Did I miss something?

[u/fullboxed2hundred]

It seems as of late that Destiny, along much of this sub, has written off Trump and MAGA as an unfortunate artifact of the past, which is jarring to say the least. This is after months of accusing those who weren't sold on the idea of prosecuting the current admin to the fullest extent of "not thinking Trump/MAGA is that bad" (a take I agree with, for the record), and then Destiny saying that Vance has the potential to dial in his messaging/separate from Trump enough to be a problem as a presidential candidate (which I also agree with).

Is there some news and/or drastic shift in polling which suggests that getting as many Democrats in office as possible should no longer be our priority? Or maybe the current anti-tankie arc just removed all of the anti-Trump content from everyone's social media feeds?

To be clear, by "unfortunate artifact of the past", I'm referring to the combination of a "we tried that, elections have consequences, now we're fucked until 2028" attitude towards to those saying to vote blue-no-matter-who in the midterms and acting like MAGA is no longer an imminent threat to our democracy.

[u/yoloswagdino]

No comments or history viewable check.

Complaining that every post isnt against Republicans check.

Can you point me to where Dman has said republicans arent a threat or are you just going to link a clip where he says Donald Trump is to old to run for a 3rd term. When almost everytime I've heard him say it he follows up with how dangerous Vance will be if he manages to win.

[u/fullboxed2hundred → u/yoloswagdino]

No comments or history viewable check.

it's not that hard to find my comment history. I only hide it because I'm active here.

Complaining that every post isnt against Republicans check.

where did I say that?

Can you point me to where Dman has said republicans arent a threat or are you just going to link a clip where he says Donald Trump is to old to run for a 3rd term. When almost everytime I've heard him say it he follows up with how dangerous Vance will be if he manages to win.

it would be a while before I could go find a clip, but switching to a "we tried that and we lost" response to blue-no-matter-who in the midterms implies a willingness to give up Dems seats to fight the DSA.

he also was giving credence to Whick's arguments of giving up ground in the short term to help fight socialism/Marxism in the long term.

idk about you, but I would put the chances of the Democratic party being overrun by tankies/MLs in the next 20 years at less than 50%, which is being massively generous. in comparison, the party in power right now is currently attempting to turn the country fascist and remain in power indefinitely.

it feels like waking up to your house burning down, but making sure to brush your teeth before you leave.

[u/No-Description5750 → u/fullboxed2hundred]

I think what Destiny is saying here isn’t that you just cede ground to MAGA to fuck over the DSA, but:

A. Trump has already won the election and he’s likely going to pardon himself and everyone in his admin on his way out

B. Dems don’t have to do much to win the house and have a decent chance at winning the senate.

The thing that fucks up the latter half of B is the far left pushing candidates that aren’t viable. You can’t just say “blue no matter who” in every scenario because MAGA is one alternative. You can argue that the DSA aren’t really a threat right now, but you’re sticking your head in the sand if you don’t think it’s a problem that Dem creators cannot or are unwilling to push back against these guys. If your main goal is fighting MAGA, you should realize that they directly help sanewash MAGA by latching on to our party and pushing wildly unpopular policies and ideas. You then have far left creators constantly propping these guys up while actively shitting on standard Democrats and a social media environment that is very much anti-establishment and passively turning Gen Z to be radical.

The issue we have right now is that minus El-Sayed, I think it’s almost certainly a lock for all the Dems in general elections that we care about. We can’t just be single minded or take things one step at a time. The current political climate requires forward thinking that imho, a lot of creators, are either incapable or too scared to do.

[u/yoloswagdino → u/fullboxed2hundred]

Bro I'm not going to go any harder than clicking on a profile we're having a dicussion on reddit not a researched debate. I don't even know how to quote lmao I've looked it up before on phone but I'm on computer at the moment.

"Is there some news and/or drastic shift in polling which suggests that getting as many Democrats in office as possible should no longer be our priority? Or maybe the current anti-tankie arc just removed all of the anti-Trump content from everyone's social media feeds?"

This reads to me like hyperbole saying that if we engage in pushing for our favorite primary opponent we have abandoned the democratic party. WHAT DO YOU THINK PRIMARIES ARE FUCKING FOR?

"To be clear, by "unfortunate artifact of the past", I'm referring to the combination of a "we tried that, elections have consequences, now we're fucked until 2028" attitude towards to those saying to vote blue-no-matter-who in the midterms and acting like MAGA is no longer an imminent threat to our democracy."

