The actual actions of Biden and his place in the Moral scale aren’t really speculation (supporting with military hardware and ammo a Genocidal fascist ethnostate because of the dominant ethnicity of that state - check!), but the part about the DNC does indeed fall into the realm of speculation.
Further, from his historical track record it seems likely that Trump wants to take over power and become some kind of dictator - he says a lot of things and then doesn’t go forward with them, but this one he said it and tried it - however, what’s in doubt (IMHO) is whether he actual can do it.
On the side of the DNC, from decades of historical track record it seems very likely that they do not want a more leftwing Democratic candidate and from recent history and the whole Democratic Primary structure, most noteably the anti-Democratic super-voters, it’s clear that they also can stop a more leftwing candidate, as that’s exactly what they did with Sanders.
So it’s a don’t vote Biden and if Trump wins he will try to become a life dictator but might or not succeed or vote Biden and if he wins the Democrat Party will keep on shifting right (and there’s not that much right to shift to, since this election is “quasi-Nazi”-supporting hard neoliberal - vs - Fascist) and eventually the Democrats will be fielding a Trump-like candidate and the Republicans a Worse-than-Trump one, with a very low probability of it not being so (it would require a change of a trend of 3 decades without anything at all forcing them to do so, hence probabilitically a Fascist -vs- Fascist election in the US it’s mainly a question of when rather than if).
It’s a Trump-today vs Trump-like-or-worse-tomorrow scenario unless (if they vote Biden now) people find a way to shift the direction of things in the time between, and I have yet to hear a single realistic way to do that for the Presidential elections, though I’ve seen a few good ideas to push the Democrats left in Congressional and Senate elections, through civil society movements and targetted campaigns in the Primaries against the most rightwing Democratic candidates.
As I said, it’s a fucked up “choice”.
PS: For me the best result (IMHO) might be a barely by the skin of their teeth Democrat victory - just about enough to stop Trump and so close to a Democrat loss that it makes the DNC fear that they’ve shifted too much to the Right - however such an outcome is impossible to organise and even if it does happen, my hope of how the DNC gets affected is still all speculation and might be totally wrong.
When talking about Biden, they’re talking about the consequences to democrat party structure. When talking about Trump, they’re talking about policy. Their point stands
His point in the comment are the possible consequences to democrat party power structure, not to policy, he’s not discussing democrat policy either. He’s proposing to have an impact on democrat power structure through not voting for them, which may or may not work, but what for sure doesn’t work is “vote blue no matter who”.
Are the results of a democratic victory as much speculation as the results of a Republican victory?
The original comment was able to discuss the results of a democratic victory with laser precision, while it danced around the potential effects of a trump victory by calling it speculation. Again, see what I quoted.
I’ve seen this disparity in foresight multiple times on Lemmy, and it’s frustrating when used to justify decision-making. It’s literally the sleeping Shaq meme.
FWIW, OP and I are actually in agreement, both in that democratic victory outcomes are also speculation (and should’ve been worded as such) as well as the point being made.
I don’t answer loaded questions. I’ve explained, he’s discussing possibilities to party structure, not to policy, you’re just trying to establish a false equivalence between them because it’s convenient for your “they’re only attacking the Dems!” narrative
Bruh it’s not an assumption (required for a loaded question) to say that reasoning about the future in the case of a democratic win is speculation just like reasoning about the future in the case of a Republican win is.
but the part about the DNC does indeed fall into the realm of speculation.
The whole point of my comment is that speculation about the effects of a democratic win were initially portrayed as ironclad, while the speculation of the effects of a Republican win were downplayed due to being speculation. I’m not commenting on the message, I’m commenting on the delivery. You’re commenting on the message, not the delivery. Your comments are simply not relevant to mine.
When the guy you’re “defending” and I are in agreement, what are you doing? Are you going to explain what they “really” meant with their comment?
When discussing the effects of a Biden victory:
When discussing the effects of a trump victory:
Hmmm.
