I know you guys won’t, because your job is to convince as many people as possible not to vote after all, but god do I yearn for the day when the Democrats start to appeal to non-voters by other means than “at least we’re not as bad as the other guy”. If you think that this is an effective strategy, you might just be able to wrestle defeat from the jaws of victory. Just keep letting marginalized folk know that they shouldn’t count on their lives improving, because you’re commited to doing just slightly better than the opposition. Don’t campaign on promises of anything materially better, only on being paid off by the same interests groups as the “other side”, except for the fact you’re going to keep doing those things they paid you for - but politely. And if you think that the existence of my argument against your strategy on the internet is going to ruin your chances for it working at all, and you’re going to blame those arguing against it for your loss while you’re blasting the same old points of “we rape and murder arguably less”, then BOY can I figure out the results it’s going to bring.
Anyone who was going to vote for the lesser evil is going to do that anyway. Anyone who’s on the fence will most likely decide to sit this one out (again). Claiming it’s someones moral obligation to vote for terrible (but slightly less) people is going to depress votes, exactly as it did with Harris. Change your strategy or lose.
Just fucking… talk about the affordibility crisis and your plans to end it. About universal healthcare. About how Israel is a bunch on genocidal bastards. Just anything other than this proven, time and again, losing strategy. You have a field full of targets and a loaded gun. Only way you can miss is if you point it at your head. Or go further right to win MAGA voters, I guess…
I think I would have heard about it if she had talked about how Israel is a bunch of genocidal bastards.
Mostly because she would have won the '24 election. It really was down to single-issue “uncommitted” voters in a few states. The exact number of people who voted “uncommitted” in the primary would have turned the election and made Harris president. The DNC has access to all this info just like I do. I dunno why they would wanna lose over supporting Israel, but they did.
She did but all we got was 24/7 coverage of “what do you have to say about israel Palestine” because apparently ukraine doesnt exist and neither do Americans or our healthcare or iran or any other issue in the world that she was infinitely better on.
Selective hearing. It’s insane how often people complain about Dems not doing something when it’s literally part of their party’s policy platform and has been for a while.
Or how often I see someone complain about something the Dems aren’t doing when it’s something their party or their president literally passed or signed an EO for. People just don’t pay attention. And then you list out the bills or EO’s in question and they move the goalposts and cry harder to compensate for their inability to pay attention.
Do they need to do more? Duh. Do they actually get stuff done? Yeah, they actually do. And compared to the other party that only works in opposition to Americans, they technically get infinitely more done than their opponents.
It’s a combination really. Of Dems not being good at messaging and people just not fucking paying attention.
Messaging is hampered when the message is delivered by people who oppose you. The Dems don’t need help to shoot themselves in the foot, but they get it anyway.
I am, despite not being from USA I am following the midterm races from the imperial core because I know their results will affect my life, the way they did in previous elections. This post, and the vast majority of the propaganda spouted by Dems, is exactly that, though. There’s more criticism from the estabilishment Dems towards politicians that do make those points, like Mamdani or El-Sayed, than towards their opponents in the White House. And what does most of them do say about their plans in office? How do they campaign? Exactly the way you see here. And don’t get me wrong, I want bad politicians to lose and good ones to win. It’s good some do have reasonable strategy, they will do better than the dumbfucks who keep blasting that uncommited voters that don’t care about politics as much as they’ve been taught not to care, that just want to get through their hard day of work and worries - that those voters have to to make time to go and vote for slightly less known Epstein associate. It’s not even that I want those dogshit politicians to lose, though I can’t claim I see presidency of Newsom going better than Trump’s in terms of quality of living for people in USA, but probably noticably better for me in Europe. It’s just that they WILL LOSE AGAIN unless the messaging capabilities of the propagandists improve.
I know you guys won’t, because your job is to convince as many people as possible not to vote after all, but god do I yearn for the day when the Democrats start to appeal to non-voters by other means than “at least we’re not as bad as the other guy”. If you think that this is an effective strategy, you might just be able to wrestle defeat from the jaws of victory. Just keep letting marginalized folk know that they shouldn’t count on their lives improving, because you’re commited to doing just slightly better than the opposition. Don’t campaign on promises of anything materially better, only on being paid off by the same interests groups as the “other side”, except for the fact you’re going to keep doing those things they paid you for - but politely. And if you think that the existence of my argument against your strategy on the internet is going to ruin your chances for it working at all, and you’re going to blame those arguing against it for your loss while you’re blasting the same old points of “we rape and murder arguably less”, then BOY can I figure out the results it’s going to bring.
Anyone who was going to vote for the lesser evil is going to do that anyway. Anyone who’s on the fence will most likely decide to sit this one out (again). Claiming it’s someones moral obligation to vote for terrible (but slightly less) people is going to depress votes, exactly as it did with Harris. Change your strategy or lose.
Just fucking… talk about the affordibility crisis and your plans to end it. About universal healthcare. About how Israel is a bunch on genocidal bastards. Just anything other than this proven, time and again, losing strategy. You have a field full of targets and a loaded gun. Only way you can miss is if you point it at your head. Or go further right to win MAGA voters, I guess…
There are democrats talking about those things, you just aren’t listening.
It’s too bad Harris didn’t during the ‘24 election, though
She did, you just weren’t listening.
I think I would have heard about it if she had talked about how Israel is a bunch of genocidal bastards.
Mostly because she would have won the '24 election. It really was down to single-issue “uncommitted” voters in a few states. The exact number of people who voted “uncommitted” in the primary would have turned the election and made Harris president. The DNC has access to all this info just like I do. I dunno why they would wanna lose over supporting Israel, but they did.
She did but all we got was 24/7 coverage of “what do you have to say about israel Palestine” because apparently ukraine doesnt exist and neither do Americans or our healthcare or iran or any other issue in the world that she was infinitely better on.
Yup.
Selective hearing. It’s insane how often people complain about Dems not doing something when it’s literally part of their party’s policy platform and has been for a while.
Or how often I see someone complain about something the Dems aren’t doing when it’s something their party or their president literally passed or signed an EO for. People just don’t pay attention. And then you list out the bills or EO’s in question and they move the goalposts and cry harder to compensate for their inability to pay attention.
Do they need to do more? Duh. Do they actually get stuff done? Yeah, they actually do. And compared to the other party that only works in opposition to Americans, they technically get infinitely more done than their opponents.
It’s a combination really. Of Dems not being good at messaging and people just not fucking paying attention.
Messaging is hampered when the message is delivered by people who oppose you. The Dems don’t need help to shoot themselves in the foot, but they get it anyway.
I am, despite not being from USA I am following the midterm races from the imperial core because I know their results will affect my life, the way they did in previous elections. This post, and the vast majority of the propaganda spouted by Dems, is exactly that, though. There’s more criticism from the estabilishment Dems towards politicians that do make those points, like Mamdani or El-Sayed, than towards their opponents in the White House. And what does most of them do say about their plans in office? How do they campaign? Exactly the way you see here. And don’t get me wrong, I want bad politicians to lose and good ones to win. It’s good some do have reasonable strategy, they will do better than the dumbfucks who keep blasting that uncommited voters that don’t care about politics as much as they’ve been taught not to care, that just want to get through their hard day of work and worries - that those voters have to to make time to go and vote for slightly less known Epstein associate. It’s not even that I want those dogshit politicians to lose, though I can’t claim I see presidency of Newsom going better than Trump’s in terms of quality of living for people in USA, but probably noticably better for me in Europe. It’s just that they WILL LOSE AGAIN unless the messaging capabilities of the propagandists improve.