AMUSING, INTERESTING, OUTRAGEOUS, or PROFOUND
This is a page for anything that's amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.
♦ ♦ ♦
RULES
① Each player gets six cards, except the player on the dealer's right, who gets seven.
② Posts, comments, and participants must be amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.
③ This page uses Reverse Lemmy-Points™, or 'bad karma'. Please downvote all posts and comments.
④ Posts, comments, and participants that are not amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound will be removed.
⑤ This is a non-smoking page. If you must smoke, please click away and come back later.
Please also abide by the instance rules.
♦ ♦ ♦
Can't get enough? Visit my blog.
♦ ♦ ♦
Please consider donating to Lemmy and Lemmy.World.
$5 a month is all they ask — an absurdly low price for a Lemmyverse of news, education, entertainment, and silly memes.
view the rest of the comments
Maybe don't be a single-issue voter?
It worked for the pro life fucks.
They actually showed up to vote
When you're losing at least 3 groups of single issue voters (and literally everyone else) it's your party platform that's wrong.
Oh the audacity and arrogance!
Let me tell you as straight (Ha!) as possible: Its your job to win over those voters. The consequences of not doing so is losing the election. Don't bend over to israel, don't get endorsements from Dick Fucking Cheney, Don't snub the Arab voting population, Don't try to win over republican.
It wasn't a fucking surprise that sprang up after halloween. People have been shouting at you to have spine and distance yourself from Israel. What was the play here? You were trying to appease AIPAC? Guess what? AIPAC gets what they want by you losing.
Blaming your constituents for losing is a loser attitude. Me being a single-issue voter has nothing to do with you doing the bare minimum to get your constituents to vote for you.
Don't ask me to be something when you can't even properly represent your constituents? Talking back to your constituents like they are children is sure fire way to lose elections.
Apparently treating your constituents like they are children is a sure-fire way to win elections, if we use the Republican strategy as a model.
If we take what you're saying at face value, then the Democrats must become the party of pleasing everybody, making sure that all of those single-issue voters get what they want. This is not and will never be a successful path for a political party.
That seems to be the intention behind the “democrats didn’t go far enough left” narrative coming from lemmy.ml. Convince the left to not vote unless they get something that will lose democrats votes elsewhere.
You can't even read. Don't pretend you know what it takes to win elections.
This is apparently a strange universe because I condemned democrats for trying to please everybody. Here is a person who thinks I said "You should have pleased everybody". Like go read what I said. I specifically said to be the party that doesn't try to please AIPAC, Republican Voters, Get endorsed by Dick Cheney. Focus on the progressive policy platform and promise to change the economy for the better. Don't say "GDP numbers are high, You're all doing fine!" To your constituents whose lives have had no effect by the GDP numbers.
Also are you aware how republican voting works? Maybe you should take some lessons and at the bare minimum lie and tell your constituents what they want to hear. Democrats could not even manage to do that this time around.
Rounding up endorsements from Dick and Liz Cheney, and Anthony Scaramucci, and Adam Kinzinger, and Alberto fucking Gonzales, while offering platitudes to the left, is not a path to victory for the Democratic Party.
But I don't think the party hierarchy cares about winning elections. They consistently offer only empty feel-good middle-of-the-road stuff which does not resonate with people who are actually suffering in this society and economy.