No, it’s that it created an insurmountable enthusiasm gap.
Yes, you’re saying progressives stayed home because voting for a moderate Dem against fascism wasn’t EXCITING enough for them.
So literally what I accused you of saying, thanks for agreeing with me.
No, but someone who exclusively punches left doesn’t strike me as being particularly left.
I’m sorry, I’ll stop attacking the people who, like you, are making apologia for letting fascism take over one of the most powerful countries in the world because they weren’t ‘enthused’ enough.
I’ll be sure to be properly contrite for shaming you when I’m in line for the death camps.
Yes, you’re saying progressives stayed home because voting for a moderate Dem against fascism wasn’t EXCITING enough for them.
I’m saying that candidates that don’t generate enthusiasm don’t win. For someone who’s constantly pontificating like they’re the only one in the world that understands realpolitik, that seems to be a real blind spot for you.
I’m sorry, I’ll stop attacking the people who, like you, are making apologia for letting fascism take over one of the most powerful countries in the world because they weren’t ‘enthused’ enough.
Buddy, that’s you.You’re the one looking for anyone to blame other than the party that blew $1.6 billion on their worst defeat since 2004.
I’m saying that candidates that don’t generate enthusiasm don’t win.
Yes, you’re saying that, according to you, the loss was caused by progressives not being enthused enough because they weren’t pandered to. Exactly what I said you were saying. You continually reaffirm this and then act like you’re contradicting me, and I can’t tell if you genuinely don’t understand, or if you’re just afraid to confront the fact that your own argument places the blame for fascism on the people you were just trying to defend.
For someone who’s constantly pontificating like they’re the only one in the world that understands realpolitik, that seems to be a real blind spot for you.
How? I’m not the one saying progressives caused this loss.
Buddy, that’s you. You’re the one looking for anyone to blame other than the party that blew $1.6 billion on their worst defeat since 2004.
I blame the Dem party, absolutely. It’s just that the Dem elite being guilty as fuck doesn’t fucking absolve all the fascist cunts who voted for fascism or stood by as fascism swept into power.
Yes, you’re saying that, according to you, the loss was caused by progressives not being enthused enough because they weren’t pandered to.
I don’t know what to tell you, dude. You don’t turn out groups you don’t campaign for. Harris didn’t campaign for progressives and the working class, she didn’t turn out progressives or the working class. Hillary didn’t visit Michigan or Wisconsin, she didn’t win Michigan or Wisconsin. It’s just reality, I’m sorry you don’t like it.
I blame the Dem party, absolutely
Citation needed.
Yes, you’re saying that, according to you, the loss was caused by progressives not being enthused enough because they weren’t pandered to.
I don’t know what to tell you, dude. You don’t turn out groups you don’t campaign for.
So you agree with my characterization of your argument, and you’ve spent the past five comments or so flailing around because… it sounds bad when it’s said by someone else? Fuck’s sake.
I voted for her you chud.
Is that supposed to make your argument less absurd? I assure you, it doesn’t.
So you agree with my characterization of your argument, and you’ve spent the past five comments or so flailing around because… it sounds bad when it’s said by someone else?
…no, dude, we’re not saying the same thing. You really need this explained? You’re saying, “pRoGrEsSiVeS DiDn’T sToP fAsCiSm BeCaUsE tHeY’Re eNtiTlEd,” and I’m saying no one, in the history of elections, turned out groups they didn’t campaign for or motivate. The Harris campaign thought they could get around a complete lack of a progressive message by saying, “Project 2025,” and scaring progressive groups into voting for them, and it didn’t work.
Is that supposed to make your argument less absurd?
No, it’s supposed to point out that it’s fucking stupid it is to call someone a Nazi because they didn’t vote for your candidate, especially when they voted for your terrible fucking candidate.
…no, dude, we’re not saying the same thing. You really need this explained? You’re saying, “pRoGrEsSiVeS DiDn’T sToP fAsCiSm BeCaUsE tHeY’Re eNtiTlEd,” and I’m saying no one, in the history of elections, turned out groups they didn’t campaign for or motivate.
Yes, you’re saying that, according to you, the loss was caused by progressives not being enthused enough because they weren’t pandered to. Exactly what I said you were saying. You continually reaffirm this and then act like you’re contradicting me, and I can’t tell if you genuinely don’t understand, or if you’re just afraid to confront the fact that your own argument places the blame for fascism on the people you were just trying to defend.
By YOUR argument, not mine, progressives refused to turn out because they weren’t motivated enough by the Dem candidate to oppose literal fucking fascism. Not sure why you’re bending over backwards not only to keep this argument, but absolve the people you claim to be responsible for ushering in fascism, but I’ve never claimed to have exceptional insight into fascist apologists.
Your only response is to repeatedly claim that it’s a fact of life that not pandering to people means you don’t get their votes, which, regardless of whether that’s true or not, does not in the least contradict the interpretation of your argument I’ve repeatedly highlighted.
No, it’s supposed to point out that it’s fucking stupid it is to call someone a Nazi because they didn’t vote for your candidate, especially when they voted for your terrible fucking candidate.
It’s absurd to call someone a Nazi for deliberately choosing to let Nazis take over the country.
