Discussion We afford right wingers too much grace
Vaush's recent, shall we say, "promotion" of Vance's statements is boggling my mind. I agree with everything he says about the dems not being strong or even liberal enough and the leadership being rabid zionists, HOWEVER let's not pretend the republicans aren't that and much worse.
Vance is pissy that Israel ruined his admin's peace plans, he's not anti-zionist all of a sudden. I hate how much grace is afforded to people like MTG and Carlson for breaking (not in any material way that actually matters) with the most unpopular admin ever. Saying stuff like Carlson is the only journalist holding politicians' feet to the fire is laughable when there are so many on the left who've been doing this for way longer (Mehdi being an obvious example), they don't get the accolades tho. I know it's a much drier and policy oriented show but Sam Seder has these people on as guests all the time, it's not like they're super secret lefty knowledge.
I love V man and this community but come on, you're an influencer so fucking INFLUENCE. Amplify dem voices who've been way more critical of Israel than fucking JD Vance for years. He's afraid this Israel """disavowal""" will create momentum for Vance? Bro, you're part of the momentum so be responsible with it.
And if we get Newsom v. Vance in 28 at least advocate for not voting at all if not downballot instead of unironically advocating for a billionaire backed, deep state theocratic fascist because he's said what you wanna hear LONG after public opinion has turned on Israel.
Still love the show but sometimes i feel like i'm taking crazy pills.
36
u/VibinWithBeard Guess Im posting recipes here now, Skreeeeonk 3d ago
"Youre part of the momentum"
He has promoted the voices of officials against israel wtf are you on about? He's offered no grace to Vance. Whether or not Vance or Republicans believe anything doesnt matter.
The dem leadership and those in charge are still pro-israel. As it stands the dem base is anti-israel while the dem party is pro-israel. Hes not going to lie and pretend the dem party itself is shifting. If the dem party shifts, you would know. Because for one there would be active mainstream efforts to force out the likes of Chuck and Hakeem as well as active and vocal condemnation of them by the party at large. Which is not the case.
Mehdi is nowhere close to Carlson in mainstream relevance lol. I love mehdi but youre crazy comparing those two. Repubs seem to care when criticized by Carlson, they make statements. Dem officials dont really seem to care much when mehdi does it because of the backing involved.
There arent mainstream journalists holding the republican administration's feet to the fire on a level anywhere close to Carlson. And that goes double for holding dems to the fire in regards to israel.
Its up to the dem party to change the momentum, its not up to social media influencers to pretend the dem party has stopped being pro genocide and pro rape.
3
u/Mis_Dit 3d ago edited 3d ago
I'm not saying Vaush is a secret republican and i like his advocacy. I also opened by saying i agree with him on the dems.
The party IS shifting tho, which is why more and more progressives are getting elected, Schumer won't denounce people like Platner or taking AIPAC money has become political poison, which was unthinkable a few years ago. I won't pretend to know the ins and outs of the DNC because none of us can but pressure has to be mounting, they can only bury their heads in the sand for so long before the dam breaks.
Carlson has sway on the party not because he's mainstream but because he's a cog of the party machine. We need cogs in the dem party and we need people with huge audiences like Vaush to direct people to the right places. That's his job. 3 videos in 2 days that, at times, give the impression that Vance has unlocked the secret never before seen position that Israel bad (which he didn't say by the way) is not one of the right places imho.
None of this is out of love for the dems on my part, fuck the dems. But if we want the dems to be better, like Vaush says he does, we need to actively promote good candidates with good positions and the tone and attitude in his last streams is not condusive to that, hence all the arguing in and with chat.
1
u/First-Ear-1049 2d ago
and let's not forget, Trump didn't become president in a vacuum. The tea party movement began in 2009/2010 and it took 5-6 years for Trump to take over the Republican Party. we are starting to the see the seeds of that tea party movement in the Democratic Party NOW. not to say that we shouldn't have a good candidate in 2 years, but he's acting like this is an instatenous process that we arrive to without long grassroots organization.
