|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On June 21 2025 08:29 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2025 05:03 LightSpectra wrote:On June 01 2025 04:01 Legan wrote:
Seems really embarrassing for democrats to have Andrew Cuomo be the leading candidate for them in New York. Such a fresh face for them. Wait for after the first debate (which is on June 4). Right now most people are just answering polls based on name recognition. "Welp" what? + Show Spoiler + The debate took Cuomo from an overwhelming landslide down to what looks to be a nailbiter finish, so that was a huge win for Mamdani compared to where he was weeks ago. I think Zam's explanation is pretty good, what's yours now? I explained above. The idea that an overwhelming majority of Democrats quietly yearn for progressive policies but they keep getting tricked into voting for centrist liberals by the dastardly DNC is simply not real life. If you go out and talk to a wide range of Democratic voters, especially older BIPOC ones, they genuinely do have closer social and economic beliefs to 90s Clintonism than Bernie Sanders. There are actually a huge number of people who love Clinton/Obama/Cuomo-style politics and it's not because they're stupid. I say this as a progressive who voted for Sanders in both the 2016 and 2020 primaries. Yes, there actually is a large centrist liberal demographic, they aren't just multimillionaires deceiving people into voting against their wishes. Pretty clear you made the argument that the majority of his support comes from name recognition, so your attempt to act like someone else pointing that out is condescending (with the implication being it is racist) disgusts me.
On June 21 2025 08:55 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 08:20 LightSpectra wrote:
It's somewhat difficult to have a conversation about this when you ostensibly start to answer my question but soapbox about something unrelated and never actually answer it. Your question was answered, it was worth precisely one sentence, and I offered you an example of a politician whose rise to power hinged heavily on his name recognition, Show nested quote +if Trump didnt have his crappy TV show and wasnt a very recognizable figure we'd probably have President Hillary Clinton You brought up BIPOC for some reason, I didnt mention it, I also didnt insinuate it because I didnt bring up BIPOC voters or anything particular to BIPOC voters. You'll notice that that of the words in this sentence none of them are BIPOC, I dont understand where youre reading BIPOC voters into these words, in this instance any BIPOC voters in the NYC mayoral primary are people I am considering part of the broad electorate for this election, and name recognition is not something I can identify as having a unique effect on BIPOC people. I dont know why you think it does, but people being broadly famous in a state because they were that state's governor and also notorious for a sex offending scandal does not strike me as having anything unique to do with BIPOC voters. Show nested quote +Do you have a better explanation than the condescending insinuation that BIPOC voters only care about name recognition? Show nested quote +The idea that an overwhelming majority of Democrats quietly yearn for progressive policies but they keep getting tricked into voting for centrist liberals by the dastardly DNC is simply not real life Not my view, and I dont believe I've said that.
Seems reasonable to me. There's also a lot going on with stuff like (the NY Times basically anti-endorsing Mamdani) and Cuomo's SuperPAC leaning into trying to make Mamdani seem scary.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Northern Ireland27266 Posts
On June 21 2025 08:21 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 05:57 Gorsameth wrote:Progressive voters have long complained about how awful the democratic party is (and they are right), yet despite the tea party giving a public showing of how to change the direction of a political party, + Show Spoiler +it seems progressive voters are not coming out to primaries to force the party further left by pushing more left leaning candidates.
This latest example of yet another case of the established democratic party being shit by pushing for Cuomo gets the same response. All these US progressives on the internet complaining about how bad the democratic party is need to actually go and vote in primaries to push the party left. And either they can't be arsed to do so, or they don't actually exist because best as I can see from across the pond here is that there is no movement to the left and in fact the party is going further right.
Presumably these people on the internet complaining about Cuomo give a shit about politics, because they are on the internet complaining about it.
They need to go out and vote in primaries at the local and state level and not just (fail to) show up for the general election. Which Koch brother is the progressive one? Honestly though, do progressives have an organization like the Tea Party with billionaires funding and networking for them? If not, then their example isn't exactly transferable to progressives, is it? Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 07:52 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2025 07:51 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 07:49 LightSpectra wrote:
So, since you seem to have given basically zero credence to everything I've pointed out, what's your explanation for why Cuomo is outperforming Mamdani by double digits among older BIPOC voters in NYC? Because Mamdani came out of nowhere and Cuomo is extremely famous? Do you have a better explanation than the condescending insinuation that BIPOC voters only care about name recognition? Welp Show nested quote +On June 01 2025 05:03 LightSpectra wrote:On June 01 2025 04:01 Legan wrote:
Seems really embarrassing for democrats to have Andrew Cuomo be the leading candidate for them in New York. Such a fresh face for them. Wait for after the first debate (which is on June 4). Right now most people are just answering polls based on name recognition. I think Zam's explanation is pretty good, what's yours now?
Do you need it?
Yeah sure the Kochs are pumping money in, but there’s already a demand for those politics to begin with.
Momentum is self-perpetuating, you don’t throw money at a lost cause, you invest it wisely so it’s a worthwhile investment.
I find there’s a tendency from the left to ascribe far too much on the right to astroturfing.
These aren’t shitbags because the Koch’s threw some money around, they were shitbags already and you share a country with them.
|
Damn two purity test fails in the same day. Got to keep the tent small to make it easier to look down on more people I guess.
|
Northern Ireland27266 Posts
On June 21 2025 09:46 Billyboy wrote:
Damn two purity test fails in the same day. Got to keep the tent small to make it easier to look down on more people I guess.
‘Why are we not winning?’ lmao.
Apparently an observation that the left can’t just automatically count on minority votes anymore by default is an anti-minority point?
Fuck knows anymore
|
Na you just missed my joke, happens. Had absolutely nothing to do with you.
|
On June 21 2025 09:23 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 08:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 21 2025 05:57 Gorsameth wrote:Progressive voters have long complained about how awful the democratic party is (and they are right), yet despite the tea party giving a public showing of how to change the direction of a political party, + Show Spoiler +it seems progressive voters are not coming out to primaries to force the party further left by pushing more left leaning candidates.
This latest example of yet another case of the established democratic party being shit by pushing for Cuomo gets the same response. All these US progressives on the internet complaining about how bad the democratic party is need to actually go and vote in primaries to push the party left. And either they can't be arsed to do so, or they don't actually exist because best as I can see from across the pond here is that there is no movement to the left and in fact the party is going further right.
Presumably these people on the internet complaining about Cuomo give a shit about politics, because they are on the internet complaining about it.
