• barsquid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    The thing you were arguing about is that they will not move left even if it gets them more votes. You referenced 2016. It looks like they went towards the more votes even in 2016, no?

    You now wish to change your argument. “If Dems had ignored the more votes and gone further left, it would have won the election,” am I reading that correctly?

    I also preferred Sanders. But I don’t see how you can logically hold both those positions.

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The party saw that Obama was popular when he was to Clinton’s left. They moved right anyway. They lost. Yes, Clinton got more votes than Trump. They still moved to the right after it was demonstrated that moving left excited voters.

      They move right no matter what and make up excuses after the fact. At least until last week. And just look at how excited Democrats finally are. The dam has burst.

      • barsquid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Clinton got more votes than Sanders, that is why they went rightwards instead of leftwards. On the topic of that person saying leftists need to vote to move the needle, you claimed that was wrong. That’s delusional? You want them to ignore the majority of their voters and go left because you felt excited about Sanders? I did also but what the hell.

        I’m glad Harris is popular with the Dem majority who do reliably vote as well as the unreliable younger demographics. It is looking pretty good. I hope it does get voters excited enough to show up and I hope the leftward ones continue to participate in the future so that the needle swings in the correct direction.

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          I’m glad Harris is popular with the Dem majority who do reliably vote as well as the unreliable younger demographics.

          I’m glad the party decided to fucking listen for once. The enthusiasm is because they listened. The listening was not because of enthusiasm, but rather its absence.

          • barsquid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            They listened in 2008 and ran Obama instead of Clinton, then they listened in 2016 and ran Clinton instead of Sanders. They have been listening to people who actually show up to vote, which was that person’s point.

            How do you want them to behave such that they would have ignored the votes for Sanders but not ignored the votes for Obama? Please suggest a policy they can use which is consistent and has integrity, not just, “I was personally excited for candidate A therefore candidate A should have won the primaries.”

            • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              If you’re going to pretend that the party’s support for Clinton was the result of a fair primary and wasn’t already present before a single vote was cast, there’s no point in arguing with you.

              They moved to the right before the 2016 primaries.

              • barsquid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Thank you for you agreeing I am correct that they follow the votes. You can move the goalposts to campaign financing if you like.

                • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  They move to the right and then announce they follow the votes, regardless of where the votes actually are. You’re just happy they move to the right.

                  • barsquid@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    I linked you to what the votes in that primary actually were, feel free to observe the facts if your ego isn’t too fragile for it. I’m not happy about it, I am just trying to not have a cognitive bias in the same why that you do. It’s insane. We agree on the desired outcome in these elections but you’re so focused on being mad about how the votes went in the 2016 primary that you accuse me of being happy they chose Clinton. Get a grip.