Remember kids: Vote blue no matter who only applies to progressives.
Want to run a campaign against the duly nominated candidate?
Only if you’re a neoliberal sex pest. Otherwise you want republicans to win.
For a second I had this confused with the Toronto mayoral election, where the former sex pest mayor is rumored to be considering re-running against the person who supplanted him last election
It also reminds me of the incumbent NDP ridings we lost to the cons because liberal voters don’t do strategic voting, yet they expect progressives to.
Vote progressive, the platform is impressive. The people aren’t oppressive and their art is more expressive - their passion is expressive but the message isn’t agressive.
For the people needs to be accomplished By the people.
Thank you Robin Williams Batty.
There is exactly 0 comparison more honorable.
You think the DNC is pushing this? Or is this just throwing shit to throw shit?
Vote blue still applies here. I don’t know who told you it doesn’t.
Someone needs to tell that to Cuomo.
Cuomo can fuck right off. And he’s declared himself not part of the DNC.
Yeah but he’s a registered Democrat and should back the nominee.
Unless you’d be okay with Bernie running as an independent in 2016.
No shit. Cuomo’s a shitbag.
You think the DNC is pushing this?
I think they’re going to be more open about doing so as the election approaches.
Vote blue still applies here.
Progressives step aside when centrists win the primaries that the party went to court for the right to rig.
the party went to court for the right to rig.
Not a fair interpretation of an argument made by a single DNC lawyer in a single context. Also, the primary is over and Mamdani won.
Not a fair interpretation of an argument made by a single DNC lawyer in a single context.
A completely accurate representation, made by a lawyer representing the party and setting precedent they have taken advantage of ever since.
Also, the primary is over and Mamdani won.
I’m not sorry that the party’s machinations against the left fail sometimes.
It’s accurate that their lawyer made that true argument. That’s just how party primaries work in the US, unfortunately. It’s not accurate that “the party went to court for the right to rig”. The whole point of the argument was to avoid a potentially long and expensive case from moving forward. The context matters, and the lawyer would have been incompetent not to bring it up, as would a Republican or even Green party lawyer in that situation.
That’s an overly charitable interpretation.
What actually happened was that progressives sued the DNC for unfairly rigging the primaries, which they did.
Rather than try to deny it, they went with the tactic of saying “well we’re allowed to because we own the process, not the voters”.
This in spite of their own charter mandating that they stay neutral and not favor any candidate over others during the primary process.
I don’t think the word “rigging” tells an accurate story. I do think they pulled strings to get all the establishment candidates to Voltron into Biden for super Tuesday. I do think they influenced their cohorts in the media to make Bernie look like he couldn’t win the general. I don’t believe they messed with the voting process itself, which is what “rigging” tends to invoke.
Rather than try to deny it, they went with the tactic of saying
Again, context matters. In a legal process there are different times to make different arguments, and a good lawyer makes use every argument available. This particular argument dealt with whether or not the court had jurisdiction in the matter, so it came early in the process.
This in spite of their own charter mandating that they stay neutral
What exactly does that mean? Is every member required to be personally neutral in even their personal relationships outside the DNC? Does that extend to Obama who is neither a board member or on staff at the DNC? Being neutral is a good idea, but that rule is pretty meaningless.
To be clear, I am no apologist for the Democratic establishment. I blame them more for Trump than the Republicans. That’s why I want progressives to show up and vote them out in primaries. Giving the false impression that their vote won’t count is counterproductive.
God damn, you’re hyperfixating on one part of my initial comment because you don’t like people remembering how awful your wing of the party constantly is to anyone but netanyahu and two cheneys.
You have no fucking idea what wing of the party I belong to.
Well, let’s see what happens. If the Democratic establishment pushes Mamdani hard, this will be true.
The person you’re replying to is just used to the establishment fighting against progressive insurgents.
If the Democratic establishment pushes Mamdani hard
Sure, and pigs might fly!
Never forget that it was a coalition led by the Dem leadership on behalf of AIPAC that ousted both Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman.
