• @DarkCloud
    link
    190
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    Liberals still hating on Bernie supporters and refusing to accept the idea that voters wanted a shake up of the system, rather than a female version of the status quo establishment left?

    …so now we’re stuck with a right wing shake up to the system instead.

    • @faltryka
      link
      8810 days ago

      They’re going to keep pissing on others like this and continue to be surprised when their candidates don’t get elected. It will always be someone else’s fault.

      • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
        link
        fedilink
        -3710 days ago

        Ƿen Y do’n vot ėgenſt ð fæciſtſ, Ðm gœıŋ ȯn t d fæciſt cit z Yṙ fȯlt.

        spoiler

        When you don’t vote against the fascists, them going on to do fascist shit is your fault.

        • @faltryka
          link
          3510 days ago

          More friendly fire. I did vote against the fascists. And you continuing to laud blame on everyone else instead of introspecting on how you can make “not fascism” a more attractive message only hurts the cause.

          You’re doing harm instead of good. That’s the point.

          • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
            link
            fedilink
            -1810 days ago

            Uı do’n o enıƿėn “n fæciſtſ” bııŋ “moṙ ėtcræktiv.” Ðı o M æ evrıƿėn luık M n hævıŋ t bı kėnvinſt “n fæciſtſ” z ð betṙ tcoıſ.

            spoiler

            I don’t kwe anyone “not fascists” being “more attractive.” They owe me and everyone like me not having to be convinced “not fascists” is fhe better choice.

            Ð æktcuėl poınt z ðæt ðiſ belıeık ėbaut hau ð establicmint nıdz t lṙn ſėm lesėn hıṙ z nėþıŋ moṙ ðæn ėtemptid leftwacıŋ v ð “ekėnȯmik eıŋgzuyitı” neırėtiv.

            spoiler

            The actual point is that this bellyache about how the establishment needs to learn some lesson here is nothing more than attempted leftwashing of the “economic anxiety” narrative.

            Ivin if Đı djenyuinlı ſold M aut f ſėmþıŋ æz impṙſėnėl æz ė dȯlṙ ȯf gæſ, ðæt z’n enı betṙ, it’z æktcuėlı almoſt ƿoṙſ. Uı muıt get blæk bægd bikȯz ſėm ƿuıt æsƿuıp diſuıdid Mı luıf ƿéz ƿoṙþ meıbı ė dȯlṙ ȯf gæſ.

            spoiler

            Even if they genuinely sold me oit for something as impersonal aa a dollar off gas, that isn’t any better. It’s actually almost worse. I might get black bagged because some white asswhipe decided my life was worth maybe a dollar off gas.

            • @faltryka
              link
              1510 days ago

              You are so sure I’m some strawman that you’ve imagined or been conditioned to identify you’re attacking someone who is an ally, and you should reflect on that.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  29 days ago

                  You’re defending fascists by making it harder for the left to unify and fight against fascism.

                  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
                    link
                    fedilink
                    -59 days ago

                    Yunifuı ėgenſt æ fuıt fæcizm buı fuıtıŋ ð kredibėl ȯpozicėn t it æ letıŋ ð fæciſtſ intu paƿṙ tƿuıſ nau?

                    spoiler

                    Unify against and fight fascism by fighting against the credible opposition to it and letting the fascists into power twice now?

          • @UsernameHere
            link
            -1810 days ago

            If you voted against facists then why are you acting like he is talking about you?

            • @faltryka
              link
              1710 days ago

              Completely obvious context…

              • @UsernameHere
                link
                -1210 days ago

                Half of the comment you responded to looks like it is in a different language. So you claiming the answer to my question is obvious looks like you’re dodging my question.

        • @chuckleslord
          link
          49 days ago

          You’re requiring the entire American populace to have the same level of being informed as yourself in order for this plan to work. In the real world, lots of people are incredibly ignorant of the actual political situation in the US. The democrats need to adjust their messaging to get those who aren’t politically engaged but vote. That means speaking on the material reality for the average person and discussing how to solve those issues. That means EMBRACING MORE PROGRESSIVE POLICIES.

          Yeah, if you know a leftist who stayed home because Harris wasn’t left enough, shame the fuck out of them. But that isn’t the same as saying Harris lost because she didn’t embrace the left. Most Americans don’t know they’re left-leaning because anything “socialist” must be evil.

          • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
            link
            fedilink
            -69 days ago

            Na, ð pu̇blik wṙ told ripıtidly. İf Y didn’t vot ėgenſt ð fæciſtſ Y aṙ æt beſt ė kolæboreıtṙ.

            spoiler

            Nah, the public were told repeatedly. If you didn’t vote against the fascists you are at best a collaborator.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -5210 days ago

        If Bernie was so popular why couldn’t he beat Hillary Clinton or Biden in the Primaries?

