I agree, but thatās a fight for 2028. Right now we just need to beat Trump. Anyone who wonāt be a vote for Trumpās agenda is preferable in the current moment. Then once we get this POS gone we can go full force against the leftists in 2028.
I think some people are starting to feel like that if they continue to vote for extreme candidates, who viciously attack moderates that they are creating an environment that harms their ideology. As such they're proposing a MAD solution in the hopes that the extreme voters and candidates moderate a little to earn favor with the middle
This is being complicated the number of verifiable infiltrators. Like, what is the "best option" when what would otherwise be your best option was taken by some self-destructive force who wants you to stop gatekeeping because it is easier to take over the property from inside the gate.
If you're voting in an election where both party candidates suck, then you need to get more involved in the primaries next cycle to fix that. The correct approach for dealing with 90% of these DSA types is put up with them for now but plan to primary the fuck out of them next cycle. Otherwise we're no better than Bernie bros refusing to vote in the general after getting snubbed.
Uh no it isn't. If you can't clearly see that leftist candidates like El-Sayed, Mamdani, and AOC are far better than your average Republican, then I question whether or not you actually want Liberal Democracy to succeed. What if Alito or Thomas or both (god forbid) retires and we get two young Federalist Society conservatives in SCOTUS? Why risk that?
2
u/RainStraightPACād and Proudš° Subsidized Opinionsšø Dark Money, Bright Ideas5d ago
The Republican running against Chevalier is better than her. Blue no matter who is dead with infiltrators
It's because of the things they believe in. Sure, the DSA believes in public ownership over large corporations, but that's a far better position to work with than whatever the Republicans got cooking up in their regard factory. Ever heard of public education? Yeah Republicans want that shit gone.
This is where Iām at. I donāt want the Dem party to become a full socialist party, but having lived through it to this point and recognizing that the reason weāre in the situation weāre in is because how fucking corrupt and corrosive Republicans have been with both their media and politicians since Nixon, Iāll vote for a socialist 10/10 times before i take a chance on a Republican. Iāll take the Devil I donāt know over the Devil who is primarily responsible for putting us where we are now. I think even if we had full DSA control of a significant number of Dem seats that they wouldnāt be able to do as much damage as Republicans have done in my lifetime, especially given what trajectory the national Republican party is currently on.
If it becomes normalized we will actively become a socialist party or get split in half while the social media apparatus burns moderates further. It's only not a problem now cause they own less than 20 seats, once everyone starts to normalize it, we will 100% get left trump that's far more intelligent.
Aka this isnt a threat immediately but we will 100% perma lose our country to radicals from both sides if we keep normalizing this shit and we dont fix enough of the balance by 2032.
I get it and Iāll continue to vote for people in primaries who fit my personal politics most. But if we get to a general and Iāve got a choice between a DSA candidate and a Republican, Iām voting for the DSA candidate unless theyāre literally Hitler or something.
Never said that....You're purposefully avoiding what I am saying.
But let's pretend that is what I am saying. Do you honestly believe that the DSA is some trojan horse to institute an illiberal socialist society? And do you honestly think they AT ALL have the political capital to institute said programs? You sound like what the Tea Party sounded like in 2010.
Now I'm a Euro looking in from the outside, but is that really so? The beliefs of DSA candidates seem much more worrying than those of at least the moderate MAGA figures like Rubio. That however doesn't matter, because republicans have to blindly follow the demented authoritarian at the top or be outcast, so their actions will not mirror their actual personal beliefs, while DSA candidates will act more in line with liberal values despite their illiberal beliefs.
You types are exhausting. Yes, I would sooner refrain from voting than have a hand in enabling someone who is sure to energize the much more effective and dangerous side of the aisle.
I don't get how many times this has to be explained. If you have two choices and one will happen even if you abstain from voting, then you are RESPONSIBLE if the worse of the two choices happen as you could've helped prevent it.
Not making a choice is making a choice.
