279
submitted 11 months ago by GiddyGap@lemm.ee to c/politics@lemmy.world

"We recognize that, in the next four years, our decision may cause us to have an even more difficult time. But we believe that this will give us a chance to recalibrate, and the Democrats will have to consider whether they want our votes or not."

That's gotta be one of the strangest reasonings I've heard in a while.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago

We get them back by reminding them of exactly what has been done for them and the realities of the alternative,

Right. Tell them to be grateful for genocide and scream that they want trump.

as well as opening a dialog on what reasonable concessions can be made (if any).

That would be something to try. The party won't. They'll skip straight to this:

If that doesn’t work, then clearly, there was no way of turning them, and they should be cut loose.

And then act like they tried everything they could and blame them for any losses.

[-] boywar3@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Right. Tell them to be grateful for genocide and scream that they want trump

No, by reminding them that "hey we are the party that stops you from actively being deported and barred from entering the country."

That's a damn convincing argument if there ever was one, and honestly if they aren't convinced it won't be a problem anymore since they won't be around next election cycle anyway after another round of republican rule...

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago

No, by reminding them that “hey we are the party that stops you from actively being deported and barred from entering the country.”

When Democrats had control of both houses and the presidency, what legislation did they introduce to stop Muslims from being deported and barred from entry into the country? What did they put into place to keep the next bigoted turd from implementing a Muslim ban?

Oh, and they're funding a genocide?

[-] boywar3@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NO_BAN_Act

They did this...it passed in the house and has been stuck in committees for ages

As for funding genocide...yeah the Democratic party has a problem in that most voters lean towards Palestine and the party doesn't, but its also a relatively "new" issue in the eyes of the public (most people didn't think about Israel or Palestine before this for any amount of time), so who knows? Maybe things shift as things go on

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

They did this…it passed in the house and has been stuck in committees for ages

Looks like it was introduced by Democrats during the Trump administration and then reintroduced and silently killed during the Biden administration. In fairness, it was in fact introduced. I'll give them credit for that.

As for funding genocide…yeah the Democratic party has a problem in that most voters lean towards Palestine and the party doesn’t

Wouldn't be the first time that the party acted contrary to the will of their voters and then demanded support anyway. But genocide is the issue this time. That's an extremely bitter pill to swallow, and it's disturbing to discover how many in your own party love the taste.

Maybe things shift as things go on

Democrats don't shift left.

[-] boywar3@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

It all rolls back to the same problem in the end:

The dems don't need to care until the Republicans stop being utter garbage, or enough of the population forces them to reconsider at once. We are. ot there yet so the best course of action is to aid the party that won't take away your rights to vote.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

The dems don’t need to care until the Republicans stop being utter garbage

You forgot to add "lol"

this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2023
279 points (87.2% liked)

politics

19089 readers
4129 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS