Wonderful. If they don’t need the far left voters, then what exactly is the problem?
Let’s see how that strategy plays out.
If they don’t need the far left voters, then what exactly is the problem?
The problem is that some 48% of the electorate is ready to elect a fascist, and we’re sitting at 52% of a coalition that doesn’t agree on a single goddamn thing. And apparently, the smallest, leftmost wing of this coalition is beginning to flirt with the idea of “Just let the fascist win”, despite the fact that they are, nominally (but apparently not in actuality, as they seem ready to pop champagne bottles at the ushering in of a fascist age) the furthest from the fascist.
Progressives don’t want the fascists to win, they want you to listen to us. If the threat of fascists winning is not enough, then you were never going to be on our side.
The only people who have taken their ball and went home are the moderate neoliberals like yourself.
Give us some genuine halfway compromise, and you will have loyal progressive voters. The stakes are simply too high for you to not compromise. We bailed you out in 2020 and you owe us a favor.
So let’s see who blinks first.
Progressives don’t want the fascists to win,
Yeah, looking down through the comments by self-proclaimed leftists in this community, it seems like a great many of them are eager for the fascists to win to ‘show’ the Democrats what for. Fuck them minorities who’ll suffer or die.
So let’s see who blinks first.
Oh, fucking wonderful. I love it when genocide is used as the stakes in a game of dumb fucking machismo between two political factions who want to show off that THEY have the biggest balls in the room.
Goddammit.
If the threat of fascists winning is not enough, then you were never going to be on our side.
Okay, before we go further - is the reverse here true? If the threat of fascists winning is not enough for progressives to side with liberals, were progressives never going to be on the liberals’ side? Is that where we’re at?
