The two progressive lawmakers have addressed massive crowds in solidly red states including Idaho and Utah in recent days, as party of the national Fighting Oligarchy Tour.

A survey taken by Harvard’s Center for American Political Studies and Harris between April 9-10 found that 72% of Democratic voters supported politicians like Sanders (I-Vt.) and Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), “who are calling on Democrats to adopt a more aggressive stance towards Trump and his administration and ‘fight harder’,” rather than leaders who are willing to “compromise” with President Donald Trump.

    • rocket_dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      25 days ago

      Bernie can’t be the nominee because if he were to win and subsequently fail and not deliver - exactly what the democrats want and would ensure - they could not march him out to smother the anger again in the next election cycle.

      For what purpose, because when they do this they lose anyway.

      Your reasoning is just, “they can’t risk losing after they win, so they’re just going to lose in the first place instead”. “Democrats can’t risk losing their losing strategy”. Your reasoning is nonsensical.

      Did you not realize that she actually doesn’t answer question but talks gobbledygook around them?

      Kamala is very articulate and laid out some very specific details of plans. She pivoted to “politically correct” when it came to culturally contentious topics like trans rights, which I don’t love, but at least Walz stood on business on trans rights.

      To say Kamala spoke “gobbledygook” is objectively false, right wing propoganda.

      You verbatim speak like a right wing troll hyped up on low effort propoganda spreading horizontal hostility.

            • Mjpasta710@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              25 days ago

              You’re not paying attention to Bernie’s fighting the oligarchy tour or facts.

              One of his points on the tour is arguing for an increased minimum wage. Bernie does the opposite of ignoring it.

              @lemming: You’re the one with egg on their face in this conversation right now.

                • Mjpasta710@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  25 days ago

                  The comments you directly ignored were specific to minimum wage.

                  Do you think a country doesn’t have a right to self defense?

                  Where’s the country you’re in, guessing they don’t deserve sovereignty either?

                  That’s a very real conclusion that could be drawn from your statement.

                  You’re still covered in schmutz, by smearing the dirty eggs in your face.

                  You’re still ignoring the facts, and trying to push buttons.

                  There’s no point with a goalpost moving liar.

            • rocket_dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              25 days ago

              Because your question spam was just a distraction from the original point that "you said something very stupid and nonsensical*, and I called you out on it. Rather than accept any kind of accountability for yourself, you made a desperate bid to take the conversation literally anywhere else.

              You aren’t a real person, 100% of your Lemmy comment history is “I hate Democrats and Bernie” political brainrot trolling. Real people have human personalities and hobbies. You’re an empty shell.

    • lemonaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      25 days ago

      Dems are too incompetent to…

      Ah, there we go, right out the gate: the enemy is both strong and weak. The hallmark of paranoid imagination and conspiracism (hence why it’s also a component of fascism).

      Bernie has been consistent in working for harm reduction alongside preaching good policy. There’s a reason they call him the amendment king: he can walk and chew gum, if you can believe it.

        • lemonaz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          25 days ago

          “Context” says the guy bringing out-of-context (yet objectively correct) Bernie quotes, meant to paint him as some establishment shill. Especially now as he’s doing tours around the country to get people to rally against the fascist oligarchs and pass on the progressive mantle to someone younger, instead of I dunno staying home with his family because he’s old and should rest and enjoy his old years — it’s not like he’s running for president. He owes nothing to no one, he gains nothing from this, but he did it anyway because he saw that this is the best shot progressives will get to take hold of the Democratic Party, now that it’s weak and confused. And it’s working.

            • lemonaz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              25 days ago

              He might not live that long…

              I don’t know the future, depends a lot on the environment. But if you’re in a general election with two viable choices, one is a pro-corporate pro-democracy candiate and the other a pro-corporate anti-democracy candidate, then objectively speaking, if you want to save democracy you have to vote the first choice.

              By “viable” I mean someone you know people will vote enough to be able to take on the candidate who does the most damage. I’m sorry but a Jill Stein like figure who only pops up in election years with the stated goal of siphoning votes from the less horrible candidate, that’s not what I’d call viable. They could be if they fought for ranked choice voting — then there would be no concern of siphoning votes.

              General elections aren’t so much about fixing everything then and there, they’re more about maintaining the environment necessary for changes to happen via public pressure, activism, protests, direct action, even future elections (all of which are way more precarious now that the greater evil won).

              People make voting in the general seem like such a heroic act of defiance to “reject the duopoly”, but that’s just an aestheticization of politics, a way for people to say a visceral “fuck you” to the system while fucking themselves too and getting nothing in return except schadenfreude. Making voting into an identity is peak liberal virtue signaling (even when leftists do it, even when MAGA does it), and it’s costing us everything.

                • lemonaz@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  25 days ago

                  You’re clinging to semantics here, which is very frustrating — and honestly not helpful at all except for edgy leftists who can’t stand engaging pragmatically with electoralism because it makes them feel dirty.

                  When I say pro-democracy, I mean they’re not explicitly anti-democracy, that is not explicitly pro-dismantling-democracy-forever-with-high-priority the way the other guys demonstrably are. So yes, given the context, we’re grading on a curve here — obviously. That’s why we say they’re the lesser evil as opposed to “the good guys”. Jesus fuck, some people really want to be the smuggest person in the death camp. Right now Bernie’s your only shot, but I’m not your boss, keep shitting on him.

                  It’s clear as day that they sabotoged the whole process.

                  And who did they sabotage it against? Jesus Christ!