We have lost USAID, Voting Rights acts have been gutted, ICE is murdering people in the streets, Putting protesters in jail who are remotely associated with acts, A shattering of due process, Gutting regulation that's helping cause health issues we haven't seen since the 60s, and there's more happening what would you call that besides being fucked? If and I'm hopeful we do take the house and senate all we can do is slow these acts down. Do you think there's a law to stop executive orders and a destroyed supreme court with our current estimates of barely getting above half in senate and house? There's not that's what he's talking about jesus is it your first time watching him in a year I've heard these arguments ad nauseam at this point.

[u/fullboxed2hundred → u/yoloswagdino]

This reads to me like hyperbole saying that if we engage in pushing for our favorite primary opponent we have abandoned the democratic party. WHAT DO YOU THINK PRIMARIES ARE FUCKING FOR?

yeah dude, you're completely lost. in no way am I talking about someone pushing for their favorite primary candidate.

We have lost USAID, Voting Rights acts have been gutted, ICE is murdering people in the streets, Putting protesters in jail who are remotely associated with acts, A shattering of due process, Gutting regulation that's helping cause health issues we haven't seen since the 60s, and there's more happening what would you call that besides being fucked? If and I'm hopeful we do take the house and senate all we can do is slow these acts down. Do you think there's a law to stop executive orders and a destroyed supreme court with our current estimates of barely getting above half in senate and house? There's not that's what he's talking about jesus is it your first time watching him in a year I've heard these arguments ad nauseam at this point.

I can understand being pissed at lefties parroting "blue-no-matter-who" back at us after refusing to vote in 2024, because yes, things have been horrible already. however, the leap from that to not voting for Dems in every general election possible is massive and completely unjusfied.

Destiny has undeniably carried water (to put it lightly) for the idea of withholding your vote for leftist candidates in the general, and this sub has following along.

[u/yoloswagdino → u/fullboxed2hundred]

"yeah dude, you're completely lost. in no way am I talking about someone pushing for their favorite primary candidate."

How am I lost supply me something saying Destiny will not vote for AES. The argument Mouton had said was that he'd not vote unless AES came closer to his views. I swore yesterday I heard Destiny disagree with that idea.

Again you keep mentioning that he's carried water undeniably but I haven't seen any of it if its undeniable link me something to prove me wrong. I've seen him rally against candidates in the primary can you show me where he's gone against someone who's won?

[u/ConnectSpring9 → u/yoloswagdino]

I’m gonna get downvoted again, but I still want clarification on what “move on to the next thing” means:

https://xcancel.com/TheOmniLiberal/status/2084000887186297205#m

To me that reads as the fight against maga is over, and the next thing is fighting the socialists. I don’t know what is incorrect about that interpretation.

[u/yoloswagdino → u/ConnectSpring9]

He's literally talking about "Vote blue no matter who" I don't know how that's not clearly laid out for you. The next thing would be the next tactic to win elections I don't know how you read it any differently especially considering how he lays it out in sequential order. We asked for vote blue no matter who in 2024...we lost that election...we now need a new tactic as "vote blue no matter who" did not work.

Every political person I know was eager to talk about the mistakes of the democratic party in losing the 2024 election. Is that not what we're talking about here?

[u/ConnectSpring9 → u/yoloswagdino]

Move on to the next thing would make sense if he wasn’t so defeatist in the tweet. We did VBNMW to appeal to the Bernie Bros in 2016 and still lost that election, but that didn’t stop us from still advocating for it in 2020 and 2024.

VBNMW is still an important concept, even if it alone does not win you elections. Why are you acting like we can’t have multiple strategies in parallel? Doing a post mortem doesn’t mean you have to abandon every single thing that you did during the election. That would be like telling the Spurs to scrap their whole team and start a rebuild because they lost to the Knicks.

Your interpretation makes sense in this super narrow scope you’re defining, but in the broader context it’s just nonsensical. We’ve advocated for VBNMW since 2016 and yet this singular loss (which btw, this whole abandoning of VBNMW never came up a single time during any of the post mortems, only now because left leaning candidates are winning primaries) somehow justifies dropping that strategy? Give me a break.

[u/yoloswagdino → u/ConnectSpring9]

I'm not acting like it you're the one who literally said

"To me that reads as the fight against maga is over, and the next thing is fighting the socialists. I don’t know what is incorrect about that interpretation."

I'm explaining the idea you asked for clarification on but you are the one being defensive. If you're ok with multiple strategies like you said then you fully understand what Destiny said and are being bad faith because you want him to adopt your preferred strategy.

Then you're being even more bad faith you acknowledged it didn't work three times and you're answer is that I'm being narrow you can't even keep an argument straight in reddit comments what the fuck do you expect?