They always fight tooth and nail against progressives and roll over on most of the demands of the fascists in the name of “bipartisanship”
The person you’re replying to is just used to the establishment fighting against progressive insurgents.
As is anyone who’s ever paid attention 🤷
Thanks, I’ll tell your waiter.
The DNC sure as hell isn’t pushing Mamdani, is the point.
Whether they’ll put their enormous propaganda machine behind Cuomo, Adams, or none of the candidates remains to be seen, but you can bet your bottom dollar that they won’t be going anywhere near as hard for the progressive running under their banner as they have for both of the Republicans in all but name he’s running against in the past.
The DNC leadership is almost half as corrupt and hypocritical as the fascist party they pretend to be the only possible alternative to.
Or at least that’s the narrative you want on Lemmy. It’s partly true.
Nope, that’s what factually is happening.
Just because the Neoliberals from your favorite billionaire-owned media says something doesn’t make it true.
IDK what you’re saying, the progressive is the blue in this context. Mamdani is the DNC candidate, Cuomo is independent.
All these years later and he still doesn’t understand that no means no.
No one’s said it, yet, but this is the best comment on this entire post.
Amazing. Chef’s kiss.
The general election won’t have ranked choice. Adams and Cuomo may end up splitting the “willing to vote for corrupt dirtbag” ticket and let Mamdani cruise to victory.
We can dream.
I expect one or the other will get pressured/bribed into dropping out.
Yes, that’s probably correct. It’ll be late in the race, because both of them are pig headed and want the other one to do it. That will only drag down whomever does end up staying in. It’ll be a glorious game of political chicken. I’m ordering all the popcorn now.
I thought the donors were going to pick one and push out the other, but web search indicates that hasn’t been successful yet. We’ll see.
They fight amongst themselves, too.
They’re all sociopaths. You can use that fact to predict how they function.
Yep, two shit bag neoliberals running I and an actual Republican.
This is both good for Mamdani and what will be used as an excuse when he wins.
Is the Republican even relevant in NYC this election? I saw this as Lieberman for Connecticut redux.
The Republican is the Guardian Angels guy from the 80s, he’s probably not relevant outside of Staten Island, and a few old cat ladies.
Careful. He has huge name recognition.
Not necessarily for good reasons, though. Particularly over the last decade or so.
He doesn’t even have the “just woke up from a 40-year coma” vote sewn up, since there’s a Cuomo running…
yes they have won NYC elections in the past, nyc has a habit of choosing a republican, or Democrat that works with republicans.
Have they ever had a choice that wasn’t one of those two things before?
If there’s 3 “Democrats” running, he might be.
I mean, that’s not even a dream, that’s just what’s almost certainly WILL happen since they appeal to almost exactly the same demographics across the board.
Would be a surprise if more than one of them even reaches double digit percentages, actually.
May it be so.
Fuck Cuomo and honestly fuck the Democratic leadership to and fuck Democrats in general.
Blue no matter who right? You bunch of hypocritical assholes on par with Republicans.
Yes, Dems have to get flushed, but other than that, this is fantastic news, this is another hubristic blunder by narcissistic political demagogues.
This will guarantee some level of split vote from the people that were going to vote for Adams again or some Republican challenger, whoever that was going to be. And there will be a lot of brainwashed median voters who have no clue what’s going on just hear the facebook warnings that Mamdani is going to enact Turbo Gay Muslim Socialism that will force everyone to stand in breadlines to get their gay muslim rations.
Turnout is ridiculously low for the general election because everyone just assumes the Democrat will win. I’m not sure taking votes from Adams even matters. How many people are actually motivated to turn out for fucking Cuomo or the incredibly unpopular current mayor, in an election that famously has low turn out?
The most likely effect Cuomo will have imo is spooking people to turn out for Mamdani. I’m pretty sure his entering the race as a third party candidate will turn out a lot of young people to vote against him and almost no one to vote for him.
some Republican challenger, whoever that was going to be
Pretty sure that it’s gonna be perennial loser and insanely racist vigilante Curtis Sliwa again.