Buddy, you can keep bitching and moaning all you want, but it’s just how fucking elections work. You want high turnout from gun control advocates? You can’t campaign on a Second Amendment message. You want high progressive turnout? You can’t campaign with Liz Cheney. If calling it, “pandering,” makes you feel better about it, you do you, but to people who aren’t entitled to other people’s votes, it’s called, “campaigning.”
And by the way, if stopping, “literal fucking fascism” was so important to the Harris campaign, maybe Harris shouldn’t have waited until two weeks before election day to actually use the word, “fascism.” Seems like, if the entire pitch to progressive groups was going to be, “my policy’s don’t matter, you have to vote for me to stop fascism,” they probably should have spent some time talking about fascism!
So yes, then I was correct, you are saying that progressives didn’t turn out because they didn’t find a moderate Dem exciting enough to oppose literal fucking fascism with. Like, not even any ambiguity in your claim, that’s literally and exactly what you’re saying, and what I’ve been accusing you of since the start and you’ve been denying in the weirdest fucking way.
Yes, you’re saying progressives stayed home because voting for a moderate Dem against fascism wasn’t EXCITING enough for them.
So literally what I accused you of saying, thanks for agreeing with me.
I’m sorry, I’ll stop attacking the people who, like you, are making apologia for letting fascism take over one of the most powerful countries in the world because they weren’t ‘enthused’ enough.
I’ll be sure to be properly contrite for shaming you when I’m in line for the death camps.
I’m saying that candidates that don’t generate enthusiasm don’t win. For someone who’s constantly pontificating like they’re the only one in the world that understands realpolitik, that seems to be a real blind spot for you.
Buddy, that’s you. You’re the one looking for anyone to blame other than the party that blew $1.6 billion on their worst defeat since 2004.
Yes, you’re saying that, according to you, the loss was caused by progressives not being enthused enough because they weren’t pandered to. Exactly what I said you were saying. You continually reaffirm this and then act like you’re contradicting me, and I can’t tell if you genuinely don’t understand, or if you’re just afraid to confront the fact that your own argument places the blame for fascism on the people you were just trying to defend.
How? I’m not the one saying progressives caused this loss.
I blame the Dem party, absolutely. It’s just that the Dem elite being guilty as fuck doesn’t fucking absolve all the fascist cunts who voted for fascism or stood by as fascism swept into power.
Wear your brownshirt proudly. You earned it.
I don’t know what to tell you, dude. You don’t turn out groups you don’t campaign for. Harris didn’t campaign for progressives and the working class, she didn’t turn out progressives or the working class. Hillary didn’t visit Michigan or Wisconsin, she didn’t win Michigan or Wisconsin. It’s just reality, I’m sorry you don’t like it.
Citation needed.
I voted for her you chud.
So you agree with my characterization of your argument, and you’ve spent the past five comments or so flailing around because… it sounds bad when it’s said by someone else? Fuck’s sake.
Is that supposed to make your argument less absurd? I assure you, it doesn’t.
…no, dude, we’re not saying the same thing. You really need this explained? You’re saying, “pRoGrEsSiVeS DiDn’T sToP fAsCiSm BeCaUsE tHeY’Re eNtiTlEd,” and I’m saying no one, in the history of elections, turned out groups they didn’t campaign for or motivate. The Harris campaign thought they could get around a complete lack of a progressive message by saying, “Project 2025,” and scaring progressive groups into voting for them, and it didn’t work.
No, it’s supposed to point out that it’s fucking stupid it is to call someone a Nazi because they didn’t vote for your candidate, especially when they voted for your terrible fucking candidate.
By YOUR argument, not mine, progressives refused to turn out because they weren’t motivated enough by the Dem candidate to oppose literal fucking fascism. Not sure why you’re bending over backwards not only to keep this argument, but absolve the people you claim to be responsible for ushering in fascism, but I’ve never claimed to have exceptional insight into fascist apologists.
Your only response is to repeatedly claim that it’s a fact of life that not pandering to people means you don’t get their votes, which, regardless of whether that’s true or not, does not in the least contradict the interpretation of your argument I’ve repeatedly highlighted.
It’s absurd to call someone a Nazi for deliberately choosing to let Nazis take over the country.
Okay. You have fun with that.
Buddy, you can keep bitching and moaning all you want, but it’s just how fucking elections work. You want high turnout from gun control advocates? You can’t campaign on a Second Amendment message. You want high progressive turnout? You can’t campaign with Liz Cheney. If calling it, “pandering,” makes you feel better about it, you do you, but to people who aren’t entitled to other people’s votes, it’s called, “campaigning.”
And by the way, if stopping, “literal fucking fascism” was so important to the Harris campaign, maybe Harris shouldn’t have waited until two weeks before election day to actually use the word, “fascism.” Seems like, if the entire pitch to progressive groups was going to be, “my policy’s don’t matter, you have to vote for me to stop fascism,” they probably should have spent some time talking about fascism!
So yes, then I was correct, you are saying that progressives didn’t turn out because they didn’t find a moderate Dem exciting enough to oppose literal fucking fascism with. Like, not even any ambiguity in your claim, that’s literally and exactly what you’re saying, and what I’ve been accusing you of since the start and you’ve been denying in the weirdest fucking way.
That’s an awfully low opinion of progressives.