They need to go out and vote in primaries at the local and state level and not just (fail to) show up for the general election. Which Koch brother is the progressive one? Honestly though, do progressives have an organization like the Tea Party with billionaires funding and networking for them? If not, then their example isn't exactly transferable to progressives, is it? On June 21 2025 07:52 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2025 07:51 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 07:49 LightSpectra wrote:
So, since you seem to have given basically zero credence to everything I've pointed out, what's your explanation for why Cuomo is outperforming Mamdani by double digits among older BIPOC voters in NYC? Because Mamdani came out of nowhere and Cuomo is extremely famous? Do you have a better explanation than the condescending insinuation that BIPOC voters only care about name recognition? Welp On June 01 2025 05:03 LightSpectra wrote:On June 01 2025 04:01 Legan wrote:
Seems really embarrassing for democrats to have Andrew Cuomo be the leading candidate for them in New York. Such a fresh face for them. Wait for after the first debate (which is on June 4). Right now most people are just answering polls based on name recognition. I think Zam's explanation is pretty good, what's yours now? Do you need it? Yeah sure the Kochs are pumping money in, but there’s already a demand for those politics to begin with. Momentum is self-perpetuating, you don’t throw money at a lost cause, you invest it wisely so it’s a worthwhile investment. I find there’s a tendency from the left to ascribe far too much on the right to astroturfing. These aren’t shitbags because the Koch’s threw some money around, they were shitbags already and you share a country with them.
Its hard to deny that a big part of why the right has so much media pull is because of right wing investment though, like not many left wing billionaires out there for obvious reasons, so there are fewer people to just pour money into the left wing propaganda machine (the proper left wing propaganda machine, not the CNN wing propaganda machine.)
The left just needs the kind of organic bottom-up grass roots style of support more since its not going to be financed by right wing billionaires or center-right wing billionaires.
Its why people like Zohran Mamdani's successes are aspirational, its paving a new (to us) pathway to electoral power, and while I dont exactly have faith in that system, as someone who will take any wins I can get, I think its a win. Even if he loses, he shows that theres a lot of power in being young, energetic, smart, and authentically wielding popular policies.
|
Northern Ireland27266 Posts
Aight no worries I just won’t comment on your posts in future, especially not ones I 100% agree with and express said agreement in.
Good to know those are the expectations.
|
On June 21 2025 08:55 Zambrah wrote:
There are a lot of older americans, black americans in particular, who remember a time when Democrats did things and their lives were bettered for it (there are still plenty of people who are alive now that were born during a time when they werent allowed to go to the same school as white people) and maintain that loyalty to the party that once helped them. If you ever wonder why the young generations dont fuck with basic bitch Democrats so much its because basic bitch Democrats havent done anything for them, people dont trust Democrat policitians because we've lived lives of seeing them ostensibly "try" and fail to do even moderately good things.
The world gets more expensive, rents spike, food costs more, there is a constant stream of once-in-a-lifetime crises, we suffer the effects of de-industrialization and we watch as that suffering is transfigured into massive wealth inequality, and all of this has been presided over by Democrats as well as Republicans. There is a reason people are becoming so vehemently anti-establishment. The older BIPOC demographic remembers a time when that establishment was competent, the younger generation doesnt have that experience.
OK, so you agree there is a market for centrist liberalism and that there are many people who subscribe to this ideologically? And moreover, that for progressives to win they have to capture this audience as well, so consistently describing them in pejorative ways like "low information" and whatnot is probably counterproductive, right?
On June 21 2025 09:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
Pretty clear you made the argument that the majority of his support comes from name recognition, so your attempt to act like someone else pointing that out is condescending (with the implication being it is racist) disgusts me.
The question was why, at the time, was Cuomo polling at 80% despite being highly controversial. He was, at that time, winning pretty much every demographic. Name recognition explains why this was true at that point in time (i.e. polls are almost meaningless at that stage of an election), but does not explain why he's still around ~50% after Mamdani owned him in the debates and has had a viral social media campaign.
If you are still asserting at this point that Cuomo is winning older black and Latino folk overwhelmingly just because they recognize his name, then surely you understand the condescending presumptions behind that, right?
Now, in case my point isn't clear, I'll restate it once again. The progressive rhetoric about how "mainstream Dems have consistently failed us because they're slaves to big money donors" works for a certain demographic, but it's noxious to the type of people that genuinely like Clinton and Biden. These people are not idiots being duped into voting against their own interests, so talking about them as such is not helping progressives win any elections. It's more helpful to learn what their perspectives are so we can appeal to them in engaging ways, rather than simply repeating the same failed strategy of "energizing the base" that hasn't worked for anyone except AOC.
|
Northern Ireland27266 Posts
On June 21 2025 10:02 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 09:23 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 08:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 21 2025 05:57 Gorsameth wrote:Progressive voters have long complained about how awful the democratic party is (and they are right), yet despite the tea party giving a public showing of how to change the direction of a political party, + Show Spoiler +it seems progressive voters are not coming out to primaries to force the party further left by pushing more left leaning candidates.
This latest example of yet another case of the established democratic party being shit by pushing for Cuomo gets the same response. All these US progressives on the internet complaining about how bad the democratic party is need to actually go and vote in primaries to push the party left. And either they can't be arsed to do so, or they don't actually exist because best as I can see from across the pond here is that there is no movement to the left and in fact the party is going further right.
Presumably these people on the internet complaining about Cuomo give a shit about politics, because they are on the internet complaining about it.
They need to go out and vote in primaries at the local and state level and not just (fail to) show up for the general election. Which Koch brother is the progressive one? Honestly though, do progressives have an organization like the Tea Party with billionaires funding and networking for them? If not, then their example isn't exactly transferable to progressives, is it? On June 21 2025 07:52 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2025 07:51 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 07:49 LightSpectra wrote:
So, since you seem to have given basically zero credence to everything I've pointed out, what's your explanation for why Cuomo is outperforming Mamdani by double digits among older BIPOC voters in NYC? Because Mamdani came out of nowhere and Cuomo is extremely famous? Do you have a better explanation than the condescending insinuation that BIPOC voters only care about name recognition? Welp On June 01 2025 05:03 LightSpectra wrote:On June 01 2025 04:01 Legan wrote:
Seems really embarrassing for democrats to have Andrew Cuomo be the leading candidate for them in New York. Such a fresh face for them. Wait for after the first debate (which is on June 4). Right now most people are just answering polls based on name recognition. I think Zam's explanation is pretty good, what's yours now? Do you need it? Yeah sure the Kochs are pumping money in, but there’s already a demand for those politics to begin with. Momentum is self-perpetuating, you don’t throw money at a lost cause, you invest it wisely so it’s a worthwhile investment. I find there’s a tendency from the left to ascribe far too much on the right to astroturfing. These aren’t shitbags because the Koch’s threw some money around, they were shitbags already and you share a country with them. Its hard to deny that a big part of why the right has so much media pull is because of right wing investment though, like not many left wing billionaires out there for obvious reasons, so there are fewer people to just pour money into the left wing propaganda machine (the proper left wing propaganda machine, not the CNN wing propaganda machine.) The left just needs the kind of organic bottom-up grass roots style of support more since its not going to be financed by right wing billionaires or center-right wing billionaires. Its why people like Zohran Mamdani's successes are aspirational, its paving a new (to us) pathway to electoral power, and while I dont exactly have faith in that system, as someone who will take any wins I can get, I think its a win. Even if he loses, he shows that theres a lot of power in being young, energetic, smart, and authentically wielding popular policies.
