I think since the scales are tipped in republicans’ favour (e.g. losing popular vote but winning presidency always goes one way - Trump, Bush), not voting likely benefits them over the dems. Depending on your state of course.
Well, at least that’s a cogent basis for an argument, thank you.
Though I still think this is something Democratic strategists should understand at this point – ultimately it’s Biden’s responsibility to drive out voters, not play chicken with his base in defense of unrepentant war criminals.
I don’t think voters can be blamed for being unable to support the politics of the party moving so far to the right, especially when Biden’s presidency itself is already representative of a massive compromise by progressive voters. If Biden loses, the blame and pressure needs to be put onto the DNC and Biden for failing to do what it takes to keep their base fed, not on the voters, or we are going to end up in this same cycle forever.
A lot of our most prominent progressive representatives came into office after 2016, as a result of Clinton’s failure. The party strategists understand when they lose, they do post-mortems even if they’re not public about them. So I still hold that it’s a valid strategy to allow democrats to fail when they end up going to far to the right, especially in such an egregious case as what we see with Gaza. Democratic support for the genocide can’t continue, it’s beyond the pale.
Agree 100%. I don’t think the people you were arguing with really want to engage on these points, their entire position only applies in the voting booth. They’re right, in pure Biden vs Trump there is only one reasonable choice. I just wouldn’t gamble so hard on the population being reasonable, otherwise Trump would have never won in 2016 either.
They are avoiding the question.
I think since the scales are tipped in republicans’ favour (e.g. losing popular vote but winning presidency always goes one way - Trump, Bush), not voting likely benefits them over the dems. Depending on your state of course.
Well, at least that’s a cogent basis for an argument, thank you.
Though I still think this is something Democratic strategists should understand at this point – ultimately it’s Biden’s responsibility to drive out voters, not play chicken with his base in defense of unrepentant war criminals.
I don’t think voters can be blamed for being unable to support the politics of the party moving so far to the right, especially when Biden’s presidency itself is already representative of a massive compromise by progressive voters. If Biden loses, the blame and pressure needs to be put onto the DNC and Biden for failing to do what it takes to keep their base fed, not on the voters, or we are going to end up in this same cycle forever.
A lot of our most prominent progressive representatives came into office after 2016, as a result of Clinton’s failure. The party strategists understand when they lose, they do post-mortems even if they’re not public about them. So I still hold that it’s a valid strategy to allow democrats to fail when they end up going to far to the right, especially in such an egregious case as what we see with Gaza. Democratic support for the genocide can’t continue, it’s beyond the pale.
Agree 100%. I don’t think the people you were arguing with really want to engage on these points, their entire position only applies in the voting booth. They’re right, in pure Biden vs Trump there is only one reasonable choice. I just wouldn’t gamble so hard on the population being reasonable, otherwise Trump would have never won in 2016 either.