4 ms·

The Democrats are somewhat hampered by their focus on facts and rationality ("play fair") rather than spouting bullshit, conspiracy theories, and whatever bigot

The Democrats are somewhat hampered by their focus on facts and rationality ("play fair") rather than spouting bullshit, conspiracy theories, and whatever bigotry is currently hot ("win at all costs").

komali2 2y ago
Also by the fact that their unwillingness to turn on their capital sponsors, who don't really care whose in power and whose needs are ostensibly better met by republicans (so long as republicans don't start a trade war...) Dems will continue to make the mistake of coasting deeper into the right wing, picking up 0 voters in doing so (why would I vote for a "tough on immigration" candidate when I can vote for the one who gleefully promises to deport all the browns?), meanwhile disenfranchising any left wing voters left in the USA and creating no new left wing voter bloc by presenting a coherent alternative to the reactionaries. The same mistake is being made by neo liberal parties across the world.
- DiscourseFan 2y ago
  Good thing they'll all cease to exist very soon.
- poincaredisk 2y ago
  >why would I vote for a "tough on immigration" candidate when I can vote for the one who gleefully promises to deport all the browns? I'm always surprised by how bipolar US politics is. There's no place for nuance or third options, it's always one or second extreme. In this case, to answer your question, maybe you want to limit an influx of new people into your country (for ideological, or economical, or whatever reasons) but don't want a full on ethnic cleansing. That's OK, people don't have to only hold extreme opinions.
  - komali2 2y ago
    > In this case, to answer your question, maybe you want to limit an influx of new people into your country (for ideological, or economical, or whatever reasons) but don't want a full on ethnic cleansing. As this election shows, then, you would vote for Trump, who is "better on immigration." You would tell yourself, as many Trump supporters demonstrate in interviews, that "he wouldn't actually do that."
    - lifty 2y ago
      Did Trump say that he will "deport all brown people"? Or that he will do a "full ethnic cleansing"?
      - a1j9o94 2y ago
        If you're looking for a quote of him saying that word for word, no. But it is not an unreasonable interpretation of the things he has said he wants to do. Especially when he's used language saying immigrants are "poisoning the blood of our country" and makes up lies about immigrants eating pets. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/inside-trumps-plan-mass-deportations-who-wants-stop-him-2024-11-06/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us/inside-trumps-plan-mass-dep...
        lifty 2y ago
        It sounds to me that this is crass exaggeration and one of the many reasons why there is such a big divide between supporters of both factions. The whole exaggerated narrative and associations to nazism is definitely off putting.
        komali2 2y ago
        I understand you think people are exaggerating. You probably roll your eyes when people say Trump is a fascist, I imagine? Can I ask - let's say before 2028 the democrat party gets tea partied and gets a genuine fascist candidate. What would that candidate say? What would their policies be? Can you do the same thought experiment for the Republican party? Or do you, unfairly, believe it's simply impossible for one, or the other, party to become genuinely fascistic? Perhaps you even believe fascism was permanently defeated when Mussolini was hanged? I would admire such an optimistic view! Just in case you're genuinely curious why people say these things, it's not like we're all just making it up. Trump's rhetoric simply, to one who studies history, sounds very similar to Hitler's. It doesn't mean he's as bad as Hitler, it just means he talks like Hitler talked. