• BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    5 months ago

    I said itsy tiny little bit left with the map room. How many adjectives do you need? No one is saying she was far left, again see adjectives. That’s what she ran on and bam she lost the election. Thanks protest no voters!

    • blazera@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      Have you considered why you have to use so many adjectives? Because she didnt at all run on a progressive platform. And you are claiming Obama won for not running on any progressiveness. He extensively ran on climate change and healthcare reform. Youve stretched your characterizations so far to try to fit your theory that you put Hillary to the left of Obama. Maybe its your theory that needs changing instead.

      • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        5 months ago

        I use those adjectives because you want to change it to “she’s not [far] left”. And I’m clarifying what her position was. It was just a tiny bit left.

        The number of adjectives is because people like to skip over it l, so I add more to get people to notice. And you’re still at it! That’s twice that you try to force words into my mouth. So ciao.

          • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            5 months ago

            Ok take out the far.

            You’re saying she’s not left. And: I didn’t say she’s left, I said she ran a teeny weeny itsy little bit left with the map room to fight climate change. And you wonder why I have the adjectives lol.

            • blazera@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              I promise you I see the words. The problem is that Obama won his elections, so you can only downplay her progressiveness so far. I wouldnt characterize his campaigns as being itsy bitsy teeny weeny left. You mentioned him campaigning on the word Hope, but he also famously campaigned on “Change we can believe in”.

    • treefrog@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      You really drank the Hillary/DNC kool aid if you’re still blaming protest voters in 2024.

      And the double think in your post is glaring by the way. She went a tiny bit to the left and bam she loses the election because protest voters refused to vote for her? How does this even add up?

      No she lost because she was an establishment candidate out of touch with the will of the people who ran on her privilege rather than her policies. So out of touch that she had to manipulate the primary to even get into the general. And so out of touch that rather than accepting the loss and taking responsibility for it, she shamed voters.

      • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        It was two fold why Hilary lost. Trump appealed to manufacturing class. And the left wing protest no voted.

        because protest voters refused to vote for her? How does this even add up?

        Well since you had a fun tone I’ll take a fun tone. JFC because left voters did not show up. Instead of showing up, the left voters protest no voted. She stuck her head a tiny bit left with the map room and climate change, and the left wing did not show up to vote and instead did a no vote protest.

        • treefrog@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Right but the way your framing it you’re acting like she moved a little bit to the left and that was the reason that left voters didn’t vote for her.

          At least that’s the way I’m understanding what you are saying which is why I asked. I wasn’t having fun. It was an honest question so I could hope to understand your position better.

          I was having fun with my Kool-Aid comment. But that was a different paragraph.

          A whole other way to frame this is that Hillary’s nepotism and the DNC lost that election by assuming that the left owes them their vote. Rather than thinking that politicians should earn our votes, and that the DNC should listen to the their base if they want voter turn out.

          • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            You can get into whatever psychological analysis you want (and I’ll do mine), at the end of it left voters don’t show up. She moved a little bit left with map room to fight climate change, a policy that should have been important to left voters, and left voters did not show up.

            So the next candidate Biden learns he has to go to the center to find voters. This is what happens every single time. Every time. Happened with Carter & Bill Clinton, happened with Gore & Obama, happened with Hilary & Biden.

            If you or any other voter want things to go left, you have to give dems consistent and overwhelming victories.

            • treefrog@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 months ago

              Right, because she didn’t move far enough to the left. That’s what I was saying about she needed to turn out her base too.

              And as I said in my other comment I think protest voting is petty and stupid. But I think Hillary’s sense of entitlement was a huge fucking turn off to lots of people including voters on the left but also centrists.

              So this is a situation of mutual responsibility. And blaming voters for not showing up when Hillary didn’t do her part to encourage them to show up I don’t think it’s helpful either.

              • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Sigh. You take small steps before big steps. You walk before you run. You stick your toes in before a big plunge. And when they do, the voters never come out. They. Never. Show. Up.

                Never, not for Carter, not for Gore, not for Hilary.

                What do they learn from this? The left voters never show up. Don’t bother trying to court them because they never show up. Or even stronger, you’d be an absolute fool to try to court them because they. Never. Show. Up.

                They learn to go to the center to find voters. And guess fucking what? Those voters show up. So guess fucking what? That’s where they go. Every. Single. Time.

                Mutual responsibility? Dems have tried. And they’ve paid with losses. Every. Single. Time. So they go to the center to find votes. Waiting for some big left platform is not going to work. Because dems stick their toes left and lose. See all the phrases again, walk before you run. Non-voters holding out like it’s a Mexican standoff when it’s not, the Dems see they just have to go to the center instead every time they lose.

    • doughless@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      But you did say she moved “too far” left - if it was her itsy bitsy move left that caused non-voter protests, that is literally by definition “too far.”

      But you’re misidentifying the cause here, while somehow still ending up at the right conclusion.

      She very well may have lost because of non-voter protestors, but it was because she wasn’t far enough left. And if Hillary had actually moved further left to win those protestors’ votes, she would have lost the center vote. And Biden may very well lose for the same reason, so the lesson should be if you don’t want Trump to win, then don’t protest vote simply because Biden isn’t far enough left.

      • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        too far

        Ctrl+F “too far” and 0 results. Nope I didn’t say “too far”.

        What I’m saying is that she stuck her head a tiny bit left, and guess what happened? The voters didn’t turn out. They protest no-voted. As in, the left voters never show up. (or excruciatingly rarely) Candidates at various times stick their head a tiny bit left trying to court those voters, but nope the voters don’t show up.

        You think they have to go even more, but every time they run left in any amount (either Gore or Hilary) the voters don’t show up. This is how it works, you go a little bit left, and see if you win. Sorry you don’t go extreme left to see if you win, you stick your toes in first. And every time the Dems do, they lose. So what does the next candidate learn? Don’t go left, because they don’t show up and you lose. They learn you go to the center to find votes.

        The message to left voters is: If you want things to move left, then you have to show up. The dems have learnt time and time again that you can’t count on left voters. So they go to the center to find voters. If you want things to move left, then give Dems consistent and overwhelming victories. You have to take small steps before big steps. You have to walk before you run. Not just president, congress too because again they will go center to find congress votes.

        • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          What I’m saying is that she stuck her head a tiny bit left, and guess what happened? The voters didn’t turn out.

          So you’re saying that she went too far left for the electorate right? Or are you saying her going left had no appreciable impact, because she didn’t go left at all and these massive paragraphs you’re writing are just an exercise in pretending to be a LLM?

              • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                5 months ago

                What is going on here. She went a little bit left and lost (because the left voters didn’t show up). So the next candidate learns to go to the center to find voters (because the left voters don’t show up). Every single time.

                I just went to find and link my explanation to someone else just to find that it’s what you responded to. If you don’t get it then you are really trying hard to not get it and/or discussing in bad faith. Ciao.

                • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  I’m not arguing in bad faith, you’re making an argument that has zero substance to it. There’s not a fucking argument to be had here.

                  If you’re saying both simultaneously that Hilary went left and that she didn’t go left, you’re just arguing with yourself.

                  • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    You walk before you run. You take small steps before big steps. That is how it works. Why am I bothering, I’m out.

        • doughless@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          Okay, it sounds like you’re saying the same thing - that Hillary tried to convince left wing voters she is on their side, and they protested because it “wasn’t enough.” Your original statement made it sound like she lost because she tried to move slightly left.

            • doughless@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              No, they protested in spite of her trying to move left, not because she tried to move left.

              Although I’ll admit it’s a distinction without a difference. Democrats are going to continue to refuse to move farther left if we don’t vote because we think they’re not left enough.

              • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                5 months ago

                You’re making no sense. Protest no vote in spite of her moving a little bit left is an oxymoron. Unless you meant protest no vote to spite her. In which case it doesn’t matter because of exactly what I’m saying, left voters don’t show up. You’d be an absolute fool to court voters that never show up, (again when you walk before you run). So candidates go to the center to find voters that do show up.

                • doughless@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  Are you saying that if Hillary had rejected the map room proposal, then left wing voters would have turned out to vote for her?

                  That’s ridiculous to think that moving further right would have got more left voters to turn out to vote.

                  Meaning the map room proposal had no effect on left wing voters, because it wasn’t enough. It did not cause them to protest.

                  • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    No I’m not. I think you don’t know what “in spite of” means. The correct usage of that expression would be: “The far left wing wanted Hillary to move far left. But they voted for her anyway in spite of her only moving a little bit left.”

                    This entire conversation has been you (intentionally or otherwise) misreading and/or misinterpreting and/or twisting words, so I’m leaving this conversation. I think I’ve explained things well enough.