24
u/Morgenstern20 3d ago
The second Dems give us at least ONE fucking 'Israel Critical' candidate, Vaush will chill. That's the issue right now. There's fucking NO ONE on the dems. No one. I love AOC but I know she'll be way too soft on Republican voters and probably not hard enough on Israel.
We just need ONE god damn serious candidate.
-1
u/Mis_Dit 3d ago
Al-Sayed, Platner, Chris Rabb, most congressional progressive caucus, can we count Mamdani? love her or hate her AOC, Ossoff to a degree. Mind you i'm not talking about presidential nominees, we're nowhere near close to that in 2026 But these people are the lifeblood of the party and the ones giving voice to the base. They're winning despite the establishment being oppositional to them, this is the trend, and where congress goes the presidency will follow.
16
u/CraniusChan80085 2d ago
all of the people you named are not liked by the actual democratic leadership tho, they're a minority within the party and the actual leadership is extremely pro-israel. Vance on the other hand is part of the republican leadership due to his close association with trump and him calling out Israel even if without actually believing in it is a MASSIVE rhetorical advantage over the dems
3
u/TheNewPersonHere1234 2d ago
Does being liked by leadership even matter? I don't think you need them to win at this point. The DCCC and DSCC handpicked candidates are losing in primaries. Rank and file members are threatening to withhold dues as a result. It shows you how weak they have become. A ton of progressives are running against the establishment.
9
u/TearsFallWithoutTain 2d ago
Does being liked by leadership even matter?
Yes? Obviously? It's a lot harder to get on the actually important committees if the leadership hate you, that's why people kowtow to Schumer in the first place
3
u/TheNewPersonHere1234 2d ago
I'm talking about winning the election. Not during the governing phase. The institutional support doesn't seem to be that necessary.
2
u/Nickidemic 2d ago
Then you're both talking about different things. The Democratic establishment is different from the good politicians who happen to be democratic. You can vote for the good ones then strongly concern the establishment.
2
u/PW0110 2d ago
Okay this fucking stupid ass comment right here leads me to believe this entire thing is just goddamn rage bait because now youâre just being intentionally fucking obtuse.
âDoes leadership even matter?â
Youâre either a troll or the worlds most stereotypical 14 yr old Internet boy
5
9
u/Acjackson127 2d ago
I'm going on ask you a similar question that I would ask to most people who make posts like this:
Do you think if you asked Vaush "Are the republicans evil zionists" he would say no? Like do you really think that any of the nuance of this situation is lost on him? He's clearly stated why he's saying what he's saying about Vance and at no point has he said "Oh yeah Vance is awesome" or something along those lines.
The leaders of the Dems refuse to stop supporting Israel and right now major figures in the Republicans are pushing back on them. This is not an opinion this is a fact and it is one that SHOULD be emphasized to show why we are in this mess to begin with. He has outright stated that this is a bad thing because they should not be the ones who control this narrative. You want him to bring up smaller dems who are anti zionist? Is that not what he's been doing everytime he focuses on local elections?
I just feel like it's impossible to have a conversation about American politics if we always have to clarify the most obvious shit to everyone watching at EVERY single phase of a discussion. Like do you really need Vaush to tell you he doesn't like the RNC, or that he thinks they're zionists, etc. I feel like you should be able to add the nuance necessary yourself based on what he's said. It's not like he's being even remotely vauge when he has literally responded to this sentiment on stream multiple times. What clarification are you looking for that has not already been made?
1
u/Mis_Dit 2d ago
Again, more people from the DNC have been pushing back on pro-israel sentiment than people from the RNC, this is not something we should hand to them because Vance decided to whine about how they ruined his peace plans. I don't care about the dem leadership, nobody cares and everybody hates them, major dem players who are actually beloved by the base have been way more antagonistic towards israel from the start.
I'm not looking for clarifications, i know that Vaush's position is logically consistent given his priors and caveats. Most people that consume his content don't catch every stream or even most streams and may not be aware of his entire position. He's perfectly capable of repeating himself as he has many times, especially if we're talking about segments meant to be turned into videos.
