Third party candidates don’t typically siphon votes away from the party that religiously tows the line.
Trump doesn’t really tow the line, through. He’s a manifestation of a revolt from inside the GOP’s white nationalist electoral core, against the financial internationalist who have controlled the party since Reagan.
I don’t think it’s clear who RFK is really feeding from. It’s possible his voters simply wouldn’t turn out if he wasn’t on the ballot. But it’s doubtful that he can steal Biden voters by parroting Trump positions.
The dems and the left will debate procedural shit for how to accomplish similar goals. The right is all emotional appeals/reactionaries.
Liberal admins don’t debate procedural shit, they kill legislation hostile to their donors with technicalities. These same technicalities never affect our illegal wars or unconstitutional policing or criminally unconscionable polluting or corrupt corporate bailouts.
The big difference between libs and cons is that cons demand their red meat and are willing to lose an election or two to guarantee it, while liberals are constantly running scared of their replacements in the next election.
The emotion you see isn’t unique to conservatives. It’s simply rewarded rather than shamed.
No, but their voters would sacrifice themselves to tow the line. That was my point.
it’s doubtful that he can steal Biden votes by parroting trump positions.
I dunno. There are plenty of relatively shallow thinking democrats. It’s called a “protest vote” for a reason.
Liberal admins don’t debate procedural shit
I didn’t mean “procedural shit” like inside baseball house floor procedural. I meant the voters are multifaceted and disagree on how to achieve what liberals and leftists can generally agree upon: social programs and the like. See what I’m saying? I’m really tired and I’m not explaining this well, but I’m saying even if leftists and liberals and democrats can all be somewhat on the same page about a general outcome they’d like to see, there are segments of that voting populace that would withhold their vote if the the issue is discussed in a way they can’t get behind or the route to the agreed-upon solution isn’t exactly to their liking.
There was a tweet someone posted just the other day on the leftist meme community, basically saying “fascists are leftists’ #2 greatest enemy, behind the other leftist who agrees with them roughly 96%.” You’ll also get a lot more single issue voters, or leftists that will be turned away because they can’t sacrifice their morals on one issue the candidate doesn’t agree with them on, while undeniably accomplishing many things the leftist does support. We have principles, basically. And sacrificing those principles is a lot harder for us than a right wing voter that see Red and mashes that button as fast as they can.
The democrats’ likely voters are finicky and incredibly diverse. On the right, the voters tow the line pretty much universally. No matter what happens, the republicans can’t seem to lose votes past a certain point. The democrats have to get a lot of stuff right for a pretty diverse group of voters, all in a row, to keep their voters turning out.
cons demand their red meat and are willing to lose an election or two to guarantee it.
If I’m understanding this correctly, I think I strongly disagree. But can you clarify this? Because I’m not sure I do actually understand what you mean.
Trump doesn’t really tow the line, through. He’s a manifestation of a revolt from inside the GOP’s white nationalist electoral core, against the financial internationalist who have controlled the party since Reagan.
I don’t think it’s clear who RFK is really feeding from. It’s possible his voters simply wouldn’t turn out if he wasn’t on the ballot. But it’s doubtful that he can steal Biden voters by parroting Trump positions.
Liberal admins don’t debate procedural shit, they kill legislation hostile to their donors with technicalities. These same technicalities never affect our illegal wars or unconstitutional policing or criminally unconscionable polluting or corrupt corporate bailouts.
The big difference between libs and cons is that cons demand their red meat and are willing to lose an election or two to guarantee it, while liberals are constantly running scared of their replacements in the next election.
The emotion you see isn’t unique to conservatives. It’s simply rewarded rather than shamed.
No, but their voters would sacrifice themselves to tow the line. That was my point.
I dunno. There are plenty of relatively shallow thinking democrats. It’s called a “protest vote” for a reason.
I didn’t mean “procedural shit” like inside baseball house floor procedural. I meant the voters are multifaceted and disagree on how to achieve what liberals and leftists can generally agree upon: social programs and the like. See what I’m saying? I’m really tired and I’m not explaining this well, but I’m saying even if leftists and liberals and democrats can all be somewhat on the same page about a general outcome they’d like to see, there are segments of that voting populace that would withhold their vote if the the issue is discussed in a way they can’t get behind or the route to the agreed-upon solution isn’t exactly to their liking.
There was a tweet someone posted just the other day on the leftist meme community, basically saying “fascists are leftists’ #2 greatest enemy, behind the other leftist who agrees with them roughly 96%.” You’ll also get a lot more single issue voters, or leftists that will be turned away because they can’t sacrifice their morals on one issue the candidate doesn’t agree with them on, while undeniably accomplishing many things the leftist does support. We have principles, basically. And sacrificing those principles is a lot harder for us than a right wing voter that see Red and mashes that button as fast as they can.
The democrats’ likely voters are finicky and incredibly diverse. On the right, the voters tow the line pretty much universally. No matter what happens, the republicans can’t seem to lose votes past a certain point. The democrats have to get a lot of stuff right for a pretty diverse group of voters, all in a row, to keep their voters turning out.
If I’m understanding this correctly, I think I strongly disagree. But can you clarify this? Because I’m not sure I do actually understand what you mean.