Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said in an interview with NBC News that he will encourage progressive voters to still back Democrats on the ticket in November even if moderates are victorious in the primaries.
Again, a party’s stance on any given policy is dictated by the members of the party. Which means that the voters can force the party to adopt a new position if they vote for candidates who want change.
It also means that if most of members of the party are criminals who support a genocide that becomes the party’s stance.
That’s literally what the theory and paper supporting it is about… Just because you refuse to accept what it claims does not mean it’s not supporting evidence.
If the theory claims that you can predict people vote then it’s a wrong theory because you cannot do that. People vote is a variable that can change according to a number so high of parameters that makes it “impossible” to predict.
Voting for people who run on an anti fascist platform is fascist…sure.
The democratic party is an anti fascist platform? The same platform supporting corporations, mass surveillance, authoritarian regimes and a genocide where kids are being murdered?
In a hypothetical situation where the only options for a candidate is a person like Abdul El-Sayed (dnc) or a person like Mike Rogers (rnc). Your claim would suggest that both candidates are just as bad because the leaders of their respective parties have both endorsed Israel? Even though Israel spent 60 million dollars in against Abdul’s primary election?
If you decide to affiliate with and to be under a leader who support a genocide because it gives you more popularity and votes you are not a good person. If a candidate was actually bad for israel government they would spend 60 millions to assasinate them.
So they are guilty by association? By that logic why are you supporting the genocide of Palestinians? You are tax paying citizen of a western nation supporting the genocide of Palestinians. Why would you associate yourself with a country that bombs children? Why not just move to a nation that has nothing to do with genocide?
You could indeed argue that anyone who pay taxes in a first world country is supporting the genocide, we are all guilty of enabling a corrupted system the same way germans were in nazi germany. Not paying taxes has direct repercussions such as going to jail, there aren’t any of such repercussions in choosing a different party to run with.
Your decisions still aid a party and a country that supports genocide.
That’s your assumption based on the propaganda that if you don’t vote for THE party you are doing something bad.
also means that if most of members of the party are criminals who support a genocide that becomes the party’s stance.
Which is a great reason why as many of those members who hold those beliefs should be voted out of office. The fastest and most likely way to achieve that is to primary them.
the theory claims that you can predict people vote then it’s a wrong theory because you cannot do that
You can build models to predict the way populations vote with varying degrees of accuracy. The more data you have to plug into those models, the more accurate it will be. For something like the likelihood of the average American voter choosing a third party candidate… We have a lot of data.
People vote is a variable that can change according to a number so high of parameters that makes it “impossible” to predict.
According to who?
The democratic party is an anti fascist platform?
It includes people who won primaries running on an anti fascist platform…
The same platform supporting corporations, mass surveillance, authoritarian regimes and a genocide where kids are being murdered?
Again, you are falsely conflating an entire party with an individual candidate.
you decide to affiliate with and to be under a leader who support a genocide because it gives you more popularity and votes you are not a good person. If a candidate was actually bad for israel government they would spend 60 millions to assasinate them.
Lol, can’t answer the question.
Not paying taxes has direct repercussions such as going to jail,
Ahh, so it’s cool for you to support genocide because you don’t want to face any repercussions? Sounds like you really care about the children of Palestine.
there aren’t any of such repercussions in choosing a different party to run with.
It would allow the democratic candidate who wins to be an actual genocide supporter.
That’s your assumption based on the propaganda
It’s just a reality… If there was even a slim chance don’t you think out of the 535 representatives there would be at least one person who didn’t caucus with Democrats or Republicans?
Which is a great reason why as many of those members who hold those beliefs should be voted out of office. The fastest and most likely way to achieve that is to primary them.
The same way “the voting population of the Republican party would be less likely to choose a progressive candidate” i expect the voting population of the Democrat party to less likely choose a candidate that isn’t aligned with the party capitalistic and authoritarian policies.
In the case where a good democrat lose against a bad democrat in primaries all the party resources gets redirected to the latest, which is what keeps happening over and over.
You can build models to predict the way populations vote with varying degrees of accuracy. The more data you have to plug into those models, the more accurate it will be.
With the tools established by red and blue administrations it’s indeed quite easy to collect and gather data about every person in the world and know exactly what they are up to at any given time…
For something like the likelihood of the average American voter choosing a third party candidate… We have a lot of data.
