• disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    It doesn’t work like that. I’ve been saying this for decades, but maybe this explanation from a political strategist will do a better job.

    Simply put, the donors want to win. They base their data on past voters, not the entire electorate. If you don’t vote, you don’t influence. It’s really always been that simple.

    We need to stop rewarding those who have the financial means to reach us in our living rooms, and actively seek out the progressives in every primary. Vote in every election. That’s how change happens.

    • Uruanna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      If you don’t vote, you don’t influence.

      That’s the stupidest strategy you could have when you know WHY a lot of people aren’t voting at all. The only purpose of this strategy is to participate in the degradation of voting shares, and by extension, fascism. You want new votes, you get new people to vote, and you know how to do that. The GOP figured it out (I don’t want to say Trump figured it out).

      • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 hours ago

        How do you think the GOP got those candidates in the election? They enter through primaries. We don’t need to figure it out. We have the goddamn answer. We just need to vote in primaries and stop allowing retirees to pick corporate centrists for us.

        • Uruanna@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 hours ago

          Look at the Cuomo / Mamdani primary for NY mayor, the DNC really tried to kill the socialist campaign. Most primaries like that don’t get that much support against the “old guard” among Democrats, so most of the time, the actual good non-centrist option gets swept away like dust. The work that’s needed to push a socialist through the primary is so much more than “you just need to get out and vote” because those like Cuomo have so much more weight to shut them down, it’s so rare for that to fail like this.

          • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 hours ago

            They didn’t try to kill anything. They just didn’t put support behind Mamdani. If we did our civic duty and voted in every primary, the candidates that represent us, like Mamdani, would always be in the general election.

            We can’t keep blaming big lettuce for not advertising salads while buying McDonald’s every day. We know it’s out there. Go get some lettuce.

      • WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        12 hours ago

        The purpose is you have to stop supporting bad parties from somewhere, otherwise you can be coerced into voting against your interests every single time.

        It had to end at some point. Now there is a socialist candidate.

    • Kühlschrank@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I saw a great quote somewhere that said something like, “You will understand modern American politics if you realize that GOP politicians fear their voters and Democratic politicians don’t fear their voters.”

      A lot of progressives and leftists use this as an excuse to not vote and act like withdrawing from politics means they’re not complicit. What they don’t realize is that is exactly what creates this atmosphere where the Dems cater more and more to the center and right to get votes.

      Not to mention the general atmosphere like we have on this very thread where the left eats itself alive and divides itself with purity tests that could never work in reality.

    • crusa187@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 hours ago

      I definitely agree with your last paragraph here. Try to vote in progressives in every primary we have access to in order to use voting to make a difference, yes.

      However,

      the donors want to win

      You mean they want everything for themselves by buying politicians, right? Because often times Dem strategy is so incredibly tone deaf the only thing that’s clear about it is that they aren’t trying to win an election, they’re simply doing what the donors tell them to do. In this case, it’s the classic pretend fight, send strongly worded letters, and then let the republicans narrowly pass the massive tax break for the rich. Which is in fact a win for the donors, but nobody else.

      • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        16 hours ago

        That’s not the case if we get behind candidates with good ethics in grassroots campaigns. They choose to accept donations, and can refuse contributions from unsavory donors. We have several clean donor Representatives in the house. It’s not impossible. It just takes our participation.

        • Ferrous@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 hours ago

          What do you think fascism is, and what are its causes?

          Do you seriously think the German descent into fascism was a result of poltical apathy?

          • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 hours ago

            I’m not entertaining a philosophical debate with someone who equates Harris and Trump.

            We can try again when you’re older.

    • Zagorath@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 hours ago

      But that video basically tells you straight-out… the usual campaign strategies are clearly wrong. You put out a campaign that gets people excited and suddenly way more people get out to vote. It’s not a complicated theory. It clearly works in practice.

      All of this conversation though, just shows how fucking poor democracy based around voter turnout is. Put elections on a weekend or make it a public holiday, and make voting mandatory (with the option of a blank ballot for those who really object to voting). It doesn’t solve all your problems. But it sure does help a lot.

      • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        17 hours ago

        Bruh. If you voted, they’d cater their advertising to you. The candidates are still there, you’re not voting for them, and blaming the lack of advertising. That’s like blaming lettuce for not advertising salads and complaining about always eating McDonald’s.

        Do you want to take control of your government or not?

        • Zagorath@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          17 hours ago

          I vote. I’m not American, in case my instance name didn’t give it away. I’d vote even if I didn’t want to, because it’s mandatory to do so, one of several vast improvements my country has over yours in the quality of our democratic processes.

          But did you watch the video you linked in the last comment? Because it completely turns your argument on its head. You say “if you voted, they’d cater to you”. But that video clearly demonstrates that the exact inverse is true. If you want to get out the vote in a large segment of the Zero Primes, all you have to do is run as exciting campaign with bold progressive policies. The evidence is all laid out there in front of you, even in common sense couldn’t get you there.

          • jj4211@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            12 hours ago

            Both things can be true.

            A good campaign can get people into the voting booth.

            A demographic that fails to show up when you think you’ve done everything that makes sense to get them out can cause them to give up on the demographic. They may be woefully misinformed about what they should be doing, but since they don’t know any better, they are likely to just give it up as a lost cause.

            Show up in the primaries for the candidate you want, it’s the only realistic way to break the chicken and egg of the establishment ignoring the voters that don’t show up and the voters not showing up for the establishment that ignores them. If the establishment is surprised by the primary outcome, that’s the strongest wakeup call for them.

          • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            16 hours ago

            Of course that’s all they have to do. That’s how we get wolves in sheep’s clothing. We need grassroots primary candidates, and they run all the time. We just don’t do our civic duty and vote in every election.

            To give you an idea of how bad it’s gotten, the average turnout for congressional primaries is less than 15% for the last 30 years. That’s why we have this government. We’ve been letting retirees pick conservative centrists and push the Overton Window to the right for decades.

            • Zagorath@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 hours ago

              You’re going to downvote my factual information in favor of your disenfranchising bullshit? Bruh. You don’t even go here.

              Nope. I didn’t even see your comment until after the edit. I am going to downvotes because of the edit, though. Probably woulda upvoted otherwise.