Either of my cats stand a better chance of becoming mayor of New York than that infected scrotum.
Blue no matter who right?
In this case there’s a better Dem to vote for. But yes, if the option is a Republican or a Democrat, I will 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000% vote blue no matter who. I’ve seen enough treason from Republicans to know to default blue if it’s blue or red.
There’s only one Dem to vote for in this race, and it ain’t Cuomo
Sure but tell that to the Democratic leadership that refuses to endorse or support Mamdani.
Careful now, remember both sides are NOT the same!
/s
They aren’t.
And only an idiot would say so unironically after everything we’ve seen.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of idiots on Lemmy.
DNC normally: “3rd parties don’t function in our two party system, there’s no point in voting for them”
DNC after losing their own primary: 3rd party it is
“Vote Blue No Matter Who” reverts to “Party Unity My Ass” as soon as centrists don’t get 100% of everything they want.
These “” seem to have fallen from around the word centrists
They have not.
They’re not centrists as much as they want to believe they are. They are firmly conservative.
Conservative and centrist are functionally synonyms at this point.
The DNC would rather have a MAGA win it than Zohran.
DNC normally "3rd parties don’t function in our two party system, there’s no point in voting for them
That part is just reality.
That’s why they sued to keep De La Cruz off the ballot in swing states.
It’s almost like mayoral politics in one of the most populous cities on the planet is somewhat different than state and federal level politics.
Who knew
Now we’re taking about Democrats and the DNC.
No, we are talking about both. Go re-read the thread for context.
The original comment was comparing the DNC’s behavior at the national level, with a mayoral primary with ranked choice voting in one of the bluest cities in the US.
I’m saying it’s not even close to a 1:1 comparison
Reality created and enforced by those two parties, especially the DNC.
A 3rd party won’t be viable in our lifetimes.
Welcome to reality.
What an absolute chode
Don’t you mean taint?
Gooch.
asshole
So no rallying behind the candidate then, eh?
What a shocker.
No no we’re supposed to rally behind their candidates.
“We’d really recommend that you use our product. You want to use an alternative? Well… we’ll leave our product right here anyway.”
Failed at being governor, and now he wants to tank the duly elected mayoral nominee for the Democratic party by attempting to split the liberal voting block in NYC. Meanwhile, Trump’s buddy corrupt Eric Adams is doing exactly the same as a favor to his buddy in the White House.
There needs to be a poster on every street corner in NYC explaining this.
Preferably with pictures of both Cuomo and Adams photoshopped into the clowns they are.
Reminds me of Jill Stein running in 2024.
They’re getting money to cause chaos because why not?
I didn’t realize Jill Stein lost the 2024 Democratic primary.
It can be a shit of another species and still smell similar
Jill Stein at the 2024 Green Primaries?
If Mamdani holds out until November, the rest of the country will see that it is possible to vote for a fair shake. If he gets buried, I think voting will be the least of our worries.
Haha I wondered how they would try to stop Mamdani becoming mayor.
It’s insane to me they would rather split the vote and put one of Trump’s puppets in office rather than move their platform slightly left of center.
It makes sense when you think about how they are closer to Trump policy wise than they are to being left of center.
“But, them democrats is all libuhruls!” ~ Most of MAGA.
But, there are some MAGAs who know it’s all a ruse but don’t care because they want the bigots to win. So, they stoke the fire under the ignorant masses.
Modern Liberalism claims to be for individual equality but that’s kind of a lie. It has the same mechanisms to distribute economic and political power than Classic Liberalism, Libertarianism or Neoliberalism. Capital rules everything.
MAGAts understand that the Democrats believe in inequality just like the fascists do, just inequality based on class instead of on identity. So for them it’s perfectly logical to choose identity instead. They are not wrong about the hypocrisy of liberals, pretending to care about equality for some specific group but ignoring the inequality for all. It was fine until prosperity started to plummet.
MO of the DNC for many years now.
Not it’s not. They prefer to lose with the right than win with the left.
