I’m talking to you about the practical benefit of voting for a particular candidate, not blame. Leftists comprise maybe 5% of registered voters. Centrist Neo-Libs comprise probably 30+%. Leftist turnout is significant in tipping a close election, but not enough to carry it without the Neo-Libs.
Neo-Lib candidates are better for Leftists than Fascists are. On every single metric, they are better, or at the very worst equal. Even if you consider the Ratchet model, the keep-things-the-same party is objectively better than the ratchet-to-the-right party. At least it gives you time to popularize Leftist policies and candidates. The further we ratchet to the right, the harder it is to promote the Left.
Not my party, not my wing. I categorize myself as one of the “Leftists who understand the basics of American elections” mentioned above. I vote strategically, because a Leftist isn’t one of the top two names on the ticket. The name with an R next to it is significantly detrimental to the advancement of Leftist policy, the name with the D next to it is also detrimental, but to a far lesser degree.
Until an effective Leftist’s name takes one of the top two spots on the ballot, the math is simple: D > R. Even if both are negative, so long as D > R, the choice e is D, every time.
And I’m voting for whoever the Democrats put up. Lecture more. Democrats won’t do shit to advance leftist policy. They barely hold back Republicans. When they feel like it.
As always, anyone to the left is significant enough to blame for every loss a neoliberal earns, but not significant enough to listen to.
I’m talking to you about the practical benefit of voting for a particular candidate, not blame. Leftists comprise maybe 5% of registered voters. Centrist Neo-Libs comprise probably 30+%. Leftist turnout is significant in tipping a close election, but not enough to carry it without the Neo-Libs.
Neo-Lib candidates are better for Leftists than Fascists are. On every single metric, they are better, or at the very worst equal. Even if you consider the Ratchet model, the keep-things-the-same party is objectively better than the ratchet-to-the-right party. At least it gives you time to popularize Leftist policies and candidates. The further we ratchet to the right, the harder it is to promote the Left.
Which is why your wing of the party loves doing it.
Not my party, not my wing. I categorize myself as one of the “Leftists who understand the basics of American elections” mentioned above. I vote strategically, because a Leftist isn’t one of the top two names on the ticket. The name with an R next to it is significantly detrimental to the advancement of Leftist policy, the name with the D next to it is also detrimental, but to a far lesser degree.
Until an effective Leftist’s name takes one of the top two spots on the ballot, the math is simple: D > R. Even if both are negative, so long as D > R, the choice e is D, every time.
And I’m voting for whoever the Democrats put up. Lecture more. Democrats won’t do shit to advance leftist policy. They barely hold back Republicans. When they feel like it.