I was gonna title this "And here I sit so patiently waiting to find out what price you have to pay to get out of going through all these things twice" and then write "Stuck inside of America with the fascism blues again" here, but I'm not sure if that comes off like gloating and that's honestly the last thing I want to do this morning.
Meanwhile the far left was cutting their own throats by handing the election to the fascists, thanks a lot.
And when you point it out, they will call you fascist and all sorts of other names too. Shame on them. Leopards gonna feast.
Even if that were true, the Dems lost because of their strategy which was based on not giving anything to the left.
It didn't work for Hilary, what in the hell made you think it'd work for Harris?
Maybe it was the Dems buddying up to the incredibly unpopular bush admin. Or using serial SAer bill Clinton on the campaign. Or calling trump a fascist then moving to the right on almost every issue so really they were just offering fascism-lite.
But no, blame the lefties who had no significant impact on the election and have been constantly telling you that the campaign is doomed and that it should change course if the stakes are really as high as you say
I mean I would love to believe there are trns of millions of silent far left protest abstentions, but the fact of the matter is seventy million plus motherfuckers actively went for the overt fascists. Tens of millions more didn't care enough to at least go third party. This was a turnout problem, not a protest vote problem.
Okay, and how do you get voters to turn out?
Well the argument being made here is that the campaign's strategy actively depressed turnout.
So not doing normalizing the opposition and implementing the policies your voting base tends to oppose.
Or maybe it's a fascist problem. It's not just the US either. My latest thinking is that microplastics are eroding empathy in human brains. May sound crazy, but put it next to some of Kennedy's ideas...
Yeah it is definitely a fascist problem.
The people don't want any more of the status quo, and Trump offered something that wasn't part of the status quo. The democrats could have offered a left-wing populist alternative but instead the democrats ran someone who was status quo. Someone who was "far left" would have been way more successful than Harris.
I don't see why you would think that. Someone like Bernie was too radical for the American left to win a primary, no way he would be considered more appealing to America at large in the general.
It's frustrating because Biden/Harris are too moderate to capture far left voters and too radical to wrestle the center from a populist like Trump. And it seems many disenfranchised voters are content to stay at home because better isn't good enough. I'm not trying to absolve them of responsibility, but I genuinely think Democrats could make great strides if the left was as good at banding with each other as the right. Instead, the Democrats lost the popular vote for the first time in twenty years.
Jumping the gun a bit on that post mortum analysis? Put up the data or shut the fuck up you wanker. This is 100% an establishment fuck up, and you are as cognitively twisted as any MAGA freak.