And after Mamdani hired one of the DNC’s consultants to
nerf all his policiesappeal to the centrists who have thus far refused to endorse him.It’s almost as though the centrist wing of the party does absolutely nothing in good faith and will do everything they can to ratfuck anyone to their left.
I’m not sure this is party desperation so much as it is Cuomo’s ego. I’d call it 75% ego at least.
That’d be blaming the one bad egg, not the the institutions. Neoliberals will ally themselves with fascists to fight socialists. But I guess it’s possible. Also good strategy, blame the rogue politician instead of their moral bankruptcy.
It’s more party desperation and bloated ego lining up perfectly.
They’ll bribe city council to vote down all his proposals as mayor.
Vote blue no matter who, no not like that…
Yes exactly fucking like that.
Vote Blue, Vote Mamdani.
This screams “I am corrupt as fuuuuuuuck!!!” so hard…like that time that Bob Dole got Elizabeth Dole elected from a state she didnt live in so he could get lobbyist access again after losing the Presidential election.
This guy is a form of cancer.
To be fair: The Democratic Party isn’t a viable political engine for positive social change or a working-class agenda. If Cuomo wins it will be yet another example of how untrustworthy, hypocritical, and vapid Blue No Matter Who voting habits are.
Remember when mods coordinated to ban any criticism of BNMW / Blue Maga from all the major subs during 2024? How they the cultivated a community of briggading, sea-lioning, etc… to try and suppress any criticism of an approach to politics that was obviously going to hand the country to Trump?
.My ass. I wish the mods had banned obviously disingenuous “let’s let Trump win to make a point, what’s the difference anyway” made-up critique that blamed Kamala Harris for Gaza and inflation, under a tissue-thin pretense of “I just care about the country sooooooooooooooooooooo much that I’m giving well informed constructive criticism.” Instead we had to just yell at y’all about it in the comments, which since there were hundreds of posts and comments every single day with that viewpoint was always a losing battle. Even trolling of crayon-quality transparency of the UniversalMonk variety was explicitly allowed by the mods, and people who objected to it too strongly got banned for it.
The whining about how you’re not allowed to get your message out, which is constantly broadcasted on every channel where you’re claiming you’re being silenced, is just part and parcel of the alternate reality you’re having a good bit of success in constructing. MAGA does it too, it’s part of the package.
You do understand that your cynical lying about the past is why your camp is losing the argument? I mean, I don’t dislike you, at least not personally, and and even if I have to drag you by the hair onto the right side of history, I’ll at least afford you the charity required for you to fix yourself.
There is no point in bothering with conjecture regarding the bans. They happened, its documented, any one can look it up. It doesn’t help your following arguments to simply lie about a reality people can easily go reference for themselves, if they didn’t live the experience themselves, as many of us have. A conjecture rooted in the same cynicism that cost us the election.
Now as before, your cynical misrepresentation of the arguments which were made also works against you. We argued that without replacing Biden, we’d lose the election. And we had the same claims you are levying, here, now, levied against us them. That we were secret Trump supporters. That we were the ones costing the Democrats the election. And then, as it does, the truth of the matter has a way of finding itself out. And we who stayed focus on an accurate and valid criticisms we’re proven right. In-spite of this, and this is the true cost of cynicism, you continued to reject the analysis and criticism of those who got it right. Instead of showing grace and changing, yours doubled down on your wrongness, when even the beltway insiders had the humility to recognize how wrong they’d been. No. No instead you embraced the worst instinct: to double down on the cynicism. Harris needed to pivot away from Biden’s policies and political techniques to come back in the extra innings she was afforded. But no. The cynics won the side-line arguments on how to handle the extra time we got on the clock (and let us not forget, these same cynics were the ones arguing against replacing Biden), and we all suffer because.
We should listen to the people who got it right, to begin with, and who stayed right the whole time. We should ignore those who are guided by cynicism and fear. Sacrificing your values for billionaire donations isn’t just morally abhorrent: Its also bad strategy.
There is no point in bothering with conjecture regarding the bans. They happened, its documented, any one can look it up.