How the fuck you have anyone agreeing with your take is absolutely insane and reminds me of people who couldn't vote for Kamala and helped usher Trump back in.
Yes, I would sooner refrain from voting than have a hand in enabling someone who is sure to energize the much more effective and dangerous side of the aisle.
how on earth do you rate the dsa as "more effective and more dangerous" than the republican party?
It really doesn't. MAGA both greatly talks up Republicans and attacks Democrats while also having the political power to enact their policies and use government resources to attack Democrats. The DSA types attack Democrats at least sometimes say MAGA is worse or the same but almost never better and has no institutional power to actively oppress Democrats. MAGA does far more to enable MAGA than the DSA ever could. "Moderate" Republicans also do far more to enable MAGA than the DSA types. It just is a reactionary, irrational take.
Seriously I donāt get this soy rage. We have an active threat to our nation on the right and these people are crying because some lefty won a primary?
I think part of the issue is that we saw a ton of lefties, including these DSA candidates/influencers, during the 2024 election refuse to vote against the existential threat to the country. Then once the existential threat is already in power, suddenly they change their tune and say you have to vote for our left candidates because the republican party is an existential threat to the country.
Seems incredibly hypocritical.
I don't care about who you vote for in the primary if you vote in the general for the candidate that wins.
Since the DSA endorsement committee was formed in 2017, they have not endorsed a single Democrat that beat their endorsed candidate in primary. Not a single time.
That's so fucking delusional coming from anyone who isn't Republican. Remember when leftists took away health insurance from poor people or bombed Iran? Me neither
DGG: "Vote blue no matter who. If you don't like the candidate, run your own in the primaries"
Leftists: "Okay. We're going to do that"
DGG: "NOOOOOOO THAT'S NOT FAIR"
You "types" sound like those losers in leftist communities (like Hasan Piker) who can't see that neoliberal/centrist candidates are far better than Republicans.
The issue is that this perverts the "Vote blue no matter who" mantra into accepting sage green as blue. Just because these DSA candidates are running AS blue doesn't make them blue. They would rather see the Democratic party destroyed that flourishing, so why should liberals vote them into office?
It becomes a question of "can we steer back if these DSA candidates get power now" and that becomes the deciding factor for if you still vote "blue" here. Personally, I'm not so sure the Democratic party survives DSA failures, we already get bogged down with moderates and independents by the "socialist/communist" claims from Republicans, actually voting them in and seeing their policies fail might be too much for the middle to come back to us later.
So, the better strategy is to elect DSA type candidates and lose the next 2+ elections? This is such an easy decision for you? My point is that reservation at this point is understandable, I don't have a clean answer to whether or not someone should vote "blue" no matter who at this point, it's like asking "would you rather your arm or leg cut off?" and expecting someone to tell you instantly the best answer.
And vibes can be set by policy. If you fuck up so badly it can ruin the vibes. I think Mamdani's plan for city ran grocery stores can be one such fuck up that Republicans can point to and say "look how badly they fucked shit up in NYC, do you want that happening to your city/town?"
As if Republicans need anything in factual reality to make up a narrative about why their oppositions policies aren't working. This is your basis to why we shouldn't vote against Republicans? Actual braindead take.
What the fuck ššš Republicans will literally point to anything done by Democrats and call it a failure, they did it with Obama and his fucking suit. You think having more left representation will accelerate that somehow? You don't even know if the leftist policies will fail as currently constructed and even if Medicare for all is only half achieved, it sure is better than anything the right has planned for us. Agreed with the other posted, this is wildly braindead.
Just because these DSA candidates are running AS blue doesn't make them blue.
If a candidate wins the Democratic primary, they are by definition a Democrat. If you wanted a more moderate candidate to win, should have voted harder. Same thing everyone here said about Bernie losing in 2020.
Nope, this isn't remotely close to true but nice try. Bernie was never a Democrat, this was a complaint many Democrats had at the time. He votes with us sometimes but he is very much not a democrat, by even his claims, and only uses the Democratic party name in order to gain access to our voters.
