5 ms·

If the left were really the left they wouldn’t be the left though. The NBC left is the problem, the Democracy Now left is not. The left doesn’t want Bernie, Cho

by bearl 1y ago

If the left were really the left they wouldn’t be the left though. The NBC left is the problem, the Democracy Now left is not. The left doesn’t want Bernie, Chomsky or Amy Goodman they want The View. Turns out young men don’t want The View, so the left is stuck now much like the American right because there is no ideological coherence, just aesthetic and hatred for the other team however they are imagined (e.g. “tax and spend republicans”).

ethbr1 1y ago
The path to winning elections is by appealing to voters who can be swayed while keeping the base on board. The problem with Democrats winning elections (since 2016) has been the ideological purity tests their social-left demands from candidates, rendering them toxic to independents. It'd be nice if internet SJWs grew up and realized that winning elections with "don't ask don't tell" is better than losing elections with overly socially progressive platforms. It feels like a large chunk of the party would rather lose an election smugly than win it with compromise. Republicans since 2014 have been in somewhat of the same mutually exclusive bind, which is why Trump emerged as the primary candidate. Turns out reconciling mutually exclusive promises is possible if you're willing to say things without intending to do them and bank on charisma and a cult of personality. Tl;dr - Democrats need to cure their case of SJW Tourette's. When someone asks a question about trans rights, say "I support equality for all Americans, because that's what our Constitution promises" and leave it at that.
- Zigurd 1y ago
  I'll bet you a beer that the analysis after the midterms is going to be that Republicans shouldn't have capitulated to the tech bro neoreactionaries.
  - ethbr1 1y ago
    Depends which way control goes, which depends on the economy in November 2026 + redistricting outcomes. And I'd say the excesses are equal part tech bro neoreactionaries + nativist Heritage / Project 2025 folks, each of which contributed their own toxic ingredients. It's rapidly becoming apparent that Trump doesn't actually care about much ideologically and generally blows whichever way the last person in the room asked him to.
- platevoltage 1y ago
  This is basically a Bill Maher monologue. We live in a country where a pathological liar can turn less than a dozen people in the NCAA into a national issue, but you think the best way to counter that is march a robot out on to the mic to say "I believe we are all equal, vote for me". This is who those "Join the conversation" Pepsi ads that went over so well were designed for.
  - ethbr1 1y ago
    It's strawmaning the argument to imply that only a robot can choose what to dive into details on. Democrats should be diving into the details on progressive economic platforms every chance they get, as wholly, messily, and authentically as they can. But yes, they should refuse to jump on progressive social landmines their opponents lay out. What's your alternative and better suggestion?
    - platevoltage 1y ago
      Going all in on Israel in 2024 WAS the social political landmine. A half-assed attempt at sorta kinda defending trans people wasn't.
      - ethbr1 1y ago
        So your offered alternative is {everything the same, except harder/softer? on Israel}?
        platevoltage 1y ago
        Yeah dude. That's totally what you should have gathered from this exchange.
        ethbr1 1y ago
        If I misinterpreted your suggestion, feel free to clarify. Taking potshots is easy: putting down your own marker is hard.
- southernplaces7 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - defrost 1y ago
    As much as I agree with your main central paragraph, this Then yes, there's the SJW issue and the completely unfounded amount of obeisance to it that many democrats and their supporters expressed. seems misplaced. For context, I've been watching UK, US, AU, and CA news and politics for decades and my observation is that relatively few on left | liberal | progressive could honestly be described as all in, full on, brain washed followers of SJW issues, trans rights, drag shows, et al. The majority didn't seem to deeply care much past the basic human rights issues of everyone should be able to find a bathroom and most people should be allowed to express themselves. Almost without exception everything I heard about SJW issues originated from right wing, post Reagan Republican, neo Conservative, Fox | Sky Media type sources. Without taking a side, just observing the political strategy aspect, this was a strong winning tactic for the US right - hammer endlessly on essentially meaningless issues and raise the perceived threat level to sway the masses, offering a solution to breadcrumbs in the bedding type issues that now rank as empire ending catastrophic confrontations.
    - southernplaces7 1y ago
      I'll have to partly disagree. I don't want to imply that the whole SJW issue was a driving factor, because I don't think it was. The American dems lost the narrative on many practical subjects that too many fence margin voters really cared about, and while the conservatives, MAGA types and republicans overblew aspects of the SJW side of Dem discourse, it was and is a real thing, frequently given obiesance to and in ways that often subtly or not so subtly implied that anyone who didn't immediately do likewise must be some kind of racist, sexist troglodyte. I'm sorry, but enough of exactly this was visible on the cultural side of support for democrat social politics that it can't just be ignored. It had its impact. Too many sacred cows were encased in too many groupthink bubbles of rigid "permissible" discourse and this was heavily associated specifically with the kind of social circles that democrat politicians are most popular with and pander to very often. For many voters on the margins, this caused a reactionary dislike that led to lost votes. Take for example the illegial immigration issue. This was something that many voters of all stripes (including many Afican American and even latino American voters) took very seriously for reasons they thought very valid to their contexts. Often, however, stating that you worried about it would be smeared as a part of being a racist in general, and that must have felt bloody insulting, even ridiculous to a hefty number of people who simply viewed it as a baseless character attack.

