653
Sanders and Warren push Democrats to fight for workers and ‘unrig’ economy
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2024
653 points (99.0% liked)
politics
19117 readers
3750 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm sorry but this is how I read your comment:
"How dare she run for President instead of letting the man take it."
She split the vote by staying running against the best progressive voice of our time. Her selfishness is a direct cause of Biden being elected.
You can pretty much lay blame on anyone or anything because there's absolutely no way to prove it one way or another. You might as well be saying Biden got elected because of the phase of the moon.
Are you claiming the spoiler effect doesn't exist?
I'm claiming that people employ binary thinking and lay blame where the answer is just a wee bit more complex. Saying "Her selfishness is a direct cause of Biden being elected." is flat-out ludicrous for all kinds of reasons, mainly that no one knows what would have happened if Bernie had been the candidate. Nobody's even putting numbers on what "split the vote" even means. FFS.
And look, I voted for Bernie. I even wrote him in in 2020 (I'm in CA).
But the main reason I'm saying all this is that she had the right to run. It just comes across as incredibly shitty - AND exactly the same thinking that made HRC the candidate - to say "oh no, you there, you can't run because it might split the vote".
And that's what many of us are tired of. This stupid noble sentiment where we jerk each other off about how we lost the right way, the honorable way. Because it just ignores pragmatic strategy and the fact that we lost. And when we lose, how does that help anyone? Congrats, SCOTUS stacked for generations.
The reality is we have a FPTP voting system. In such a system, two party control is all but guaranteed mathematically. It looks binary because IT IS BINARY.
It's not a zero sum game. It's not like you "win" the election across the board and get everything you could possibly want. And even if you did get a blue wave you STILL don't get everything you want. Incredibly, it's a big country with lots of different people with different ideas of how it should run. It's a simple fact that among Dems most are not that progressive. Our political system is really a bunch of compromises where nobody gets everything they want but, ideally we all get something. What I've observed among many folks such as yourself is that you think you should get everything instantly. My speculation is that people who think like this are dealing with a shorter time scale because they are younger. That's in no way a bad thing but it does mean you haven't seen the tremendous change that's happened or 4 or 5 decades. To me, things have improved dramatically and of the many things that stand out is the fact that I don't have to worry about being beaten, raped, or murdered for being queer. I can be openly trans. I can even marry my lover.
I'm not saying I don't want to see a viable third party or more truly progressive candidates. But this is a long game where slow incremental progress is assured even if on a much shorter time scale it seems nothing has happened. From my perspective while we still have a long way to go, we've made a lot of progress.