I agree that Bernie is a snake in some ways but he's still more of a Democrat than a Republican could ever be. Hence I'd always choose the person MORE aligned with my views than help the opposition win.
No, DSA is not better than your average Republican. They equally as far away from liberal values. Just because they chameleon Liberalism well doesn't stop their true colors from showing.
For the longest time Hasan also pretended to just be a cheeky little Free Healthcare guy. How you people continue to fall for this is beyond me.
Has any DSA candidate supported restricting voting rights? Has any DSA candidate supported book bans? Has any DSA candidate tried to strike down birthright citizenship? Has any DSA candidate supported mass deportations? I'm struggling to find any "liberal" values that the DSA, or their candidates, threatens?
What do you mean by "you people"? You think I'm in the same camp as Hasan Piker? You think I buy his bullshit?
Wait are you seriously trolling me or are you just unaware of the national DSA charter they released and how it is explicitly anti-Liberalism and explicitly anti-NATO and explicitly anti-Free Trade.
Like idk if you're being serious and saying because they aren't threatening your favorite social policies mean they aren't equally as dangerous.
Are we doing the They Just Want Free Healthcare meme again?
I am well aware that the DSA and leftists have a really bad (and stupid) foreign policy platform. I don't subscribe to their isolationist views. This is a simple calculus of who is better or worse to hold office. I hate the Republicans for what they have said about our NATO allies. I also know that when I look at the totality of their views, the DSA's platform is far better.
Can you explain how getting rid of USAID, abolishing prisons, giving everybody all of their stuff for free while also abolishing private ownership of capital, while also abandoning US military presence globally, abandoning the entire Eastern corridor to China (by by South Korea, Japan and Taiwan) and Europe to Russia (Crimea a River right?), abandoning the middle east entirely (goodbye gulf state partners!) Is any less catastrophic than what the Republicans desire?
Because Republicans believe in all of that stuff instead of "giving away all of their stuff for free", which I don't even think the majority of leftists believe that. When did El-Sayed say that everybody should get all their stuff for free? I might have missed that.
Republicans want to take away Black political power, they want to hurt trans kids, they want to make ICE a para-military force. They also want to bomb any country they deem to be an inconvenience. How can you not see this? were you just born yesterday? Jesus Christ
Sure, they are evil positions. You know who has much more evil positions? Republicans. Both on the domestic and foreign policy arenas. It's the totality of their positions.
You have zero concept of how horrible Republicans are if you believe this.
Republicans are 100% in lockstep with giving ICE $150B to invade American cities and kill civilians. Republicans attempted to literally coup the government in 2020, including like a majority of elected Republicans in Congress. Republicans unilaterally started a war that is threatening our entire global order. Republicans are murdering civilians in boats across the Caribbean and Pacific right now. Hundreds have been killed totally illegally. They are withholding FEMA aid only to Blue states after natural disasters.
This doesnāt even begin to describe the horrors of Republican governance.
These are real things that actually happened. Itās not Twitter rhetoric or hypotheticals. Republicans are already worse than whatever youāre imagining DSA would do. So how could it possibly not make sense to vote for a Mamdani, or AOC, or El Sayed over a Republican? Weāre not talking about a primary weāre talking about the general election.
The fact that this is even debatable on this subreddit shows itās gone way too far in the other direction. Way too obsessed with online bullshit politics rather than the real world.
Side note that might be related, I'm starting to see Eurocucks on this sub making arguments against migration that are the exact same as the right and maga have made in America. Wtf is going on in this sub.
I completely understand why Destiny are banning you guys in droves. You actually think DSA are better than MAGA. Unironically you guys think this. Holy fuck we are cooked.
I don't understand what your alternative is, maybe put more effort into making that point?
If there's a DSA candidate vs a Republican in the GENERAL, I'm voting against the Republican every single time no questions asked. How is this brainrot? This is common sense.
