• DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    4 months ago

    I think the current best demonstration on this is how hard people are pushing Mark Kelly as VP.

    They push a center-right president onto the stage and then dangle another “centrist” to try and, what? Appeal to Never Trumper Republicans? Racists?

    How about you offer actual progressives some goddamn enticement for once and offer it to Jamaal Bowman, who the Dems primaried in favor of a genocidal AIPAC stooge?

    • timbuck2themoon
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      3 months ago

      If he was that popular and progressives that numerous he wouldn’t have lost his primary, especially as the incumbent. Simple as.

      • DancingBear@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        You are clueless as far as actual policies supported by actual Americans. Policy wise, there is pretty much a super majority of Americans that support actual progressive policies

        • timbuck2themoon
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          If that was the case then maybe they should get off their asses and vote then huh?

          • Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            As soon as there’s a candidate that actually represents them… Imagine if the 2 candidates were Trump and Romney, both running as Republicans… Would libs be crying that everyone needs to vote Republican or the Republicans will win? Replace Republican with conservative in that last sentence, and maybe it will clear up why progressives don’t bother voting… There is no one to vote for

            (I’m voting for Kamala, so should everyone)

            • timbuck2themoon
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              Don’t be mad at me that he either sucks or progressives can’t be assed to go vote.

              Im just pointing out your suggestion is laughable because he can’t even win his primary as an incumbent.

              • DancingBear@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Yes because Israel lobby spent the most money in history for any primary seat of congress. One district rep for congress is a little different than the whole country, but yes, money needs to be taken out of politics.

                In other news the capital of Israel is about to get bombed by Iran, which is too bad I guess

                • timbuck2themoon
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Except he was down like 17 before that money even came in.

                  Try again.

                  Make more excuses.

                  • DancingBear@midwest.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    I agree with you, money in politics has no influence over our politicians. If someone gave me 100 million dollars I wouldn’t feel obligated to give them taxpayer money or weapons. Lobbyists are just good people trying to make an honest living.

                    I totally agree with you

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Policy wise, there is pretty much a super majority of Americans that support actual progressive policies

          There’s a huge trust gap in implementation. That’s why Donald Trump threaten a national victory via votes from dying Boomers convinced he’s going to unleash fantasy free health care technology while Bernie Sanders can’t squeak through a primary on the promise of increasing Medicaid enrollments.

          People may want the same things, but they are deeply cynical in who they trust to deliver those policies.

          • DancingBear@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            Health care is a fantasy in the United States don’t get sick here it would be cheaper to fly to a hotel in Paris if you are sick I suppose

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        If he was that popular and progressives that numerous he wouldn’t have lost his primary

        Propaganda works. You can bombard people with media attacks on a progressive politician to trick people into thinking he’s reactionary. In this case, a heavily Jewish district was flooded with “Jamaal Bowman is antisemetic” messaging for months straight and it cost him the election.

        This has nothing to do with his popularity or his progressive bonafides and everything to do with his cash on hand to run counter-programming.

        • timbuck2themoon
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Again, he was down a ton before the AIPAC money came in.

          That PAC bullshit is just that but it doesn’t explain his loss.

      • cheeseandrice@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        That you’re being downvoted for this totally reasonable comment only inches away from a top level comment lamenting a system that silences dissenting views is nice.

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Lol because he’s citing the system being critiqued as evidence to make the case that progressive politics aren’t popular

          “This system disadvantages dissenting views”

          “Dissenting views just arent popular, just look at the outcome of this system”

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      They push a center-right president onto the stage

      Like, 90% of the US Senate is center-right or worse. You’re in a country that is governed overwhelmingly to the right of the popular political view. I don’t think the VP pick is going to meaningfully shift any of that. Running Walz as your VP isn’t going to turn the US Senate into the Minnesota Governor’s Mansion.

      How about you offer actual progressives some goddamn enticement for once and offer it to Jamaal Bowman, who the Dems primaried in favor of a genocidal AIPAC stooge?

      Because the US has a huge geopolitical strategic interest in staying friendly with Israel and a vanishingly small interest in cultivating support among progressive New Yorkers.

      • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Because the US has a huge geopolitical strategic interest in staying friendly with Israel and a vanishingly small interest in cultivating support among progressive New Yorkers.

        This is an excellent explanation for the way things are but a really terrible reason to keep them that way

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Am I the only one who thinks we need to pick someone no older than ~50 for VP? Based on the idea that VP is an understudy position?

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          It’s not an understudy position. The role of VP has historically been a way to “balance the ticket” between factions in the party. So, a Kennedy from Massachusetts and Johnson from Texas. Or California’s Reagan with a Connecticut Bush.

          More recently, the VP has been a means of whipping votes in the House (Cheney and Ford) or the Senate (Gore, Biden, Pence) and raising money from affiliate donor networks (all of the above, but Harris and Vance more than ever).

          If you want a Presidential job training program, look to the governor’s mansion or the State Department. But by the time you’re VP, you’re not training. You’re in the game.