Can you look them up, and show them to me? I came close to digging through the modlog myself, to prove that the number of times in Dec 2023 / Jan 2024 that someone was banned for posting a poll showing Biden behind was 0.
We argued that without replacing Biden, we’d lose the election.
I said that with replacing Biden, we’d lose the election, because the exact same arguments that applied to Biden would get applied to Harris, plus some new ones, and all the forces that marshaled a variety of bad-faith bullshit against Biden would start to do the same against Harris, and people in this country literally can’t tell up from down when it comes to the election. And, in the election, that’s what happened.
A lot of what you’re saying happened also, yes. I’m genuinely confused about how you’re accusing me of being cynical about it or telling the Democrats to be more right wing. What statements did I make that led you to think that?
I said that with replacing Biden, we’d lose the election, because the exact same arguments that applied to Biden would get applied to Harris, plus some new ones,
Are you genuinely, seriously, trying to pretend that Joe “We beat Medicare” Biden was the better candidate to beat Trump? Bruh.
This absolute baldfaced refusal to accept reality from Democrat loyalists up and down the party structure, makes the whole party look unserious. Team sports, ‘my guy can do no wrong’ horseshit that they also see from the MAGAs, but team red talks game about inflation and the economy - and isn’t the incumbent seen as responsible for it.
Are you genuinely, seriously, trying to pretend that Joe “We beat Medicare” Biden was the better candidate to beat Trump? Bruh.
What? No, not even slightly. I’m saying that the people who are extensively hand-wringing about how these specific Democratic candidates fucked everything up, should be sparing at least one or two words for thirty years of Democratic fuckery laying the groundwork, the media pretending that Trump was a controversial but ultimately capable businessman who would fix the economy that was hurting them so badly, and any particular thing the Democrats did wrong was justification for having a multi-week freakout, and also the fact that most Americans get their political news from TikTok and Facebook if they get it at all.
Biden was old as fuck and it was a massive problem, even before the debate. I’m saying that none of the most serious problems got solved when he was replaced. And look… they didn’t.
hand-wringing about how these specific Democratic candidates fucked everything up, should be sparing at least one or two words for thirty years of Democratic fuckery laying the groundwork
I agree (and did), but posting that context often was dismissed with “it’s election season, quit posting FUD if you’re not a troll/bad-faith”. Y’all weren’t there for the discussion even - as was shown with Gaza.
But the basic fact is that the candidate(s) and party apparatus either: A) Fundamentally failed to read the room and see the obvious discontent and voter backlash over several policy stances and material realities, or B) Knew all that and still decided to run the campaign they wanted to, whilst cynically wielding the Republicans as a worse option to impel democrat voters on the left, so they could run to the center and abandon the working class to the Republicans
Nobody forced them or their staffers to pick option B, even as their own internal polling showed their defeat was all but assured under option B. And here we are.
Biden was old as fuck and it was a massive problem, even before the debate. I’m saying that none of the most serious problems got solved when he was replaced. And look… they didn’t.
So when do I get to play the ‘Quit spreading FUD’ card then? Because as you said, if nothing was going to fundamentally change re:platform, why not present a new and younger candidate after Biden’s cognitive meltdown, and claw back some of the party’s reputation with the electorate? Why not hold a ‘speed primary’? Why let cynicism win out and accept Biden drowning the party with him, because ‘nobody else can do better’ while he’s an elder lich that refuses to let go of power?
Can you look them up, and show them to me? I came close to digging through the modlog myself, to prove that the number of times in Dec 2023 / Jan 2024 that someone was banned for posting a poll showing Biden behind was 0.
Yes and no. Yes I can, in that I’ve built out at least some of the tools to do so. I can’t in that I’m still at work today and haven’t returned to that project in quite a while.
So anyone can look it up, but in order to look it up, you’d have to build some tools and it’s a whole project?
I mean any one could go find some examples from memory that they experienced. I could dig far enough into my comment history to find them. In-fact I was digging through some banned community members and found some examples just the other day.
