Factually incorrect, as evidenced by the fact that Hillary won the popular vote.
The problem isn’t running women. It’s running women who are unscrupulous and/or shitty at politics. Harris couldn’t even make it out of Iowa in 2016, so it was evidently a stupid call to let our brain-damaged former president anoint her as a successor without a primary.
“Pokemon Go to the polls” was just a silly meme. I think voters wanted somebody to the left of Obama, and Hillary felt like a big step back to the '90s.
Dissing Bernie’s platform didn’t help. One key moment I remember was her saying that Medicare For All was something that would “never, ever happen”. Instead of adapting her platform to win over Bernie’s voters, she just dismissed it completely as foolish pipe dreams. Just really tone deaf and smug about it.
One key moment I remember was her saying that Medicare For All was something that would “never, ever happen”.
I honestly hope it happens in my lifetime. Just for the sheer delight of gloating at centrists that the default is no longer “siphon your paltry amassed wealth to billionaires and then die.”
Not really. That’s kind of the point of the quote. If the popular vote actually counted it would radically change the way elections are run and campaigned in. There’s no telling how that election would change if the popular vote mattered.
That election is pretty interesting for instance because Hillary made massive mistakes in not campaigning in certain swing States. Or at least campaigning enough. Michigan being the main one. Now maybe that means in a universe in which popular votes mattered she would win. Or maybe it means in a universe where popular votes matter, Trump would campaign in places that he didn’t before and get a lot more votes. The entire concept is altered dramatically by that key fact.
Either way the point is you can’t just assume it would be the same because clearly it would not.
You were fine with democracy being flushed down a toilet when Hillary was rigging primaries against Bernie or when Dems sue Greens off the ballot at the state level.
Was I? Cause I’m pretty sure I strongly campaigned for Bernie during the primaries even after Super Tuesday when the race pretty much ended. My voting didnt take place until the 15th and I still put his name on my ballot. Then when the presidential election rolled around I voted for Bernie again as a write-in.
You can try to put me into some nice little predefined box, but I’ve its not going to prove your point. My point is simple. If we for some reason need to run against Trump again in 2028 do you feel confident beyond doubt that swing state voters are going to support AOC or any other female candidate? Cause in case you haven’t learned this yet, unless you live in Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania or Michigan…our votes don’t really matter. And quite a few of those states are pretty rural.
I mean you also see conservatives vote for people like Boebert and MTG. Misogynists, surprisingly, will reliably prioritize their other ideals over whether to put a woman in power.
Interesting point. I do think there’s a sort of power dynamic at play there. They see the way they campaign against women’s rights and label them as one of the “good ones” that will show women that they can have higher positions in society if they submit. Maybe, hopefully, my assessment is off base.
If we for some reason need to run against Trump again in 2028 do you feel confident beyond doubt that swing state voters are going to support AOC or any other female candidate?
Women won senate races in three of the swing states Kamala lost, so clearly gender wasn’t the problem.
I am confident beyond a reasonable doubt that AOC would beat Trump, if only because Trump would be an incredibly weak candidate. I’d love for him to try.
I’m also confident that the Democrats are at risk of losing an entire generation (both in the short and long terms) the longer they keep offering uninspiring candidates and refusing to give any policy concessions to the left, especially those popular with young voters.
Your argument about female senators winning in swing states has the most merit I’ve seen so far. I’ve got to give that too you. But it does worry me that those are elections that are localized to some degree. A national election is going to garner way more negative sentiment from the Bible belt.
In a perfect society I would absolutely love for AOC to be the first female president in 2028. The realist in me understands that if you were to take everything about her and put it into a white male, they would garner more votes and be more likely to win. I care deeply about being able to elect the first female president in history, but I care more about saving the lower and middle class. I don’t care who does it. Just that it gets done and we can start to leave predatory capitalism behind.