I basically entirely agree, I just disagree with how some frame it.
The right wing propoganda machine isn’t effective because it’s throwing shitloads of money into converting reticent people. It’s effective because they’re already pretty receptive to those ideas.
A leftist response that’s predicated on the assumption that all of these things are astroturfed is bound to fail.
|
On June 21 2025 10:05 WombaT wrote:
Aight no worries I just won’t comment on your posts in future, especially not ones I 100% agree with and express said agreement in.
Good to know those are the expectations.
I have no idea what you are tantruming about now, but it is for the best because I can not keep up. My post had absolutely nothing to do with you for the second time.
|
Northern Ireland27266 Posts
On June 21 2025 10:12 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 10:05 WombaT wrote:
Aight no worries I just won’t comment on your posts in future, especially not ones I 100% agree with and express said agreement in.
Good to know those are the expectations. I have no idea what you are tantruming about now, but it is for the best because I can not keep up. My post had absolutely nothing to do with you for the second time.
Yes Billy I’m having a tantrum because I responded to something you posted, adding to it, in agreement with the sentiment of your post.
Frankly I hope the mods step in to deal with me at this point, I’ve clearly lost control of myself and I will cause carnage in the thread until someone brings me back into line. A part of me hopes they do, such is my descent into anarchy and chaos. I’m not sure I can return to sanity alone.
|
Northern Ireland27266 Posts
On June 21 2025 10:08 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 08:55 Zambrah wrote:
There are a lot of older americans, black americans in particular, who remember a time when Democrats did things and their lives were bettered for it (there are still plenty of people who are alive now that were born during a time when they werent allowed to go to the same school as white people) and maintain that loyalty to the party that once helped them. If you ever wonder why the young generations dont fuck with basic bitch Democrats so much its because basic bitch Democrats havent done anything for them, people dont trust Democrat policitians because we've lived lives of seeing them ostensibly "try" and fail to do even moderately good things.
The world gets more expensive, rents spike, food costs more, there is a constant stream of once-in-a-lifetime crises, we suffer the effects of de-industrialization and we watch as that suffering is transfigured into massive wealth inequality, and all of this has been presided over by Democrats as well as Republicans. There is a reason people are becoming so vehemently anti-establishment. The older BIPOC demographic remembers a time when that establishment was competent, the younger generation doesnt have that experience. OK, so you agree there is a market for centrist liberalism and that there are many people who subscribe to this ideologically? And moreover, that for progressives to win they have to capture this audience as well, so consistently describing them in pejorative ways like "low information" and whatnot is probably counterproductive, right? Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 09:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
Pretty clear you made the argument that the majority of his support comes from name recognition, so your attempt to act like someone else pointing that out is condescending (with the implication being it is racist) disgusts me. The question was why, at the time, was Cuomo polling at 80% despite being highly controversial. He was, at that time, winning pretty much every demographic. Name recognition explains why this was true at that point in time (i.e. polls are almost meaningless at that stage of an election), but does not explain why he's still around ~50% after Mamdani owned him in the debates and has had a viral social media campaign. If you are still asserting at this point that Cuomo is winning older black and Latino folk overwhelmingly just because they recognize his name, then surely you understand the condescending presumptions behind that, right? Now, in case my point isn't clear, I'll restate it once again. The progressive rhetoric about how "mainstream Dems have consistently failed us because they're slaves to big money donors" works for a certain demographic, but it's noxious to the type of people that genuinely like Clinton and Biden. These people are not idiots being duped into voting against their own interests, so talking about them as such is not helping progressives win any elections. It's more helpful to learn what their perspectives are so we can appeal to them in engaging ways, rather than simply repeating the same failed strategy of "energizing the base" that hasn't worked for anyone except AOC.
I’d disagree on the bolded, I think that’s pretty resonant almost universally across the political spectrum. The left doesn’t like that, centrist Dems don’t like that, many Republicans don’t like that.
Outside of that I wouldn’t disagree with any of this.
|
Obama has something like a 61% approval rating last time I saw, that's pretty much everyone that's not hardcore MAGA. There's a bit of dissonance when people who have healthcare because of the ACA listen to Internet progressives tell them Obama is basically just a blue Republican because of drone strikes.
I want progressives to win, but the world where that's commonplace is not the same world where we act like we are the arbiters of Objectively Good Governance™ and everything wrong with the world is the DNC's fault.
|
Northern Ireland27266 Posts
On June 21 2025 10:50 LightSpectra wrote:
Obama has something like a 61% approval rating last time I saw, that's pretty much everyone that's not hardcore MAGA. There's a bit of dissonance when people who have healthcare because of the ACA listen to Internet progressives tell them Obama is basically just a blue Republican because of drone strikes.
I want progressives to win, but the world where that's commonplace is not the same world where we act like we are the arbiters of Objectively Good Governance™ and everything wrong with the world is the DNC's fault.
Ironically enough in a world where Trump somehow got rid of term limits I think it would be a net short-term gain for the Dems if it brought Obama back into play.
Doesn’t mean I love Obama’s politics in their totality. But it’s sometimes thin margins. I don’t think Trump wins either of his two election victories if he’s facing Obama, I really don’t.
There are reasons for his rather enduring popularity and it’s not his progressive credentials.
I think part of it was he straddled the line pretty damn well. ‘America is great, but we can do better’ in terms of rhetoric, if I was to characterise his general approach.
People seem to like that. I personally agree with the progressive analysis that the US in many ways is a fucking basket case and needs fixing, but for whatever reason that doesn’t seem to land as strongly.
|
On June 21 2025 10:12 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 10:02 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 09:23 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 08:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 21 2025 05:57 Gorsameth wrote:Progressive voters have long complained about how awful the democratic party is (and they are right), yet despite the tea party giving a public showing of how to change the direction of a political party, + Show Spoiler +it seems progressive voters are not coming out to primaries to force the party further left by pushing more left leaning candidates.
This latest example of yet another case of the established democratic party being shit by pushing for Cuomo gets the same response. All these US progressives on the internet complaining about how bad the democratic party is need to actually go and vote in primaries to push the party left. And either they can't be arsed to do so, or they don't actually exist because best as I can see from across the pond here is that there is no movement to the left and in fact the party is going further right.
