• TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    74
    ·
    1 month ago

    Its so hilarious how this ridiculously toxic culture around blaming third party was developed, worked on for months, and then when it came time, the impact of third parties was so utterly irrelevant as to be laughable.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      The real beef was with stay home single EDIT issue folks who would otherwise be Dem voters.

      Edit for clarity: the above group are historical, nominally Dem voters, who stayed home abnormally this election.

      3rd party “voices” were annoying because they only punched at Dems, never at republicans. Interestingly, a few of them migrated to libertarian and conservative instances now

      • Glytch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        1 month ago

        Don’t blame the people staying home. Blame the Democrats for doing nothing to earn those votes but say “Orange Man Bad”. They did the exact same thing in 2016. Democrats ran on maintaining the status quo at a time when no one is happy with the status quo.

        The Harris campaign should have campaigned on issues that would attract progressives and others on the left. Instead they tried to get conservatives to leave their cult by touting the endorsement of Dick fucking Cheney and his incredibly unpopular daughter and saying they’ll close the borders and continue funding Netanyahu’s genocide. It’s like Harris didn’t want to win.

        If Democrats want to win they need to stop being Republicans.

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Edit but in the spirit of conversation: Biden AND Harris are lame candidates that absolutely only maintain the status quo. As you say, voters are unhappy with that.

          Edit restructure

          I disagree with the conclusion that OMB isn’t valid reasoning. But it’s just one dudes opinion that I’ve laid out in the thread.

          Orange man bad was more then enough to pick a rock with a smiley face on it as alternative

          People will learn the consequences, regardless of what brought them in our kept them home.

          If folks fundamentally can’t play out the math on 2 choices in a FPTP where one is a serial rapist, anti abortion candidate, who is on record for wanting to accelerate Gaza, then I dunno what to say on that. “Status quo” starts looking pretty shiny, which is terrible, but the world we live in.

          But now we have trump, and a lot of folks get to say “they didn’t attract me”

          • Glytch@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            1 month ago

            Orange man bad was more then enough to pick a rock with a smiley face on it as alternative

            It’s a logical argument and it’s a correct argument. Unfortunately it’s demonstrably not an effective argument, especially when it’s all you’re doing. The same thing happened in 2016 with Clinton thinking she was owed votes because Trump would be (and was, and will be again) a disaster for the US. Yet they still went with the same strategy anyway.

            I say this as someone who did make the “correct” choice of voting blue despite my moral objections to a lot of what she was saying. We will now all see the consequences of only barely trying to win an election against fascists.

            • GBU_28@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              I am aligned with you here. Well put.

              To be clear, I have no love for the dnc or their strategies. I am not championing them as a model. Other commenters seem to think I’m simping for “blue maga” or some other shit.

              I’ve consistently argued for harm reduction in a limited outcome system.

              • Glytch@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                1 month ago

                I agree with the harm reduction strategy, but I also understand people being apathetic with the choices they’re presented.

                Of course this means people should be more active and now is the time to start really pushing for ranked choice voting so we can maybe do something about the dominance of the two-party system.

                Screw trying to convince Democrats they need to start looking left. Force them to with the threat of new, actually progressive, parties.

                • GBU_28@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Bro you do words real good. Your closing statement is gold.

                  Edit to be clear: I strongly agree with their comment I just wrote it silly.

                  Imo that work to build candidates start right now, and to circle back my issue with third party voices, they are crickets until right before he election

            • Katana314@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              It’s a logical argument and it’s a correct argument. Unfortunately it’s demonstrably not an effective argument.

              The logical summation I derive from this statement is: Blame the voters, as they committed a stupid and illogical act.

              The only reasonable explanation for 2016 is that most people assumed Trump had no chance. There is no reasonable explanation for 2024.

              • Glytch@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 month ago

                I can see how you’d arrive at that conclusion (mostly by ignoring everything else I said), but my point was really that Harris needed a better argument than just that. She never gave people a reason to vote for her rather than just against Trump. That caused 14 million people who previously voted Democrat to stay home.

