Apologies for the breaking up of the post.
Folks often conflate "understand" with "agree".
People do, I am not. I'm quite literally saying "you do not understand", because if you did understand, you wouldn't employ the rhetorical devices you are doing.
You seem to be implying that if I don't declare that I'll never vote for the Democrats because Palestine, or LGBTQ issues, or whatever, then I "don't understand" those criticisms of Democrats. That does not make sense.
No, I'm not implying this at all, which is probably why it doesn't make sense
I'm not sure what your point is. Why does "blame" matter, and why are you asking me to explain why its not "blame"?
Because you said, and I quote, "you (the royal you) can't blame your vote on "
Sommers was mean to me on the internet" GTFOH with that implication.". I'm saying, that therefore, people can. Because this is what you're accusing people of enabling:
"All of which goes back to the vicious cycle we discussed previously. Democrats' voters will #AbandonBiden them if their one main issue doesn't advance/happen, while Republican voters stay faithful through thick and thin, in the hope that someday, somehow, the stars will align and their team will deliver on one big issue...
that's how we end up with Roe overturned, the Voting Rights Act gutted, affirmative action banned, etc... and that's how we are going to end up with Obergefell overturned, another Muslim ban, the return of the Soviet Union/Russian Empire, a second Partition in Israel instead of India, not to mention what is going to happen with climate change."
These are your words, again. You are saying that because of the alleged lack of a vote (drawn on literally nothing beyond people
criticising Democrats online - you have no evidence to suggest that these posters are not capable of tactical voting), that X and Y will happen. You are
blaming these voters for the consequences that will follow. Because that's how blame works. It is what you're doing. It's how your rationale works. It's not that the party could do better. It's not that you could do better. It's that these people, these "single issue" voters, that will allow the Republicans to wreak the havoc they want to wreak.
You can say you "understand" as much as you want, but so long as that's your rationale, the blame comes across as more important than the understanding. Hence, why I don't think you understand.
"Too confrontational" about what? Go back to
the beginning of our particular exchange here. You will see that I posted after @Gori the Grey , more or less piggybacking on a point that he made about the uphill legislative and SCOTUS battle Democrats face, on trans rights for example.
You tagged me on that and started this exchange we are having. Now you're accusing me of being "too confrontational"? That doesn't make sense
...
you initiated the discussion with me.
Initiating a discussion has nothing to do with being confrontational? I'm confused.
Again, as I've said, I understand why people are announcing their refusal to vote for Biden. They have legitimate criticisms of both Biden and the Democratic party in general.
And yet, you're laying the hypothetical consequences of a future Republican administration at their feet. Not at yours. Not at the party's. Theirs.
"Losing tactic"? What is it that you think I am trying to win? Again, as I keep pointing out to you, and you apparently keep ignoring, I'm not trying to get you to do anything.
And as I said to Gori more than once, it's a convenient catch-all that absolves you (personally, in your head) of any consequences of your posts. And yet, your words matter. Everyone's words matter. Equating "single issue" voters to the hatred of the Republican platform and it's policy outcomes
matters. You doing that is an action, with a consequence, and holding your hands up and saying "I just want to call out hypocrisy" doesn't win you any Internet points.
You want me to play the role of the Democrat begging everyone to vote for Biden/Democrats so that you can shame and criticize and take me to task.
No, I don't. Or are you going to accuse
me of lying?
Its not really about preferring that Democratic voters behave like Republican voters or that Democratic politicians/office holders behave like Republicans. I am offering an observation that goes back to the Lawrence O'Donnell segment that I linked/posted. One of the things I am doing is pointing out what seems to be a strategic difference (in terms of outcome) between how Democratic voters and Republican voters behave that O'Donnell identified in his segment.
You passed the point of "offering an observation" quite a few posts back. It's one thing to offer a theory. It's another to defend it across two threads. And in my replies to Gori I believe I've laid out a pretty thorough argument for why I consider the observation flawed.