We indeed have a lot of data on people voting out and fighting government and that’s why authorities are spending billions and trillions to keep their grip on power and control the public.
People vote is a variable that can change according to a number so high of parameters that makes it “impossible” to predict.
According to who?
According to logic
Again, you are falsely conflating an entire party with an individual candidate.
If you affiliate with, endorse, support and run for a party you are doing major work for it
Even though Israel spent 60 million dollars in against Abdul’s primary election?
Lol, can’t answer the question.
Israel government is spending a billion in propaganda, they put money on whatever gives them an advantage and good press, if trump was running against someone even more evil they would put money on the latest to get away with even more evil actions. If they put money against Abdul it means they didn’t want him to win and that they could fight him off putting the money where they did.
Ahh, so it’s cool for you to support genocide because you don’t want to face any repercussions? Sounds like you really care about the children of Palestine.
Yes i do care about innocent children getting murdered with the help of the government, what about you?
It would allow the democratic candidate who wins to be an actual genocide supporter.
Wrong, again that’s your assumption rooted in propaganda that if you don’t vote for “the party” the enemy win.
It’s just a reality… If there was even a slim chance
Governments are spending billions in propaganda and mass surveillance because the chances they get vote out and replaced are realistic
expect the voting population of the Democrat party to less likely choose a candidate that isn’t aligned with the party capitalistic and authoritarian policies
Less likely compared to the Republicans?
case where a good democrat lose against a bad democrat in primaries all the party resources gets redirected to the latest, which is what keeps happening over and over.
Have you been following the latest primaries…?
With the tools established by red and blue administrations
Ahh yes, the numbers are biased against reality… Sure bud.
We indeed have a lot of data on people voting out and fighting government and that’s why authorities are spending billions and trillions to keep their grip on power and control the public.
Lol, we’ve spent trillions of dollars fighting …the green party?
According to logic
The thing you don’t understand?
If you affiliate with, endorse, support and run for a party you are doing major work for it
You affiliate with your country, pay taxes for its wars, choose to live within its borders, so that means you like genocide? Why don’t you move to a country that doesn’t support genocide? Because it’s difficult? People immigrate with less resources than you every day. Why choose to support genocide? Why choose to stay and try and change an evil country instead of just moving to a country that doesn’t slaughter children?
Abdul it means they didn’t want him to win and that they could fight him off putting the money where they did
So… Why did they not want Abdul to win? Come on you are so close to making a logical deduction.
Yes i do care about innocent children getting murdered with the help of the government, what about you?
Again, according to your logic it doesn’t seem like you do. Why continue to support a government that does genocide when you could simply choose to move to a different country?
My claims do not support guilt by association, I think voting for candidates who have an actual chance at winning and are anti Israel is how we stop the genocide.
again that’s your assumption rooted in propaganda that if you don’t vote for “the party” the enemy win.
Math is propaganda… Something tells me you didn’t do very well in school.
Governments are spending billions in propaganda and mass surveillance because the chances they get vote out and replaced are realistic
What evidence do you have to support the claim that it is realistic that a third party is likely to elect enough representatives to Congress to have an influence on a genocide happening right now? None… You have no evidence.
Lol, we’ve spent trillions of dollars fighting …the green party?
Yes, governments spend billions and trillions in consolidating their power and fighting any potential threat to their stability which include any party that could ruin their authoritarian plans.
You affiliate with your country, pay taxes for its wars, choose to live within its borders, so that means you like genocide? Why don’t you move to a country that doesn’t support genocide? Because it’s difficult? People immigrate with less resources than you every day. Why choose to support genocide? Why choose to stay and try and change an evil country instead of just moving to a country that doesn’t slaughter children?
You are comparing living in a country and being forced to pay taxes to voluntarily choosing to be part of a party that support and endorse a genocide
So… Why did they not want Abdul to win? Come on you are so close to making a logical deduction.
For the same reason they don’t want a third party to win over red and blue, they increase their odds to get away with a genocide by supporting scum.
Again, according to your logic it doesn’t seem like you do. Why continue to support a government that does genocide when you could simply choose to move to a different country?
As you are making these stupid arguments there are kids being murdered in gaza in a genocide perpetrated by the israel government with the full support of the red and blue party.
