Good job the democrats alienating their base by trending right. I get you but this was completely avoidable if the democrats were competent and not a big circlejerk for themselves. Bernie could have beat that spastic in 2016.

Gaza is a serious issue, the US is supporting a genocide. If you cant come out against that then why bother, there isnt much more important to a lot of people. I know Trump will be worse for the region, they do too but if you cant take a principled position that aligns with people you cant complain they didnt vote for you.

[–] perspectiveshifting@sh.itjust.works 18 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You can be rightfully mad at the party that's failing to represent you correctly (I certainly am) and still make the pragmatic choice of not getting the guy who will make those issues worse elected.

We need to come together nationally and locally to attempt to affect change within the DNC more often than every 4 years, because it seems like every time we're all reminded how incompetent they are, it's too late for us to do anything about it for that election cycle.

[+] Squizzy@lemmy.world -6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Didnt everyone do that four years ago, in monumental numbers and there stood a president that provided the arms to blow children out of house and home and off the face of the planet.

Biden did a lot but he missed on some vital issues and that is the fault of the dems.

[–] perspectiveshifting@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yes, and now Trump will help provide significantly more arms than Harris would have, even if she kept providing the same amount as Biden. Surely I don't have to tell you that that's worse?

We need to mobilize to change the DNC and Democratic Party leadership in the time we have in between these decisions, not ignore it for 4 years and then throw away your vote in protest.

[–] Squizzy@lemmy.world -4 points 2 weeks ago

So the continued support of Israel was inevitable. The choice was between shipping food with the bombs or not. How would you go about changing the democratic party by voting them in, they did that four years ago and they just drifted further right.

Surely I dont need to point out that record numbers defested trump only to have israel propped up and the strictest border laws ever put to a vote by the democrats.

Here is how you change the democratic party, kick out the losers. I wanted her to win but now that she hasnt the party can only blame themselves.

[–] rarbg@lemmy.zip 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Good job the democrats alienating their base by trending right

Ok, but

Bernie could have beat that spastic in 2016.

Bernie lost in the primaries, it’s our own fault (I voted for him…)

[–] kava@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Bernie lost in the primaries

DNC primaries are a joke. look at this last primary. oh wait we didn't actually have a primary.

they intentionally waited until the "primary" was over so that Biden could get the incumbent automatic primary votes and then let him drop out so they could rush in Kamala without having a real primary.

i firmly believe if Democrats were not trying to game democracy this presidential cycle, DNC would have had a chance to beat Trump

[–] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

they intentionally waited until the “primary” was over so that Biden could get the incumbent automatic primary votes and then let him drop out so they could rush in Kamala without having a real primary.

If that was the case, they would have done it sooner. Kamala stepping in was definitely an unplanned, and unprecedented, move. It's a huge risk to drop the incumbent in favor of somebody else.

[–] kava@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

i think it was perfectly timed

a) after the primary was informally settled

b) a couple weeks before the candidate was formally sworn in

If that was the case, they would have done it sooner

sooner and there may have been a real primary contest. too risky. they did it with just enough time to sort of "zerg rush" Kamala into the primary without giving anyone time to mount a meaningful attempt at the primary

and unprecedented, move. It’s a huge risk to drop the incumbent in favor of somebody else.

unprecedented, yes. it's the first time in US history since we've been using the primary system that a candidate got the party nomination without a single vote being cast for them

risky, also yes. but they (I think correctly) determined that Biden was a lost cause.

so it was either a) go with the guy you know you're gonna lose or b) go with someone you will probably lose with

b is the logical choice

[–] AnyProgressIsGood@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The mythical left dem base doesn't out vote average centerist group. If you are looking for a perfect group you'll never find it

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

In support of that viewpoint, if they were ready to vote but just wanted to vote for someone who touted their interests, they'd have been there for a third party candidate, but they just were no where to be found.

Would be interested to see why people sat it out. To the extent it was something utterly mundane like "couldn't afford to take any time off work to get it done".

[–] Squizzy@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

If you didnt want to vote gor either candidate why bother with the hardship to vote third party, everyone and their dog knew it was a two horse race. It always has been, and that is by design.

It is disingenuous to say they would have showed up for third parties when it was the same as not voting essentially.