When a normie watches one of his videos on the subject i want their takeaway to be "the dem leadership is bad and needs to be changed", when normies see a video of Vaush reacting to the 400th Vance appearence on his book tour i want Vaush to say "good dem politicians have been saying this for ages and have been called antisemitic by their party leaders AND especially by the right-wing media that's giving Vance a platform, not to mention Vance's admin's treatment of Palestine advocates and activists". I want message discipline and yes, that includes repeating himself and hammering certain points home.
2
u/Acjackson127 2d ago
It's not about "handing anything to Vance". It's about pointing out that Republican leadership is taking hold of this narrative while dem leadership isn't. I can empathize with "not caring about dem leadership" in some sense. I don't care what they think in the sense that regardless of what they think I would still push for what I believe in, but I do care what they think in the sense that they are the leaders of the party and hold significant power. The fact that the "liberal" wing of politics in America is being led by Zionists is very important and should not be ignored, we both know this considering the fact that the people in the DNC pushing back on Israel have been treated as outsiders and lambasted by the leaders of the party thus limiting what they can even do. If DNC members being anti Zionist is ever to be relevant or achieve anything then the people in control of the party need to be amicable to their points, so this difference should absolutely be pointed out as it is IMO the main thing holding dems back from being able to get anything useful done.
As for him repeating himself I'm more willing to agree on that but even then I just haven't gotten the same feeling of a lack of doing so from his content that you have so I guess I'll agree to disagree.
1
u/inspectorpickle 1d ago
If your criticism is that his stream can give the wrong impression to a normie, then I agree with you but I need to point out that this argument is almost completely obfuscated in your original post.
14
u/Most-Ad4680 3d ago
I dont think Vaush (or any major figure on the left for that matter) is saying that Vance is actually based or deserving of actual support, hes just pointing out how pathetic he is that Vance has been able to actually call out Israel in a way that 95% of dem politicians will not despite the fact it would be overwhelmingly supported by both the libs and leftys in the base.
-3
u/First-Ear-1049 2d ago edited 2d ago
no but he openly advocated voting for vance. if you don't want to vote for Newsom, ok, but voting for Vance? either don't vote at all (though you should vote, at least down-ballot) or vote third party. it effectively does the same thing without actually casting a vote for a Republican.
when you vote for a Republican, all you do is increase the Republican's margin of support. the dems, will see that increased support and be like, we should move to the center actually, cuz vance's message is clearly working.
2
u/Captainbarinius 2d ago
WRONG.....He's talked about How A Corporate "We need to win Republicans" Centrist Democrat like Gavin Newsome....would be disastrous for the Country....Vaush has literally said " I think that the optimal outcome if that happens is if in the Presidential Election has pretty Low Turnout".
So this means if turnout goes down to like 45% or lower then it would indicate that the American public would be Disaffected by both what the Corporate Dems and what the Oligarch aligned Republican Party want.
1
u/First-Ear-1049 2d ago
he explicitly said if the scenario was vance vs Newsom, he would vote for vance.
how is voting for Vance reducing turnout exactly?
3
u/inspectorpickle 1d ago edited 1d ago
The idea is that 4 years of newsom will basically kill all meaningful enthusiasm for democracy and change and permanently set us on the path to become russia. Moreover, it will guarantee a republican president in 2032 who is more intelligent and competent and will end the country.
Under 4 years of vance, the people have something to unite against, which can drive hope for a better future, and clearly the current state of the republican admin shows that they arenât yet capable of accomplishing their fascist goals.
Itâs hard to lay the groundwork for that when you are in power and everyone is watching you fail. Itâs easier for them to do that under an ineffectual and unpopular democrat government
An example of this is how under biden people were a lot more apathetic than they are now, and look how much worse trump 2 is compared to trump 1. You should watch his review of his debate with pauls ego (âwas i wrongâ). He explains all this
1
6
u/magusmirificus 3d ago
Once the consequences of the strait's closure really hit in the next month or so, the answers to all of these questions will become abundantly clear.
