It's not a thing. It's just the difference in having only two choices: one is a nightmarish hellscape that will destroy this country, and the other is not that. It's pretty fucking simple.
this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
-56 points (22.5% liked)
politics
19150 readers
1686 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Am I blue MAGA if I'm gonna vote blue no matter who but hate every second of it?
bLuE mAgA: a dog whistle that edgelords like to use to insult people without breaking the rules.
Stop trying to make Blue MAGA happen, it's not going to happen.
BlueMaga very much exists, and has for years. The VBNMW crowd are the largest contingency
This is simply a lie. Maga labeled themselves Blue maga is something you labeled someone else as a pejorative...and it doesn't really exist except in your mental gymnastics head.
Those things are not the same.
Blue MAGA has been used to describe those who are fierce advocates of the so-called "vote blue no matter who"
ohhhhh! genuinely i have had it backwards this whole time i thought it just meant people using leftist rhetorical tricks to advocate for Trump. still downvoting this article because the concept is clearly just a strawman. seeing it 8.7mil times in the .ml modlogs made that obvious to me.
We called them Pumas in 2008, but it's the same people.
For those not aware, PUMA was the movement Hillary's team started. It was Party Unity My Ass, and was trying to get Dems to vote against Obama in the general in an attempt to show progressivism wasn't popular and the party needed to move right.
It didn't work, but they were always going to say the party had to move right anyways. Doesn't matter what happens, they're gonna keep saying it.
https://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/23/preston.puma/
They're rarely rational and if you question any of their talking points they start screeching insults.
They showed back up in 2016, I don't know why people act like they're a new thing now. They're like fucking cicadas, every 8 years or so they show up and make a shit ton of annoying noise. Then after the election they seem to disappear overnight
Lmao these idiots using "blue maga" are pretty sad.
I've not seen a single person defend Biden the way brainwashed republican idiots defend trump. But it's nice to know they also think maga is idiotic and try to attach blue to it to make it seem like both sides are the same.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Saib Bilavel, historian and associate editor for Three Essays Collective, suggested that "Blue MAGA is real" while sharing a headline from The Hill noting MSNBC host Joy Reid said she would still vote for Biden if he was "in a coma."
Keith Orejel, an assistant professor of history at Wilmington College in Ohio, posted on X, formerly Twitter: "We are like two days away from Blue MAGA arguing cognitive decline is a made up ailment invented by the New York Times."
The Blue MAGA accusation has also been attached to those who have pushed false claims about Biden and his popularity, while urging the president to remain in the White House race.
The post was fact-checked by X's "readers added context" feature, which noted that Biden's numbers did largely go down in the wake of the debate, and CNN's viewership has remained unchanged.
Elsewhere, the DemsMight PAC says it is proud of the "Blue MAGA" label, suggesting that supporting Biden no matter what is vital in order to stop Trump winning November's race.
"I'm BlueMAGA and proud of it, if that means standing up for democracy, stopping Trump, Project 2025, Agenda 47, MAGA and staying in the fight with the most legislatively successful president in modern American history: Mr. Joe Biden," the PAC posted.
The original article contains 712 words, the summary contains 214 words. Saved 70%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!