• rocket_dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    4 days ago

    Not voting means the party has to start offering policies to entice you back.

    Leftists have been doing this strategy for a couple decades now. How successful has this been at moving the Overton window left?

      • rocket_dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        4 days ago

        Yes it has. Voting turnout in the US is dreadful. Who do you think does reliably get out to vote? I’ll give you a hint: it’s right wingers.

        • masquenox@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 days ago

          Yes it has.

          No, it hasn’t. That is, unless you want to claim that liberals lying themselves into a corner is (somehow) “leftist strategy.”

            • masquenox@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              4 days ago

              This you?

              Leftists have been doing this strategy for a couple decades now.

              I could have sworn that was you.

              • TheFonz@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                I could be wrong, but I get the sense there are a lot of young people on this platform and maybe this is your first experience with election cycles?

                • masquenox@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  maybe this is your first experience with election cycles?

                  I don’t know… how many election cycles has there been since Bush Snr. invaded Panama?

                  • TheFonz@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 day ago

                    Ok so maybe you’ve been around. How’s the leftist strategy of non participation been working out? Have we moved to closer to our goals?

              • rocket_dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                10
                ·
                3 days ago

                I’m not a liberal, I’m anti-capitalist.

                And also I’m correct, every election is like groundhogs day, like being trapped in a time loop, where leftists go:

                “The lesser of two evils is still evil, I’m going to keep my hands clean”.

                “Voting doesn’t work, because you can’t fix an inherently flawed system from within the system.”

                “Voting is just part of the system of oppression by keeping people complacent from making real changes.”

                In my memory this anti-voting/vote boycotting goes back at least to 2000 Bush/Gore.

                Now let’s say I’m completely wrong, let’s say I’m crazy and I just made that all up in my head. Let’s say that leftists have always been enthusiastic participators in American democracy, and 2024 was the first ever leftist election boycott.

                Now from 2025 to 2028, is the overton window moving left, or right? Will the 2028 election be to the left of 2024, or will 2028 be to the right of 2024?

                I’m dead serious willing to bet $500 that 2028 will be to the right of 2024. The overton window is still moving right.

                So did my original statement even matter? Either way leftist election boycotts are moving the overton window right, whether it started in 2000, or 2024.

                The only question is, how many election boycotts have to fail at doing what leftists want until leftists suddenly become aware they are poking the stick in their own bicycle wheel?

                • masquenox@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  like being trapped in a time loop,

                  Yes… and you have decided to blame leftists for this instead of the political racketeers who invented and maintains this cyclical pseudo-democratic spectacle itself.

                  How liberal of you… you, a (supposed) “anti-capitalist.”

                  You can’t be a liberal and an anti-capitalist, Clyde - you have to decide which you’re going to be.

                  “Voting doesn’t work, because you can’t fix an inherently flawed system from within the system.”

                  And they are correct.

                  “Voting is just part of the system of oppression by keeping people complacent from making real changes.”

                  And they are still correct.

                  In my memory this anti-voting/vote boycotting goes back at least to 2000 Bush/Gore.

                  Nope. It was a thing long before the Russian Revolution, genius - it’s only you liberals that are now finding out how utterly hollow your “liberal democracy” truly is and always have been. Leftists have known that before Marx or Bakunin even went through puberty.

                  Now let’s say I’m completely wrong,

                  Yes. Let’s.

                  • rocket_dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    23 hours ago

                    You kinda crashed out and lost the plot, you were claiming that leftists were doing lots of voting up until 2024, but you just confirmed my whole point that leftists did not vote.

        • InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          And those right wingers have gotten momentum and a lot of what they have asked for. Dems are not as left as we want, but that is where the little progressive politics we have lives. Not voting for it or working to grow is is hurting us.

    • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 days ago

      Leftists have been doing this strategy for a couple decades now

      OBJECTION!

      What actual evidence do you have of this claim?

      This gets thrown around all the time as “conventional wisdom,” but it’s never actually backed up by anything. In fact, the Libertarian Party typically gets roughly three times the number of votes as the Green Party, and the last major third party candidate, Ross Perot, split the Republican vote leading to Clinton’s election.