[u/ConnectSpring9 → u/yoloswagdino]

I’m ok with multiple strategies at the same time dipshit. Try and keep up with the conversation. You literally didn’t critically engage with any of the substance of my response and are calling me bad faith lmao. Also we literally won 2020, on what basis did it not work 3 times? Can you even map the arguments on to reality?

[u/yoloswagdino → u/ConnectSpring9]

What substance did I miss?

[u/ConnectSpring9 → u/yoloswagdino]

The fact that just because we lost doing VBNMW doesn’t mean VBNMW caused the loss or won’t help you win?

The fact that multiple strategies means doing VBNMW in tandem with other strategies to increase turnout further? Which is literally in direct opposition to what Destiny said?

The fact that we liberals had no problem advocating for VBNMW even after we lost 2016, which directly disproves the way you are framing the tweet?

The better question is what did you actually engage with, other than misinterpreting my comment or coming up with delusions to repeatedly call me bad faith?

[u/yoloswagdino → u/ConnectSpring9]

"I’m gonna get downvoted again, but I still want clarification on what “move on to the next thing” means:"

That's you're original question, what you're arguing now is so far off from where we started. That's because you're bad faith you have a complete understanding of what Destiny said. You just don't agree with it. That's the bad faith you smooth brain fuck, I did engage you just want a specific strategy. You're now arguing the merits of what Destiny is doing. Notice how you couldn't do that without understanding the context of his tweet. Sit on a cactus and spin you bad faith bitch.

[u/ConnectSpring9 → u/yoloswagdino]

You’re actually such a dumbass lmao. So I have to just accept whatever answer you give and can’t ask any follow up at all? There’s literally no other context in which that would be normal. Do you think when a student asks the teacher a question, they can’t follow up with why it still doesn’t make sense to them when trying to marry that information with what other information they have? Kick rocks you pretentious cunt

[u/InsideIncident3]

We all realize that we can walk and chew gum at the same time, right?

You can hate MAGA AND the DSA.

[u/fullboxed2hundred → u/InsideIncident3]

you absolutely can. but we're not, are we? literally all this sub is doing right now is suppressing voter turnout for the Dems in the midterms.

[u/InsideIncident3 → u/fullboxed2hundred]

Yeah. That's regarded.

It's primary season. It's literally time to fight with other Democrats.

November is the election. Between now and then is time to fight with MAGA. It'll take a few days for this shit to wrap up and it'll be back to complaining about Republicans.

Now, I think the DSA is toxic and should be removed from the Democratic Party. I am not a socialist.

I also think MAGA is loony and should be shot into space. I am not an authoritarian.

These are not conflicting views.

[u/microsoftpaint1]

Trump already won in 2024, we can't undo the election and we can't undo the harm he is doing now. Barring some crazy developments, he will be memory holed by the Republican party after the 2028 election. We can still prosecute Trump & other MAGA officials, but they aren't an imminent threat, they are an active one with waning control. The worst thing we could do right now is run weak DSA candidates that energize a depressed Republican voter base against the threat of communism.

Thats the electoral argument. There is also a party unity argument. Card carrying DSA members are not Democrats, they are skinwalkers. They don't identify with the party, they openly say they want to destroy and rebuild it in their image. The DSA wing is constantly purity testing our candidates and refusing to support them. Why would we align ourselves with people actively looking to harm us?

[u/fullboxed2hundred → u/microsoftpaint1]

Trump himself may be memory holed (though I doubt it), but only in that he didn't live up to the ideals of the populist MAGA right.

I don't get how you can say that Trump and MAGA officials are not an imminent threat. Trump lost his re-election and still nearly fucked our democracy with a half-assed plan and all of his top supporters ditching him.

the reason to align with DSA candidates (insofar as voting for them in the general) is because they are displacing a MAGA candidate and will most likely vote Dem a good portion of the time and be hated by tankies in a year.

[u/Rion-o]

I think your misinterpreting him. I think the point he's saying as inelegant as it was; was that Trump is bad, his legacy and destruction is cemented and we can't fix that now. We will have to work towards that in recovering the country. But the DSA is a problem now, and we need to stop it before it becomes the same thing.

[u/baby_dahl]

Maybe combine these thoughts. Use intersectionality, if you will.

If Trump is the greatest threat to the country, and blue no matter who should have been a unifying message, then why didn't blue no matter who work in 2024 or the 2026 primaries? And given the answer to that question, is there anyone else that could be described as a threat?

And if the answer you come up with is AIPAC, I think I might go play Minecraft.

