No, that’s the opposite of the truth. They’re a paid jobber party. They don’t oppose the Republicans, they job them. You know, like in wrestling when a wrestler is paid to lose a fight on purpose.
The best thing we can do to fuck up their plans and screw with the billionaires is vote for the Democrats and persuade others to do the same. That’s the thing they least want us to do. They want bad PR and low voter turnout. But if we register with the party, go to local primaries to support socialist candidates who actually believe in improving things, and then help those candidates win (and keep the Rs out by voting for the jobbers when we have to), then the billionaires are fucked because the true believers in the party, even the libby ones, will raise taxes. And Trump won’t be able to lower them.
I can get behind primaries pushing out the establishment and neo-liberals, but honestly if we don’t succeed in that you’ll find me hard pressed to vote blue no matter who.
I’m guessing that’s because you think voting for a candidate supports them in more than one way?
The first way that voting for a candidate supports them is that it helps them beat the opposing candidate, the R fascist. So you’re giving them the “better than actual Nazis” award, I’m sure you agree.
But I’m guessing you think voting for a candidate gives them support in more ways than just that one?
I’m just curious, where in the realm of conservatism is their views acceptable and not acceptable? I’m not confused but many people seem to give neo-liberals a free pass when that’s the ideology of Thatcher and Reagan. Becoming mainstream in the Democrat party while the Republican party tilted further into conservatism, especially after Gingrich said essentially no more compromise with Democrats.
When it’s trying to conserve something good. For example, I’m learning the local Indigenous language because when it comes to Indigenous issues, I’m a conservative. I believe in preserving traditional culture. Language is part of that, I want to help keep the language alive. Earlier this week I learned how to perform a ceremony to talk to the Rainbow Serpent. And I’m a proponent of land back.
No, that’s the opposite of the truth. They’re a paid jobber party. They don’t oppose the Republicans, they job them. You know, like in wrestling when a wrestler is paid to lose a fight on purpose.
The best thing we can do to fuck up their plans and screw with the billionaires is vote for the Democrats and persuade others to do the same. That’s the thing they least want us to do. They want bad PR and low voter turnout. But if we register with the party, go to local primaries to support socialist candidates who actually believe in improving things, and then help those candidates win (and keep the Rs out by voting for the jobbers when we have to), then the billionaires are fucked because the true believers in the party, even the libby ones, will raise taxes. And Trump won’t be able to lower them.
I can get behind primaries pushing out the establishment and neo-liberals, but honestly if we don’t succeed in that you’ll find me hard pressed to vote blue no matter who.
I’m guessing that’s because you think voting for a candidate supports them in more than one way?
The first way that voting for a candidate supports them is that it helps them beat the opposing candidate, the R fascist. So you’re giving them the “better than actual Nazis” award, I’m sure you agree.
But I’m guessing you think voting for a candidate gives them support in more ways than just that one?
It’s more of neo-liberal Dems are fascist, they just have a nicer visage about it as they provide more of the boots.
You shouldn’t round so imprecisely.
I’m just curious, where in the realm of conservatism is their views acceptable and not acceptable? I’m not confused but many people seem to give neo-liberals a free pass when that’s the ideology of Thatcher and Reagan. Becoming mainstream in the Democrat party while the Republican party tilted further into conservatism, especially after Gingrich said essentially no more compromise with Democrats.
I don’t understand the question; your syntax is too confusing.
When is conservatism acceptable?
When it’s trying to conserve something good. For example, I’m learning the local Indigenous language because when it comes to Indigenous issues, I’m a conservative. I believe in preserving traditional culture. Language is part of that, I want to help keep the language alive. Earlier this week I learned how to perform a ceremony to talk to the Rainbow Serpent. And I’m a proponent of land back.
All of that is conservatism and it’s good.