Do they think people will just move on from the fact that their entire ruling class is in a cabal of Zionist pedophiles? They may get away with it, in fact they probably will, but it will always be at the back of the mind. For everyone.

  • plinky [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
    37·
    3 months ago

    Did clinton stop entryism into democratic party? Treatlerism will prevail

    You can observe as a proximate: 0 quits over genocide, even rashida still changes them from inside, they, at the end of the day, are power hungry poops, who will not lose power on principle or risk

    • Le_Wokisme [they/them, undecided]@hexbear.netEnglish
      21·
      3 months ago

      0 quits over genocide, even rashida still changes them from inside,

      at some point i don’t think it’s entryism so much as taking up space. If the squad ditched the party and ran as independents they would be taking on an uphill battle against democrats’ entrenchment to be in a more morally pure position with the same or less power.

      Bernie had an I next to his name for years and look at him. There’s a low ceiling on electoralism and i don’t think leaving the party makes a difference one way or the other. Is attempting to normalize third parties worth losing congressional seats? Depends how valuable a congressional seat is and whether you’re vulnerable to redistricting or primarying anyway.

      • fort_burp@feddit.nlEnglish
        16·
        3 months ago

        Well under Democracy with American Characteristics, political parties are private corporations. Participation in the presidential debates is also run by a private corporation, who declared early on

        After studying the election process in 1985, the bipartisan National Commission on Elections recommended “[t]urning over the sponsorship of presidential debates to the two major parties”.[3] The CPD was established in 1987 by the chairmen of the Democratic and Republican Parties to “take control of the presidential debates”.[3] The commission was staffed by members from the two parties and chaired by the heads of the Democratic and Republican parties, Paul G. Kirk and Frank Fahrenkopf.[3] At a 1987 press conference announcing the commission’s creation, Fahrenkopf said that the commission was not likely to include third-party candidates in debates, and Kirk said he personally believed they should be excluded from the debates.[3]

        The heads of the CPD are usually ex-leaders of the two corporations that make up the Democratic and Republican parties, and when those corporations want to bypass the CPD, they just negotiate with different corporations.

        In May 2024, the Biden and Trump campaigns struck a deal to circumvent the CPD and participate in two debates (on CNN on June 27 and ABC on September 10), breaking a longstanding tradition of debates organized under the auspices of the CPD,[10] throwing the future of the CPD into doubt.

      • Ram_The_Manparts [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
        8·
        3 months ago

        Is attempting to normalize third parties worth losing congressional seats?

        Yes. Absolutely.

        It’s not going to happen though, because none of these people are socialists.

        • plinky [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
          3·
          3 months ago

          it’s not even socialist as such, they just don’t have strong moral convictions. some liberals are also horrified at entity behavior, some (best) of them even quit their jobs over it (say in state department) around 10 people in 12000 department or some numbers around that, it’s basically consistent number that people with morals are less than 1% of people (i would like to say it’s uniquely seppos, but same is true in europe and middle east and asia), we have several representative samples across populations when push comes to shove they all vote/continue to work for/shop at/entertain for better burgers. which means socialist should brings morals by backdoor of treats, which would require extraordinary individual/organizational duality.

      • plinky [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
        7·
        3 months ago

        As i said, power hungry poops, the power comes first and above all, and thus indicates the person is cooptable and not a threat, in a larger sense. Your either immediately quit or become pelocia, or willing to be such a nuisance to be 1term representative, or you get starry eyed about proximity to power as to take pictures with genocide joe. You don’t have any power, but you think you do, and do this work for 30 years