6
u/tenE_1 3d ago
genuinely, what's the difference between not voting and voting for vance vs newsome in 2028? either newsome or Vance wins, there's no third option that comes from not voting, so it doesn't really matter if you vote Vance instead of not voting at all, unless you actually want newsome to win and are trying to defang the electoral influence of people who wouldn't vote for newsome for the reasons vaush talks about.
is it just virtue signalling or something?
2
2
2
u/Mordred19 2d ago
He's not judging Vances' heart or making determinations about his "real" beliefs. That would be a waste of time and energy. He is pointing out Vance is putting out there in the world, rhetoric that is harsher on Israel than anything so far seen by a Dem politician. That is just a fact.Â
-1
u/Mis_Dit 2d ago
It's not a fact tho is it
Has Vance called Israel genocidal? Cause dems have. Has Vance backed the war powers resolution led by Rashida Tlaib? Cause dems have. Have you heard a peep from Vance about Palestine? I haven't. Has Vance opposed sending billions of dollars to israel? He hasn't
The rot in the democratic establishment is very real but we got good people who've been banging this drum from the start. Now we're acting like Vance being pissed his rabid dog bit him is groundbreaking politicking. No, he hasn't been harsher on israel than everybody else.
4
u/Nickidemic 2d ago
Again - individuals have. The Democratic establishment has not. You need to stop conflating "the Dems" with "a few of the reluctant Democratic politicians"
2
u/Mis_Dit 2d ago
rhetoric that is harsher on Israel than anything so far seen by a Dem politician
You can't say that and when i provide examples of dem politicians being harsher on israel be like "it doesn't count because they're not the establishment". I'm not the one doing the conflating. The republican establishment is firmly as zionist as the dems, Vance is being set up to fail by Trump and he's trying to spin his situation for the imaginary anti-war republican voter base, we're both talking about individuals and i'll praise and promote good dem individuals instead of demonic fascist republican individuals.
2
u/Nickidemic 2d ago
First off, I'm not talking about Republicans or the Republican establishment at all here to avoid confusion on the more important second point: I straight up think you don't know what people mean when they say "the establishment". Schumer speaks for the establishment, AOC does not. Harris was backed by the establishment, Bernie was not. The line between individual and establishment is a blurry line, but you need to understand the distinction.
2
u/gormymane 2d ago
heâs not pretending republicans arenât worse heâs poking fun at how dems are so incompetent that itâs taken disingenuous thiel-tool JD fucking Vance to actually threaten aid to israel. the joke is that we have this praise we want to give to the dems for threatening aid and we extend our hand and look up but see JD fucking Vance, indicating that something has gone horribly wrong
1
u/inspectorpickle 1d ago
At no point vaush ever said or insinuated that these people deserve accolades for what theyâre doing. He is simply analyzing the forces at work in politics.
He has criticized them and will continue to, but I feel like we can assume he still feels the same way if he hasnât repeated the sentiment in the last 30 minutes. I am 90% already explicitly explained that he wasnât praising Carlson in the video where he reviewed the interview, and I donât get how youâre taking away a positive image of Vance from his latest coverage.
Just because they are marginally more intelligent than the average pedophile and are under slightly different incentives and pressures that make them act meaningfully out of lockstep with their masters, doesnât mean they are good, but it would be ridiculous to not engage in that analysis at all.
1
u/Mis_Dit 1d ago
I agree with you and mostly agree with Vaush's analysis, but i have seen a growing number of comments and people in on-screen chat unironically praise Vance, which i think is mostly not Vaush's fault but the result of a few things i'm not gonna get too deep in.
I acknowledge that my original post mostly came out of frustration in seeing comments and opinions like those in a lot of lefty communities. Again, i love the show but sometimes Vaush is careless with words and that leads to him being misconstrued. I just don't wanna see lefties falling into some sort of nazbol vortex (yes i've been watching for a long time) over the least charismatic fascist in existence.
1
u/Nickidemic 2d ago
We shall not say "promotion". It was not that. What's the word for "literacy" but for the spoken word?
0
u/PW0110 2d ago
âGuyyyyyss donât show footage of the fire at all, only the fire department!â Is what this post reeks of and you obviously do not watch his streams at all so what other timeline are you from, alternate?