Math is propaganda… Something tells me you didn’t do very well in school.
Arguing that not voting for a party is doing evil it’s propaganda at it’s finest.
What evidence do you have to support the claim that it is realistic that a third party is likely to elect enough representatives to Congress to have an influence on a genocide happening right now? None… You have no evidence.
In elections you are not supposed to vote for the party more likely to win, you are supposed to vote for the party you agree with.
Operation gladio was against an entirely different nation state, not two political parties competing against a third. This is a ridiculous comparison.
You are comparing living in a country and being forced to pay taxes to voluntarily choosing to be part of a party that support and endorse a genocide
I’m comparing a choice of affiliation. Progressive candidates could leave the democratic party for a third party, but it would prevent their ability to win office. You could choose to immigrate to a new country, it would just be difficult.
For the same reason they don’t want a third party to win over red and blue
Lol, so you are admitting that Abdul is an anti Israel anti fascist candidate of the Democratic party? You do realize he won the primary as a Democrat, right?
are making these stupid arguments there are kids being murdered in gaza in a genocide perpetrated by the israel government with the full support of the red and blue party.
Again… Dodging the question. Why not simply choose to end your affiliations with the countries doing that genocide?
Also, it’s not the full support. There are over 20 house Democrats that have cospinsored a genocide resolution bill and over 100 Democrats that have voted to restrict weapon sales and military aid.
Even if a third party candidate beat the odds and one a seat, they would still be working with those Democrats to stop the genocide.
not voting for a party is doing evil it’s propaganda at it’s finest.
Splitting the vot in a close election between a progressive Democrat and a fascist is supporting evil.
In elections you are not supposed to vote for the party more likely to win, you are supposed to vote for the party you agree with.
According to who? You have the naivety of a middle schooler.
Operation gladio was against an entirely different nation state, not two political parties competing against a third. This is a ridiculous comparison.
“According to several Western European researchers, the operation involved the use of assassination, psychological warfare, and false flag operations to delegitimize left-wing parties in Western European”
It’s not a comparison it’s the history of our countries.
I’m comparing a choice of affiliation. Progressive candidates could leave the democratic party for a third party, but it would prevent their ability to win office.
Not paying taxes gets you in jail and in legal troubles, always. Running for a different party does not prevent your ability to win, that’s your assumption rooted in the propaganda that no third party can ever win. Associating yourself with evil to boost your ability to win power sounds like opportunistic bullshit to me, especially when you are running for a position where you are supposed to be trusted by everyone else.
Lol, so you are admitting that Abdul is an anti Israel anti fascist candidate of the Democratic party? You do realize he won the primary as a Democrat, right?
People can claim whatever they want, if their actions align with these of a fascist party they are not much anti fascist at all. What is this anti fascist guy doing on the private platform of a nazi?
If israel spent millions against him that’s good evidence that the guy may be against them but let’s not forget how much many of these “progressive” and “good” candidates are aligned with power.
Again… Dodging the question. Why not simply choose to end your affiliations with the countries doing that genocide?
That’s a good question for everyone to answer, if you open a thread on asklemmy i’ll gladly provide the best answer i could provide, there is a lot to say on this issue
Splitting the vot in a close election between a progressive Democrat and a fascist is supporting evil.
“not voting for the red and blue party is supporting evil”
not exactly, i would argue that voting for someone evil is supporting evil, voting for someone good is doing good.
It’s not a comparison it’s the history of our countries
You’re conflating national and foreign policy…
Not paying taxes gets you in jail and in legal troubles
Why not move to a different country?
Running for a different party does not prevent your ability to win
Yes it does… I’ve already given evidence supporting my argument. You have failed to give any evidence to support yours.
if their actions align with these of a fascist party they are not much anti fascist at all
And the Democrats who have already gone against the party line?
open a thread on asklemmy i’ll gladly provide the best answer i could provide, there is a lot to say on this issue
Lol, avoiding the question again? Why can you answer here? The reason you don’t move is the same reason candidates don’t move to another party. Because it’s hard, and because you don’t really blame yourself for the actions of others, and because you hope you can influence people to change.
exactly, i would argue that voting for someone evil is supporting evil, voting for someone good is doing good.
Again, you really don’t understand the concept of splitting the vote. Which is ironic considering how often you accuse people of falling for propaganda.
