Republican Bidens and the Failure of the Democratic Party

[EnglishEdward]

Correct, but I will reiterate that "the Democratic Party" is comprised of the voters

That is an interesting belief system.

I have voted for various candidates standing for various parties in the UK, but I am
not a party member and I do not regard myself as being any part of those parties.

 

[Sommerswerd]

To quote myself: "the reasons folks are declaring that they refuse to vote for Biden". You say you do, but I'm not sure I believe you.

Folks often conflate "understand" with "agree". Just because a person does not share and/or agree with a position/point of view, does not mean they don't understand/comprehend it. Also, you can share or sympathize with a person's position and still have commentary, criticism or analysis of it. 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.

On the other hand, if you are just saying that I am a liar, I'm not sure where to go from there...

Look at your post here. Tell me, in what universe is "that's how we end up" is not an assignation of blame?

I'm not sure what your point is. Why does "blame" matter, and why are you asking me to explain why its not "blame"?

So no, I think I'm pretty accurate here. I have a position, and if you're failing to see it, maybe there's another reason. Maybe you're being too confrontational about it

"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.

or you're refusing to see the issues in the Democratic Party . . . or maybe you think it'd be a good thing if Democratic voters were more like Republican voters, is that it?

If all you're doing is simple moral posturing, if you truly have no care in changing peoples' minds, and you just want to say "look at me I'm so smart in pointing out what these progressive posters are getting wrong", that's exactly what I mean by "browbeating". It's not about you wanting something from me (or anyone - I'm a Brit, remember? I say this at least one a page of US politics posting). I don't think you're taking the right approach at all, but that's irrelevant. I'm not going to be able to fix that

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. I'm not optimistic that choice will help their overall goals long-term, but I'm certainly not going to be able to convince them, nor am I trying. But as you say, you're a Brit, so you're not involved anyway... or something along those lines. So no need for me to get too long winded about it with you, right?

What it is about is pointing out that blaming the voters for the party's failures is a losing tactic, and it will continue to do worse the longer you feel obliged to use it for. What you do with that information is entirely up to you.

"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. What seems to be going on here, is that you have a position that you want to argue with, specifically the hypothetical Democrat that is trying to convince everybody to vote for "the lesser of two evils", and you are projecting that position/person onto me.

Thinking more about it... I think that's why you're saying things like "I don't believe you"... I suspect that it's not about belief, but about desire. 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. So every time that I remind you that I'm not playing that role, you are frustrated and refuse to accept it and keep insisting that I play the role you want me to play.

Republican voters, in that regard, are not voting like people in a democratic institution should do. They're voting as though they were in a cult, and you for some reason think this is a good thing.

Beyond that, you seem to think that the Democratic Party actually wants to do these things. I don't think it's a stretch to assert that they're cynically dangling these carrots in front of their progressives to get votes, while happily doing nothing about it when in power. Why wouldn't they? Every party does it. Say what you want, so long as you get in. Once you're in, it doesn't actually matter.

Too cynical? Perhaps.

Except that Republican politicians don't get these miracle wins. They subvert, they stack courts, they play around the actual game of "voting and being elected on a position". They don't depend on their voters for jack, they do what they want to do in violation of (lowercase-d) democratic norms regardless. We have a ton of examples of this.

Your entire position is based on some kind of idealistic view of politics that seems long-dead. Why cling to it?

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.

 

[Sommerswerd]

That is an interesting belief system.

I have voted for various candidates standing for various parties in the UK, but I am
not a party member and I do not regard myself as being any part of those parties.

The UK party system is very different from the US party system... so your point about party membership in the UK doesn't really apply. In the US you can certainly become an official "party member" in various ways, but for the most part people just express their party preference with their vote.

 

[Gorbles]

In the US you can certainly become an official "party member" in various ways, but for the most part people just express their party preference with their vote.

This is also how it works in the UK. I don't think the shield of "it's different" applies.

I'll respond to your recent post when I have more time, sorry.

 

[EnglishEdward]

I take the view that the three main parties in the UK and the two main parties in the USA are
owned by big money, one way or the other; rather than being comprised of their voters.

In this circumstance the ordinary voter, who is not a party member; who reluctantly votes
for what they consider the least worst option is scarcely part of any political party.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Something I was just thinking about, that seems relevant to this thread... on the topic of the Democrats failing as a party.

The Republicans have only won the popular vote in a POTUS election once in the past 35 years... and even that was 20 years ago (Baby Bush in 2004). Despite this, the Republicans have won the Presidency 3 times in that same time period.

