: There is absolutely no precedent for this. We're living in unprecedented times.
Kassi Posted April 4 Posted April 4 2 hours ago, Thesedays said: Single-payer healthcare in the 90s is great. Does she support universal healthcare now or supports any politician that does? No. Anti-war in the 00s? Wow, how great. What's her position on pro-war Dem politicians like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden? More importantly, where does she stand when the subject is Israel and the ceasefire? We don't need politicians who supported the right things decades ago but do not now. If you want to be taken for a ride, that's your choice, but don't think we're all stupid. Anyway, the fact she's a Democrat from San Francisco -- a deep blue city with the highest amount of billionaires per capita in the world alongside homeless tent cities that spread as far as the eyes can see -- is an excellent metaphor for the dystopic ****** up an institution that is the current Democratic Party. Does she support universal healthcare now or supports any politician that does? — Yes. What's her position on pro-war Dem politicians like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden? — She supports the leaders Democratic voters elect. More importantly, where does she stand when the subject is Israel and the ceasefire? — She hates Netanyahu. SF sux due to local progressive politics which are some of the most far left in the country. If anything, it serves as a cautionary tale against leftists basic inability to govern effectively when handed power. Instead they prefer to advance their ideological pet projects. And yet none of this has to do with the fact that a third party has never won a US presidential election in 200+ years. 2
Kassi Posted April 4 Posted April 4 48 minutes ago, GraceRandolph said: We're living in unprecedented times. We've lived through many unprecedented times in US history and it has never helped third parties.
Thesedays Posted April 4 Posted April 4 19 minutes ago, Kassi said: Does she support universal healthcare now or supports any politician that does? — Yes. What's her position on pro-war Dem politicians like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden? — She supports the leaders Democratic voters elect. More importantly, where does she stand when the subject is Israel and the ceasefire? — She hates Netanyahu. SF sux due to local progressive politics which are some of the most far left in the country. If anything, it serves as a cautionary tale against leftists basic inability to govern effectively when handed power. Instead they prefer to advance their ideological pet projects. And yet none of this has to do with the fact that a third party has never won a US presidential election in 200+ years. "She hates Netanyahu" doesn't answer the question. The Democratic primary process is hardly transparent. And well, what can I say about your claim that she supports universal healthcare? We can only speculate if it's stupidity or if you're lying to try to win an online argument. Anyways, yes, no third party won a US presidential election in 200+ years. That's cause the US isn't really a democracy and is run by a private-funded duopoly that mostly responds to their donors. Of course, voting for Biden won't change that so yeah.
GraceRandolph Posted April 4 Posted April 4 21 minutes ago, Kassi said: We've lived through many unprecedented times in US history and it has never helped third parties. And yet people would still rather vote third party or leave the ballot blank than support Biden. 1
Recommended Posts