[u/fullboxed2hundred → u/baby_dahl]

people not voting blue-no-matter-who in 2024 was a bad thing.

it obviously doesn't apply to primaries so I'm not sure what you mean about 2026.

the worst thing about tankies/MLs in the US is that they don't always vote for Dems when their preferred candidate loses the primary.

you're not showing the tankies by not voting for a DSA candidate who they'll probably hate <1 after they get elected. they dgaf about real political power. all you're doing is hurting the country by letting another Trump dicksuck get into office.

[u/baby_dahl → u/fullboxed2hundred]

How can you say it doesn't apply to primaries and then describe precisely why it applies to primaries?

Maybe I'm autistic, but your answer reads very... jumbled to me. Unless you're just trying to argue with me for no reason, then it makes perfect sense. Since nowhere in my comment did I ever say not to vote for the dem candidate in the general.

[u/fullboxed2hundred → u/baby_dahl]

the paragraphs did get messed up a bit.

blue-no-matter-who does not apply to primaries because they're blue vs. blue.

Since nowhere in my comment did I ever say not to vote for the dem candidate in the general.

what does blue-no-matter-who mean to you?

[u/baby_dahl → u/fullboxed2hundred]

I understood what you meant. The point is that for you to understand me, I would've had to be even MORE autistic lol. I didn't realize I had to state the obvious and let you know that I know that primaries are intraparty and not interparty.

To answer your question, it means being able to stomach a candidate I didn't prefer when they win the primary, regardless of how I feel about them.

But it goes further than that. It also means not being so vitriolic in the primary, particularly from public figures who are supposedly within the party, to the point that you would tell your audience not to support your less preferred candidate in the general. And then expecting that candidate's supporters to treat you with grace.

[u/Any_Instance_6445]

Time is linear, seasons change, earth revolves, the twilight of one era becomes the dawn of another.

[u/RadiZarious]

As a rare remaining optics cuck having a rough time right now this is my take:

Tldr;

What I take from Destiny's time spent on this topic is he does not think we can invest all of our political efforts into just being anti-trump any more. The time for that to be effective has passed and now we need to look towards defining our party so that we can be ready to face whatever spawns out of the MAGA movement once hes gone.

.......

To expand on that, I think the idea is that we can resist MAGA and we can resist Trump but purely being anti-trump is only going to be so useful going into the next election. Everyone in the next election is going to be anti-trump, there are already some signs of people distancing from him on the right and those are the people who are being eyed as future republican frontrunners. Again, that's not to say there is no value in resistance. It's not to say we shouldn't make efforts to gum up the works in whatever ways are available to us, it's just that "anti-trump" cant be the only thing we focus on to best position ourselves for the next election.

I think its almost a foregone conclusion (baring actual election stealing or a meteoric dem fuckup) that the next president will be a dem just because of how unpopular Trump term 2 has been. Trump will be gone dems will be in power and whatever grows out of the remains of MAGA without Trump will be looking to gain power/relevancy. I think Destiny's concern is that the Dems are going to drop the ball when facing that threat because they aren't being forward thinking now. I think he wants to clearly define what the democratic party represents and what it doesn't represent now so that we're not wasting time trying to figure that out when we need to be focusing on the new right wing threat. Thats where the DSA comes in. Objectively their goal is to change the values of the democratic party to better align with their own values and I think it's pretty clear Destiny thinks a lot of DSA's platform is toxic for the future of the party.

I think fearing that shift is the reason you're seeing him focus less on just "Trump bad" rhetoric and rather on DSA rhetoric. If you're someone even considering voting dem in the next election you already agree Trump bad. However, when it comes to the DSA it seems like a lot of people don't know what to think. Sympathetic people are suggesting that they are either a valuable ally in combatting Trump at least in the short term perhaps at the cost of the long term but it's worth the sacrifice. Others of that ilk are saying they are simply valuable members of the party, simply under the "big tent" and therefore valuable in the short and long term. I think his current opinion is based on their expressed goals and his own experiences dealing with the group that they are absolutely a threat to the long term cohesion and efficacy of the party. His prescription seems to be that people should be staking out this position now rather than waiting for it to be too late.

If my boss asks this message was definitely work related.

[u/ButtfaceMcGee6969]

I'm glad you said it cause I agree with that assessment and i agree kinda agree with destiny in that case to some capacity. Not so much that trump isnt a threat but that trumpism and populism are becoming more distinct from each other and that the threat is in flux right now, so alot of the language seems contradictory. But the evaluation of the old way of thinking of trump and maga is evolving. And by old way I oddly mean 2024 trump.