Have you read the posts of the poster that I was replying to? If you have I don’t see how you can honestly state that I am engaged in a strawman fallacy. I am genuinely perplexed.
You have no idea what this means to me, coming from you.
So you actually think that the method of communication that you and Der Trihs engages in is actually convincing more than it is performative?
[bolding mine]
I believe you. More’s the pity.
Trump can be inarguably exhibiting overwhelmingly authoritarian and fascist tendencies, supported by documentation and innumerable statements wholly in concordance.
Hitler took power in '33. He didn’t invade Poland until '39. The idea that we’d all be in prisons now and that center or left-of-center media would all be state run at this point is a pure, unadulterated straw man.
Because people are talking about what they believe might be coming is not refuted by you pointing out that it is not yet here.
And yet, Republicans just won control of the entire government using exactly that strategy.
Maybe the problem is that we didn’t demonize the right enough over the last sixty years. Should have spent less time trying to build bridges, and more time calling them traitors and child predators.
Turns out … “snowflake --” as always – is nothing but projection with this crowd.
We should, of course, invite Leslie Jones.
And what I have been saying is that either they voted that way because they like racism and homophobia and shit, or they voted that way because the Democrats have utterly failed to communicate with a huge chunk of Americans. And in my opinion, it’s the latter.
And this is why we just need to split the Democratic party.
If the Progressive Party wants to declare that a huge chunk of the Electorate are unreachable fascists, double down on socialist and far left policy under the misguided assumption that despite being totally electorally unviable these policies are actually secretly hugely popular, etc - more power to them. Let them run on that platform, and let the Democrats reclaim sanity.
Yeah, maybe you should have called Bush a fascist chimp. How did no one ever think of such a brilliant strategy??
Sorry to break it to you, but you are missing the point of a) what a strawman is and b) my original point about how crying wolf is counterproductive.
Well, I disagree. I think Trump won because of a set of variables, not just memes. I think the predominant reason is backlash against globalization which is leading to a reshuffling of the coalitions that make up each party and this backlash will continue in other Western democracies.
It’s not either/or.
A majority of White Americans say that “seeing racism where it does not exist” is a bigger problem than “overlooking racism where it does exist.” cite. A plurality want to criminalize medical professionals who help minors attain gender-affirming care, and want to force trans people to use the bathroom of the gender they were assigned at birth, and want to investigate parents for child abuse if they help their child obtain gender-affirming care cite.
Yes, Democrats aren’t doing a great job communicating about economic issues. But also, a bunch of Americans are bigots.
Electorally viable:
- Plan to forcibly deport 12 million people in what Trump said would be “a bloody story”
- Institute trillions of dollars in new taxes (aka tariffs) because our new president doesn’t understand who pays tariffs
- Declare a huge chuck of the Electorate “the enemy within” and propose using the military to handle them
- Lying about transgender surgeries
- Lying about immigrants eating cats
- Being convicted of illegally paying hush money to a porn star with campaign funds
- Being held liable for raping a lady some years ago.
Either they supported the lawlessness, hatred and raping, or they ignored it…and I think the latter may be worse.
Yet at the same time, from your own cite:
So the majority of Americans support protecting Trans people and their place in society, a quarter don’t really care one way or the other, and only 10% oppose protecting Trans people.
The share of people who don’t care or actively oppose trans rights is smaller than the share of people who strongly support them.
When I see those stats, it makes me think that maybe the opposition to gender affirming care for minors, misguided as it may be, is not purely motivated by Transphobic hatred.
Same goes for your other stat. I think that racism that people don’t notice is a bigger problem than non racist incidents that people falsely flag as racist. But I certainly wouldn’t say that the only reason someone could possibly have to disagree with me is that they’re bigots.
Yeah, it’s pretty gross how people support Trump despite all these things.
Do you want to whine about it, or do you want to deal with reality and figure out how to win elections anyways?
I also think some people will only start pushing back when their particular ox is getting gored. It’s easy to be patient with an antisemitic uncle when you’re Polish Catholic.
I’m a powerless nobody who isn’t involved in Democratic election strategy, so I’m going to whine about it.
OK, have fun!
The problem isn’t that the Democrats aren’t communicating - the DNC spent over a billion dollars on this campaign. We could not possibly have done more to get our message out. The problem is that Americans don’t want difficult solutions to difficult problems, and won’t listen to people who propose them. That’s not a problem you can message your way out of, that’s a fundamental defect in the electorate. Currently, half of American adults can’t read at a sixth grade level, and we’re expecting them to understand the complexities of climate science?
Speaking of issues with reading comprehension, I shouldn’t need to explain that that was sarcasm, and yet: that was sarcasm. The idea that the problem with Democrats is that we’re too mean is obviously stupid, and that’s what I was responding to.
Reminder: I am literally one single person, and not “the Progressive Party” (whatever the fuck that’s supposed to be). I’m also not complaining that the Democrats weren’t progressive enough. I have zero problems with the Harris campaign, or the policies she ran on. Would I have preferred a more progressive platform? Sure. Would that have won the election for Harris? I doubt it; I don’t think this election was winnable for the Democrats. Too many Americans want exactly what Trump was selling, and too many more are just too fucking stupid to understand what they were voting for. Neither of those are things that Harris could possibly have changed. They’re systemic issues with American society that have been festering for decades.
If you want to argue with someone saying that the Dems lost because they weren’t progressive enough, you’re talking to the wrong poster. That’s something you need to take up with octopus:
Also, I think its important to highlight how absolutely fucking stupid “split the party” is as a solution to an election loss. Yes, we can totally get more votes by having fewer Democrats. That’s an absolutely galaxy-brained plan you’ve got there.
Not a phrase I’ve ever used in my life, but nice try. Also, again, sarcasm. But also, the thing I was sarcastically suggesting is that we nominate candidates who use that sort of language, because that appears to be the trick to getting Americans to vote for you.
So, out of two attempts to respond to that part of my post, you managed to be wrong in at least four different and unique ways. Nice job!
Well, I didn’t advocate splitting any party or parties. I said that there is a current realignment of political alliances because of the impact of globalization. Stating a fact is not advocacy.