So to @Senethro's point, no, the system isn't working. The fact that Democrats consistently receive most of the votes, but Republicans are consistently able to get control of the government is inherently dysfunctional.

We were discussing something like this in another thread a while back but I don't remember whether this particular factoid was mentioned.

 

[Gorbles]

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.

 

[Arwon]

If the Democratic party is failing, its the fault of Democrats. "The Democratic Party machine" is just a bogeyman. Its a way of shifting blame from Democrats, ie the Democratic voters, to some faceless "they", in order to absolve the voters of any responsibility.

This really demonstrates quite strongly the weirdness of having people officially identify with a party when they enrol to vote

 

[EgonSpengler]

This really demonstrates quite strongly the weirdness of having people officially identify with a party when they enrol to vote

I just heard a story on the radio the other day that a majority of voters in Massachusetts are unaffiliated/independent for the first time. 54%, iirc. According to Ballotpedia,

As of March 2024, 29 states and the U.S. Virgin Islands allowed voters to indicate their partisan affiliations on voter registration forms and reported total registration numbers publicly. The remaining states and territories either do not ask voters to indicate partisan affiliation on their registration forms or did not publicly report those totals for the most recent year cited on this page.


As of March 2024, 44.7 million registered voters in these areas identified themselves as Democrats. At 38.35%, Democrats represented the single largest share of registered voters in the states and territories that allow voters to indicate partisan affiliation on their registration forms.

A total of 35.3 million registered voters identified themselves as Republicans, representing 30.32% of registered voters in these areas.

A total of 32.2 million registered voters identified themselves as independents or unaffiliated with any political party. This amounted to 27.61% of registered voters in these areas.

Approximately 4.3 million registered voters identified themselves as members of other political parties. This amounted to 3.72% of registered voters in these areas.

Gallup, meanwhile, shows independent/unaffiliated voters as a plurality nationwide, but not a majority, in surveys of 12,000 people. And their question isn't strictly about whether respondents have registered with one party or the other, but more about how they self-identify: "In politics, as of today, do you consider yourself a Republican, a Democrat or an independent?"

Independent Party ID Tied for High; Democratic ID at New Low

In 2023, 43% of U.S. adults identified as independents, tying the record high from 2014. Meanwhile, Democratic identification fell to a new low of 27%.

news.gallup.com

Political independents continue to constitute the largest political bloc in the U.S., with an average of 43% of U.S. adults identifying this way in 2023, tying the record high from 2014. Independent identification has been 40% or higher each year since 2011, except for the 2016 (39%) and 2020 (39%) presidential election years. Equal 27% shares of U.S. adults identify as Republicans and Democrats, with the Democratic figure marking a new low for that party in Gallup’s trend.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Apologies for the breaking up of the post.

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.

No, I'm not implying this at all, which is probably why it doesn't make sense

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.

Again, I'm not denying what I said, implied, etc... you are asking me to explain how I am not "blaming". I never claimed that I wasn't "blaming". Once again, you seem to be trying to get me to defend a position that I never took. What I said was don't blame me for how you (the royal you) vote. Of course people should receive the "blame" for their own voting choices. I am specifically rejecting your repeated attempts in this particular discussion, of trying to strawman me into the role of trying convince people to vote for Biden/Democrats. To quote the illustrious @Ziggy Stardust:

Nothing we do here is going to affect the vote, so mock away.

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.

I disagree.

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.

Yes I do believe that people are responsible for their own voting choices.

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.

I disagree.

 

[Gorbles]

Again, I'm not denying what I said, implied, etc... you are asking me to explain how I am not "blaming". I never claimed that I wasn't "blaming".

So you agree you're blaming people for their own voting choices?

Yes I do believe that people are responsible for their own voting choices.

And again, here?

Like, you tried to put the whole "Farm Boy" shtick on me a little while back, suggesting that I wasn't clear. Would you like to spell it out, exactly? Because you seem to be dancing about it a bit.

And this:

I am specifically rejecting your repeated attempts in this particular discussion, of trying to strawman me into the role of trying convince people to vote for Biden/Democrats.

I'm not attempting anything of the kind. I'm saying that words have power, regardless of whatever you think your intent is, and that if you are blaming people for their vote (or lack of one), then that is a dumb thing that isn't going to help you, or the voting result you personally desire.

It's one thing to say "I'm not trying to convince people to vote". I'm not saying that. I'm saying you are actively hindering people voting in the way you'd evidently prefer them to, and I don't care about your attempts to try and wriggle out of that responsibility. So, like Ziggy said, "mock away"

 

[Senethro]

Sommer, you look like you're saying no and yes in the same post!