Presumably these people on the internet complaining about Cuomo give a shit about politics, because they are on the internet complaining about it.
They need to go out and vote in primaries at the local and state level and not just (fail to) show up for the general election. Which Koch brother is the progressive one? Honestly though, do progressives have an organization like the Tea Party with billionaires funding and networking for them? If not, then their example isn't exactly transferable to progressives, is it? On June 21 2025 07:52 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2025 07:51 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 07:49 LightSpectra wrote:
So, since you seem to have given basically zero credence to everything I've pointed out, what's your explanation for why Cuomo is outperforming Mamdani by double digits among older BIPOC voters in NYC? Because Mamdani came out of nowhere and Cuomo is extremely famous? Do you have a better explanation than the condescending insinuation that BIPOC voters only care about name recognition? Welp On June 01 2025 05:03 LightSpectra wrote:On June 01 2025 04:01 Legan wrote:
Seems really embarrassing for democrats to have Andrew Cuomo be the leading candidate for them in New York. Such a fresh face for them. Wait for after the first debate (which is on June 4). Right now most people are just answering polls based on name recognition. I think Zam's explanation is pretty good, what's yours now? Do you need it? Yeah sure the Kochs are pumping money in, but there’s already a demand for those politics to begin with. Momentum is self-perpetuating, you don’t throw money at a lost cause, you invest it wisely so it’s a worthwhile investment. I find there’s a tendency from the left to ascribe far too much on the right to astroturfing. These aren’t shitbags because the Koch’s threw some money around, they were shitbags already and you share a country with them. Its hard to deny that a big part of why the right has so much media pull is because of right wing investment though, like not many left wing billionaires out there for obvious reasons, so there are fewer people to just pour money into the left wing propaganda machine (the proper left wing propaganda machine, not the CNN wing propaganda machine.) The left just needs the kind of organic bottom-up grass roots style of support more since its not going to be financed by right wing billionaires or center-right wing billionaires. Its why people like Zohran Mamdani's successes are aspirational, its paving a new (to us) pathway to electoral power, and while I dont exactly have faith in that system, as someone who will take any wins I can get, I think its a win. Even if he loses, he shows that theres a lot of power in being young, energetic, smart, and authentically wielding popular policies. I basically entirely agree, I just disagree with how some frame it. The right wing propoganda machine isn’t effective because it’s throwing shitloads of money into converting reticent people. It’s effective because they’re already pretty receptive to those ideas. A leftist response that’s predicated on the assumption that all of these things are astroturfed is bound to fail.
Yeah, Id agree, I would characterize most people as fairly fundamentally malleable, especially during the younger years, right wing media has very much abused both the general air of despair in American society alongside algorithms pushing the manosphere content bullshit to attract a lot more people. Id argue that the cohort that is really into the manosphere could have wound up as leftists/progressives but the general content ecosystem is flooded with right wing freaks funded by monied right wing freaks.
On June 21 2025 10:08 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 08:55 Zambrah wrote:
There are a lot of older americans, black americans in particular, who remember a time when Democrats did things and their lives were bettered for it (there are still plenty of people who are alive now that were born during a time when they werent allowed to go to the same school as white people) and maintain that loyalty to the party that once helped them. If you ever wonder why the young generations dont fuck with basic bitch Democrats so much its because basic bitch Democrats havent done anything for them, people dont trust Democrat policitians because we've lived lives of seeing them ostensibly "try" and fail to do even moderately good things.
The world gets more expensive, rents spike, food costs more, there is a constant stream of once-in-a-lifetime crises, we suffer the effects of de-industrialization and we watch as that suffering is transfigured into massive wealth inequality, and all of this has been presided over by Democrats as well as Republicans. There is a reason people are becoming so vehemently anti-establishment. The older BIPOC demographic remembers a time when that establishment was competent, the younger generation doesnt have that experience. OK, so you agree there is a market for centrist liberalism and that there are many people who subscribe to this ideologically? And moreover, that for progressives to win they have to capture this audience as well, so consistently describing them in pejorative ways like "low information" and whatnot is probably counterproductive, right? Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 09:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
Pretty clear you made the argument that the majority of his support comes from name recognition, so your attempt to act like someone else pointing that out is condescending (with the implication being it is racist) disgusts me. The question was why, at the time, was Cuomo polling at 80% despite being highly controversial. He was, at that time, winning pretty much every demographic. Name recognition explains why this was true at that point in time (i.e. polls are almost meaningless at that stage of an election), but does not explain why he's still around ~50% after Mamdani owned him in the debates and has had a viral social media campaign. If you are still asserting at this point that Cuomo is winning older black and Latino folk overwhelmingly just because they recognize his name, then surely you understand the condescending presumptions behind that, right? Now, in case my point isn't clear, I'll restate it once again. The progressive rhetoric about how "mainstream Dems have consistently failed us because they're slaves to big money donors" works for a certain demographic, but it's noxious to the type of people that genuinely like Clinton and Biden. These people are not idiots being duped into voting against their own interests, so talking about them as such is not helping progressives win any elections. It's more helpful to learn what their perspectives are so we can appeal to them in engaging ways, rather than simply repeating the same failed strategy of "energizing the base" that hasn't worked for anyone except AOC.
Theres a market for basically every ideology, especially ones that are extremely mainstream like basic bitch Democrat centrist liberalism, yes. Yes, many Democrats would probably subscribe to this sort of ideology, though I dont believe theres actually a lot of principled attachment to that particular ideology, I believe people generally subscribe to it because its what the Democrats are and people identify themselves as Democrats.
I dont actually think progressives need to capture that audience, I think that audience is actually extremely Vote Blue No Matter Who, and that is a vote that, by its own admission, requires no appeals or concessions. They are the voting base who are easiest to simply count as Free Votes, in my opinion. I think progressives need to drive energized turnout, both in primaries and general elections and the centrist liberal Vote Blue No Matter Who types will simply Vote Blue No Matter Who.
Can you please find me where I said centrists were being duped into voting against their interests?
|
Northern Ireland27266 Posts
On June 21 2025 11:10 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 10:12 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 10:02 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 09:23 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 08:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 21 2025 05:57 Gorsameth wrote:Progressive voters have long complained about how awful the democratic party is (and they are right), yet despite the tea party giving a public showing of how to change the direction of a political party, + Show Spoiler +it seems progressive voters are not coming out to primaries to force the party further left by pushing more left leaning candidates.