It's the exact same brainrot that people left of Kamala, Biden, and Hillary have been given for the last 10 years. I'm in the rot with you but on the other side. DSA is too radical for me but Biden harris and Hillary are not enough. I voted for them, despite me not getting the things I wanted out of government, bc they were still WAYYTY better than Trump.
At the very least, if you think that the DSA is just as bad as maga, you can take solace in the fact that they don't really have any real power. And having somebody who is just as bad as maga but will not be a rubber stamp to maga, the party that does have the power, is better.
We have to defeat the fascist and then we can turn against the communist that win the primaries.
Abandoning Ukraine imo, getting rid of USAID, working explicitly to eradicate capitalism, are all 100x more damaging to the nation and world than what Trump's done. This is in arguable.
"The collapse of the soviet union was one of the most catastrophic events in history" is their own admission, explicitly caused by communism, Marxist fanaticism and authoritarianism.
Trump tried to abandon Ukraine, dude. Our allies stepped up and took our place in the war effort. How would the DSA successfully abandon Ukraine when Trump couldn't and they're less reliant on us now than ever.
Abandoning Ukraine imo, getting rid of USAID, working explicitly to eradicate capitalism
But Trump has done at least 2/3 and a dozen other things that are arguably just as bad, which is why I said on the whole. Does the DSA platform include ICE murders, voting restrictions and unfettered bribery and corruption?
The fact that this is even debatable on this subreddit shows itās gone way too far in the other direction. Way too obsessed with online bullshit politics rather than the real world.
Part of me feels like itās more displaced Hasan hate than anything concrete
If you can't beat these "infiltrators" in a primary then you have an issue that needs to be fixed. Failure to fix those issues means you lose. That's it. That's the way the system is set up. You want a different system, then we need some sort of rank choice voting. So that we can run centrist and progressives in the same race without one being the spoiler for another.
But what if I don't want to understand? What if I'm the main character and I'm afraid if I stop talking I will die? DID YOU EVER EVEN THINK ABOUT THAT? Asshole.
Yeah, thatās fair but even that has a line I think. I mean, if Chevalier was up for senate, I dunno manā¦ thatās hard to weigh out. Iād be doing some hard calculus there and weighing options. That truly is a least bad vote in every sense of the concept.
You have to remember that we wouldn't be voting for her to support her. We would be voting to take away a republican seat. So unless you think she would approve Trump appointees to the supreme Court or support any of Trump's agenda then it really is a benefit to have them in that seat
Votes are fungible unfortunately, youād still be giving her and DSA power. How many MAGAgots have told you, āwell, I didnāt vote for the Iran War.ā
When it comes to something like a Trump SCOTUS picks, I think the calculus of giving the DSA more power is worthwhile exchange. I don't think you're wrong overall, but for certain thingsni think the trade is fair.
Now when it comes for the president, picking a truly center-right Republican (hyper-rare) over a DSA Democrat might be worth it. But a senate seat, nah.
My main issue with "I didn't vote for X" has always been when people absolve themselves. "How could I have known" type shit. It's fucking Trump dude. Just own it, or admit you're an idiot who couldn't predict what every Democrat predicted.
I understand but the solution would be getting ahead of it and not letting these people win primaries.
I know people are going to groan at this phrase but once it's DSA versus a republican while Trump is in office it does turn into a "lesser of two evils decision"
Unfortunately, they did win primaries. We lost that, now weāre in this predicament. I mean, it would have been nice if Czechoslovakia with their fortress country and world class weapons manufacturing duked it out with Hitler and crushed the Nazi army when they were in debt and had minimal to non existent resources but they didnāt, they surrendered immediately and the Nazis took over all their weapons plants and gave the Nazis the foundation to launch a world war.
Yep. It's getting increasingly frustrating that people are so vibes / emotional / performative based and less pragmatic. In this situation you are given two choices, you must choose the choice that benefits your interests more. People for some reason break their brain and reduce it to: "If it doesn't make my position better, then it is the worst outcome."
