this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024
1519 points (93.2% liked)

Progressive Politics

840 readers
96 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 79 points 1 month ago (57 children)

It’s much easier to get 65% turnout when it’s a candidate we can get excited about.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago (16 children)

Change starts from the bottom, not the top.

Young people aren't voting = political parties seeing no reason to appeal to them.

Older generations vote, so politicians who appeal to older generations get promoted over ones who might otherwise have broad appeal.

Don't complain about there being nothing but geriatric candidates if you're only engaging in National level races and not taking part in local, regional and state elections that are spring boards for the younger politicians to rise up the ranks to get onto the national level.

You want to see change? Vote. In every election you're eligible to vote in. And get all your friends and co-workers to do the same. Doesn't matter if it's for city council, school board or senate races. Just fucking vote.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago (10 children)

when the dem party ran a candidate that young people liked, we went out and voted for him. so it's not the young people's fault that they don't vote, it's that the party doesn't care enough to put forward a candidate that young people actually can get behind.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Not to defend dems strategy but look at 2010 for a prime example of what my post above was talking about. ACA is exactly what young voters wanted, what dems pushed for in 2008 and was exactly what GOP ran against in 2010. And in 2010, young voters didn't show up, so all the congressional members who pushed it through got unseated by conservatives eager to rip it apart and stonewall anything else Obama did.

So yes, my point stands. It's because young voters do not vote, especially not in midterm years between presidential elections that we aren't getting politicians who appeal to the under 50-60 block. Because even when Dems go all out and give them everything they want, they still don't show up at the polls to maintain momentum, and Dems lose a ton of ground. So can you blame them for making the choice between getting once in a generation power plays to change the status quo then go right back to letting GOP rip everything apart piecemeal and load the courts with conservative judges, or pick safer bet candidates who appeal to the ones who regularly turn out to vote even if progress only comes in bite sized changes they can slip through with aid of moderates and independents?

The math is there, you just have to look at the entire equation. GET OUT AND VOTE. EVERY ELECTION.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

ACA is exactly what young voters wanted

Young voters wanted rebranded RomneyCare?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

ACA is exactly what young voters wanted, what dems pushed for in 2008

Absolute nonsense. Young people wanted universal healthcare, not new tax bureaucracy to deal with. Young people wanted something akin to M4A, but instead got RomneyCare

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Rotating villain

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Senate pissed away their majority and thought that people wouldnt notice the stone-walling and nuclear option and other bullshit shenanigans that MAJORITY elected officials were letting Republizards get away with. Liebermann and other DINOs were allowed to run free and destroy the MAJORITY vote.

Guess why the 2nd-term of Obama DID NOT GET THE SUPER MAJORITY? FAILED TO KEEP PROMISES.

Biden was the Veep responsible to ensure that Senate and the House did their job.

Geriatric Dog Pony Soldier Biden screwed around during the Obama Presidency and now doing worse.

Biden could nominate Bernie, dude is older than any one else. AND STILL THE DEMS WILL WIN THIS 2024!

@@@@$##$&#%#%&^#$%&#%^%(&%

I feel worse than just cursing at the 'Murican stupidity on display. Hate this crap. You cannot blame voters when your candidate is brain-dead. So get serious or get out.

Drumpf is elected because of all the lies he tells and not because he is competent. He is the "Set everything on Fire and watch it all Burn down" candidate. IF YOU CANNOT BEAT THIS DUMB DEADBEAT YOU ARE NOT WORTH ANYTHING.

During the Drumpf Rule, Republizards silently pass every rule-breaking garbage and rig every system beyond breaking-point and create an unfixable situation everywhere again.

Dem Candidate has to :

  • Inspire voters

  • Unbreak all the broken systems since the time of Jimmy Carter.

  • Implement new systems that are robust and unbreakable.

  • Imprison every rule-breaking politician regardless of party or affiliation.

  • Simplify everything for anyone earning below 1 MILLION USD.

  • Tax 90% everything for anyone earning above 1 BILLION USD.

You need a very brave candidate. Bernie will do it. Biden is a zombie without even the brainworm.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Even IF they let him near a primary, even if he won primary and general, and had a majority of both houses... Do you think every Dem would vote with him? Even if they wanted to?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

I hear ya. I so wish we were in a better spot.

But here we are with ~14 weeks left.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (51 replies)