This latest example of yet another case of the established democratic party being shit by pushing for Cuomo gets the same response. All these US progressives on the internet complaining about how bad the democratic party is need to actually go and vote in primaries to push the party left. And either they can't be arsed to do so, or they don't actually exist because best as I can see from across the pond here is that there is no movement to the left and in fact the party is going further right.
Presumably these people on the internet complaining about Cuomo give a shit about politics, because they are on the internet complaining about it.
They need to go out and vote in primaries at the local and state level and not just (fail to) show up for the general election. Which Koch brother is the progressive one? Honestly though, do progressives have an organization like the Tea Party with billionaires funding and networking for them? If not, then their example isn't exactly transferable to progressives, is it? On June 21 2025 07:52 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2025 07:51 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 07:49 LightSpectra wrote:
So, since you seem to have given basically zero credence to everything I've pointed out, what's your explanation for why Cuomo is outperforming Mamdani by double digits among older BIPOC voters in NYC? Because Mamdani came out of nowhere and Cuomo is extremely famous? Do you have a better explanation than the condescending insinuation that BIPOC voters only care about name recognition? Welp On June 01 2025 05:03 LightSpectra wrote:On June 01 2025 04:01 Legan wrote:
Seems really embarrassing for democrats to have Andrew Cuomo be the leading candidate for them in New York. Such a fresh face for them. Wait for after the first debate (which is on June 4). Right now most people are just answering polls based on name recognition. I think Zam's explanation is pretty good, what's yours now? Do you need it? Yeah sure the Kochs are pumping money in, but there’s already a demand for those politics to begin with. Momentum is self-perpetuating, you don’t throw money at a lost cause, you invest it wisely so it’s a worthwhile investment. I find there’s a tendency from the left to ascribe far too much on the right to astroturfing. These aren’t shitbags because the Koch’s threw some money around, they were shitbags already and you share a country with them. Its hard to deny that a big part of why the right has so much media pull is because of right wing investment though, like not many left wing billionaires out there for obvious reasons, so there are fewer people to just pour money into the left wing propaganda machine (the proper left wing propaganda machine, not the CNN wing propaganda machine.) The left just needs the kind of organic bottom-up grass roots style of support more since its not going to be financed by right wing billionaires or center-right wing billionaires. Its why people like Zohran Mamdani's successes are aspirational, its paving a new (to us) pathway to electoral power, and while I dont exactly have faith in that system, as someone who will take any wins I can get, I think its a win. Even if he loses, he shows that theres a lot of power in being young, energetic, smart, and authentically wielding popular policies. I basically entirely agree, I just disagree with how some frame it. The right wing propoganda machine isn’t effective because it’s throwing shitloads of money into converting reticent people. It’s effective because they’re already pretty receptive to those ideas. A leftist response that’s predicated on the assumption that all of these things are astroturfed is bound to fail. Yeah, Id agree, I would characterize most people as fairly fundamentally malleable, especially during the younger years, right wing media has very much abused both the general air of despair in American society alongside algorithms pushing the manosphere content bullshit to attract a lot more people. Id argue that the cohort that is really into the manosphere could have wound up as leftists/progressives but the general content ecosystem is flooded with right wing freaks funded by monied right wing freaks.
I have genuinely encountered and conversed with at length former Fascists who became leftists, and the inverse. Quite a lot of them in my youth dwelling in various forums.
It seems a crazy transition, but there is kind of a binding glue there.
Both cohorts reject the idea of an amoral society based on Neoliberalism and whatever makes money is good and yearn for some other system of value to rule the place.
Where they ended up landing was as much as which wing they thought could deliver wins, rather than some deep commitment.
In terms of ‘soul’ leftism gives you self-actualisation, and also greater community. Fascism gives you the greater community part too. Not in a good way but it does do that.
Neoliberalism doesn’t give you any kind of higher moral purpose whatsoever, you’re just an economic cog in the machine. If it makes money, it’s good.
Who’s actually enthused by that?
The tricky part currently seems to me to redirect folks who gravitate towards the right end of thing, back towards the left. And that’s bloody tricky
|
On June 21 2025 11:24 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 11:10 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 10:12 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 10:02 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 09:23 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 08:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 21 2025 05:57 Gorsameth wrote:Progressive voters have long complained about how awful the democratic party is (and they are right), yet despite the tea party giving a public showing of how to change the direction of a political party, + Show Spoiler +it seems progressive voters are not coming out to primaries to force the party further left by pushing more left leaning candidates.
This latest example of yet another case of the established democratic party being shit by pushing for Cuomo gets the same response. All these US progressives on the internet complaining about how bad the democratic party is need to actually go and vote in primaries to push the party left. And either they can't be arsed to do so, or they don't actually exist because best as I can see from across the pond here is that there is no movement to the left and in fact the party is going further right.
Presumably these people on the internet complaining about Cuomo give a shit about politics, because they are on the internet complaining about it.
They need to go out and vote in primaries at the local and state level and not just (fail to) show up for the general election. Which Koch brother is the progressive one? Honestly though, do progressives have an organization like the Tea Party with billionaires funding and networking for them? If not, then their example isn't exactly transferable to progressives, is it? On June 21 2025 07:52 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2025 07:51 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 07:49 LightSpectra wrote:
So, since you seem to have given basically zero credence to everything I've pointed out, what's your explanation for why Cuomo is outperforming Mamdani by double digits among older BIPOC voters in NYC? Because Mamdani came out of nowhere and Cuomo is extremely famous? Do you have a better explanation than the condescending insinuation that BIPOC voters only care about name recognition? Welp On June 01 2025 05:03 LightSpectra wrote:On June 01 2025 04:01 Legan wrote:
Seems really embarrassing for democrats to have Andrew Cuomo be the leading candidate for them in New York. Such a fresh face for them. Wait for after the first debate (which is on June 4). Right now most people are just answering polls based on name recognition. I think Zam's explanation is pretty good, what's yours now? Do you need it? Yeah sure the Kochs are pumping money in, but there’s already a demand for those politics to begin with. Momentum is self-perpetuating, you don’t throw money at a lost cause, you invest it wisely so it’s a worthwhile investment. I find there’s a tendency from the left to ascribe far too much on the right to astroturfing. These aren’t shitbags because the Koch’s threw some money around, they were shitbags already and you share a country with them. Its hard to deny that a big part of why the right has so much media pull is because of right wing investment though, like not many left wing billionaires out there for obvious reasons, so there are fewer people to just pour money into the left wing propaganda machine (the proper left wing propaganda machine, not the CNN wing propaganda machine.) The left just needs the kind of organic bottom-up grass roots style of support more since its not going to be financed by right wing billionaires or center-right wing billionaires. Its why people like Zohran Mamdani's successes are aspirational, its paving a new (to us) pathway to electoral power, and while I dont exactly have faith in that system, as someone who will take any wins I can get, I think its a win. Even if he loses, he shows that theres a lot of power in being young, energetic, smart, and authentically wielding popular policies. I basically entirely agree, I just disagree with how some frame it. The right wing propoganda machine isn’t effective because it’s throwing shitloads of money into converting reticent people. It’s effective because they’re already pretty receptive to those ideas. A leftist response that’s predicated on the assumption that all of these things are astroturfed is bound to fail. Yeah, Id agree, I would characterize most people as fairly fundamentally malleable, especially during the younger years, right wing media has very much abused both the general air of despair in American society alongside algorithms pushing the manosphere content bullshit to attract a lot more people. Id argue that the cohort that is really into the manosphere could have wound up as leftists/progressives but the general content ecosystem is flooded with right wing freaks funded by monied right wing freaks. I have genuinely encountered and conversed with at length former Fascists who became leftists, and the inverse. Quite a lot of them in my youth dwelling in various forums. It seems a crazy transition, but there is kind of a binding glue there. Both cohorts reject the idea of an amoral society based on Neoliberalism and whatever makes money is good and yearn for some other system of value to rule the place. Where they ended up landing was as much as which wing they thought could deliver wins, rather than some deep commitment. In terms of ‘soul’ leftism gives you self-actualisation, and also greater community. Fascism gives you the greater community part too. Not in a good way but it does do that. Neoliberalism doesn’t give you any kind of higher moral purpose whatsoever, you’re just an economic cog in the machine. If it makes money, it’s good. Who’s actually enthused by that? The tricky part currently seems to me to redirect folks who gravitate towards the right end of thing, back towards the left. And that’s bloody tricky
Yeah that’s a form of YouTube content I enjoy once in a while, former right wingers talking about their transition towards the left wing and it’s why I have an admiration for people who make that concerted effort to have empathy for people in the hopes they can be better. I believe even shitty right wingers can change and be better, not all of them but a lot of them.