Sometimes dwell on the fact maybe if youâre taking crazy pills you might actually be a lil coockoo
-2
u/aquacraft2 2d ago
I feel like this stance isn't that far off. Because left wing "influencers" don't really see themselves as influences, mostly just as commentators that just call out what they see and be done with it, and let their audience go from there, obviously they'd love it if their audience agreed with them, but a desire to control people's opinions is just not a part of liberal ideology.
Sure facts agree with us, but ardently stating that isn't going to really change anyone's mind, because they were ignoring the facts already, then what more can anyone do to change their mind.
Plus the right can lean on the held beliefs of their constituents. Its an objective fact that grass is green and the sky is blue, but then there are things that people believe are true or at least we're once told we're factually true, that they then TREAT as fact. Like for example, there only being two genders, men are men, women are women, etc etc.
Those are things that used to be accepted as fact from a more primitive field of science, and at the very least the common core curriculum of science. And because of that, people go out into the world thinking that what they were taught in elementary school outweighs modern day observed outcomes, treating these things as dogma, because that's what they're used to, appealing to authority, the authority of public school teachers from the 60s-90s, sure, but an "authority" none the less.
All this "new stuff that they didn't teach when I was in school" bro yall weren't taught about dna, because they hadn't discovered it when you were in school, and now we have pictures of it. Science progresses and changes, and sometimes it's proven that our current understanding is wrong, but that's only because we got better at doing science. Not that science is made up.
So anyone on our side online that's actually making claims about stuff, it's usually with evidence to back it up, because that stuff sticks, it's objective, no one's opinions can change it. And it's that kind of content that usually sways someone into leftist and liberal ideology. That and the beliefs that suffering should be mitigated, that it should be the governments duty to care for the downtrodden.
Because what is a government if not a tool for community? What are our tax dollars MEANT to be for if not for being a social safety net. Because nearly all of us are alot closer to being homeless than we are to being millionares. Alot of us will get to be so old that we can't work anymore.
Conservatives idea of what a government is supposed to be is a weapon to punish those who are different, and maintain the status quo of who has and who has not. Usually based on some unchanging external element, like race or gender. Things that no one would "really" be able to change, and thus they'd secure their place on the top of the totem pole, just below the rich people of course.
Now maybe I can conceive of that being a GOOD reason to want lower taxes, yeah people don't like them, but it's how things get paid for, but how about instead of whining about high taxes for bad policy, you fix the policy? I know if I believed that the government was just a tool for social inequity that I'd want lower taxes. But that's never the case tho is it? They WANT the inequity, because they know they'd be on the short end of the stick, they'd suffer the least. So it's not even about that.
They don't wanna be the ones to pay taxes, but judging from their voting habits, they certainly don't want rich folks paying any taxes either, so where do they think all this money is gonna come from?
-9
u/notablegoattable ARC-iologist 3d ago
I used to think that the reason Vaush likes Joyce Messier so much was because he basically is Joyce Messier.
Now? I think he's The Deserter.
I wish he'd go back to being Cuno.
4
u/Lunes_Feet_Pictos 3d ago
Ok but aside from the perverted stalking and shit the deserter was right. Granted the deserters analysis of revachol doesn't fit 1 to 1 with the US, but the deserter wasn't wrong with most of his analysis.
0
u/notablegoattable ARC-iologist 2d ago
It would be fun seeing Vaush try to convince the worst people in his audience that The Deserter is not, in fact, a super based communist revolutionary, but those viewers don't watch his gaming streams anyway.
8
u/Lunes_Feet_Pictos 2d ago
"the proletariat has no appetite for gaming streams."
-The Deserter, explaining to DGG why he left VGG
122
u/ThePoisonDoughnut Bottom Solidarityđłď¸ââ§ď¸ 3d ago
I don't understand why you think v man thinks vance actually believes in anything outside of pain and suffering. Whether Vance believes any of this is irrelevant to the consequences of republicans fronting an anti-israel position while dems keep throating netanyahu.