425
Democrats worry their most loyal voters won’t turn out for Biden in 2024
(www.washingtonpost.com)
this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2023
425 points (94.4% liked)
politics
19120 readers
4013 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Anyone "worth getting excited about" is going to challenge the status quo too much - even nominally - for the DNC to be okay with it. They are conservative in the descriptive sense. "No-one's standard of living will fundamentally change."
I get that we have many problems that aren't really being actively solved, but personally I've been pretty happy with this return-to-status-quo term as compared to the previous non-status-quo term... and right now the narcissistic traitor is leading the nomination polls.
You've been pretty happy with status quo have you? Great, love that for you. Sounds like being apathetic to the problems is working out for you specifically. I certainly wouldn't want you to have to think about the enormous numbers of disenfranchised, poor and minority people who overwhelmingly don't turn out to vote because they don't see a real difference in their lives between parties and the dems aren't doing anything to prove to them why they should care. That sounds like it wouldn't be comfortable for you, and that's the top priority here.
Context matters. If you take my words out of context, then you aren't actually addressing what I said, you're addressing a straw man. Or did you intend to imply that you were happier with the previous president?
And this is putting words in my mouth:
But never mind your flawed approach to debate, let's actually take a look at what's been done during Biden's time in office:
Rejoining the Paris Climate Agreement
Overturning Trump's transgender service member ban
Reuniting children with their families who were separated by Trump's border control policies
Oh yeah, and more than $75 billion in support for Ukraine
In fact, Biden's track record is pretty good overall. So every single problem hasn't been solved in 2.5 years, at least there's been progress. And did you forget that Biden inherited the country in a crisis which Trump massively bungled? You're like a poster child for letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.
I could compile a similar list of their failures if I cared to. This is just a gish gallop.
Here's one: Hillary's campaign directly promoted the extreme far right leading directly to Trump's victory in 2016.
https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/
That's not "good", that's "enabling fascism". Absolute clown shit.
If you have to compare them to outright fascists to say they are comparatively "good", that's not a great look, but even then you can't ignore when they do shit like this. You can't hide behind their supposed good intentions either. They nearly threw 2020 by pushing Biden into everyone's faces like a wet fart and saying, "At least it's not a torrent of diarrhea! Vote for the wet fart please!"
I never told anyone not to vote as far left as was practical - which in the US means voting Dem. I am simply pointing out the reality that the most disenfranchised people in the US don't even vote. Not voting isn't a sign of privilege, thinking voting will change anything is a sign of privilege, because it means you're in the increasingly small minority that might see any change from it.
You say I'm letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, but you actively defend mediocrity from any and all criticism because you can't see past the false dichotomy you've been presented with. If I want my kids to leave the park, I don't say, "We're leaving now," I say, "Do you want to leave in 5 minutes or 10?" and they respect the results, even though I invented the entire spectrum of possibility for them. The two party system has done the same thing to you.
It doesn't matter why you're happy with the status quo, what matters is that you are defending the status quo. That makes you functionally conservative. Just because there are other conservatives that are worse by comparison doesn't change that.
You might want to consider that millions of people know the kinds of ideas you want put forward and just think those are bad ideas
You might want to consider that US democracy is functionally an oligarchy and doesn't reflect the will of the people: https://archive.org/details/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc
i doubt it. i bet they think what the cia wants them to think about it, but knowledge is a justified true belief, and my bet is that they believe a lot of things about those ideas that just aren't true.
Well that's silly
Some of those accomplishments are worth celebrating, but:
lol are you kidding? The only countries on Earth with a competent response to COVID were New Zealand, South Korea, and China.
This is just tradewar bullshit with China. I work in manufacturing so I'm not against seeing more investment in my sector, but like, this isn't about making good American jobs. It's only about preparing for the inevitable war over Taiwan.
Also for Democrat voters. I don't want a Bernie/Williamson/RFK candidate. I want the candidate I voted in as President in 2020