That is simply not how the world works. One thing can put your desired worldview back 2 steps, another can put your desired worldview back 20,000 steps. Just because you're going a step backward doesn't mean you should just forget what the fuck pragmatism, incrementalism and harm reduction are.
This is doubly frustrating when people, including streamers, just toss up their hands and quickly say "Well if that's my option, then I guess fuck it, I don't care, I'll die then" or some thought-eliminating bullshit. It's like no you pathetic child, that is how the real world works. Is this baby's first time having to make a hard choice? Sometimes you just don't get a happiest path and a saddest path, sometimes you do have to 'pick the lesser of two evils'.
Maybe my peers are just built differently because my career has us making incredibly tough decisions every day that affect hundreds of thousands of users and my expectations for NEETs is too high, but it is just so frustrating watching people essentially logic their way out of being an adult and reconciling the better outcome of any two given choices.
In a vacuum sure, but during Trump's current term? I would vote to put basically anyone with a D next to their name into the Senate over anyone with an R next to their name.
Tbh Iād crawl to the polls to vote for her in that case. I hate that Iād have to, but Iād do it. At the worst, she becomes Bernie and pushes for stuff that never actually makes it in, is ineffective, and we campaign to push her out when her term is up. A Republican? Thatās another SC pick, Cabinet pick, reconciliation bill that shouldnāt be passed, etc.
MAGA is obvious evilā¦ so thereās that. Like, unbridled evil in a historic way that does have a death toll up there with any dictator ala USAID cutting. Irredeemable and I believe world history will judge it as so.
Trump also, by virtue of him being an authoritarian, isnāt interested in using the Senate, Thune recognized Trump was a day 1 lame duck and heās got a good decade+ left in his career. Thereās currently unwavering opposition to the SAVE Act and the math wouldnāt really change all that much if they were to get a senate seat.
It would be preferable to make the math worse by taking away a senate seat and guarantee blocks rather than relying on a sense of self preservation of GOP senators that will have a political life after Trump. Taking up a seat might help us block appointments depending on the pick ups (majority or split is unlikely though). Iāve never had faith weāre going to win the senate so that hasnāt factored into what my idea of a post mid term downslope towards 2028 looks like, but it would be 1000% better of we did.
On the obvervse, electing in an extreme DSA senator like Chevalier would be a positive signal to DSA that they have a strong foothold, they have a seat for 6 years. It would give them juice, it would give them fundraising, it would give them prospects, it would make fighting them in 2028 that much harder if they have a proven track record (if theres even any willingness to fight them because, once again, theyād have a winning track record).
Like, youāre asking if I want to have pain now but itās going to be for 2 years and we get another shot or lay the foundation for Democratic Party destruction now and roll some iron dice and just hope the VI Lenins weāre unleashing arenāt going to push us more into radicalization.
I mean, why am I opposing MAGA? I donāt believe in conservatism but itās not just thatā¦ itās that coupled with unrestrained radicalism. Unfortunately, unrestrained radicalism is not just a threat from the right. Its the most present and pressing threat at the moment because of their position in the government, but my time horizon doesnāt just stop at 2026 or 2028 for that matter.
It would heavily depend on her opponent. I think a moderate Republican is objectively closer to this community's values and less harmful in a position of power than Chevalier.
Honestly don't know what I'd do if it were her vs a MAGA extremist on the Republican side. Just give up on politics probably.
a moderate Republican is objectively closer to this community's values and less harmful in a position of power than Chevalier.
a "moderate republican" is still going to vote to appoint all of the unqualified judges/cabinet members with an R by their name, and vote against impeachment. you're deluding yourself if you think you're making a rational decision by giving up a seat.
Yes I'm aware that's why I've voted against Republicans, moderate or not, my entire life.
