this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2024
823 points (97.7% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2329 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 144 points 8 months ago (3 children)

This is what I've been pointing out all along... Say what you want about Biden funding Israel, Trump is actively worse.

And no, Jill Stein or Cornell West are not viable alternatives.

[–] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 17 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Just voted for Gabriel Cornejo in my state's primary. Looked him up, liked his policies, voted for him instead of Vermin Supreme, because no way am I voting for Biden in the primary. It's purely symbolic, let's be real, but I did ultimately vote for someone with leftist platform.

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 28 points 8 months ago (2 children)

It’s not purely symbolic. The bigger candidates often start to address policy positions represented by smaller candidates who get enough votes in the primaries as a way to sway those voters in the general election.

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Absolutely! If we can show that there are votes to be taken up by repositioning policies just a little or adding some, then it absolutely in a working 2 party system moves the closest party to adopt those in order to get the votes. And then it's up to consistent pressure to make sure they are worked on while in office, pest they lose trust and that voter base forever.

It's a shame, I'm pretty sure the US is not in a working or stable 2 party system.

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, it’s not a total solution, but it’s better than letting the Dems pander to the centrists.

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah but the centrists are easy fodder while the right wing has been shifting more to the right after losing support over the years and seeing the fringe party voters as votes they could pick up.
The centrists don't have a party as easy to back and thus Democrats are picking them up by moving even more center.

Unless they think they need the progressive votes, which they don't at the moment, they won't care as much for trying to pick up left fringe voters. The middle is just bigger tastier looking prey.

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, that was my point. The primaries are a chance to vote progressive to send the dominant candidate a message.

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 1 points 8 months ago

Right. I'm disagreeing that it will have much of an effect though. Centrists are adrift that would normally vote "fiscally conservative but socially liberal" and lean more Republican because of the bad taste Trump left in their mouth but I think Democrats assume that is an easy voter based to capture by just not doing anything overly crazy and acting fiscally conservative and centrist in their ideology.

So Democrats might pick up some minor left leaning points to make sure they get enough of the left leaning populace but unless a 3rd party candidate gets an incredible primary, in the current state, I don't expect them to adjust policy much at all. Centrist just likely seems the safer bet to them which is dangerous if they lose them but they are against Trump and MAGA so it's somewhat a safe gamble.

In better times primarying works but here, and right now, I don't think the Democrats give a flying fuck.

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

This right here. There's no actual threat of weakening Biden by voting against him in the primary, because there's no real candidate running against him. Voting uncommitted or for a write in the primary is a great way to leverage your voting power without empowering trump.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 3 points 8 months ago

Yeah, in the primary all options are valid to vote for, even if it's just symbolic. That still shows where people stand. However, in the general you pick who you need to pick in order to get the best outcome. You don't get to vote for symbolism then, at least if you're a rational person and not just doing something out of an emotional attempt to feel better than other people. It sucks, but that's how the system functions for now at least. Acting morally superior doesn't do anything except allow the morally corrupt to get their way.

[–] NotAtWork@startrek.website 2 points 8 months ago

Gabriel Cornejo Identified the leading problem in the country and hired the smartest person in the world to fix it.

[–] kromem@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

And no, Jill Stein or Cornell West are not viable alternatives.

My vote will only ever go to Vermin Supreme.

[–] Donjuanme@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

But what about naz-yay? (Yeay? Yeah?)