Republican Bidens and the Failure of the Democratic Party

[Lexicus]

Obama was pre-Trump in that way: devised a slogan that anyone could read whatever they wanted into.

Disappointing to Democrats. Whereas, Trumpers absolutely believe that he "Made America Great Again."

One of the new campaign slogans I've seen around for Trump this time out is "Save America Again."

So America was Unsaved under Obama. Then it was Saved for four years. Now it's Unsaved again. But it could be Saved yet again.

Some saving that first time!

"Save" (religiously super-charged word) means nothing more than "my favored guy is in office." Or, to put it another way, my guy just being in office is as significant a thing as salvation itself!

Just being in office, to repeat O'Donnell's thesis. Pretty much independently of achieving anything in particular. (How's that wall coming?)

This suggests the real problem is that Republicans are basically instant cultists (just add water!) whereas Democrats are burdened by the fact that their voters are aware of reality

 

[Gori the Grey]

Well, we've all tried various ways of rephrasing O'Donnell's core insight about the mentality of voters on the two sides (which as has been pointed out is itself a version of the old "fall in line/fall in love"). The one you're citing is just my latest stab. Yours strikes me as perfectly sound also. And yours strikes me as being in accord with what the progressives have indicated is their reservation with D Presidents: They say they're going to change some reality; I'm looking at reality and they've not changed it.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

This suggests the real problem is that Republicans are basically instant cultists

Not instant. But there certainly is a subsection of Republicans who were fed Fox News Alternate Realities (FNAR) for decades.
Marinated in that, they finally have a candidate who FNARs hard.
Result: The MAGA cult.

Democrats are burdened by the fact that their voters are aware of reality

Being aware of reality is really quite the low bar.
Republicans who are aware of reality are burdened by the fact the other Republican lot is batskip nutballs who found traction with their batskip nutballs cult leader.

 

[Lexicus]

Being aware of reality is really quite the low bar.

It's also not really true as written. Liberals are liberals and not leftists because they refuse to let go of childish illusions like the "free market" and "bipartisanship". A lot of Democrat voters are depressingly delusional.

 

[Senethro]

I wish liberals did more to implement their values, or to defend against the undermining of their practice.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

It's also not really true as written. Liberals are liberals and not leftists because they refuse to let go of childish illusions like the "free market" and "bipartisanship". A lot of Democrat voters are depressingly delusional.

My point was, Republicans who are aware of reality are on par with Democrats who are aware of reality.
There must be a lot of voters on each side rolling their eyes over the antics of their so-called (literally) peers.

You guys need a sensible party.

 

[Sommerswerd]

I agree in general terms r.e. political concepts, but this is CFC OT

So... reality ceases to exist because... "this is CFC OT"?? What?

the actual consequences are irrelevant. What's important is that they're "bad" consequences.

Nonsense. The overturning of Roe v. Wade isn't "irrelevant" regardless of whether people view it as "bad" or not. There are plenty of US voters who view the overturning of Roe as a good thing and plenty who view it as a bad thing. Saying that its "irrelevant" is just wrong.

You're twisting yourself into ridiculous illogical pretzels trying to "win" the discussion... and for no reason. As I've said. I'm not upset with you. I'm not your adversary and I keep declining the role of your adversary. What I am interested in here is reasons Democratically inclined voters reject voting for Biden/Democrats and analysis of the O'Donell segment/position.

Because the consequences are immaterial. They're relevant when discussing the US, but in the UK it might be same-sex spaces or whatever.

As I've said above, the notion that "consequences are immaterial" is nonsense, however... Huh? "They're relevant when discussing the US"?? What?? You just said "consequences are irrelevant". Now they're relevant? Make up your mind. Also... you say "They're relevant when discussing the US"?? We ARE discussing the US. So what are you talking about? I feel like I'm in the Twighlight zone again. Once again, you keep contradicting yourself and saying nonsensical things trying to "win" the discussion... and for no reason.

The title of the thread is "Republican Bidens and the Failure of the Democratic Party". It doesn't get more "US" than that. As I've noted repeatedly, your UK grievances are not what I am focused on here and I reject the role of the adversary in your UK-based beefs.

 

[Gorbles]

So... reality ceases to exist because... "this is CFC OT"?? What?

Incorrect.

Nonsense. The overturning of Roe v. Wade isn't "irrelevant" regardless of whether people view it as "bad" or not. There are plenty of US voters who view the overturning of Roe as a good thing and plenty who view it as a bad thing. Saying that its "irrelevant" is just wrong.

Irrelevant, or you're not understanding the point I'm making. Either way I've said it enough times, so I guess maybe you're doing the bit on purpose? Or you really don't get how adding and removing words changes the meaning in a sentence. What's the more charitable assumption for me to make?