      More recently, the 2016 election had two major “outsider” candidates. Of them, Trump refused to rule out a third party run, while Sanders went all out campaigning for Clinton, despite all the shenanigans with superdelegates.

      Only in 2024 can I see a credible case that some of the left has begun using the stubborn, “my way or the highway” tactics that the right has been employing for decades - with a high degree of success, I might add! The Republican Party has shifted further and further right to accommodate the demands of their base, because they know that if they’re soft on things like guns or abortion, significant portions of their base will denounce them as RINOs and sit out or vote third party. The Democratic Party, by contrast, knows that they can always count on the left to flinch, to be “reasonable,” to accept the “lesser evil,” and so they have moved further right as well, taking those votes for granted.

      Again, every piece of actual evidence contradicts this “conventional wisdom,” which only exists in the first place because liberals are so preoccupied with the idea that someone, somewhere, might choose to stand on principle rather than fall in line. Meanwhile, people on the right are constantly choosing to die on the dumbest, most petty hills imaginable.

    • WraithGear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      4 days ago

      Voting blue no matter who seems to have done the US wonders huh?

      You can’t have it both ways. Either the progressives not voting had no change on the outcome on of the election thus their strategy has no merit, OR progressives not voting cost democrats the election and the democrat party were at fault for abandoning their base. Oh what’s that? The apathetic vote is not to blame for either scenario? No shit.

      • rocket_dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        4 days ago

        You’re getting confused because it doesn’t have anything to do with the outcome of the last election.

        Leftists don’t vote, therefore no one caters to them, therefore the overton window moves right.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      Leftists have been doing this strategy for a couple decades now.

      Wait, what? No they haven’t. They’ve been turning out in droves in both primaries and general elections.

          • rocket_dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            3 days ago

            If you combine Sanders and Warren into one they still would have lost to Biden by a pretty wide margin.

            Warren is to the right of Bernie anyway, and Bernie is barely left enough for many leftists; I can’t imagine it was leftists that Warren was splitting away.

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

              If you combine Sanders and Warren into one they still would have lost to Biden by a pretty wide margin.

              That’s incorrect

                  • rocket_dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 days ago

                    If you combine Warren and Sanders into one candidate by the end of Super Tuesday would they have a popular vote lead over Biden in all states who voted up to that point?

                    Is there a reason Sanders didn’t perform better after Warren dropped out?

    • Deceptichum@quokk.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Probably be more successful if you stopped being rightists and joined them?

      And I think you’ll find that blindly supporting blue no matter who has been done far more often for a couple of decades now. How successful has this been at moving the Overton window left?

      • Guy Ingonito@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        4 days ago

        Let’s compare leftist strategies of never turning out with the evangelical strategy of driving massive turnouts.

        Who has had better success shifting their party?

        • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          What planet are you living on where either of those strategies are actually what’s being employed?

          The right turns out because they’re getting what they want. Would they still turn out of the candidate was a RINO who was soft on things like guns, abortion, or immigration? Probably not! The party has been disciplined by the base for deviating on those issues often enough that they have kept moving to more extreme right positions and the right no longer has any reason to defect.

          Meanwhile, there are tons of people on (what passes for) the left who will readily agree that Biden and Harris were complicit in genocide, in some of the worst crimes imaginable, and yet, we should still fall in line behind them. Right wingers will be like, “Sure, this guy has an impeccable record on most of the issues I care about, but he accepted free federal Medicare expansion, which is socialism, so fuck that RINO piece of shit commie traitor I’m voting Libertarian!” And so the Libertarian Party is triple the size of the Greens. And yet, somehow, libs are constantly obsessed with this idea that somewhere out there, someone might be standing on leftist principles, and that’s the worst thing ever and they must immediately be lectured and shamed for it.

          Try to pull that shit in some of their circles and you’re liable to get shot. I mean, can you imagine? “Look, I’m as upset as anybody that the only realistic candidates are anti-gun, but you just have to accept that guns are not on the ballot this time around, you’re going to have to vote for someone who wants to take your guns away, and if you don’t, it means you’re a bad person and I’ll constantly lecture you about it. Hey, where are pointing that- OK, OK, I’LL LEAVE”

          • Disaster@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 days ago

            As Lonergan and Blyth put it in Angrynomics, the right has better tribal enforcement along the boundaries they care about. Like a football team with more fired up and cohesive fans.