US delegitimization of left wing parties, socialism and communism happened and is happening both on national and foreign ground
Yes it does… I’ve already given evidence supporting my argument. You have failed to give any evidence to support yours.
It doesn’t, the evidence is that in a democratic election any party can win
And the Democrats who have already gone against the party line?
I’ve yet to see someone from the democrat party going against the line of using a platform owned by a nazi.
Lol, avoiding the question again? Why can you answer here? The reason you don’t move is the same reason candidates don’t move to another party. Because it’s hard, and because you don’t really blame yourself for the actions of others, and because you hope you can influence people to change.
You are arguing that running with a different political party is as much hard as moving to a different country that doesn’t support israel, i can only conclude that you are arguing in bad faith.
Again, you really don’t understand the concept of splitting the vote. Which is ironic considering how often you accuse people of falling for propaganda.
exercising your right to vote does not equal in splitting the vote, stop spreading the party propaganda.
It also means that if most of members of the party are criminals who support a genocide that becomes the party’s stance.
If the theory claims that you can predict people vote then it’s a wrong theory because you cannot do that. People vote is a variable that can change according to a number so high of parameters that makes it “impossible” to predict.
The democratic party is an anti fascist platform? The same platform supporting corporations, mass surveillance, authoritarian regimes and a genocide where kids are being murdered?
If you decide to affiliate with and to be under a leader who support a genocide because it gives you more popularity and votes you are not a good person. If a candidate was actually bad for israel government they would spend 60 millions to assasinate them.
You could indeed argue that anyone who pay taxes in a first world country is supporting the genocide, we are all guilty of enabling a corrupted system the same way germans were in nazi germany. Not paying taxes has direct repercussions such as going to jail, there aren’t any of such repercussions in choosing a different party to run with.
That’s your assumption based on the propaganda that if you don’t vote for THE party you are doing something bad.
Which is a great reason why as many of those members who hold those beliefs should be voted out of office. The fastest and most likely way to achieve that is to primary them.
You can build models to predict the way populations vote with varying degrees of accuracy. The more data you have to plug into those models, the more accurate it will be. For something like the likelihood of the average American voter choosing a third party candidate… We have a lot of data.
According to who?
It includes people who won primaries running on an anti fascist platform…
Again, you are falsely conflating an entire party with an individual candidate.
Lol, can’t answer the question.
Ahh, so it’s cool for you to support genocide because you don’t want to face any repercussions? Sounds like you really care about the children of Palestine.
It would allow the democratic candidate who wins to be an actual genocide supporter.
It’s just a reality… If there was even a slim chance don’t you think out of the 535 representatives there would be at least one person who didn’t caucus with Democrats or Republicans?
The same way “the voting population of the Republican party would be less likely to choose a progressive candidate” i expect the voting population of the Democrat party to less likely choose a candidate that isn’t aligned with the party capitalistic and authoritarian policies.
In the case where a good democrat lose against a bad democrat in primaries all the party resources gets redirected to the latest, which is what keeps happening over and over.
With the tools established by red and blue administrations it’s indeed quite easy to collect and gather data about every person in the world and know exactly what they are up to at any given time…
We indeed have a lot of data on people voting out and fighting government and that’s why authorities are spending billions and trillions to keep their grip on power and control the public.
According to logic
If you affiliate with, endorse, support and run for a party you are doing major work for it
Israel government is spending a billion in propaganda, they put money on whatever gives them an advantage and good press, if trump was running against someone even more evil they would put money on the latest to get away with even more evil actions. If they put money against Abdul it means they didn’t want him to win and that they could fight him off putting the money where they did.
Yes i do care about innocent children getting murdered with the help of the government, what about you?
Wrong, again that’s your assumption rooted in propaganda that if you don’t vote for “the party” the enemy win.
Governments are spending billions in propaganda and mass surveillance because the chances they get vote out and replaced are realistic
Less likely compared to the Republicans?
Have you been following the latest primaries…?
Ahh yes, the numbers are biased against reality… Sure bud.
Lol, we’ve spent trillions of dollars fighting …the green party?
The thing you don’t understand?
You affiliate with your country, pay taxes for its wars, choose to live within its borders, so that means you like genocide? Why don’t you move to a country that doesn’t support genocide? Because it’s difficult? People immigrate with less resources than you every day. Why choose to support genocide? Why choose to stay and try and change an evil country instead of just moving to a country that doesn’t slaughter children?