You're twisting yourself into ridiculous illogical pretzels trying to "win" the discussion... and for no reason.

Incorrect.

I'm not your adversary and I keep declining the role of your adversary.

Never said you were, not creating said role for you.

What I am interested in here is reasons Democratically inclined voters reject Biden/Democrats and analysis of the O'Donell segment/position.

Then you should listen to someone who is both progressive and would vote, however tactically, for the Democrats in the US if he lived there. Much like Lexicus and others, who actually live there. Your continual choice not to, to deflect, ignore and otherwise cherrypick words out of a sentence, is entirely yours.

As I've said above, the notion that "consequences are immaterial" is nonsense, however... Huh? "They're relevant when discussing the US"?? What?? You just said "consequences are irrelevant". Now they're relevant? Make up your mind.

Like I said above, it seems that either you're doing this as a bit, or you genuinely don't understand how two sentences with different words in changes the meaning of those sentences.

The title of the thread is "Republican Bidens and the Failure of the Democratic Party". It doesn't get more "US" than that. As I've noted repeatedly, your UK grievances are not what I am focused on here and I reject the role of the adversary in your UK-based beefs.

And?

What are you even saying here? That because I'm from the UK, I can't make a point? That because this thread is about US political subjects, they can't be extrapolated out to more general progressive-vs-centrist issues that crop up across a bunch of Western (ostensibly) democratic nations?

All you have is this browbeating form of attack. Voters are responsible for Republican policies. I'm "twisting myself into pretzels". Attack, attack, attack. No understanding! And yet you professed understanding right at the start. Kinda makes me feel that really is the issue here. You think you understand, but you only understand so far as it serves to reinforce your biases r.e. how if progressives had simply voted more / better / harder, Republicans couldn't do what they're doing. Note the difference between "trying to make someone vote a specific way" (which you're not) and "complaining that they voted a specific way which caused a specific result" (which you are).

 

[Sommerswerd]

I wish liberals did more to implement their values, or to defend against the undermining of their practice.

Me too... although I will admit that I can't fully define what that "more" is exactly, in practice. I do know that I don't like the idea of Democrats just wholesale resorting to the tactics of Republicans.

Something else the 2020 election alerted me to, is that I was wrong in my perception of how vastly Democratic/liberal/progressive inclined voters outnumbered Republican/conservative inclined voters. Trump got a gigantic, historic amount of votes in 2020, the second highest vote total in US history, second only to the amount Biden got, to win the very same election. Prior to that election, I'd held the belief that with maximum voter turnout, the Democrats would win easily, in landslide fashion and no Republican could ever hope to win the POTUS election. 2020 made me question that position, because of how it was, relative to how much of a blowout I'd envisioned, in an election with such historic participation.

 

[Lexicus]

My point was, Republicans who are aware of reality are on par with Democrats who are aware of reality.
There must be a lot of voters on each side rolling their eyes over the antics of their so-called (literally) peers.

You guys need a sensible party.

I can't help but be reminded of a quote from Joe Biden:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/14/politics/joe-biden-republicans-trump-epiphany/index.html

"The thing that will fundamentally change things is with Donald Trump out of the White House. Not a joke," Biden told reporters at a diner in Concord, New Hampshire. "You will see an epiphany occur among many of my Republican friends."

And by the way, we already have a "sensible party", it's called the Democratic Party. As Nancy Pelosi explained a few years back, the Democrats don't have an ideology, leaving only sensibility.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Attack, attack, attack. No understanding!

Again, you're conflating "understanding" with "agreement". I understand your point(s). I just don't agree.

Also, again, the way this discussion started between us was that I made a post which did not quote or tag you, which you responded to, quoting me. The fact that you feel "attacked" and "browbeaten" because I'm simply responding to your posts directed at me, says more about you than anything else. I'm just responding to your posts. I've said previously that you were trying to cast me as your adversary, and you said:

Never said you were, not creating said role for you.

and in the same post, you said, of me:

All you have is this browbeating form of attack.

and

Attack, attack, attack.

You don't see that this is doing exactly what you claim not to be doing? You claim that you aren't casting/characterizing me as your adversary, in the same post, where you accuse me, of quote, "attack, attack, attack" and "browbeating form of attack" against you.

Once again, you keep contradicting yourself trying to "win". Again, my point is to hear why people who are Democratically inclined voters are intending/choosing not to vote for Biden/Democrats, particularly as described in the O'Donnell segment.

 

[Gorbles]

Again, you're conflating "understanding" with "agreement". I understand your point(s). I just don't agree.

No, I'm not. It's pretty obvious you don't agree. I'm saying you also don't understand. I think we've had the exact interaction before in this same tangent, to boot.

Also, again, the way this discussion started between us was that I made a post which did not quote or tag you, which you responded to, quoting me.