The absent moral core and cynical profit driven nature of modern neoliberalism is also a great point, it really has nothing to offer from a spiritual or moral standpoint, it’s hollow and empty materialism and what comforts it brings are heavily offset by the wealth inequality it drives. Without some greater purpose behind the exploitation of workers it makes it harder for people to justify to themselves.
|
Northern Ireland27266 Posts
On June 21 2025 11:33 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 11:24 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 11:10 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 10:12 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 10:02 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 09:23 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 08:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 21 2025 05:57 Gorsameth wrote:Progressive voters have long complained about how awful the democratic party is (and they are right), yet despite the tea party giving a public showing of how to change the direction of a political party, + Show Spoiler +it seems progressive voters are not coming out to primaries to force the party further left by pushing more left leaning candidates.
This latest example of yet another case of the established democratic party being shit by pushing for Cuomo gets the same response. All these US progressives on the internet complaining about how bad the democratic party is need to actually go and vote in primaries to push the party left. And either they can't be arsed to do so, or they don't actually exist because best as I can see from across the pond here is that there is no movement to the left and in fact the party is going further right.
Presumably these people on the internet complaining about Cuomo give a shit about politics, because they are on the internet complaining about it.
They need to go out and vote in primaries at the local and state level and not just (fail to) show up for the general election. Which Koch brother is the progressive one? Honestly though, do progressives have an organization like the Tea Party with billionaires funding and networking for them? If not, then their example isn't exactly transferable to progressives, is it? On June 21 2025 07:52 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2025 07:51 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 07:49 LightSpectra wrote:
So, since you seem to have given basically zero credence to everything I've pointed out, what's your explanation for why Cuomo is outperforming Mamdani by double digits among older BIPOC voters in NYC? Because Mamdani came out of nowhere and Cuomo is extremely famous? Do you have a better explanation than the condescending insinuation that BIPOC voters only care about name recognition? Welp On June 01 2025 05:03 LightSpectra wrote:On June 01 2025 04:01 Legan wrote:
Seems really embarrassing for democrats to have Andrew Cuomo be the leading candidate for them in New York. Such a fresh face for them. Wait for after the first debate (which is on June 4). Right now most people are just answering polls based on name recognition. I think Zam's explanation is pretty good, what's yours now? Do you need it? Yeah sure the Kochs are pumping money in, but there’s already a demand for those politics to begin with. Momentum is self-perpetuating, you don’t throw money at a lost cause, you invest it wisely so it’s a worthwhile investment. I find there’s a tendency from the left to ascribe far too much on the right to astroturfing. These aren’t shitbags because the Koch’s threw some money around, they were shitbags already and you share a country with them. Its hard to deny that a big part of why the right has so much media pull is because of right wing investment though, like not many left wing billionaires out there for obvious reasons, so there are fewer people to just pour money into the left wing propaganda machine (the proper left wing propaganda machine, not the CNN wing propaganda machine.) The left just needs the kind of organic bottom-up grass roots style of support more since its not going to be financed by right wing billionaires or center-right wing billionaires. Its why people like Zohran Mamdani's successes are aspirational, its paving a new (to us) pathway to electoral power, and while I dont exactly have faith in that system, as someone who will take any wins I can get, I think its a win. Even if he loses, he shows that theres a lot of power in being young, energetic, smart, and authentically wielding popular policies. I basically entirely agree, I just disagree with how some frame it. The right wing propoganda machine isn’t effective because it’s throwing shitloads of money into converting reticent people. It’s effective because they’re already pretty receptive to those ideas. A leftist response that’s predicated on the assumption that all of these things are astroturfed is bound to fail. Yeah, Id agree, I would characterize most people as fairly fundamentally malleable, especially during the younger years, right wing media has very much abused both the general air of despair in American society alongside algorithms pushing the manosphere content bullshit to attract a lot more people. Id argue that the cohort that is really into the manosphere could have wound up as leftists/progressives but the general content ecosystem is flooded with right wing freaks funded by monied right wing freaks. I have genuinely encountered and conversed with at length former Fascists who became leftists, and the inverse. Quite a lot of them in my youth dwelling in various forums. It seems a crazy transition, but there is kind of a binding glue there. Both cohorts reject the idea of an amoral society based on Neoliberalism and whatever makes money is good and yearn for some other system of value to rule the place. Where they ended up landing was as much as which wing they thought could deliver wins, rather than some deep commitment. In terms of ‘soul’ leftism gives you self-actualisation, and also greater community. Fascism gives you the greater community part too. Not in a good way but it does do that. Neoliberalism doesn’t give you any kind of higher moral purpose whatsoever, you’re just an economic cog in the machine. If it makes money, it’s good. Who’s actually enthused by that? The tricky part currently seems to me to redirect folks who gravitate towards the right end of thing, back towards the left. And that’s bloody tricky Yeah that’s a form of YouTube content I enjoy once in a while, former right wingers talking about their transition towards the left wing and it’s why I have an admiration for people who make that concerted effort to have empathy for people in the hopes they can be better. I believe even shitty right wingers can change and be better, not all of them but a lot of them. The absent moral core and cynical profit driven nature of modern neoliberalism is also a great point, it really has nothing to offer from a spiritual or moral standpoint, it’s hollow and empty materialism and what comforts it brings are heavily offset by the wealth inequality it drives. Without some greater purpose behind the exploitation of workers it makes it harder for people to justify to themselves.