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

So you agree you're blaming people for their own voting choices?

Since it seems I'm already participating ...
Blame was in quotation marks. The vibe I'm getting is: people are responsible for their vote and it's consequences. Like 81 million voters are to "blame" for having Biden as prez instead of the oaf.

To quote the great Jon Bon
My heart is like the open highway
Like Frankie said, "I voted my way"

then that is a dumb thing that isn't going to help you, or the voting result you personally desire.

But it's also not going to hurt the voting result someone desires.

We are quite inconsequential.

 

[Gorbles]

The vibe I'm getting is: people are responsible for their vote and it's consequences.

And in turn, I'd argue the party is responsible for not motivating people enough to vote for them. That's the driving force here. We're not discussing people mad at Deep State Pizza Parlours or something. We're discussing people at real risk in the real world.

Comes down on where the responsibility stops, I think. Sommer makes it clear that it stops with the voters (for him). Blaming people for being "responsible" is, well, why I used "browbeating" originally (that he objected to). And yet, we're back to that.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

And in turn, I'd argue the party is responsible for not motivating people enough to vote for them. That's the driving force here. We're not discussing people mad at Deep State Pizza Parlours or something.

Exactly why I used voting for Biden as an example.
And it's a shared responsibility. The party is responsible for the way they present themselves, the voter is responsible for casting the vote.

Comes down on where the responsibility stops, I think. Sommer makes it clear that it stops with the voters (for him). Blaming people for being "responsible" is, well, why I used "browbeating" originally (that he objected to). And yet, we're back to that.

That's not really what he's saying.

 

[EnglishEdward]

The vibe I'm getting is: people are responsible for their vote and it's consequences.

I'd insert an "immediate" before consequences.

Yes, their voters are responsible for Trump, and then Biden getting elected,
but not for every bad thing that President Trump or President Biden did.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I'll go with that.
Plus, when there's only 2 choices, you're not in control of all the consequences. So also not all immediate consequences.
I didn't mean to put voters as responsible for all the choices a government makes.

 

[Gorbles]

That's not really what he's saying.

Well, that's why I asked him pretty bluntly, so we'll see I guess!

 

[Zardnaar]

Something I was just thinking about, that seems relevant to this thread... on the topic of the Democrats failing as a party.

The Republicans have only won the popular vote in a POTUS election once in the past 35 years... and even that was 20 years ago (Baby Bush in 2004). Despite this, the Republicans have won the Presidency 3 times in that same time period.

So to @Senethro's point, no, the system isn't working. The fact that Democrats consistently receive most of the votes, but Republicans are consistently able to get control of the government is inherently dysfunctional.

We were discussing something like this in another thread a while back but I don't remember whether this particular factoid was mentioned.

That and blaming the Democrats for that fact. And the progressives can't really do much because there's not enough of them and they live in the wrong areas.

So you need to compromise on the left in order to govern. The rightbis more or less united behind tax cuts and anti woke.

Pushing both sides are bad is very deceptive. It's what they did here claiming Labour was useless.

Vote for the other guys shocked Pikachu face when they start slashing and burning.

There's a lot of stuff that doesn't get the headlines. Being able to govern somewhat competently is a big one even if a party fails on your big ideas.

So left wing parties get blamed for being useless by progressives despite progressives being a small minority. They're just one faction in the Democrat party or Labour if you're elsewhere.

Actual progressives are around 20 years away from being the majority on the left not even overall. That assumes the younger ones retain their views over the next 20 years.

If a progressive is lecturing people about white privilege in a democracy where the majority is white you're basically an idiot. You need those whites to support you. If you're a poor black and a rich white sure. Upper middle class black lecturing poor whites well yeah.

You need that power to protect the people you pretend to care about. Even if your left of center party wins power and does absolutely nothing that's still an improvement over the other side.

The reason they "do nothing" is they have to pander to the middle that 5-10% or so who can and will swing either way. If they don't you lose.

That 5-10% in proprtional or the purple states or swing electorates in FPtP. You also need to retain support in marginal seats and anything that's not a stronghold so a 10% swing can result in a massive blowout.

Or you can troll CFC and talk a big game about revolution. Not sure if uts bad faith actors or people wat to se the world burn. Democrats may jot do much about Israel but neither will the GoP. Hell the GoP loves Israel. Until then what type of country do you want to live in.

 

[Gorbles]

Do you ever have a different point, Zard, or is it the same thing anytime anyone ever mentions "the left" and "elections"?