            The democratic party has two major problems;

            • Their leadership is technocratic and alienated along class lines from the voter base they’re trying to reach. Nobody trusts them to do anything more than run on focus group issues, then turn around the moment they get into power and fail to act on them. This is not isolated to American politics - France’s emmanuel macron is another really good example. The working-class voting base, more than any other group, has been burned too many times on this since clinton1 to get enthusiastic about a democrat candidate. They are almost immediately viewed - and rightly so - as being fundamentally untrustworthy. The DNC’s subsequent games with the 2016 primaries lost an entire generation of potential voters who now view themselves as disenfrachised party outsiders. Now that the senile party leadership is literally dropping dead in office, there is nobody left to replace them who have the blessing of those same aging party elites. From their perspective, they are under siege from without vs. the republicans, and within from the newbies. They well and truly did it to themselves by resisting the emerging organic self-interest of their replacements. Kronus ate his children.

            • Funding sources come from billionaires and the top .01%. Normal people no longer have the disposable income, even at >$250kpa, to make significant enough contributions to run effective election campaigns. This is a form of capture by the ultra-wealthy, and therefore it makes it very difficult to run a campaign on small donations. The political process is entirely captured by the owner class, because nobody else has the $$$$$$ to own anything at all, and now gets charged rents to keep them in usury. Corporate donors can’t be relied upon because they are simple organisms who act in their own best interest of making more money. This needed to be corrected in the 2000’s, and the opportunity was lost. Instead we used QE to prop up a zombie economic system which did not provide appropriate investment in the next generation of the population, nor did it appropriately invest in infrastructure. So instead of flying taxis, vibrant broadband-enabled online fora, high speed trains, electric vehicles, stable rural communities and walkable cities, we got NFT’s, crypto scams, decaying suburbs harboring increasing deaths of despair, ludicrously oversized and inefficient vehicles and auto-enshittifying privacy-destroying cloud capital phone apps. It’s a paper tiger that is now falling to pieces vs. other emerging global competitors because it has extracted every drop of value from its feeder resource pools and is now well into the process of self-cannabalizing. It is a pest economy in the final stages of ecosystem collapse.

            Basically, the triangulation game is already played out, the dam has disintegrated and there’s no longer any useful opposition to the rightwards move, because in order to even be an oppositional force, it would require selfless multi-billionaire unicorns (hah!) to effectively sacrifice their family fortunes in order to fund and animate such a movement- whilst somehow political candidates capable of rebuilding five decades of broken promises and tonedeaf social positions regards to the working class come out of the woodwork as a fully-formed well-oiled political machine that both offers and delivers enough Good Things to budge the needle. The technocratic so-called “Abundance Agenda” currently being circulated amongst DNC circles fails to do this - in typical democrat fashion - by attempting to lobotomize the working class out of the picture and reducing them to a mute “consumer of ideas”.

            I guess stranger things have happened, but I’m pessimistic on the outlook at this point, because they’d have to win against an entrenched radical political insurgency, with full control of the government, and near unanimous support of the owner class, that legitimately doesn’t want democracy to succeed anymore.

            As long as the democratic party elite fail to engage in good faith, they will continue to lose. Even if they do, they’ll also have an uphill battle until they have demonstrated in terms of lived experience to a chronically abused electorate that they have the will and capability to deliver on their promises.

            • TheFonz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              I agree with most what you’re saying but I think you’re minconstruing the abundance book. Ezra has been clear and very vocal about wanting to execute the goals of the left. He’s just calling for a more fluid mechanism that doesn’t put up dozens of roadblocks throughout the process. No one ever addresses the elephant in the room: the upper echelon progressive home owner class. This group alone is blocking every progressive movement indirectly while also spouting the usual progressive rhetoric.

        • Grainne@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          The Tea Party, they obliterated the old GOP by not voting them and voting for their people instead. The DNC has kept their party under lock and key to avoid any of that happening.

          • Guy Ingonito@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            You’re misremembering.

            The Tea Party pushed more conservative candidates in primaries, but in general elections Tea Party voters never sat out in protest - instead, they either supported the GOP candidate or, in a few cases, backed third-party or independent runs, but there were never large-scale abstention.