by bearl 1y ago

ethbr1 1y ago

The path to winning elections is by appealing to voters who can be swayed while keeping the base on board. The problem with Democrats winning elections (since 2016) has been the ideological purity tests their social-left demands from candidates, rendering them toxic to independents. It'd be nice if internet SJWs grew up and realized that winning elections with "don't ask don't tell" is better than losing elections with overly socially progressive platforms. It feels like a large chunk of the party would rather lose an election smugly than win it with compromise. Republicans since 2014 have been in somewhat of the same mutually exclusive bind, which is why Trump emerged as the primary candidate. Turns out reconciling mutually exclusive promises is possible if you're willing to say things without intending to do them and bank on charisma and a cult of personality. Tl;dr - Democrats need to cure their case of SJW Tourette's. When someone asks a question about trans rights, say "I support equality for all Americans, because that's what our Constitution promises" and leave it at that.

Zigurd 1y ago
I'll bet you a beer that the analysis after the midterms is going to be that Republicans shouldn't have capitulated to the tech bro neoreactionaries.
- ethbr1 1y ago
  Depends which way control goes, which depends on the economy in November 2026 + redistricting outcomes. And I'd say the excesses are equal part tech bro neoreactionaries + nativist Heritage / Project 2025 folks, each of which contributed their own toxic ingredients. It's rapidly becoming apparent that Trump doesn't actually care about much ideologically and generally blows whichever way the last person in the room asked him to.
platevoltage 1y ago
This is basically a Bill Maher monologue. We live in a country where a pathological liar can turn less than a dozen people in the NCAA into a national issue, but you think the best way to counter that is march a robot out on to the mic to say "I believe we are all equal, vote for me". This is who those "Join the conversation" Pepsi ads that went over so well were designed for.
- ethbr1 1y ago
  It's strawmaning the argument to imply that only a robot can choose what to dive into details on. Democrats should be diving into the details on progressive economic platforms every chance they get, as wholly, messily, and authentically as they can. But yes, they should refuse to jump on progressive social landmines their opponents lay out. What's your alternative and better suggestion?
  - platevoltage 1y ago
    Going all in on Israel in 2024 WAS the social political landmine. A half-assed attempt at sorta kinda defending trans people wasn't.
    - ethbr1 1y ago
      So your offered alternative is {everything the same, except harder/softer? on Israel}?
      - platevoltage 1y ago
        Yeah dude. That's totally what you should have gathered from this exchange.
        ethbr1 1y ago
        If I misinterpreted your suggestion, feel free to clarify. Taking potshots is easy: putting down your own marker is hard.
southernplaces7 1y ago
[flagged]
- defrost 1y ago
  As much as I agree with your main central paragraph, this Then yes, there's the SJW issue and the completely unfounded amount of obeisance to it that many democrats and their supporters expressed. seems misplaced. For context, I've been watching UK, US, AU, and CA news and politics for decades and my observation is that relatively few on left | liberal | progressive could honestly be described as all in, full on, brain washed followers of SJW issues, trans rights, drag shows, et al. The majority didn't seem to deeply care much past the basic human rights issues of everyone should be able to find a bathroom and most people should be allowed to express themselves. Almost without exception everything I heard about SJW issues originated from right wing, post Reagan Republican, neo Conservative, Fox | Sky Media type sources. Without taking a side, just observing the political strategy aspect, this was a strong winning tactic for the US right - hammer endlessly on essentially meaningless issues and raise the perceived threat level to sway the masses, offering a solution to breadcrumbs in the bedding type issues that now rank as empire ending catastrophic confrontations.
  - southernplaces7 1y ago
    I'll have to partly disagree. I don't want to imply that the whole SJW issue was a driving factor, because I don't think it was. The American dems lost the narrative on many practical subjects that too many fence margin voters really cared about, and while the conservatives, MAGA types and republicans overblew aspects of the SJW side of Dem discourse, it was and is a real thing, frequently given obiesance to and in ways that often subtly or not so subtly implied that anyone who didn't immediately do likewise must be some kind of racist, sexist troglodyte. I'm sorry, but enough of exactly this was visible on the cultural side of support for democrat social politics that it can't just be ignored. It had its impact. Too many sacred cows were encased in too many groupthink bubbles of rigid "permissible" discourse and this was heavily associated specifically with the kind of social circles that democrat politicians are most popular with and pander to very often. For many voters on the margins, this caused a reactionary dislike that led to lost votes. Take for example the illegial immigration issue. This was something that many voters of all stripes (including many Afican American and even latino American voters) took very seriously for reasons they thought very valid to their contexts. Often, however, stating that you worried about it would be smeared as a part of being a racist in general, and that must have felt bloody insulting, even ridiculous to a hefty number of people who simply viewed it as a baseless character attack.