this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2024
1503 points (95.2% liked)

Political Memes

5354 readers
1811 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 57 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (27 children)

Every time the Dems lose, they go to the center to find voters. Want them to stop going to the center? Then give them overwhelming and consistent victories.

If you think you can change their platform by not voting or voting 3rd party, you're dead wrong. They will just go to the center voter even more. This is not a Mexican standoff that you can win, because they have an out which is worth double (a center voter is both a vote for them and vote taken away from the other party).

[–] Ephoron@lemmy.kde.social 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (17 children)

If a centre vote is worth double, then it doesn't make any difference if the left are mobilised to vote or not.

With a mobilised left it's left-vote=1 centre-vote=2

With an apathetic left it's left-vote=0 centre-vote=2

Either way the centre vote is worth more so the party moves to the centre.

But if this is wrong, and the left vote is indeed worth more, then why change policies to court the centre, why not have openly leftist policies to attract this game-changing leftist vote?

You can't have it both ways. You can't claim that the democrats have to hide their leftist agenda to gain votes and also claim that the leftist voting block is the make or break of electoral success.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (16 children)

You have this all twisted around in who knows what. They move to the center when they lose. They don't move just because.

Right now the left never shows up. Occasionally the Dems run on a left platform and they lose. Think Gore, think Hilary saying she'll have a map room. After they lose they go to the center to find voters. Now imagine they don't lose every time they run on a left policy? Because the left never shows up.

Occasionally the Dems enact a left policy. Think of Obama's ACA. Thank Biden green energy. Their thanks for this is Obama lost the House of Reps, then lost the house of reps again, then lost both the house of reps and the Senate. Biden lost the house of reps, and polls shows Biden was going to lose. Now imagine they won after enacting left policy. They're probably enact more. But the left never shows up.

If the left wants things to change They. Have. To. Show. Up.

Hide their agenda? They adopt what the ~~people~~ voters (the ones that show up) vote for. If the left voters show up, then guess what? More left policies will be adopted. C'mon this is civics for kindergartners. You have this so twisted around to justify not voting.

[–] Ephoron@lemmy.kde.social 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

If the left voters show up, then guess what? More left policies will be adopted.

Why? A left vote is worth 1 (because they wouldn't have otherwise voted right), a centre vote is worth 2 (because it's also a vote away from the other party). So it doesn't matter how many on the left "show up" their votes simply aren't worth as much as centre voters.

That's the argument given. Centre votes are worth double. The corollary is that they'll always be the target demographic.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

Yeah same thing as the other message. You're constructing a narrow path of interpretation when it's really quite simple. Do they win? Do they lose? Anyway, it was explained in my other reply.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (23 replies)