this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
898 points (90.8% liked)

Political Memes

5455 readers
2333 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
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Party leadership has control over primaries and don't have any legal responsibility to have them be fair or even have them at all.

[–] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Whew! Good thing you've got an excuse for everything, otherwise you might actually have to do something other than play-act at being a radical on social media.

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

But whining is so much easier! You don't even have to leave the toilet! /s

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml -3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The primaries being controlled by party leadership is not an "excuse" to not participate in them, it's just clarifying that that isn't a sufficient approach.

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

If you don't vote in them it doesn't matter.

If the most vocal young voters had actually shown up for Sanders, who as far as I can tell, offered pretty much everything progressives could realistically ask for, well, we'd be in a very different position.

But, elderly people outvoted the youth ans went centrist Clinton.

Edit: a word

[–] leadore@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Plenty of older people voted (caucused in my state) for Sanders, including me. And in the general I voted for Clinton anyway. Those who didn't are why we got trump.

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Oh absolutely, no voting block is a monolith! (And thanks for caucusing for the good guys!) It's just, on average, the older voters stood by Clinton in the primaries and as they show up in the greatest numbers, she won.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

If you do vote in them it may not matter.

The party pulled plenty of shenanigans to stop Sanders from getting the nomination. The US has overthrown governments for less. They aren't accountable processes.

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

And at the end of the day, young progressive voters didn't show up.

Before whining that everything is rigged, maybe show up in the numbers required to win?

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Do you acknowledge that the primary processes are not legally required to be fair? Yes or no.

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Sure, there's no legal requirement.

Can you acknowledge that this hypothetical problem has never come up as progressive candidates have never won the majority of votes? (Because, yup, the progressive youth vote doesn't show up.)

Yes or no.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml -2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

No. What meaning is there in talking about votes in an election with no guarantee of fairness?

I just held an election where I got 100% of the votes (just one vote, me). If you don't like it, it's your fault for not showing up to it.

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

This is an impressively dumb argument.

"We shouldn't vote because I can imagine a scenario in which they don't count the votes!"

"Has that happened?"

"Well, no, but it could!"

I doubt you're old enough to have seen Billy Maddison but you remind me of the bus driver:

Bus Driver : That Veronica Vaughn is one piece of ass, I know from experience dude. If you know what I mean.

Billy Madison : No, you don't.

Bus Driver : Well, not me personally but a guy I know. Him and her got it on. Wooo-eee!

Billy Madison : No, they didn't.

Bus Driver : No, but you can imagine what it'd be like!

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml -3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Cool.

Do you apply that standard consistently? If Kim Jong Un announces his party got 100% of the vote, are you going to say that's on his opponents for not showing up?

Also, I never said "we shouldn't vote." What I said is that the process isn't legitimate. As I mentioned, there were plenty of shenanigans that the democratic establishment used to ensure that Sanders wouldn't get the nomination, so this isn't just a hypothetical about what I can imagine or what might happen.

[–] Saryn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

"Do you apply this logic cosistently?"

Proceeds to give a wholly incompatible and incosistent example of North Korea.

How anyone could not take you seriously is beyond me.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml -3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

What makes it incompatible? You're dismissing questions of legitimacy and looking only at the results. The results of the 2016 democratic primaries were that Hillary won, and you say regardless of how legitimate or illegitimate the process may be, that happened because not enough Bernie supporters showed up. How is that different from looking at the North Korean elections and putting aside any questions of legitimacy or fairness and just looking at the results and saying the same thing? It's the exact same logic.

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

You don't see the difference between your imaginary DNC scenario and North Korea's elections which have been decried as sham elections?

When international observers start showing that the votes in the Democratic primaries don't count, then you'd have a case.

Until then, this is the stupidest argument I've read or hears in weeks and not worth anymore of my time.

If you're arguing in good faith, God help us all. I much prefer to think you're trolling as it breaks my heart to think someone this dumb has the same number of votes that I do. (Well, fewer as you're too dumb to vote in primaries but still...)

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml -2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

You don’t see the difference between your imaginary DNC scenario and North Korea’s elections which have been decried as sham elections?

Oh, so it does matter whether or not elections are legitimate? So then why do you automatically dismiss all questions of legitimacy regarding the Democratic primaries?

(Well, fewer as you’re too dumb to vote in primaries but still…)

Again, did not say that one shouldn't vote in primaries, only that the primaries are not a sufficient answer to how to enact left-wing polices.

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Like I said, this isn't worth my time.

Reread what's been written, it has the answers.

Maybe it'll make sense when you grow up?

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

And I've answered all your points.

I'm in my 30's and the older I get the further left I go, so don't hold your breath on that.

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago

Oooof, you're in your 30s and these are the sorts of arguments you're making? I mean, when I was in grade school, maybe...

Right now though, your argument is like saying it's dangerous to go outside because no one can prove that Michael Meyers isn't out there ready to chop you to bits. Sure, it's possible a psychopath is out there lurking but it's very unlikely. Similarly, sure, it's possible the DNC could rig the primaries and not count the votes but it's comically unlikely. Since the primary system began, the candidate with the most votes has won the nomination. Should that not happen, then there'll be outrage and chaos but until then, it seems kind of insane to not actually try to make things better because you can pretend a scenario in which your vote doesn't matter.

[–] Saryn@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Like I keep saying - time doesn't ipso facto make you wise. Wisdom is something you earn with hard work and dedication to intellectual honesty. It does not simply come with time and you are yet another great example of this.

Pretending like elections in North Korea and the USA are comparable is either very ignorant or wholly disingenuous.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 weeks ago

I never pretended that. My point is that if you categorically dismiss questions of legitimacy in an election, then it leads to absurd conclusions.