Imagine if Kamala’s line was just to the right of yours, whatever you care most about, she’s just going to agree with trump on.
But that is not how it works. If she is to your right, she will hold a position to the right of your position. That’s all. How do you equate her being to your right to her agreeing with Trump? That assumes that to your right everything is one single position. But that is of course not the case. It’s a continuum, and Kamala is probably closer to you than Trump is.
Surely there are more policies she disagrees with Trump that policies she agrees with him. Shouldn’t that proportion be enough to make progressive voters to vote for her?
So why don’t we try to get Kamala away from that conservative policy? It gets the votes to beat trump and we end up with a president who’s policy aligns more closely with the Dem voter base.
It’s literally a win/win, why spend time yelling at people to vote (when we know that’s not effective) instead of trying to get Kamala to move to the left and get the votes?
When we know that’s effective
If Biden hadn’t been pulled left in 2020, he wouldn’t have beat trump.
I don’t get it. You are a progressive voter. You agree the difference should be enough to make you vote Democrat, yet you don’t. Why?
The rest of your argument rests on the assumption that moving the policies of a presidential candidate is easier than moving individual votes. But how can that be the case? The positions a presidential candidate take are determined by a lot of very powerful, sometimes mutually exclusive interests. The positions a presidential candidate takes are the results of a lot of work and negotiations among these competing interests. Of course it is incredibly hard to change the policies of a candidate.
On the other hand, individual voters like yourself have two choices, and it seems reasonable you would choose the best of the two, or the least bad, if you will. You yourself said that the differences between the two choices you have should be enough to convince the voter to choose the option closer to their ideals.
So it seems to me that convincing individual voters is a much more efficient and likely to be successful strategy than trying to change the policies of Kamala.
That assumes that to your right everything is one single position.
That’s how these people think. Yes-or-no, black-or-white, totally agree or mortal enemies.
There’s either a genocide or there isn’t, no concept of relative scale. There’s either environmentalism or there isn’t. There’s support for immigrants or bigoted xenophobia. No complexity. No shades of gray.
You either agree with me completely about everything, or you are the enemy. It’s why Leftism inevitably eats itself. Completely incapable of compromise.
@[email protected]
But that is not how it works. If she is to your right, she will hold a position to the right of your position. That’s all. How do you equate her being to your right to her agreeing with Trump? That assumes that to your right everything is one single position. But that is of course not the case. It’s a continuum, and Kamala is probably closer to you than Trump is.
The shitty “meme” that your commenting under…
Surely there are more policies she disagrees with Trump that policies she agrees with him. Shouldn’t that proportion be enough to make progressive voters to vote for her?
It should.
But it isn’t.
So why don’t we try to get Kamala away from that conservative policy? It gets the votes to beat trump and we end up with a president who’s policy aligns more closely with the Dem voter base.
It’s literally a win/win, why spend time yelling at people to vote (when we know that’s not effective) instead of trying to get Kamala to move to the left and get the votes?
When we know that’s effective
If Biden hadn’t been pulled left in 2020, he wouldn’t have beat trump.
I don’t get it. You are a progressive voter. You agree the difference should be enough to make you vote Democrat, yet you don’t. Why?
The rest of your argument rests on the assumption that moving the policies of a presidential candidate is easier than moving individual votes. But how can that be the case? The positions a presidential candidate take are determined by a lot of very powerful, sometimes mutually exclusive interests. The positions a presidential candidate takes are the results of a lot of work and negotiations among these competing interests. Of course it is incredibly hard to change the policies of a candidate.
On the other hand, individual voters like yourself have two choices, and it seems reasonable you would choose the best of the two, or the least bad, if you will. You yourself said that the differences between the two choices you have should be enough to convince the voter to choose the option closer to their ideals.
So it seems to me that convincing individual voters is a much more efficient and likely to be successful strategy than trying to change the policies of Kamala.
What?
I’ve voted D for literal decades, exactly one of those times I was voting for someone and not against R.
And the only reason I haven’t already voted D, is Im in the blue part of a red state and they like to play games with mail ins.
I’m talking about how best to reach those potential voters so Kamala doesn’t fuck it up.
So if you want to yell at someone till they vote, it’s not me. I literally can’t vote for Kamala anymore than I already am. Just one vote homie.
I don’t think your approach will actually help, but I’m not going to stop you or discourage you from what you think will help stop Trump.
And I’d appreciate it if you dont try and stop progressices from trying to pull Kamala left to meet voters.
Maybe your way is faster. Maybe my way is.
But I feel like the best bet is both us doing it, and the worst bet is us both stopping to have a slap fight with each other.
Or you could double down on arguing, I’d just block you tho, trump is to dangerous to be wasting time with that.
That’s how these people think. Yes-or-no, black-or-white, totally agree or mortal enemies.
There’s either a genocide or there isn’t, no concept of relative scale. There’s either environmentalism or there isn’t. There’s support for immigrants or bigoted xenophobia. No complexity. No shades of gray.
You either agree with me completely about everything, or you are the enemy. It’s why Leftism inevitably eats itself. Completely incapable of compromise.