Vote with your heart in the primary, head in the general. If you won't vote blue in the general, you know what you get? Red. Not deep blue, not green. It doesn't work the way you wish it did. It just doesn't. Are you a member of a party?
Vote with your heart in the primary, head in the general. If you won't vote blue in the general, you know what you get? Red. Not deep blue, not green. It doesn't work the way you wish it did. It just doesn't. Are you a member of a party?
if you vote for transphobes in the general you know what you get? transphobia.
I don't know what 'deep blue' is supposed to represent, but your whole argument seems to be based on the premise that I care what colour / party the victor is, as opposed to whether they have policies I agree with or not.
But I'm confused that you now seem in *favour* of "vote blue no matter who" when before you said you were against purity tests?
The left having purity tests means that they refuse to work with or vote for people not completely aligned with themselves. They mean "hold your nose and vote for this person cause the stinking dumpster fire of the right is so much worse". It's acknowledging the problem of less than desirables.
bsky.app/profile/my-r...
Right - and your purity test is that you'll refuse to work with or vote for anyone who's not the Democratic Party's candidate; you'll never hold your nose and vote for someone else if it's pragmatic to do so. It's exactly the same principle.
Like, if front runners in a certain race were, say, a communist and a fascist Democrat, I would vote for the communist *even if they had no chance of winning*, and you would vote for the Dem *even if they had no chance*. Because my purity test is 'no fascists' and yours is 'always the Dem'.
Some people would say "in general I tend to agree with Dems so I tend to vote for them, but of course I would never vote for a Dem who was a fascist". But people who say VBNMW have decided that the purity test of "are they a Dem?" is more important than anything else.
And like, this isn't a criticism of the principle of having purity tests - I have purity tests too, so I and the VBNMW advocate have the same approach to politics really. Of course, I think that anti-fascism is way more important than party loyalty so we disagree on the details, but that's all.
No, it totally is not, it's weird who you think you are arguing with. It's not me. I look at polling and I try to navigate to the best possible option. I am a member of a party and I try to influence it from within. This is how you change things. Not spit the dummy and toss the vote. You agree?
Oh sorry, I misunderstood - I thought you were an advocate of the 'Vote Blue no Matter Who' policy but I must have misunderstood.
I'm glad we're in agreement that it's a bad policy after all!
Meanwhile the fascists push the polls and you get endlessly dragged rightwards
Is that why the dems went right, tried appealing to trumps base, supported genocided, alienated the left, and lost anyway? Tell us oh wise one, do you have them exactly where you want them for your master plan?
Muslim and Arab Americans had voted overwhelmingly and consistently for Dems for the past 20 years. They inside and outside the Democratic party they lobbied for Dems not to genocide Arabs and Muslims. The Dems sole response was to send Bill Clinton to Michigan to tell them off.
Yes it is, and no amount of “nuh uh” will change that. I’m sorry reality is too hard for your fash ass
And how’s that been working out these last 20 years or so?
And your proof that this is not actually achieving better outcomes is what? I'm just saying that you need to think and vote tactically. It's hilarious how quickly everyone will jump and call me a fascist. Just totally proving my point really. You will alienate the people you need.
Your strategy is: “let’s get him elected first, THEN once he has all the power & authority, we’ll ask him to do what we want! And if he won’t, we’ll be mad, but not too mad bc we’re still glad he’s not the other guy.” A better plan is: “if you want our vote, do what we want.” Also called democracy.
A) my proof is everything that’s currently happening. That was the subtext of my post, which I thought was pretty obvious. B) I never called you a fascist, but it’s funny you kinda told on yourself there. C) voting between 2 virtually identical parties is about as tactical as neon camo.
How flexible should one be on human rights? I think not at all, is that wrong?
No it means we have actual convictions like "genocide is bad" and "human rights are essential" and not having any means your party gets infiltrated by sinemas and manchins while you fund baby murder and eat shit in elections
With Trump you get genocide *and* racism. If you are indifferent to all the ADDITIONAL suffering that having Trump as president then you are scum. I'm not pro-genocide, I am ANTI ANTI ANTI ANTI ANTI ICE.
“Genocide *and* racism” Harris and the Dems literally ran on trying to out racism Trump and insist it was okay for THEM to support genocide. Seriously, none of your bullshit has any merit to it whatsoever due to your burning need to
defend Blue Fascism at all costs having disconnected you entirely from reality.
it's not us choosing to abandon voters.
If you vote for someone who will hurt me in the primary, I will vote for someone who will hurt you in the general. Take that into your calculations and fix your heart.
if the opposition party wins running on fascist policy then you didn't win. you just became a fascist.