                To a lot of apathetic people we were presented with 2 very similar choices neither of whom gives a shit about the working class. So a lot of people figured “why bother?” and I don’t blame them for that. I blame Democrats for abandoning the working class and catering to corporate donors and conservatives. That’s not even mentioning doing nothing to stem the flow of genocide supplies to Israel (which caused a lot of Muslim voters to stay home).

                So sure, you can blame voters, but it makes more sense to blame the campaign that wasn’t even trying to win.

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        1 month ago

        This is all just the same toxic projection that I’ve been pointing out in this thread.

        You want to blame third parties but there is basically 0, practically negative evidence for it.

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          No, I haven’t discussed 3rd parties at all in my comment. I said 3rd party “voices”, reading comprehension meaning “commenters/online personalities” because I noted their movement to new instances.

          Edit also note I had a typo in my above “single party” to 'single issue"

                • GBU_28@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  So much assuming.

                  My “toxicity” are legitimate concerns to not get trump, who will ramp everything up. Well look who’s here now.

                  As I said, single issue stay homes, and “alternative” voices that actually only served to strike at Dems are issues I believe shifted the narrative and may have influenced the election.

                  I made a thread to discuss other influences beyond just punching down at 3rd party platforms.

                  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    8
                    ·
                    1 month ago

                    Yes we heard you the first 3 times. Its the voters fault. The Democrats are merely victims, completely maladroit at managing their own fate.

                    You aren’t making different any new points or clarification, just repeating the same, tired tropes that just handed the US democracy over to fascism. And we get it, you are incapable of expanding your understanding beyond the initial assumptions you made. No need to repeat yourself any longer.

      • ComradeSharkfucker@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 month ago

        None of us would “otherwise be dem voters”. What part of “I’m not voting for you because I don’t support your policies” did you not understand?

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Many “normally / historically” Dem voters stayed home. That’s the group I’m referring to by “single issue” section.

          I don’t know who you “us” are so why would I speak for you?

          Because you’ve been so civil in your reply, I’ll throw an edit on there just for you.

          • ComradeSharkfucker@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Just because someone voted Democrat before doesn’t mean they would necessarily do so this year if it hadn’t been for that pesky genocide they are doing.

            By us I mean leftists, third party voters, and people who did not vote

            • GBU_28@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 month ago

              That’s fine, I clarified I’m not discussing leftists.

              Registered party voters represent millions and millions of voters. That type of “historical” voter is not an anomaly.

      • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Turnout in 2024 was about the same as 2020. It wasn’t Democrats staying home. Trump simply swayed more voters.

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I’m specifically referring to otherwise active voters, who are historically punchcard democrats. There are many other types of voters, but I specifically grouped a sample that is my discussion.

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        1 month ago

        No, it was just part of a broader culture of infantalism demonstrated by Democratic apologists. There was no there there. Just people desperate for something to blame for their incompetence.

        • lime!@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 month ago

          but like… if everyone is saying “don’t vote third party”, and the amount of third party votes significantly drops as a result, isn’t this what the result would look like?

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            19
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            There is a term for the act of only looking for evidence that confirms your bias. If the “strategy” worked, then why isn’t Kamala Harris president?

            And if that wasn’t the goal of the strategy, what point is it that you think was being made in the first place?

            • lime!@feddit.nu
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 month ago

              i have no idea what the strategy of the us democratic party was, I’m just reflecting on what i’ve on social media over the past month or so (a constant barrage of “don’t vote third party”) and comparing it to the results (very few people voting third party). of course there’s no way to know how much of that was due to said barrage, but we can for sure say that the people telling people to vote third party failed.

          • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            Correct me if I’m wrong, but the leftists who switched to voting Democratic this election were dwarfed by the Democrats who didn’t vote or even voted for Trump.

            So they succeeded at what they were trying to do, but it was of negligible benefit.

            • lime!@feddit.nu
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              probably. the actual demographics shifts don’t make it over here, only the final numbers.