That’s a good point (no irony intended)
The actual actions of Biden and his place in the Moral scale aren’t really speculation (supporting with military hardware and ammo a Genocidal fascist ethnostate because of the dominant ethnicity of that state - check!), but the part about the DNC does indeed fall into the realm of speculation.
Further, from his historical track record it seems likely that Trump wants to take over power and become some kind of dictator - he says a lot of things and then doesn’t go forward with them, but this one he said it and tried it - however, what’s in doubt (IMHO) is whether he actual can do it.
On the side of the DNC, from decades of historical track record it seems very likely that they do not want a more leftwing Democratic candidate and from recent history and the whole Democratic Primary structure, most noteably the anti-Democratic super-voters, it’s clear that they also can stop a more leftwing candidate, as that’s exactly what they did with Sanders.
So it’s a don’t vote Biden and if Trump wins he will try to become a life dictator but might or not succeed or vote Biden and if he wins the Democrat Party will keep on shifting right (and there’s not that much right to shift to, since this election is “quasi-Nazi”-supporting hard neoliberal - vs - Fascist) and eventually the Democrats will be fielding a Trump-like candidate and the Republicans a Worse-than-Trump one, with a very low probability of it not being so (it would require a change of a trend of 3 decades without anything at all forcing them to do so, hence probabilitically a Fascist -vs- Fascist election in the US it’s mainly a question of when rather than if).
It’s a Trump-today vs Trump-like-or-worse-tomorrow scenario unless (if they vote Biden now) people find a way to shift the direction of things in the time between, and I have yet to hear a single realistic way to do that for the Presidential elections, though I’ve seen a few good ideas to push the Democrats left in Congressional and Senate elections, through civil society movements and targetted campaigns in the Primaries against the most rightwing Democratic candidates.
As I said, it’s a fucked up “choice”.
PS: For me the best result (IMHO) might be a barely by the skin of their teeth Democrat victory - just about enough to stop Trump and so close to a Democrat loss that it makes the DNC fear that they’ve shifted too much to the Right - however such an outcome is impossible to organise and even if it does happen, my hope of how the DNC gets affected is still all speculation and might be totally wrong.
Indeed.
When talking about Biden, they’re talking about the consequences to democrat party structure. When talking about Trump, they’re talking about policy. Their point stands
Why are the consequences to democrat party structure not also speculation?
His point in the comment are the possible consequences to democrat party power structure, not to policy, he’s not discussing democrat policy either. He’s proposing to have an impact on democrat power structure through not voting for them, which may or may not work, but what for sure doesn’t work is “vote blue no matter who”.
You still haven’t answered my question.
Are the results of a democratic victory as much speculation as the results of a Republican victory?
The original comment was able to discuss the results of a democratic victory with laser precision, while it danced around the potential effects of a trump victory by calling it speculation. Again, see what I quoted.
I’ve seen this disparity in foresight multiple times on Lemmy, and it’s frustrating when used to justify decision-making. It’s literally the sleeping Shaq meme.
FWIW, OP and I are actually in agreement, both in that democratic victory outcomes are also speculation (and should’ve been worded as such) as well as the point being made.
I don’t answer loaded questions. I’ve explained, he’s discussing possibilities to party structure, not to policy, you’re just trying to establish a false equivalence between them because it’s convenient for your “they’re only attacking the Dems!” narrative
Bruh it’s not an assumption (required for a loaded question) to say that reasoning about the future in the case of a democratic win is speculation just like reasoning about the future in the case of a Republican win is.
That is 100% a fact. Once again, the guy you’re defending has arrived at the same conclusion:
The whole point of my comment is that speculation about the effects of a democratic win were initially portrayed as ironclad, while the speculation of the effects of a Republican win were downplayed due to being speculation. I’m not commenting on the message, I’m commenting on the delivery. You’re commenting on the message, not the delivery. Your comments are simply not relevant to mine.
When the guy you’re “defending” and I are in agreement, what are you doing? Are you going to explain what they “really” meant with their comment?