        Or was that someone else’s fault?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          7510 days ago

          Because the DNC put their thumbs on the scales and did everything they could to lock him out of the process while doing the opposite for Clinton.

          If the chosen, status quo DNC candidates are so popular, why do they keep losing or nearly losing all their elections?

          • Scrubbles
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3610 days ago

            The media HEAVILY favored Hilary for that whole cycle and basically made Bernie look like a joke. He had his “we will need to raise taxes” and that’s when everything shifted. DNC was never going to let him be the candidate

          • @mojofrododojo
            link
            English
            12
            edit-2
            9 days ago

            remember the totally innocent time the people managing the contest had a visit with Bill Clinton on the fucking tarmac? yeah, DNC, message received, you don’t even care about how bad that looks…

          • @UsernameHere
            link
            -1510 days ago

            Because the DNC put their thumbs on the scales and did everything they could to lock him out of the process while doing the opposite for Clinton.

            Source? The way I remember it Bernie didn’t get enough votes.

            If the chosen, status quo DNC candidates are so popular, why do they keep losing or nearly losing all their elections?

            Out of the last 5 elections they won 3.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              1610 days ago

              The DNC was out of money and severely in debt after Obamas 2012 campaign. They conspired with Hillary because she paid off 80% of the debt and was funding the DNC. She had control of their finances and decisions because the DNC would go under without her

              • @UsernameHere
                link
                410 days ago

                Wow I’ve never heard that. Do you have a source where I can verify?

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  5
                  edit-2
                  10 days ago

                  https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774/

                  Donna Brazile is the former interim chair of the Democratic National Committee

                  The Saturday morning after the convention in July, I called Gary Gensler, the chief financial officer of Hillary’s campaign. He wasted no words. He told me the Democratic Party was broke and $2 million in debt.

                  “What?” I screamed. “I am an officer of the party and they’ve been telling us everything is fine and they were raising money with no problems.”

                  That wasn’t true, he said. Officials from Hillary’s campaign had taken a look at the DNC’s books. Obama left the party $24 million in debt—$15 million in bank debt and more than $8 million owed to vendors after the 2012 campaign—and had been paying that off very slowly. Obama’s campaign was not scheduled to pay it off until 2016. Hillary for America (the campaign) and the Hillary Victory Fund (its joint fundraising vehicle with the DNC) had taken care of 80 percent of the remaining debt in 2016, about $10 million, and had placed the party on an allowance.

                  “Wait,” I said. “That victory fund was supposed to be for whoever was the nominee, and the state party races. You’re telling me that Hillary has been controlling it since before she got the nomination?”

                  Gary said the campaign had to do it or the party would collapse.

                  “That was the deal that Robby struck with Debbie,” he explained, referring to campaign manager Robby Mook. “It was to sustain the DNC. We sent the party nearly $20 million from September until the convention, and more to prepare for the election.”

                  • @UsernameHere
                    link
                    -2
                    edit-2
                    10 days ago

                    Interesting read. I was hoping for evidence though instead of anecdote. Also, I don’t see how it supports this claim:

                    Because the DNC put their thumbs on the scales and did everything they could to lock him out of the process while doing the opposite for Clinton.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              310 days ago

              Lies and statistics. Out of the last 7 elections they also won 3. And out of the last 3 they only won 1. Really it’s a pretty even split so far this century, and counting this last election Republicans have had the edge. So sure the dnc isn’t losing all of their elections, but ffs sake they should be doing a lot better than this.

              • @UsernameHere
                link
                -210 days ago

                I would like for them to be doing better than this also but if the person I responded to based their argument on the false claim that democrats are losing all the elections then they have already lost their credibility and are arguing in bad faith. So it is reasonable to expect for a source for their other claims.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -5110 days ago

            Did they take his name off the ballot?

            Did they change the vote totals?

            Did they forbid him from campaigning?

            They just ‘put their thumbs on the scales’? What does that even mean? They did ‘everything they could to lock him out of the process’ while letting him campaign and participate in the process? All your examples are vague as fuck, bro.

            • @Psychodelic
              link
              1910 days ago

              “I’ma be disrespectful to you, but I expect you to teach me!”

              This ain’t a debate. lol. If you want people to share their knowledge with you, come correct. Most people would be happy to share information. When you act all dishonest it makes no one want to even talk to you unless they agree with you

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -1610 days ago

                The man is out here talking shit and won’t show you evidence of why he’s right because it’s not his job to be a teacher and also you are disrespectful in your challenging of his assertions, am I following you correctly?

