Maybe the DNC should stop trying to run on the status quo instead of blaming the voters.
Americans want change, that’s how trump got elected, even the right wing doesn’t like the status quo. They don’t agree on the direction, but the status quo was not the move to make there, not when that includes US funded murder of children
The DNC can do far better, yes. But the voters can also do better. Thinking critically is an important part of participating in democracy.
As I said before the election, there was no option that did not include US funded murder of children. If Trump had been an outspoken opponent of the war in Gaza, (and we had any reason to believe him) then I could see the argument. But that was not the case, was it?
I appreciate the pragmatism, and for what it’s worth, I agree with your logic but voters aren’t pragmatists. They engage emotionally, which is why reactionary movements thrive.
Republicans offered an identity rooted in tribalism, fueled by fear, anger, and even hatred. Yet even a hateful tribe is still a tribe. In an era of loneliness and division, the group that accepts you flaws and all holds a powerful advantage. The side effect? Politics becomes emotional, not intellectual.
And let’s be honest: It’s hard to blame voters for disengaging. First-past-the-post, ‘lesser of two evils’ voting is demotivational at its core.
When every election feels like damage control, idealism withers.
She abandoned all her progressives positions early. I’m no political consultant, but I think thats usually not the best method to win over progressives. I dont think she planned on progressive support-- I think someone told her she could win some republicans and never have to talk to a progressives ever again.
Harris was supposed to be the one who’d get the Progressives excited and she got fewer votes than Biden did in 2020.
WEIRD! I KNOW Progressives and they LOVE Bombing Children and KEEPING the Status Quo! It’s so WEIRD they WOULDNT Vote for Harris!
Well, they must love bombing children since they worked so hard to keep Trump in.
are you talking about progressives or centrists, dagwood?
When your choice is keeping the status quo, or everything getting a lot worse, that doesn’t seem to be a difficult choice.
Maybe the DNC should stop trying to run on the status quo instead of blaming the voters.
Americans want change, that’s how trump got elected, even the right wing doesn’t like the status quo. They don’t agree on the direction, but the status quo was not the move to make there, not when that includes US funded murder of children
The DNC can do far better, yes. But the voters can also do better. Thinking critically is an important part of participating in democracy.
As I said before the election, there was no option that did not include US funded murder of children. If Trump had been an outspoken opponent of the war in Gaza, (and we had any reason to believe him) then I could see the argument. But that was not the case, was it?
I appreciate the pragmatism, and for what it’s worth, I agree with your logic but voters aren’t pragmatists. They engage emotionally, which is why reactionary movements thrive.
Republicans offered an identity rooted in tribalism, fueled by fear, anger, and even hatred. Yet even a hateful tribe is still a tribe. In an era of loneliness and division, the group that accepts you flaws and all holds a powerful advantage. The side effect? Politics becomes emotional, not intellectual.
And let’s be honest: It’s hard to blame voters for disengaging. First-past-the-post, ‘lesser of two evils’ voting is demotivational at its core.
When every election feels like damage control, idealism withers.
Agreed on all points. But rational thinking is necessary for a functioning democracy.
As you observe, that’s one reason we don’t have one.
Well whoever thought of that was clearly a moron
Backing a genocide and pretending like people weren’t having financial issues just because the stock market was up didn’t help much.
She didn’t have any progressive stances, why were they supposed to be excited about her?
Why was she supposed to be? And why did she spend so much time on stage with conservative republicans trying to prove how middle of the road she was?
She abandoned all her progressives positions early. I’m no political consultant, but I think thats usually not the best method to win over progressives. I dont think she planned on progressive support-- I think someone told her she could win some republicans and never have to talk to a progressives ever again.
Why would she have gotten progressives excited?
The question I ask is why people needed to be excited at all?
Trump was openly talking about aiding the Israelis plus stopping aid to Ukraine.
Apparently, people thought if they didn’t vote for Harris Trump wouldn’t win either.