this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2025
115 points (98.3% liked)
Progressive Politics
3197 readers
742 users here now
Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)
(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The point however, regardless of if you are willing to surrender our high standards of living to the rich under Democrats that do not restore our position to before the Republicans, is that by not being popular, and not instituting that reform, the Democrats lose and allowed the Republicans to win.
We all know what the electorate is, that being better than the other guy is not enough to win, so why do we support running people only being better than the other guy that cannot win? It is very simple.
All true; and whose fault is that?
It’s not the “Democrats’ fault”. After all, their goal isn’t to win - it’s to make themselves just popular enough to make victory plausible and garner donations. 45% of the vote is a “victory” for them. They don’t need to be more popular. They don’t need to push anti-billionaire sentiments when “same old” policies get them to that 45%. They uncork the champagne when election anxiety brings donations in, not when they win those elections.
But for that to get to 45% requires 55% of the country to be voting for “FUCK MINORITIES, FUCK HEALTHCARE, FUCK SOCIAL SECURITY, FUCK OUR ALLIES, give EVERYTHING to billionaires, no tax on tips woohoo.” That leaves a very obvious direction for improvement.
We don’t “support” leaving things shit, we just think that’s better than actively making things worse. Of course, we’re also sentient humans capable of thought which is better than the 55%.