Nor do I. It was a hypothetical, but its not our job to find that person. I think the closest we currently have is still Bernie but he needs to be able to retire. I don’t want him in the presidential office at 84. Then maybe Graham Platner who has his own “controversial” past. Ro Khanna(not white). Mamdani(not US born). Pritzker(Billionaire. I love what he’s done in Illinois, but I feel as though his status as a billionaire puts him at odds with what the message for 2028 should be). Talarico(Maybe? But people find issue with his framing of progressive policy in religious values).
The way I see it, there’s an ever-widening gap between what is considered permissible or possible within the existing system, and what actually needs to happen to avert collapse. How much the DNC is willing to allow and what messaging a candidate goes with may matter just as much as who the candidate is.
Note that as a commie I expect most politicians to be self-serving opportunists and I’m skeptical that it’s at all possible to bridge the gap between what’s possible in the system and what needs to happen. But tactically speaking, they need to find someone who will at least promise to try to do good things rather than just maintaining the status quo.
And if Trump gets the outrageous military budget he wants, I’m not sure I’m going to envy whoever inherits the debt crisis. They need to call out military spending as the source of the problem and strongly condemn the Iran War. What we absolutely don’t need is someone doing austerity policies and trying to balance the budget by cutting social spending even further, which I expect to be the DNC’s agenda, and it’d be the fastest way to lose what should be a layup.
Confidently incorrect. Popular vote doesn’t win elections and red state men don’t vote for women.
I say this as a huge fan of AOC, I think she should be Veep and have the POTUS leave at the start of the second admin. Then let her run once (twice?) more.
Popular vote doesn’t win elections and red state men don’t vote for women.
Red state men don’t vote for democrats either. Maybe you should try to win gettable votes instead of making excuses for shutting out candidates you don’t want.
Factually incorrect, as evidenced by the fact that Hillary won the popular vote.
The problem isn’t running women. It’s running women who are unscrupulous and/or shitty at politics. Harris couldn’t even make it out of Iowa in 2016, so it was evidently a stupid call to let our brain-damaged former president anoint her as a successor without a primary.
Beware of ANYONE going around spouting the “we can’t run AOC because WOMEN ALWAYS LOSE! Just look at the LAST TWO TIMES!” bullshit
As if Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris were perfect candidates offering anything more than “imagine how bad Trump would be!”
“The Most Lethal Millitary”
“Nothing will fundamentally change”
“Pokemon Go!-to-the-polls”
I mean come the fuck on.
Centrists are happy to hold back all women in order to stop one woman.
“Pokemon Go to the polls” was just a silly meme. I think voters wanted somebody to the left of Obama, and Hillary felt like a big step back to the '90s.
Dissing Bernie’s platform didn’t help. One key moment I remember was her saying that Medicare For All was something that would “never, ever happen”. Instead of adapting her platform to win over Bernie’s voters, she just dismissed it completely as foolish pipe dreams. Just really tone deaf and smug about it.
I honestly hope it happens in my lifetime. Just for the sheer delight of gloating at centrists that the default is no longer “siphon your paltry amassed wealth to billionaires and then die.”
Agreed. It’s like people think these candidates were above reproach despite the very obvious flaws.
George W Bush once said that if the popular vote mattered he’d campaign in Texas.
No shit it doesn’t matter, but it does demonstrate a flaw in LDF’s point.
Not really. That’s kind of the point of the quote. If the popular vote actually counted it would radically change the way elections are run and campaigned in. There’s no telling how that election would change if the popular vote mattered.
That election is pretty interesting for instance because Hillary made massive mistakes in not campaigning in certain swing States. Or at least campaigning enough. Michigan being the main one. Now maybe that means in a universe in which popular votes mattered she would win. Or maybe it means in a universe where popular votes matter, Trump would campaign in places that he didn’t before and get a lot more votes. The entire concept is altered dramatically by that key fact.
Either way the point is you can’t just assume it would be the same because clearly it would not.
Thank you for sharing your opinion. Have a nice evening.
Aight. Cool. Wanna bet democracy on it?
BlueMaga loves saying that Democracy is over if they lose the election, then losing the election.
Always with the platitudes.
You were fine with democracy being flushed down a toilet when Hillary was rigging primaries against Bernie or when Dems sue Greens off the ballot at the state level.
