Many Democrats continue to believe that the racism of average Americans — many of whom voted for Barack Obama twice — explains why Donald Trump won. This moralism suits party elites who would rather demonize the public than address growing inequality.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    421 days ago

    That is exactly how it works. Criticizing the better option of the two will reduce turnout for that candidate. That’s the whole purpose of political campaigns.

    That’s how Trump got elected. We had a better option but people complained so much that the worse option won.

    Your attempt to claim both sides are as similar as Hitler and Himmler is an obvious bad faith argument of “both sides are the same”.

    • Otter
      link
      fedilink
      English
      721 days ago

      I find this unproductive. People SHOULD ask their elected representatives (and candidates) to improve. I want people to point it out when my preferred candidate does something wrong, because then they’re more likely to address it before the election.

      That is exactly how it works. Criticizing the better option of the two will reduce turnout for that candidate. That’s the whole purpose of political campaigns.

      I’m not saying this doesn’t happen, but I don’t think a significant number of people changed their mind about voting for her because of the protests.

      • Option 1: Politically engaged people don’t point out a problem -> The candidate doesn’t address the problem -> The average voter doesn’t vote for the candidate because of the problem

      • Option 2: Politically engaged people DO point out a problem -> The candidate addresses the problem -> The average voter is more likely to vote for the candidate

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        221 days ago

        Maybe if it wasn’t Trump and fascism on the line.

        But in this context you’re referring to the prevention of fascism as “unproductive”.

        • Otter
          link
          fedilink
          English
          7
          edit-2
          21 days ago

          But in this context you’re referring to the prevention of fascism as “unproductive”.

          I’m saying that if the candidate listened to the protests and addressed the issues that were brought up, they may have gotten more votes. Arguably, having MORE protests may have helped them win if it could convince the leadership to make changes.

          Outcry from supporters is what convinced Biden to step down, which I think helped the Democrats come closer. Protest is important if it can help a party make the right adjustments in their campaign.

          Telling people to stay silent is unproductive.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            121 days ago

            Not all voters agreed with those protests. Arguably, the candidate would’ve lost by more if they listened to the protests and addressed the issues that were brought up.

            What we can’t argue about is the fact that the protests hurt voter turnout and now Trump is the president.

            • Otter
              link
              fedilink
              English
              721 days ago

              Not all voters agreed with those protests. Arguably, the candidate would’ve lost by more if they listened to the protests and addressed the issues that were brought up.

              Even if this was true, silencing any criticism isn’t the solution. In most parts of the world anyway

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                121 days ago

                Every candidate will have criticisms.

                Every politician will amplify their opponent’s criticism to impact election results.

                Validating concern trolls isn’t the solution.

                Getting everyone to vote in everyone’s best interest is.

                Allowing the GOP to gain more power and end democracy is unproductive.

                • Otter
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  6
                  edit-2
                  21 days ago

                  Was the timing of the protests the problem in your opinion? The way that it was done?

                  In your opinion, how should supporters of a party express what they want changed with an electoral platform

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    121 days ago

                    The timing, the fact that it was only used against democrats is a sign that the GOP will use it to their advantage.

                    The way it was done is also an issue. In this context, the message of the protest was that democrats needed to give the protestors what they want. Otherwise democrats wouldn’t get votes from the protestors. Resulting in the protestors helping Trump get elected.

                    Democrats have constituents that do not agree with those protestors and so democrats would’ve lost votes by giving into the protestors. Resulting in the protestors helping Trump get elected in this outcome also.

                    In my opinion, supporters of a party should express what they want changed by engaging with their politicians.

                    The only time that won’t work with a politician is if their intel indicates they gain more votes by not making those changes.

                    In that scenario, the supporters need to accept that the majority rules in a democracy and vote for the lesser of two evils because that is in the best interest of those supporters.

                    Instead what happened was protestors cut off their nose to spite their face and now things are much worse as a result.