In my case it was more based on 1-1 conversations, but I sorta stopped doing that when i got a shoutout on the ‘Daily Shoah’ podcast as an example of a ‘reasonable leftist’. Just because I’m listening to your bollocks doesn’t mean I don’t find it repugnant.
Horseshoe theory is complete nonsense, but I do fervently believe there is a huge amount of commonality between far right and far left on the specific idea of higher purpose. Neoliberalism does not deliver that to either group, or indeed anyone.
|
On June 21 2025 11:51 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 11:33 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 11:24 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 11:10 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 10:12 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 10:02 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 09:23 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 08:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 21 2025 05:57 Gorsameth wrote:Progressive voters have long complained about how awful the democratic party is (and they are right), yet despite the tea party giving a public showing of how to change the direction of a political party, + Show Spoiler +it seems progressive voters are not coming out to primaries to force the party further left by pushing more left leaning candidates.
This latest example of yet another case of the established democratic party being shit by pushing for Cuomo gets the same response. All these US progressives on the internet complaining about how bad the democratic party is need to actually go and vote in primaries to push the party left. And either they can't be arsed to do so, or they don't actually exist because best as I can see from across the pond here is that there is no movement to the left and in fact the party is going further right.
Presumably these people on the internet complaining about Cuomo give a shit about politics, because they are on the internet complaining about it.
They need to go out and vote in primaries at the local and state level and not just (fail to) show up for the general election. Which Koch brother is the progressive one? Honestly though, do progressives have an organization like the Tea Party with billionaires funding and networking for them? If not, then their example isn't exactly transferable to progressives, is it? On June 21 2025 07:52 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2025 07:51 Zambrah wrote:
[quote]
Because Mamdani came out of nowhere and Cuomo is extremely famous? Do you have a better explanation than the condescending insinuation that BIPOC voters only care about name recognition? Welp On June 01 2025 05:03 LightSpectra wrote:On June 01 2025 04:01 Legan wrote:
Seems really embarrassing for democrats to have Andrew Cuomo be the leading candidate for them in New York. Such a fresh face for them. Wait for after the first debate (which is on June 4). Right now most people are just answering polls based on name recognition. I think Zam's explanation is pretty good, what's yours now? Do you need it? Yeah sure the Kochs are pumping money in, but there’s already a demand for those politics to begin with. Momentum is self-perpetuating, you don’t throw money at a lost cause, you invest it wisely so it’s a worthwhile investment. I find there’s a tendency from the left to ascribe far too much on the right to astroturfing. These aren’t shitbags because the Koch’s threw some money around, they were shitbags already and you share a country with them. Its hard to deny that a big part of why the right has so much media pull is because of right wing investment though, like not many left wing billionaires out there for obvious reasons, so there are fewer people to just pour money into the left wing propaganda machine (the proper left wing propaganda machine, not the CNN wing propaganda machine.) The left just needs the kind of organic bottom-up grass roots style of support more since its not going to be financed by right wing billionaires or center-right wing billionaires. Its why people like Zohran Mamdani's successes are aspirational, its paving a new (to us) pathway to electoral power, and while I dont exactly have faith in that system, as someone who will take any wins I can get, I think its a win. Even if he loses, he shows that theres a lot of power in being young, energetic, smart, and authentically wielding popular policies. I basically entirely agree, I just disagree with how some frame it. The right wing propoganda machine isn’t effective because it’s throwing shitloads of money into converting reticent people. It’s effective because they’re already pretty receptive to those ideas. A leftist response that’s predicated on the assumption that all of these things are astroturfed is bound to fail. Yeah, Id agree, I would characterize most people as fairly fundamentally malleable, especially during the younger years, right wing media has very much abused both the general air of despair in American society alongside algorithms pushing the manosphere content bullshit to attract a lot more people. Id argue that the cohort that is really into the manosphere could have wound up as leftists/progressives but the general content ecosystem is flooded with right wing freaks funded by monied right wing freaks. I have genuinely encountered and conversed with at length former Fascists who became leftists, and the inverse. Quite a lot of them in my youth dwelling in various forums. It seems a crazy transition, but there is kind of a binding glue there. Both cohorts reject the idea of an amoral society based on Neoliberalism and whatever makes money is good and yearn for some other system of value to rule the place. Where they ended up landing was as much as which wing they thought could deliver wins, rather than some deep commitment. In terms of ‘soul’ leftism gives you self-actualisation, and also greater community. Fascism gives you the greater community part too. Not in a good way but it does do that. Neoliberalism doesn’t give you any kind of higher moral purpose whatsoever, you’re just an economic cog in the machine. If it makes money, it’s good. Who’s actually enthused by that? The tricky part currently seems to me to redirect folks who gravitate towards the right end of thing, back towards the left. And that’s bloody tricky Yeah that’s a form of YouTube content I enjoy once in a while, former right wingers talking about their transition towards the left wing and it’s why I have an admiration for people who make that concerted effort to have empathy for people in the hopes they can be better. I believe even shitty right wingers can change and be better, not all of them but a lot of them. The absent moral core and cynical profit driven nature of modern neoliberalism is also a great point, it really has nothing to offer from a spiritual or moral standpoint, it’s hollow and empty materialism and what comforts it brings are heavily offset by the wealth inequality it drives. Without some greater purpose behind the exploitation of workers it makes it harder for people to justify to themselves. In my case it was more based on 1-1 conversations, but I sorta stopped doing that when i got a shoutout on the ‘Daily Shoah’ podcast as an example of a ‘reasonable leftist’. Just because I’m listening to your bollocks doesn’t mean I don’t find it repugnant. Horseshoe theory is complete nonsense, but I do fervently believe there is a huge amount of commonality between far right and far left on the specific idea of higher purpose. Neoliberalism does not deliver that to either group, or indeed anyone.
Yeah I used to talk more to right wing people in highschool - my early 20s, now Im just in a pretty hyper-liberal bubble, plus I work alone at home for the vast majority of my time.