                The reason for no evidence is because there is no evidence, the reason for my disrespect is because i know he has no evidence. Don’t try to pretend like if i came at this from a different angle he’d suddenly be opening the library of Alexandria for us.

                • @Psychodelic
                  link
                  59 days ago

                  If I say, the earth isn’t a perfect sphere and that actually it’s a bit oval/elliptical (or whatever or supposedly is) and then someone answers all pissy and asking me to prove it, do you really think I’m likely to help them understand my position if I find them rude and annoying? Most people that genuinely want to understand others’ point of view don’t say things like “or was that someone else’s fault?” They say things like"can you explain why you think that?" or maybe “I’ve been thinking xyz, why is it you think abc instead?”

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -229 days ago

                Superdeligates have never once decided a primary.

                Here’s a simpler explanation: Progressive voters don’t turn out, even when it’s Bernie. They failed him in 16, they failed him in 20, and now they’ve failed us all.

                It’s easy to mail in vote, it is easy to donate money. It’s hard to actually physically show up and vote, so they stay at home.

                • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet
                  link
                  English
                  139 days ago

                  Superdelegates are the primary tool that the DNC used to exert influence over primaries. They’ve only ever once voted against the voter consensus, but they pledge full support early, which is then used by the media to grossly misrepresent candidate popularity. Mob mentality causes voters to pile behind the leading candidates, and thus the outcome of the primaries can be manipulated through use of super delegates. They abused this mechanism so heavily against Bernie that sweeping changes were made to the way that super delegates operate to avoid torch and pitchforks from an enraged constituency.

                  There, I explained it to you in a very summarized form, even though I didn’t want to.

            • @Ptsf
              link
              1410 days ago

              Did they change the vote totals?:

              Yes. Every running candidate next to Bernie pulled out, dedicating their votes to Clinton instead. It was blatant and out in the open. Hell, Bloomberg even “entered” the race late in caucusing and pulled out shortly after an insane ad spend dedicating his votes to Clinton as well. That’s “putting their 👍 on the scale”.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -89 days ago

                So do you consider what the French left change did ‘changing vote totals’ when they dropped out of races where they were splitting the vote and allowing far right candidates to win?

                Biden offering people he was running against influence and positions in his government if they drop out and endorse him isn’t cheating, it’s basic politics and if Bernie had half a brain he’d have done the same thing to keep those people in the race.

                • @Ptsf
                  link
                  69 days ago

                  Yes.

                  Also, anything that isn’t ranked choice voting that allows people to specify an order of preference at time of vote is not good politics and is not going to, and shouldn’t, sit well with progressives. Tit-for-tat is additionally an issue that many voters and progressives consider objectionable (source: exit polls). You can call it basic politics if you want, but if you’re progressive you’ll need to accept that it’s going to continuously cause us to lose elections and bleed voter support. People are clearly tired of establishment politics. Trump has proven that twice. Running as an anti-establishment candidate both times and winning, both times.

            • bobalot
              link
              -49 days ago

              Lemmy like Reddit is a circlejerk.

              Bernie lost because less people voted for him.

              If it wasn’t for the undemocratic caucuses, he would have lost earlier.

        • JackbyDev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          319 days ago

          Do you not remember every media outlet showing all the superdelegates as voting for Clinton even before their votes had been cast making it look like Sanders stood no chance?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -229 days ago

            Superdelegates have never once decided a primary, they’ve always gone with the person who got the most regular votes.

            • JackbyDev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              129 days ago

              I think you’re missing my point. Reread my comment. The media was reporting all super delegates as voting for Clinton even before any of them voted. Only a few states had voted. So they were showing stats like

              Clinton
              --------------------
              
              Sanders
              --
              

              Making it appear like Sanders had no chance.

    • @UsernameHere
      link
      3010 days ago

      If people won’t vote in their own best interest we get facsism.

    • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
      link
      fedilink
      -2310 days ago

      Ƿantid t ceık u̇p ð ſiſtim ſ mu̇tc ðeı did’n paṙtiſipeıt i it lıdıŋ t Bernie luzıŋ boþ pruımeırız?

      spoiler

      Wanted to shake up the system so much they didn’t participate in it leading to Bernie losing both primaries?

      • @Ptsf
        link
        310 days ago

        This is a blatant misrepresentation of the 2016 DNC cacus run. Absolutely ignorant.

        • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
          link
          fedilink
          -10
          edit-2
          9 days ago

          Co M ð vot tælız ðæt pruv M rȯŋ.

          spoiler

          Show me the vote talleys that prove me wrong.

          Betṙ yet, co M ð tṙnaut figyṙz ðæt ıvin impluı Uı muıt bı rȯŋ.

          spoiler

          Better yet, show me the turnout figures that even imply I might be wrong.