What I’m doing is far, far larger in scope. I’m not trying to find one instance, I’m trying to find all of them. I’m also interested in correlating that to “shifts in the overall narrative” to the sub. And I’m trying to do this across several prominent subs. And I’m not doing this in an adhoc way. When I have results they’ll be publishable.
I’ve built some of the more important tools already which allow me to pull the entire comment history of a user and perform significant sentiment analysis, key phrase extraction, etc… but some aspects aren’t reliable enough yet to be completely useful.
This is some example output using flyingsqids data: https://tmpweb.net/jS19ePfgNdz0/
(scroll to the bottom, then scroll up instead of starting at the top)
The first analysis is a “trolling/ not trolling” analysis. Then its a frequency analysis. I used squid because of their preposterous number of comments. Some weeks they were commenting almost ever 3 minutes for hours on end.
If life we’re simpler I’d be further along on this project, but alas, the bills. They do not pay themselves. And its a hobby thing I’m not getting paid for, so its the last to get access to my time.
Find a particular modlog entry from last year. See how long it takes.
Alternate realities, certainly unlike not making a PR at GitHub, rather than unhinged accusations that spent over an hour doubling, tripling, quintupling down for a couple of hours…
Oh dear, he’s going down the list of fallacies, after calling us disingenuous, when I clearly attacked unhinged posts.
You attacked me on some totally unrelated topic, instead of addressing anything I said about this topic.
If you disagreed with me about whether or not it’s totally cool and normal for Lemmy to send people’s admin passwords back to the mothership, you could weigh in over on that topic back when we were talking about that (and I’m pretty sure you did). It’s all good, the issue is fixed now whether or not it was an honest mistake in the code, and we all had our say on it.
Now all of a sudden we’re talking about some totally different issue, and whether or not anyone in power on Lemmy was “suppressing” or “banning” criticism of the Democrats during the run-up to the election (they were not) is left on the table, forgotten.
Here’s more explanation if you need it, with some examples of how attacking past unrelated arguments or issues can be a good example of using ad hominem to deflect from anything about the issue currently under discussion:
https://practicalpie.com/ad-hominem-fallacy/
When someone uses an ad hominem fallacy, what’s going on inside their head? Often, this tactic is a defense mechanism. People tend to resort to ad hominem when they feel backed into a corner or threatened in some way.
Instead of tackling the issue or the argument being discussed, it’s easier—and emotionally safer—to attack the person making the argument. This is often an unconscious response fueled by cognitive biases like the “confirmation bias,” which makes us more likely to believe things that align with our existing opinions.
Launching an ad hominem attack, on the other hand, is quick and easy. It’s a low-effort way to feel like you’re winning an argument, even if you’re not actually engaging with the issue at hand. It’s a psychological shortcut that undermines rational discussion.
This is why I always regret it when I go to lemmy.world lol.
Can you explain how this fallacy applies? Also, dick move posting pictures of text without a transcript.
Because instead of addressing anything at all about what I said, they said more or less “but you’re the person that said (totally unrelated thing) which I don’t agree with therefore you’re unhinged.”
Yes, and they’ve apparently decided to abandon this community in order to wall themselves off from we BoTh SiDeS-ers.
I mean, they lost. And more than just the election. They lost the battle for ideological control of how to do politics; of how to win elections, which was always the premise that justified their reason for being: Their loss is existential.
The core of their argument was that their cynicism was required to win elections. That we had to sacrifice our values, for whatever reason, to be able to “win” the election. To reiterate what our criticisms. Originally, it was with Biden. That without a serious pivot on Gaza and to right wing “enlightened centrism” that had guided his path to that point, he would lose the election. The later criticism was with Harris, and basically identical: That without pivoting and focusing on the issues the base was concerned with, that she would lose the election.