A lot of American right wingers can have funnily liberal beliefs, Ive talked to a lot of them that were really into forest preservation because they loved pristine nature and liked to hunt and fish, etc. Ive met right wingers that were cool with abortion because, "I dont want any more kids!" Plenty of them believe that they work hard and they deserve more pay than they get compared to their bosses.
These were mostly working class people, and its why I believe policy that focuses on uplifting the working class people is the best bet, and the biggest failure of modern Democrats.
Theres a lot of overlap in places from which to bring people leftward, the key is being genuine and not being smug and shitty towards them when you're dealing with someone who isn't actively disingenuous like the average right wing debate lord.
|
Northern Ireland27266 Posts
On June 21 2025 13:03 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2025 11:51 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 11:33 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 11:24 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 11:10 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 10:12 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 10:02 Zambrah wrote:On June 21 2025 09:23 WombaT wrote:On June 21 2025 08:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 21 2025 05:57 Gorsameth wrote:Progressive voters have long complained about how awful the democratic party is (and they are right), yet despite the tea party giving a public showing of how to change the direction of a political party, + Show Spoiler +it seems progressive voters are not coming out to primaries to force the party further left by pushing more left leaning candidates.
This latest example of yet another case of the established democratic party being shit by pushing for Cuomo gets the same response. All these US progressives on the internet complaining about how bad the democratic party is need to actually go and vote in primaries to push the party left. And either they can't be arsed to do so, or they don't actually exist because best as I can see from across the pond here is that there is no movement to the left and in fact the party is going further right.
Presumably these people on the internet complaining about Cuomo give a shit about politics, because they are on the internet complaining about it.
They need to go out and vote in primaries at the local and state level and not just (fail to) show up for the general election. Which Koch brother is the progressive one? Honestly though, do progressives have an organization like the Tea Party with billionaires funding and networking for them? If not, then their example isn't exactly transferable to progressives, is it? On June 21 2025 07:52 LightSpectra wrote:
[quote]
Do you have a better explanation than the condescending insinuation that BIPOC voters only care about name recognition? Welp On June 01 2025 05:03 LightSpectra wrote:
[quote]
Wait for after the first debate (which is on June 4). Right now most people are just answering polls based on name recognition. I think Zam's explanation is pretty good, what's yours now? Do you need it? Yeah sure the Kochs are pumping money in, but there’s already a demand for those politics to begin with. Momentum is self-perpetuating, you don’t throw money at a lost cause, you invest it wisely so it’s a worthwhile investment. I find there’s a tendency from the left to ascribe far too much on the right to astroturfing. These aren’t shitbags because the Koch’s threw some money around, they were shitbags already and you share a country with them. Its hard to deny that a big part of why the right has so much media pull is because of right wing investment though, like not many left wing billionaires out there for obvious reasons, so there are fewer people to just pour money into the left wing propaganda machine (the proper left wing propaganda machine, not the CNN wing propaganda machine.) The left just needs the kind of organic bottom-up grass roots style of support more since its not going to be financed by right wing billionaires or center-right wing billionaires. Its why people like Zohran Mamdani's successes are aspirational, its paving a new (to us) pathway to electoral power, and while I dont exactly have faith in that system, as someone who will take any wins I can get, I think its a win. Even if he loses, he shows that theres a lot of power in being young, energetic, smart, and authentically wielding popular policies. I basically entirely agree, I just disagree with how some frame it. The right wing propoganda machine isn’t effective because it’s throwing shitloads of money into converting reticent people. It’s effective because they’re already pretty receptive to those ideas. A leftist response that’s predicated on the assumption that all of these things are astroturfed is bound to fail. Yeah, Id agree, I would characterize most people as fairly fundamentally malleable, especially during the younger years, right wing media has very much abused both the general air of despair in American society alongside algorithms pushing the manosphere content bullshit to attract a lot more people. Id argue that the cohort that is really into the manosphere could have wound up as leftists/progressives but the general content ecosystem is flooded with right wing freaks funded by monied right wing freaks. I have genuinely encountered and conversed with at length former Fascists who became leftists, and the inverse. Quite a lot of them in my youth dwelling in various forums. It seems a crazy transition, but there is kind of a binding glue there. Both cohorts reject the idea of an amoral society based on Neoliberalism and whatever makes money is good and yearn for some other system of value to rule the place. Where they ended up landing was as much as which wing they thought could deliver wins, rather than some deep commitment. In terms of ‘soul’ leftism gives you self-actualisation, and also greater community. Fascism gives you the greater community part too. Not in a good way but it does do that. Neoliberalism doesn’t give you any kind of higher moral purpose whatsoever, you’re just an economic cog in the machine. If it makes money, it’s good. Who’s actually enthused by that? The tricky part currently seems to me to redirect folks who gravitate towards the right end of thing, back towards the left. And that’s bloody tricky Yeah that’s a form of YouTube content I enjoy once in a while, former right wingers talking about their transition towards the left wing and it’s why I have an admiration for people who make that concerted effort to have empathy for people in the hopes they can be better. I believe even shitty right wingers can change and be better, not all of them but a lot of them. The absent moral core and cynical profit driven nature of modern neoliberalism is also a great point, it really has nothing to offer from a spiritual or moral standpoint, it’s hollow and empty materialism and what comforts it brings are heavily offset by the wealth inequality it drives. Without some greater purpose behind the exploitation of workers it makes it harder for people to justify to themselves. In my case it was more based on 1-1 conversations, but I sorta stopped doing that when i got a shoutout on the ‘Daily Shoah’ podcast as an example of a ‘reasonable leftist’. Just because I’m listening to your bollocks doesn’t mean I don’t find it repugnant. Horseshoe theory is complete nonsense, but I do fervently believe there is a huge amount of commonality between far right and far left on the specific idea of higher purpose. Neoliberalism does not deliver that to either group, or indeed anyone. Yeah I used to talk more to right wing people in highschool - my early 20s, now Im just in a pretty hyper-liberal bubble, plus I work alone at home for the vast majority of my time. A lot of American right wingers can have funnily liberal beliefs, Ive talked to a lot of them that were really into forest preservation because they loved pristine nature and liked to hunt and fish, etc. Ive met right wingers that were cool with abortion because, "I dont want any more kids!" Plenty of them believe that they work hard and they deserve more pay than they get compared to their bosses. These were mostly working class people, and its why I believe policy that focuses on uplifting the working class people is the best bet, and the biggest failure of modern Democrats. Theres a lot of overlap in places from which to bring people leftward, the key is being genuine and not being smug and shitty towards them when you're dealing with someone who isn't actively disingenuous like the average right wing debate lord.
Pretty much. I found economic arguments about Brexit very ineffective for example because ‘GDP goes down’, I mean, who cares? We’re not on this Earth to maximise GDP.
And that position is very much shared on both the right and the left, for many people
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
