• Subverb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    Change won’t come overnight (at least without revolution). Like evolution, it requires constant pressure on the system. Changes that are too radical kill the organism.

    A long as people think we can jump from Geoge H.W. Bush to Bernie Sanders in one election it’s going to continue to fail.

    Votw Harris this time. Vote for the person slightly more liberal than her next time, etc. It’s a process.

    • mlg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      That’s one of my issues though, Harris is less liberal than Obama. It went in the opposite direction.

      I advocated that Biden step down and allow a primary. Instead they ran with the VP because the DNC is not interested in actually bringing a more liberal or leftist candidate.

      Meanwhile Trump has made Bush look good in comparison, so even if he stops running, an equal or worse candidate will simply take his place, and then we’ll be faced with a similar problem.

      It would take 20 years to make a grassroots movement work, but if we never start it’s never gonna happen.

      • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Presumably because the US electorate isn’t actually leftist or progressive in general and losing swing states wouldn’t be balanced by extra votes in safe blue states.

    • Socialist Mormon Satanist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      3 months ago

      But with the Democratic party, the conversation is ALWAYS “Vote us this time…” or “This election is too important!” They’ve been saying that for 50 years. Nah, friend. Now is the time for me to vote third party. Tired of waiting.

        • Socialist Mormon Satanist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          18
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m voting for someone I believe in and who matches my values. If the duopoly has a problem with that, then they can work harder to welcome me rather than mock me for not voting for them.

          So it “helps” because I’m voting for who I want to. As the system should be.

              • pooperNickel@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Yeah we will just pretend the supreme Court back to being not packed with ultra conservative assholes. You know, something a socialist would give a flying fuck about

              • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                You can’t get to a progressive candidate this way. A more progressive candidate is going to pull votes more from the left than the right. If you project the results at the point where the progressive candidate starts to matter they just tank the Democrat.If they take 80% of Democratic voters they just lose every state.

              • Charapaso@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                3 months ago

                We could also achieve universal peace if everyone just threw down their weapons, and no one would go hungry if everyone would stop being greedy. Unfortunately, people aren’t rational, and there’s cultural/social constructs that keep these things from happening.

                If we want to change them for the better, we unfortunately have to operate within the constraints we’re faced with. We can change those constraints with hard work, but can’t just act as if those constraints don’t exist. It’s the same way folks pretend that being “color blind” re: racial issues will solve things. Would be great, but sadly plenty of folks are incapable of not being racist, and historical harms mean that we can’t just pretend that perception is the only problem.

              • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                3 months ago

                So your solution is to try harder within the current system, like many others have done for the last 50 years, but this time it will be different! If the problem is with the system, work on changing the system while achieving the best you can until the system has changed. Who you vote for in this election won’t have any impact on the system. This will require a different approach. Vote for who you like, but don’t fool yourself that this will make anyone with power change their stance or plan. Your actions are part of the system working as intended.

              • This is technically true, but it’s quite tough.

                If extradimentional aliens from outside the multiverse came in and reprogrammed everyone who was a Dem (and only Dems) so that they suddenly switched and voted for West, we likely would have West as our next president.

                The difficulty in the current system is that it basically enforces two parties. Makes people afraid to leave. Reform like RCV would make this easier, and allow for events to snowball (a 3rd party might have a good showing in an earlier RCV round as people are less afraid of having their vote wasted, and then the next election more people are willing to vote for that person, until it’s enough to cause an actual win).

                It’s unlikely that Dems keep the Senate. But with I-WV and I-AZ retiring, if Dems take the presidency and both houses, we might have enough finally to drop the filibuster and push through real reforms… (we did in 2020 but Manchin wouldn’t have gone along with it, making it 49:51 with reform losing.)