Yes, and? What are you trying to say, that me quoting your post was an attack or something?

The fact that you feel "attacked" and "browbeaten" because I'm simply responding to your posts directed at me, says more about you than anything else. I'm just responding to your posts. I've said previously that you were trying to cast me as your adversary, and you said:

Again, you demonstrate a lack of understanding. I do not "feel" attacked. I'm characterising your argument; your position on this topic as one of an attack. Of browbeating a demographic of posters because you think you've stumbled upon the political argument that explains how Republicans are doing what they're doing.

It's nothing to do with me personally, or even on behalf of anyone else in the thread.

You said "single issue voters abandon Biden when he can't deliver and this is why we get all these bad Republican things". This is an attack on "single issue" (a.k.a. progressive voters). It's blaming them for Republican policy. And with that, we come (yet again) full circle, and I fully expect you (yet again) to find a way to not engage with the argument. But maybe the tenth time is the charm.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

And by the way, we already have a "sensible party", it's called the Democratic Party. As Nancy Pelosi explained a few years back, the Democrats don't have an ideology, leaving only sensibility.

In relation to stuff like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025 Kermit the Frog would be the sensible choice.

But he's just a handpuppet!

 

[Klaus Hergersheimer]

And by the way, we already have a "sensible party", it's called the Democratic Party. As Nancy Pelosi explained a few years back, the Democrats don't have an ideology, leaving only sensibility.

>_< you always come so close to rejecting the American political duopoly, but never do it. I don't understand it.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Something else the 2020 election alerted me to, is that I was wrong in my perception of how vastly Democratic/liberal/progressive inclined voters outnumbered Republican/conservative inclined voters. Trump got a gigantic, historic amount of votes in 2020, the second highest vote total in US history, second only to the amount Biden got, to win the very same election. Prior to that election, I'd held the belief that with maximum voter turnout, the Democrats would win easily, in landslide fashion and no Republican could ever hope to win the POTUS election. 2020 made me question that position, because of how it was, relative to how much of a blowout I'd envisioned, in an election with such historic participation.

Trump brought in a bunch of people who don't ordinarily vote because they hate all that political stuff by making his appeal "don't you hate all that political stuff? Me too. If you hate politicians, vote for me, because I'm not a politician."

Biden brought in a different set of non-voters: people who say "what does it matter? they're all the same." People who woke up on Nov 9 2016 and said "no, effing way; that's what can happen if I don't bother voting?"

 

[Lexicus]

Biden brought in a different set of non-voters: people who say "what does it matter? they're all the same." People who woke up on Nov 9 2016 and said "no, effing way; that's what can happen if I don't bother voting?"

Needs an edit

 

[Lexicus]

>_< you always come so close to rejecting the American political duopoly, but never do it. I don't understand it.

I think the problem here is that you don't understand that the statement you quoted was sarcastic

 

[Gori the Grey]

Needs an edit

 

[Sommerswerd]

Yes, and? What are you trying to say, that me quoting your post was an attack or something?

More projection Accusing me of doing what you did, ie., interpret any response that disagreed with you as an "attack".

browbeating a demographic of posters

There is it again... "browbeating"

It's nothing to do with me personally, or even on behalf of anyone else in the thread.

Both of these claims are demonstrably false. In the first instance, again in the same post you accused me of "browbeating a demographic of posters". So you are clearly purporting to speak about/on behalf of others in the thread. Look at the quote before this one. You said, explicitly "a demographic of posters". What posters? Obviously you are referring to the posters on CFC OT and the posters in this thread. So once again, you are contradicting yourself. You are clearly trying to speak about/on behalf of other posters in the thread.

In the second instance... your argument is about you personally. You said:

I'm telling you as a progressive voters repeatedly blamed for "letting the bad guys win"

This is all about you personally. You specifically referenced that you personally feel "blamed" and you were arguing on that basis... you gave it as the very foundational justification of the credibility of your argument ie., "I'm saying this as a progressive". So saying that "It's nothing to do with me personally" is a blatant contradiction. Again... you're all over the place, you're constantly contradicting yourself.

This is an attack on "single issue" (a.k.a. progressive voters).

No its not. Again, as I've said. I disagree with your claim. However, now I see what is going on. Sometime back, I called you out on repeatedly using the phrase "gotcha" as a way of making an implication that disagreement with you was somehow unfair, or otherwise improper. So you dropped "gotcha" and what you've done, is replaced it with "browbeating" and "attack"... those are the new words you are using to express your feeling that my disagreement with you is somehow unfair, or otherwise improper... it's an "attack"... its "browbeating".

 

[Lexicus]

Read it again. You say Biden brought in a different set of voters: and then you just name two contradictory sets. You either need to delete one or add some logical connector between the two categories. (I think, could be misreading I guess?)