651
Blue No Matter Who?: Jeffries Slammed for 'Gutless' Refusal to Endorse Zohran Mamdani
(www.commondreams.org)
this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2025
651 points (97.8% liked)
News
31697 readers
3369 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
lol insane neckbeard energy
“You are the reason that Democrats suck”
“Lmao”
“Insane neckbeard energy”
what the fuck did u just say 2 ur superior
At least you have a sense a humor. Most right wingers don’t.
and you have the reading comprehension and reasoning ability of every other "vote blue no matter who" I've ever seen
That’s because you don’t understand voting or politics, son.
Got the answer to my original question :)
Ok so I’m feeling kind of generous today. I will try to explain this to you as best I can. Vote blue no matter who is an Election Day-only strategy. It is not an advocacy for shitty right wing candidates to win in primaries or for decent people to support prior to the election.
As I mentioned a few days ago, the right wing corporate Democrats never adhere to vote blue no matter who, as Joe Lieberman, Byron Brown, and Andrew Cuomo prove. It is not a strategy for them, it’s a strategy for us; those of us who understand that when there is a guaranteed outcome of one of the candidates no matter what, we have a moral obligation to vote against the worst candidate.
The important part is that since this is an Election Day action, it does not have any effect on the Democrats. The (corporate) Democrats don’t learn lessons, that’s the thing that folks like you need to understand. When they win, it’s because they moderated their message; when they lose, they didn’t moderate their message enough.
If you think random people sitting out elections, even in larger numbers, constitutes collective action, you are sorely mistaken. Only something like a drastic highly organized boycott of the Democrats could yield something like that—and by the time you’re at that level of organization, you might as well be voting real socialists into office. I helped elect Kshama Sawant here in Seattle, so it’s not like that’s hopeless, but we’re talking about a different kind of race.
Democrats don’t get more right wing because voters just keep electing them. The alternative is Republicans in most cases. That’s where vote blue no matter who comes in. Once one of them is gonna win no matter what, you vote against the Republican. This does not have any effect on Democrats whatsoever. Real activism is done in the other 99.9999% of the time you’re not in a voter booth.
It’s time to recognize the stakes for decent folks here. Those of us who understand elections, voting, and politics know that the difference between a Democrat and a Republican can mean life or death for people. That trans person is being ridiculous. Gavin Newsom is a loathsome right wing corporate garbage monger, but he is infinitely better for trans rights than literally any Republican. The Republicans are trying to genocide trans people. Standing on principle that you refuse to vote if he happens to win the primary is insane, selfish, and treasonous.
tldr
Edit: ok I'm generous too, while you're not wrong about most of that low voter turnout is absolutely a signal, moreso than hundreds of thousands pinching their noses and voting Democrat again. Why should they ever bother being worth voting for when you and everyone else just wants your vote to be against something?
Over the long term, you created these conditions. The sooner you stop letting them get away with it, the sooner they'll have to start serving the people
So let’s assume that you’re right. What is the proposal exactly? Like, what are you saying is what gets us where we need to go? Because as I said before, I’m only talking about when we get to the voting booth. The rest of the time, we organize a mass movement.
Another thing that is important is who can be pushed by a mass movement. Would you rather have a Trump or a Harris when we’re making our demands? These things are entirely strategic in the moment, but I don’t understand how this somehow makes Democrats any worse.
You didn’t ask me a question and you have no idea what you’re talking about. :)