@Phillip_The_Bucket is demonstrating the same cynicism in this thread that lost the election for all of us in his fraudulent interpretation of our critique. The argument wasn’t that Biden or Harris should lose. We we’re point out that they were losing, and at least some of us where arguing what they needed to do to win. If you were to point out the obvious fact that Biden was polling, somehow below DJT, in Dec 2023/Jan 2024, you would get down voted all to hell, if not outright banned. You would get called a bot. Or an NPC. Or an russian operative. Or any other number of slurs. I presented a scientific analysis showing that it was statistically impossible for Biden to turn things around in March of 2024. It was removed as misinformation and I received a ban for it. This isn’t conjecture. Its all documented. Ask @Return2Ozma some of the names they’ve been called and insults they’ve had to suffer for simply posting articles that actually reflect reality.
They were wrong to begin with, insisted on staying committed to something that they knew was both a moral and tactical disaster, they were wrong after Biden dropped out, they were wrong up until the day of the election, and they’ve been wrong since. Alternatively, the exact same critiques we’ve been levying for years now have become the mainstream interpretation of past events. And now, with Mandami’s victory we’re showing something even more powerful. That there is real power in doing the right thing and speaking ones truth. And thats simply not possible for those whose politics is based on the false validation cynicism offers.
What i ask myself in all of this is, whether the “sacrifice” of values wasn’t genuine. Because if they are willing to compromise on genocide and ethnic cleansing, the question is how much of these values were there to begin with.
And subsequently, if they are somehow “okay” with brown people being mass murdered abroad, how should anyone including these people themselves believe that they would do anything substantial to human rights violations at home. And lo and behold they do very little about it.
Because if they are willing to compromise on genocide and ethnic cleansing
Oh they’re not. They remain steadfast in their support for both.
Your core point here is actually something that deserves a little more of a response than I feel like typing up here. I’ll make a post in some “political discussion” community and maybe send you a note about it, because how we make forward progress and deal with the brokenness of the Democratic party is obviously a pretty important topic that is highly relevant to this story.
I just want to deal with this stuff a little, since you did try to tag me:
The core of their argument was that their cynicism was required to win elections. That we had to sacrifice our values, for whatever reason, to be able to “win” the election. To reiterate what our criticisms. Originally, it was with Biden. That without a serious pivot on Gaza and to right wing “enlightened centrism” that had guided his path to that point, he would lose the election. The later criticism was with Harris, and basically identical: That without pivoting and focusing on the issues the base was concerned with, that she would lose the election.
That wasn’t the core of my argument. The core of my argument was that, with the exception of Gaza, Biden already embodied every one of the values you’re claiming you weren’t willing to sacrifice: On income inequality, on climate change, on corporate corruption, on policing, on basically everything, he was the best leader we’d had in decades, someone who actually made some small amount of forward progress after, which is especially impressive given that he had to deal with a mostly-dogshit Democratic congress to try to get it all done with, and letting Trump win the next election just to spite the Democrats for not being “left enough” (which, yes, they are not) because of a mostly fantastical conception of what Biden even did in the first place, was going to lead to (1) a total cessation of any forward progress, in or out of politics (2) horrors that would have been hard to conceive of, some small number of which are coming true even now (before he turned the deportation machine into the third largest military in the world).
It was based on grabbing quotes and pretending they corresponded to policy, assembling misleading little talking-points, and outright lying. And, of course, pointing to Gaza. That was one thing that the anti-Biden crew had 100% in the bag without needing to misconstrue a damn thing. It was a horror, a stain on the world, and he was arming the whole thing the whole time through. So what could anyone say to defend it? Fair enough. And then, Kamala Harris came along, who hadn’t done any of that, and y’all blamed her for it anyway, and went back into this wild fantasy-land where the only answer to save Palestine was to let Trump win.
Anyway, now we’re in the timeline we’re in. I really hope that it is the catalyst for something better, the kind of popular revolution and massive upset to our politics that’s always been what we need, and not too many people have to die in the meantime to make that happen. I honestly don’t even really know what the answer is, in terms of finally making the American government a decent operation that can provide for its people some kind of decent life and future. I hope it happens before the whole world explodes.
