this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2024
703 points (94.6% liked)

Memes

1208 readers
272 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 24 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I think the current best demonstration on this is how hard people are pushing Mark Kelly as VP.

They push a center-right president onto the stage and then dangle another "centrist" to try and, what? Appeal to Never Trumper Republicans? Racists?

How about you offer actual progressives some goddamn enticement for once and offer it to Jamaal Bowman, who the Dems primaried in favor of a genocidal AIPAC stooge?

[–] timbuck2themoon 0 points 4 months ago (3 children)

If he was that popular and progressives that numerous he wouldn't have lost his primary, especially as the incumbent. Simple as.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

You are clueless as far as actual policies supported by actual Americans. Policy wise, there is pretty much a super majority of Americans that support actual progressive policies

[–] timbuck2themoon 6 points 4 months ago (2 children)

If that was the case then maybe they should get off their asses and vote then huh?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago

As soon as there's a candidate that actually represents them... Imagine if the 2 candidates were Trump and Romney, both running as Republicans... Would libs be crying that everyone needs to vote Republican or the Republicans will win? Replace Republican with conservative in that last sentence, and maybe it will clear up why progressives don't bother voting... There is no one to vote for

(I'm voting for Kamala, so should everyone)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Policy wise, there is pretty much a super majority of Americans that support actual progressive policies

There's a huge trust gap in implementation. That's why Donald Trump threaten a national victory via votes from dying Boomers convinced he's going to unleash fantasy free health care technology while Bernie Sanders can't squeak through a primary on the promise of increasing Medicaid enrollments.

People may want the same things, but they are deeply cynical in who they trust to deliver those policies.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

Health care is a fantasy in the United States don’t get sick here it would be cheaper to fly to a hotel in Paris if you are sick I suppose

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If he was that popular and progressives that numerous he wouldn’t have lost his primary

Propaganda works. You can bombard people with media attacks on a progressive politician to trick people into thinking he's reactionary. In this case, a heavily Jewish district was flooded with "Jamaal Bowman is antisemetic" messaging for months straight and it cost him the election.

This has nothing to do with his popularity or his progressive bonafides and everything to do with his cash on hand to run counter-programming.

[–] timbuck2themoon 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Again, he was down a ton before the AIPAC money came in.

That PAC bullshit is just that but it doesn't explain his loss.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

he was down a ton before the AIPAC money came in

George Latimer was recruited and sponsored by AIPAC on day one.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That you’re being downvoted for this totally reasonable comment only inches away from a top level comment lamenting a system that silences dissenting views is nice.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

Lol because he's citing the system being critiqued as evidence to make the case that progressive politics aren't popular

"This system disadvantages dissenting views"

"Dissenting views just arent popular, just look at the outcome of this system"

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

They push a center-right president onto the stage

Like, 90% of the US Senate is center-right or worse. You're in a country that is governed overwhelmingly to the right of the popular political view. I don't think the VP pick is going to meaningfully shift any of that. Running Walz as your VP isn't going to turn the US Senate into the Minnesota Governor's Mansion.

How about you offer actual progressives some goddamn enticement for once and offer it to Jamaal Bowman, who the Dems primaried in favor of a genocidal AIPAC stooge?

Because the US has a huge geopolitical strategic interest in staying friendly with Israel and a vanishingly small interest in cultivating support among progressive New Yorkers.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

Because the US has a huge geopolitical strategic interest in staying friendly with Israel and a vanishingly small interest in cultivating support among progressive New Yorkers.

This is an excellent explanation for the way things are but a really terrible reason to keep them that way

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Am I the only one who thinks we need to pick someone no older than ~50 for VP? Based on the idea that VP is an understudy position?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It's not an understudy position. The role of VP has historically been a way to "balance the ticket" between factions in the party. So, a Kennedy from Massachusetts and Johnson from Texas. Or California's Reagan with a Connecticut Bush.

More recently, the VP has been a means of whipping votes in the House (Cheney and Ford) or the Senate (Gore, Biden, Pence) and raising money from affiliate donor networks (all of the above, but Harris and Vance more than ever).

If you want a Presidential job training program, look to the governor's mansion or the State Department. But by the time you're VP, you're not training. You're in the game.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It's absolutely been used as an under study position in the past. It can be all those things too.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It’s absolutely been used as an under study position in the past.

Name one VP who was a practical understudy for the job of President and I'll name you ten that were equally if not more qualified for the job.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Explain how Dick Cheney was an understudy to Bush Jr.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Cheney was a very unique case. In some ways he wielded more power than Bush. That's not normal in any sense.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Cheney was a very unique case.

The VP after Cheney was Biden, a man with more years in the Federal Government than any three 2008 primary rivals combined.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Did you look at the list at all? It's not at all uncommon for the VP to be considered the next presumptive nominee. Which is what an understudy does.

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

It’s not at all uncommon for the VP to be considered the next presumptive nominee.

That's very different from being less experienced

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

I never said less experienced. You're supposed to have experience. Under study means you're getting an inside track to be ready if you need to step in and then you should have a better resume next time hiring is done.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Under study means you’re getting an inside track to be ready if you need to step in

When you've got Timothy Chalmette as your President and Anthony Hopkins as your VP, the concern isn't whether Hopkins will have the exposure to fill the role.