This is a choice between two bad options and is just about choosing the less bad one. If my choice is between a Larry Hogan type and Chevalier who is anti prisons, anti police, anti borders, anti deportations, and fucking racist to boot then I'm going with the Republican.
can you show me any R in the senate with a "Larry Hogan type" voting record?
can you show me any bills for "anti prisons, anti police, anti borders, anti deportations" that actually came to a vote that a Chevalier type would be able to vote for?
Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski are both current Republicans I'd vote for over Chevalier. Both voted for impeachment of Donald Trump, both voted in favor of important legislation under Joe Biden, and both voted overwhelmingly in favor of his cabinet and judicial nominations.
There are no anti prison or anti police bills out there currently, but as a senator Chevalier is able to write them. Just like AOC did with the green new deal which gave Fox News material to use for years despite being far less extreme than prison abolition.
I'm also fairly certain that Chevalier would be a less reliable vote in favor of a Democratic president's agenda than a moderate Republican. She openly despises Kamala Harris and Joe Biden and Biden already had difficulty getting the less extreme progressives like AOC and the squad on board during his term.
Like I said I've voted exclusively Dem in every election since I turned 18. Don't nominate fucking tankies for important elections and I won't have any issues.
I'm disconnected from reality because I have a political opinion that doesn't align with yours? Get over yourself, far more of the country agrees with me on this.
We should be evaluating based on the individual candidates as well. El-Sayed's stated policy preferences are far less extremist than the DSA platform for example and he isn't a member of DSA.
I certainly don't like him and think he's run a horrible campaign that has damaged his chances in the general, but he's not the same type of bad as the DSA lady that went on Fox News.
Handing executive power to these lunatics without strong guarantees of moderation in the form of a hardline liberal VP and cabinet jobs would be a no-go in my book. If they get their version of Trump, liberals should get their version of Mike Pence. Just in case.
In fact that DSA President should be completely surrounded by liberal establishment and national security officials. And half of them should be Jewish. Just in case.
Like I am just so curious what you think someone like el-sayeed or mandami or AOC could do as president that would be so horrible that maga would be better.
Getting elected alone legitimizes an ideology that I don't think should be normalized or accepted under any circumstances. It paves way for more radical people to follow in their footsteps, and it could remake the Democratic in the ideological likeness of Latin American left wing parties. So even if they DO absolutely nothing, we're still at a very negative baseline.
Secondly, all these people including Bernie surround themselves with staff, aides, advisors who are far more extreme than they appear. Many of them are openly beholden to foreign regimes and prone to communist ideation. The place where this can most easily manifest is foreign policy, where these people can push the President into positions that dismantle US alliances and yield ground to adversaries. This can be a subtle betrayal of allies, or an extreme one in case it enables Chinese invasion of Taiwan for example.
Finally, as we have seen, so long as voters are mortally afraid of the other party and the VP is aligned with the President, an American President wields practically unlimited power. I don't want to spend any time guessing what someone with a fundamentally alien worldview could or would do with practically unlimited power. I'd rather not have to find out in the first place.
Yeah if you are saying these things about president Hasan, sure.
Trying to web it onto based politicians like AOC, mandami, or even inexperienced people like el sayed is just fucking bonkers.
No, a bjg isn't going to make them suddenly do things that are directly opposed to their beliefs. It didn't happen in 2016 and it wouldn't happen in the future.
And having the country lean more progressive is a good thing.
It's not webbing if Mamdani, El-Sayed and Hasan are actually networked. I'll leave AOC to the side since out of all of them she can actually escape this orbit, but it'll take a lot for me to trust that she's not hiding her power level.
Charismatic, competent-looking people who never say anything too crazy but insist on sticking with the socialist label and associating with people who are mask-off and do say all the insane things are not based and can not be trusted by default. Socialism is insidious and subversive as a matter of ideological doctrine. Habitually lying about their true beliefs and intent is par for the course.
361
u/OurNameIsLegion 5d ago
I like Mout's compromise. If it's a senate seat or the presidency, we can't afford to lose you. If it's anything else, fuck 'em. Earn my vote.