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/10/trump-authoritarian-rhetoric-hitler-mussolini/680296/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/10/trump-a... As for hitlerian policy, there is simply no way to deport the millions he has promised to deport that doesn't involve roundups, trains, and concentration camps. It's a physical impossibility to achieve otherwise. Do you disagree? Will he not follow through on his campaign promise to deport every undocumented immigrant?
  - a1j9o94 2y ago
    How is ideological not wanting some level ethnic cleansing?
  - kelnos 2y ago
    > ... but don't want a full on ethnic cleansing That's what Trump's circle wants, though. They want to deport 25M immigrants. Generously, the number of people here illegally is only half that. They don't care if people here legally get caught up in it and deported as well. Deporting even a couple million people will require mass raids, round-ups, and the construction of concentration camps. It is physically impossible to deport that many people quickly or quietly or efficiently. They're afraid of losing the white majority, plain and simple. The sad thing is so many non-white people don't see this and voted for him.
selfmodruntime 2y ago
> ("play fair") Which is why they forced an unpopular, unelected candidate? I don't see it.
- Cthulhu_ 2y ago
  They planned poorly with their candidacy; Biden and Harris were the obvious candidates being president and vice-president, respectively, but Biden was too old and they couldn't find a different candidate that wasn't as well known as Harris quick enough. That said, the Republicans would have the same problem if Trump dropped out or if that bullet didn't miss.
- ejstronge 2y ago
  Within the contexts of their written rules… And maybe you’ve forgotten how the RNC rules were changed to support their candidate?
  - selfmodruntime 2y ago
    > Within the contexts of their written rules… Well these rules surely benefitted them.
- rightbyte 2y ago
  It is some sort of tribalism. Believers can't see it. E.g. we gotta remember that people were gaslighting eachother into pretending Biden is not what could charitably be described as about to be senile. Refusing to see one self as part of the problem, fundamentally.
SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
Unironically yes. You have to meet the median voter where they're at, even if you find some of their positions dumb or bigoted. That's why Obama spent the 2008 election cycle pretending to be opposed to gay marriage. The party has evolved an idea that you can do away with those kind of dirty political shenanigans, and construct a rational fact-based proof that will leave voters no choice but to support you, and I think that pretty clearly doesn't work.
throw_m239339 2y ago
[flagged]
- zimpenfish 2y ago
  > "Project 2025" or whatever it is called? a fucking unhinged conspiracy theory. How is that a conspiracy theory? It literally exists and was created by Trump loyalists. > who's calling the other camp fascist and nazi on cable TV? But that's not bullshit. Trump is following the fascist playbook fairly closely (as agreed by experts in fascist history).
- ks2048 2y ago
  Who's calling Trump a fascist? For one, John Kelly, the right-wing Marine General, Trump's former chief of staff. "Project 2025" may be unhinged, but in what sense is it a conspiracy theory? It's right out in the open and produced by one of the most prominent conservative think tanks.