So… Why did they not want Abdul to win? Come on you are so close to making a logical deduction.
Again, according to your logic it doesn’t seem like you do. Why continue to support a government that does genocide when you could simply choose to move to a different country?
My claims do not support guilt by association, I think voting for candidates who have an actual chance at winning and are anti Israel is how we stop the genocide.
Math is propaganda… Something tells me you didn’t do very well in school.
What evidence do you have to support the claim that it is realistic that a third party is likely to elect enough representatives to Congress to have an influence on a genocide happening right now? None… You have no evidence.
Yes, governments spend billions and trillions in consolidating their power and fighting any potential threat to their stability which include any party that could ruin their authoritarian plans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio
You are comparing living in a country and being forced to pay taxes to voluntarily choosing to be part of a party that support and endorse a genocide
For the same reason they don’t want a third party to win over red and blue, they increase their odds to get away with a genocide by supporting scum.
As you are making these stupid arguments there are kids being murdered in gaza in a genocide perpetrated by the israel government with the full support of the red and blue party.
Arguing that not voting for a party is doing evil it’s propaganda at it’s finest.
In elections you are not supposed to vote for the party more likely to win, you are supposed to vote for the party you agree with.
Operation gladio was against an entirely different nation state, not two political parties competing against a third. This is a ridiculous comparison.
I’m comparing a choice of affiliation. Progressive candidates could leave the democratic party for a third party, but it would prevent their ability to win office. You could choose to immigrate to a new country, it would just be difficult.
Lol, so you are admitting that Abdul is an anti Israel anti fascist candidate of the Democratic party? You do realize he won the primary as a Democrat, right?
Again… Dodging the question. Why not simply choose to end your affiliations with the countries doing that genocide?
Also, it’s not the full support. There are over 20 house Democrats that have cospinsored a genocide resolution bill and over 100 Democrats that have voted to restrict weapon sales and military aid.
Even if a third party candidate beat the odds and one a seat, they would still be working with those Democrats to stop the genocide.
Splitting the vot in a close election between a progressive Democrat and a fascist is supporting evil.
According to who? You have the naivety of a middle schooler.
“According to several Western European researchers, the operation involved the use of assassination, psychological warfare, and false flag operations to delegitimize left-wing parties in Western European”
It’s not a comparison it’s the history of our countries.
Not paying taxes gets you in jail and in legal troubles, always. Running for a different party does not prevent your ability to win, that’s your assumption rooted in the propaganda that no third party can ever win. Associating yourself with evil to boost your ability to win power sounds like opportunistic bullshit to me, especially when you are running for a position where you are supposed to be trusted by everyone else.
People can claim whatever they want, if their actions align with these of a fascist party they are not much anti fascist at all. What is this anti fascist guy doing on the private platform of a nazi? If israel spent millions against him that’s good evidence that the guy may be against them but let’s not forget how much many of these “progressive” and “good” candidates are aligned with power.
That’s a good question for everyone to answer, if you open a thread on asklemmy i’ll gladly provide the best answer i could provide, there is a lot to say on this issue
“not voting for the red and blue party is supporting evil”
not exactly, i would argue that voting for someone evil is supporting evil, voting for someone good is doing good.
You’re conflating national and foreign policy…
Why not move to a different country?
Yes it does… I’ve already given evidence supporting my argument. You have failed to give any evidence to support yours.
And the Democrats who have already gone against the party line?
Lol, avoiding the question again? Why can you answer here? The reason you don’t move is the same reason candidates don’t move to another party. Because it’s hard, and because you don’t really blame yourself for the actions of others, and because you hope you can influence people to change.
Again, you really don’t understand the concept of splitting the vote. Which is ironic considering how often you accuse people of falling for propaganda.
US delegitimization of left wing parties, socialism and communism happened and is happening both on national and foreign ground
It doesn’t, the evidence is that in a democratic election any party can win
I’ve yet to see someone from the democrat party going against the line of using a platform owned by a nazi.
You are arguing that running with a different political party is as much hard as moving to a different country that doesn’t support israel, i can only conclude that you are arguing in bad faith.
exercising your right to vote does not equal in splitting the vote, stop spreading the party propaganda.