The comments on here don’t reflect those differences.

I see progressives on here everyday attacking democrats for fundraising.

Why is it that both Trump and progressives on lemmy want the DNC to not have fundraising?

“If conservatives become convinced that they can not win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. The will reject democracy.”

As republicans have become less popular over the years, they have resorted to more gerrymandering, voter suppression and psyop campaigns to win without catering to constituents. Like the one you are contributing to right now.

Your brain is mush if you seriously believe it’s perfectly OK for Dems to move right and repugs to also move right…

It is what the voters voted for. You sound like a dictator who demands it your way instead of what the people want.

He didnt just complain without trying to win. Like leftists are popular for doing.

Kamala campaigned to everyone. Trying to reach as many voters as possible because that is a prerequisite for winning elections and a reason leftists don’t win elections.

Russia needed Trump to win for their invasion. It is public knowledge that their strategy is to create infighting in the US so we are more divided and don’t get anything done. This is done by trying to push the right further right and the left further left.

We already know the GOP campaigns with the goal of preventing Dems from winning.

Kamala campaigned on making the wealthy pay their fair share so the billionaire class didn’t want her to win.

These are the obvious sources of “psyops” that are rampant on the internet right now.

This constant blaming the left for Democrats’ failure is the true psyop

This doesn’t even make sense.

Another bad faith argument.

You know that “majority” consisted of Sinema and Manchin and in addition to that, most big changes require a super majority.

But you’re just trying to cause infighting.

No one is “allowed” to take power. There is a constant struggle for it. Leftists have been losing that struggle because they don’t get enough votes.

Dems move right because it is a politician’s job to cater to their constituents regardless of their ideology. If there are fewer leftist constituents then the politicians move right.

Obvious bad faith argument. Voters and gerrymandering from the GOP moved the country further right.

The country will move left when leftists start winning elections.

Which is much less likely now that Trump is in office.

The problem is, all that fighting, criticizing and finger pointing can be weaponized. That’s why FUD works.

You just amplify any legit concerns until they seem worse than Trump.

I’m convinced most of the leftists on here are either foreign actors or repeating their talking points.

That strategy won the majority of elections since the 90s.

Trump lost by more in 2020 and repeated his strategy just to win. Too bad he didn’t follow the leftist strategy of complaining and not trying to win.

I’m convinced they are bad actors. With all the damage Trump is doing they still complain about the alternative like they are campaigning for the GOP.

This is why leftists consistently lose elections.

Why do Democrats talk like they can win elections but then blame voters when they lose?

Because they’ve won the majority of elections in the last 3 decades. They arent blaming voters when they lose. The voters that voted democrat are blaming leftists for not voting and getting Trump elected.

And to be honest, I don’t really even follow your post. Are Democrats not progressives? Are we agreeing that they are center right and that their base isn’t really motivated to vote for that?

Democrats have been moving left since Obama. Leftist didn’t show up to vote this elections because of Gaza so they got Trump elected. So now democrats need to cater to the right to increase voter turnout.

Why is it that progressives consistently lose elections but talk like they know how to win elections?

If progressives know how to win better than democrats why do they keep losing elections?

We are in an echo chamber. Downvotes on lemmy do not reflect a real world consensus on opinions.

Literally anyone can run in a closed primary. A closed primary means that only registered members of the party can vote in the primary.

Winning the primary decides whether or not someone can run as a candidate in the general election. Either you need that explained because you don’t know anything about primaries or you are pretending to not understand what you’re reading.

There are only 15 states that hold closed primaries. I live in a state with open primaries, and I’m repped by Ed Markey, Elizabeth Warren, and Ayanna Pressley. Not exactly a bunch of secret conservatives, is it?

Your reading comprehension is failing you again. Having no vetting process doesn’t guarentee the candidate is a “secret conservative” it just increases the chances of it happening. I’m surprised I need to explain that again.

It isn’t. Sit down, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

vetting noun [ U ] US /ˈvet.ɪŋ/ UK /ˈvet.ɪŋ/ the action of examining someone or something carefully to make certain that they are or it is acceptable or suitable for something

It’s literally the definition of what they are doing with closed primaries. Why does that need to be explained to you?

And giving people the choice between center right and far-right doesn’t motivate voters.

That choice was made by the voters.

LOL, how do you think letting anyone run as a candidate without vetting them will turn out?

Absolutely any bad actor will be able to run without intervention. The floodgates would be open. Which is probably what the bad actors calling for open primaries want.

Also, closed primaries don’t add any more vetting. They just mean that the only people who get to vote in the primaries are party members.

This is the definition of vetting. lol

Nah, they just cater to their corporate donors and folks that would never vote for them.

Because of Citizens United, this is a necessary evil. You either get donors or you lose from lack of funding.

Look at the progressives that lost recently because AIPAC out funded their competition.

Voters had to chose between two candidates, one on the left and one on the right. Voters chose the one on the right. Meaning not enough leftist showed up to vote.

Leftist don’t show up to vote > voters chose the option furthest right > leftists learn nothing, blame democrats and do it again next cycle.

This is why leftist keep losing elections and their legislation doesn’t get passed. They refuse to work with other ideologies and they don’t have enough voters to accomplish anything alone.

Democratic Party is made up of people the voters chose. Many of whom are moderate.

If leftists can’t get enough voters to change that, it won’t change.

Politicians don’t cater to groups that don’t vote.

They need to start poking bears. Use the laws even if outnumbered. Show force; show pressure.

These words mean nothing. They are not a strategy or a plan or even coherent.

You’re avoiding the fact that in a democracy, you need enough votes to make things happen.

Tell us what is happening. Get the word out. We can’t help if all we hear is what has happened.

We know what’s happening. That’s why we are having this conversation.

The rules have changed and democrats are still using a textbook from 1990.

What rules have changed? Republicans are breaking the rules by performing a coup. To even imply that democrats should do the same thing as republicans shows you’re arguing in bad faith.