komali2 2y ago

Also by the fact that their unwillingness to turn on their capital sponsors, who don't really care whose in power and whose needs are ostensibly better met by republicans (so long as republicans don't start a trade war...) Dems will continue to make the mistake of coasting deeper into the right wing, picking up 0 voters in doing so (why would I vote for a "tough on immigration" candidate when I can vote for the one who gleefully promises to deport all the browns?), meanwhile disenfranchising any left wing voters left in the USA and creating no new left wing voter bloc by presenting a coherent alternative to the reactionaries. The same mistake is being made by neo liberal parties across the world.

DiscourseFan 2y ago
Good thing they'll all cease to exist very soon.
poincaredisk 2y ago
>why would I vote for a "tough on immigration" candidate when I can vote for the one who gleefully promises to deport all the browns? I'm always surprised by how bipolar US politics is. There's no place for nuance or third options, it's always one or second extreme. In this case, to answer your question, maybe you want to limit an influx of new people into your country (for ideological, or economical, or whatever reasons) but don't want a full on ethnic cleansing. That's OK, people don't have to only hold extreme opinions.
- komali2 2y ago
  > In this case, to answer your question, maybe you want to limit an influx of new people into your country (for ideological, or economical, or whatever reasons) but don't want a full on ethnic cleansing. As this election shows, then, you would vote for Trump, who is "better on immigration." You would tell yourself, as many Trump supporters demonstrate in interviews, that "he wouldn't actually do that."
  - lifty 2y ago
    Did Trump say that he will "deport all brown people"? Or that he will do a "full ethnic cleansing"?
    - a1j9o94 2y ago
      If you're looking for a quote of him saying that word for word, no. But it is not an unreasonable interpretation of the things he has said he wants to do. Especially when he's used language saying immigrants are "poisoning the blood of our country" and makes up lies about immigrants eating pets. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/inside-trumps-plan-mass-deportations-who-wants-stop-him-2024-11-06/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us/inside-trumps-plan-mass-dep...
      - lifty 2y ago
        It sounds to me that this is crass exaggeration and one of the many reasons why there is such a big divide between supporters of both factions. The whole exaggerated narrative and associations to nazism is definitely off putting.
        komali2 2y ago
        I understand you think people are exaggerating. You probably roll your eyes when people say Trump is a fascist, I imagine? Can I ask - let's say before 2028 the democrat party gets tea partied and gets a genuine fascist candidate. What would that candidate say? What would their policies be? Can you do the same thought experiment for the Republican party? Or do you, unfairly, believe it's simply impossible for one, or the other, party to become genuinely fascistic? Perhaps you even believe fascism was permanently defeated when Mussolini was hanged? I would admire such an optimistic view! Just in case you're genuinely curious why people say these things, it's not like we're all just making it up. Trump's rhetoric simply, to one who studies history, sounds very similar to Hitler's. It doesn't mean he's as bad as Hitler, it just means he talks like Hitler talked. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/10/trump-authoritarian-rhetoric-hitler-mussolini/680296/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/10/trump-a... As for hitlerian policy, there is simply no way to deport the millions he has promised to deport that doesn't involve roundups, trains, and concentration camps. It's a physical impossibility to achieve otherwise. Do you disagree? Will he not follow through on his campaign promise to deport every undocumented immigrant?
- a1j9o94 2y ago
  How is ideological not wanting some level ethnic cleansing?
- kelnos 2y ago
  > ... but don't want a full on ethnic cleansing That's what Trump's circle wants, though. They want to deport 25M immigrants. Generously, the number of people here illegally is only half that. They don't care if people here legally get caught up in it and deported as well. Deporting even a couple million people will require mass raids, round-ups, and the construction of concentration camps. It is physically impossible to deport that many people quickly or quietly or efficiently. They're afraid of losing the white majority, plain and simple. The sad thing is so many non-white people don't see this and voted for him.

selfmodruntime 2y ago

> ("play fair") Which is why they forced an unpopular, unelected candidate? I don't see it.

Cthulhu_ 2y ago
They planned poorly with their candidacy; Biden and Harris were the obvious candidates being president and vice-president, respectively, but Biden was too old and they couldn't find a different candidate that wasn't as well known as Harris quick enough. That said, the Republicans would have the same problem if Trump dropped out or if that bullet didn't miss.
ejstronge 2y ago
Within the contexts of their written rules… And maybe you’ve forgotten how the RNC rules were changed to support their candidate?
- selfmodruntime 2y ago
  > Within the contexts of their written rules… Well these rules surely benefitted them.
rightbyte 2y ago
It is some sort of tribalism. Believers can't see it. E.g. we gotta remember that people were gaslighting eachother into pretending Biden is not what could charitably be described as about to be senile. Refusing to see one self as part of the problem, fundamentally.

SpicyLemonZest 2y ago

Unironically yes. You have to meet the median voter where they're at, even if you find some of their positions dumb or bigoted. That's why Obama spent the 2008 election cycle pretending to be opposed to gay marriage. The party has evolved an idea that you can do away with those kind of dirty political shenanigans, and construct a rational fact-based proof that will leave voters no choice but to support you, and I think that pretty clearly doesn't work.

throw_m239339 2y ago

[flagged]

zimpenfish 2y ago
> "Project 2025" or whatever it is called? a fucking unhinged conspiracy theory. How is that a conspiracy theory? It literally exists and was created by Trump loyalists. > who's calling the other camp fascist and nazi on cable TV? But that's not bullshit. Trump is following the fascist playbook fairly closely (as agreed by experts in fascist history).
ks2048 2y ago
Who's calling Trump a fascist? For one, John Kelly, the right-wing Marine General, Trump's former chief of staff. "Project 2025" may be unhinged, but in what sense is it a conspiracy theory? It's right out in the open and produced by one of the most prominent conservative think tanks.