Was I? Cause I’m pretty sure I strongly campaigned for Bernie during the primaries even after Super Tuesday when the race pretty much ended. My voting didnt take place until the 15th and I still put his name on my ballot. Then when the presidential election rolled around I voted for Bernie again as a write-in.
You can try to put me into some nice little predefined box, but I’ve its not going to prove your point. My point is simple. If we for some reason need to run against Trump again in 2028 do you feel confident beyond doubt that swing state voters are going to support AOC or any other female candidate? Cause in case you haven’t learned this yet, unless you live in Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania or Michigan…our votes don’t really matter. And quite a few of those states are pretty rural.
I mean you also see conservatives vote for people like Boebert and MTG. Misogynists, surprisingly, will reliably prioritize their other ideals over whether to put a woman in power.
Interesting point. I do think there’s a sort of power dynamic at play there. They see the way they campaign against women’s rights and label them as one of the “good ones” that will show women that they can have higher positions in society if they submit. Maybe, hopefully, my assessment is off base.
Women won senate races in three of the swing states Kamala lost, so clearly gender wasn’t the problem.
I am confident beyond a reasonable doubt that AOC would beat Trump, if only because Trump would be an incredibly weak candidate. I’d love for him to try.
I’m also confident that the Democrats are at risk of losing an entire generation (both in the short and long terms) the longer they keep offering uninspiring candidates and refusing to give any policy concessions to the left, especially those popular with young voters.
Your argument about female senators winning in swing states has the most merit I’ve seen so far. I’ve got to give that too you. But it does worry me that those are elections that are localized to some degree. A national election is going to garner way more negative sentiment from the Bible belt.
In a perfect society I would absolutely love for AOC to be the first female president in 2028. The realist in me understands that if you were to take everything about her and put it into a white male, they would garner more votes and be more likely to win. I care deeply about being able to elect the first female president in history, but I care more about saving the lower and middle class. I don’t care who does it. Just that it gets done and we can start to leave predatory capitalism behind.
The reddit stink is strong…
Sure, and that’s valid, I’m just not sure who that white male version of AOC would actually be.
I think people put to much weight on two data points. Relevant XKCD.
Nor do I. It was a hypothetical, but its not our job to find that person. I think the closest we currently have is still Bernie but he needs to be able to retire. I don’t want him in the presidential office at 84. Then maybe Graham Platner who has his own “controversial” past. Ro Khanna(not white). Mamdani(not US born). Pritzker(Billionaire. I love what he’s done in Illinois, but I feel as though his status as a billionaire puts him at odds with what the message for 2028 should be). Talarico(Maybe? But people find issue with his framing of progressive policy in religious values).
Progressive candidate? Excuse.
Repeat.
The way I see it, there’s an ever-widening gap between what is considered permissible or possible within the existing system, and what actually needs to happen to avert collapse. How much the DNC is willing to allow and what messaging a candidate goes with may matter just as much as who the candidate is.
Note that as a commie I expect most politicians to be self-serving opportunists and I’m skeptical that it’s at all possible to bridge the gap between what’s possible in the system and what needs to happen. But tactically speaking, they need to find someone who will at least promise to try to do good things rather than just maintaining the status quo.
And if Trump gets the outrageous military budget he wants, I’m not sure I’m going to envy whoever inherits the debt crisis. They need to call out military spending as the source of the problem and strongly condemn the Iran War. What we absolutely don’t need is someone doing austerity policies and trying to balance the budget by cutting social spending even further, which I expect to be the DNC’s agenda, and it’d be the fastest way to lose what should be a layup.
Confidently incorrect. Popular vote doesn’t win elections and red state men don’t vote for women.
I say this as a huge fan of AOC, I think she should be Veep and have the POTUS leave at the start of the second admin. Then let her run once (twice?) more.
Red state men don’t vote for democrats either. Maybe you should try to win gettable votes instead of making excuses for shutting out candidates you don’t want.
Anyone else not buying this?
Given that they’re a well established right wing Zionist, no, I’m not buying this