this post was submitted on 23 May 2024

-33 points (24.6% liked)

Political Memes

5455 readers

2051 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civil

Jokes 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 misinformation

Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memes

Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotion

Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world

Rooki@lemmy.world

automodbeta@lemmy.world

Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world

rjc@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

JonsJava@lemmy.world

WrenFeathers@lemmy.world

-33

When they want you to stop agitating action because the democrats might lose (midwest.social)

submitted 6 months ago by archomrade@midwest.social to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 10 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[+] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Shut up and vote for who we tell you to, we don't care what you want

Is just such a horrible campaign strategy...

Like, is anyone else thinking that maybe, just maybe, we should put people who know about political science, or sociology in charge of campaigns and the DNC?

Instead of just giving those positions to the people who show up with the most donations?

Because Biden spent a billion last election, is predicted to spend 2 billion this year...

And he can barely beat the easiest candidate to beat.

Maybe just throwing insane amounts of money isn't as good of a strategy as just running someone voters actually like?

[–] criitz@reddthat.com 11 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Maybe Trump isn't really that easy to beat. He's got his cult locked down.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Maybe we shouldn't keep running candidates against him like Hillary and Biden that can't even poll above 45% approval with registered Dems?

Maybe we should start letting more than 5 states vote in a primary before naming the candidate?

Like, we can run candidates in their 40s, at least sounds progressive, are charismatic, and have a natural report with the youth...

Because historically, that the kind of candidates Dems win with.

It's like people have forgotten what Obama's and Bill's campaigns were like, or that they basically got walk in victories to the overall office.

We don't need to keep running people like Hillary and Biden.

There's no rational reason to. The party just uses trump as an excuse to run these people that voters would never think of supporting if it was against anyone else.

If it was literally anyone besides trump, Biden wouldn't stand a snowballs chance in hell.

That doesn't mean we couldn't just run a good candidate that would easily beat Trump

[–] archomrade@midwest.social -4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That it's the only campaign strategy they have says more about them then anything.

5 months to election day and still no campaign positions on their campaign site.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Well. It's hard to remember since they've declared the primary over after like the first 5 states voted months ago...

But technically the primary isn't over and Biden isn't the candidate till the convention.

And for some reason the DNC scheduled the convention so late that Biden won't even make it.on all the ballots.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Normally candidates are campaigning for the primary. Even fucking Ramaswami had actual policy positions.

To give him more credit than he deserves, he could be waiting for the convention so that they can decide what to run on as a party, but that doesn't abdicate his responsibility to do his fucking job as president. Everything he's done for the last 3 and a half years is a part of his campaign no matter what they choose to focus on, if he doesn't fucking pick some of them people are just going to look at the worst things he's done and make the decision for him.

I swear to god, everyone that's playing the "LEAVE BRITTANY ALONE" game is doing him a massive disservice. If you're planning on voting but you're not screaming at him to make a better case for himself, good news: you're a part of the problem (not directing this at you, just generally).

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

so that they can decide what to run on as a party

He already knows the voters want to tax the wealthy, Biden doesn't

He already knows we want universal healthcare, Biden doesn't.

He already knows we don't want to fund a genocide, Biden does.

He already knows we don't want to codify Trump's border policies, Biden does.

....

For all those reasons and more, I sincerely doubt Biden is waiting to hear what voters want to decide the party platform in any way except meaningless platitudes for a few months before the election.

That's the rub running unpopular candidates.

If Biden talks about his policies, it hurts him with potential voters.

If Biden hits the trail and engages with voters, he faces protestors.

His best move is to just hide and have surrogates talk about how bad trump is.

It's still a shit strategy, but it's the best one for Biden.

The best for the country would be running a better candidate...

[–] archomrade@midwest.social -1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

"""""But that's just not realistic. The best candidate naturally rises to the top; if biden is the candidate it must mean biden was the best option"""""

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If you're trying to be sarcastic, no one can tell online.

If you're being serious....

I don't think this will be productive

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 0 points 6 months ago

Sorry, I thought the context made it clear

I think the fact that it isn't obvious on this platform makes the point more pertinent: the voices in the room silencing opposition aren't doing it in good faith, they're just trying to protect their position. I'll edit it to make it a little more obvious.