I also know that you’re lying about what “we” said before the election, what Biden’s record was before the election, what the mods did before the election (I guarantee you you cannot find stuff in the modlog where someone was banned for posting a poll that showed Biden behind or something), what “our” (my at least) goals are in all of this, and all the rest of it. You’re trying to reframe it all in this innocent way by retconning that something totally different happened than what happened. So, that makes me suspicious of your motives, and of the honesty of all the constructive criticism you’re now trying to offer, yes.
Let’s hope Cuomo fucks things up for the establishment, let’s hope Mamdani gets somewhere and his message keeps spreading, with or without the help of the current people in power. Hopefully we can agree on that, at least.
I also know that you’re lying about what “we” said before the election, what Biden’s record was before the election, what the mods did before the election (I guarantee you you cannot find stuff in the modlog where someone was banned for posting a poll that showed Biden behind or something), what “our” (my at least) goals are in all of this, and all the rest of it.
Jokes on you, I’ve spent almost two years developing tooling to do specifically this because lemmy still lacks an adequate external API. Unfortunately, I’m not independently wealthy and I do have a day job and haven’t made much progress in a few months, but I am planning on releasing it as a public tool when I can get around to it. And considering I’ve finally found the line giving me shit at my day job, I’m going to have to keep it short.
I specifically am building it to document the relationship between how moderation operates as a power structure and structures narratives of the community. Its a work in progress but I’ve shared components of it with others (SatansMaggotyCumFart, for one, who wanted me to use it to do an investigation of UniversalMonk).
The issue is broad and isn’t able to be contained to just one sub, so its going to have to span many subs, but effectively I’m testing how moderation functions to support some narratives and inhibit others.
I would appreciate if you repost this to maybe one of the debate subs that I think someone started. Its probably better to house the discussion there then to create an endless series of responses.
I specifically am building it to document the relationship between how moderation operates as a power structure and structures narratives of the community. Its a work in progress but I’ve shared components of it with others (SatansMaggotyCumFart, for one, who wanted me to use it to do an investigation of UniversalMonk).
I think this is 100% an excellent idea. I am firmly convinced that you’ll find it works the opposite of the way you’re saying it does here (you’ll find that there are certain types of topics where flamewars develop, and some mods whose names aren’t really commonly spoken tend to sanction participants on one and only one side of the flamewar, more or less, the “pro-Democrat” side.) But I’d be happy to wait and see what the data on it is. Who knows, maybe anyone who spoke poorly of Biden was getting banned and it happened all the time but you really do need to build a whole analysis tool to give me even a single example.
I would appreciate if you repost this to maybe one of the debate subs that I think someone started. Its probably better to house the discussion there then to create an endless series of responses.
Agreed. Like I said, aside from all the backbiting about who said what before the election and whose fault it all is, there is actually a useful conversation to be had about what can even happen in American politics that’s good right now.
Wouldn’t Cuomo not have the (D) next to his name this time?
You’re missing the point. Vote Blue No Matter Who means that competitors are supposed to step aside after a primary and support the winning candidate. In practice, this means they expect the losing progressive candidate to suck it up and support the establishment democrat. Now that a progressive has won the primary, the establishment democrat is refusing to step aside.
So yes, he technically won’t have a D next to his name, but it is well understood that he is an arm of the political machine that is refusing to respect the will of the voters.
Come on, y’all. If we all believe he’s a dick, Cuomo can still have his D and eat it, too!
The point is its “vote blue no matter who” until it’s against the pro-business centrists in the Democratic party, and then it’s “fuck you, we’ll run independent and split the vote to let a Republican win!” because they only say that it’s important to not let perfect be the enemy of good when it comes to corrupt fuckheads who don’t give a single iota of a shit about working class people. They’re happy to drop the facade when someone like Mamdani gets in, they’d rather a Republican win than someone with real plans for change.
Now it’s time to hammer home the fact that it’s liberals’ turn to “vote blue no matter who.”
What?
How would voting I be voting blue?
Why are people up voting that? It makes zero sense…
Cuomo is the one violating the VBNMW
He should hold his nose and vote for the nominee.
It isn’t, but since centrists didn’t get their very first choice, they’re fine with it now.
He is a spiteful little ball sack.
