• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Is AOC right?

  • I am American, and I agree.

    Votes: 880 38.5%
  • I am American, and I disagree.

    Votes: 119 5.2%
  • I am American, and I think it's complicated.

    Votes: 240 10.5%
  • I am not American, and I agree.

    Votes: 918 40.2%
  • I am not American, and I disagree.

    Votes: 52 2.3%
  • I am not American, and I think it's complicated.

    Votes: 77 3.4%

  • Total voters
    2,286
Oct 28, 2017
1,469
I generally agree but I do think it's a little more complicated than that.

Some of the far left fiscal policies, the Democrats are correct to push back on. But for every one of those instances, there are probably two others of the establishment Democrats being corporate bootlickers.

And don't even get me started on war. I still don't understand how Obama got away with drone striking as many civilians as he did. And all of the Democrats in the last debate gave mealy mouthed responses basically affirming they would continue this nonsense except Sanders and...Steyer if I remember correctly?
 

Johnny Blaze

Avenger
Oct 29, 2017
4,162
DE
So we've resigned ourselves to letting the GOP walk all over us? We're cool with putting children in government cages? Selling weapons to the Saudis for their genocidal purposes?

The Democrats aren't too centrist, they're too cowardly. They have no convictions. They'll let the world end if preventing it meant stepping on too many toes. Which, come to think of it, they already are.
There's a difference?
 

jviggy43

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
18,184
So we've resigned ourselves to letting the GOP walk all over us? We're cool with putting children in government cages? Selling weapons to the Saudis for their genocidal purposes?

The Democrats aren't too centrist, they're too cowardly. They have no convictions. They'll let the world end if preventing it meant stepping on too many toes. Which, come to think of it, they already are.
I disagree with this. I think calling them cowardly gives them too much credit.
 

Ichthyosaurus

Banned
Dec 26, 2018
9,375
So we've resigned ourselves to letting the GOP walk all over us? We're cool with putting children in government cages? Selling weapons to the Saudis for their genocidal purposes?

What is this "letting" shit? The GOP have the power at the moment to make those polices happen, the Dems don't have the power to stop it - that was decided by the voters in 2016 and 2019.

The Democrats aren't too centrist, they're too cowardly. They have no convictions. They'll let the world end if preventing it meant stepping on too many toes. Which, come to think of it, they already are.

Better to be a "coward" doing the most within the system than risk giving the GOP far more control over the government than they already have. The Dems don't have the luxury of doing what you're saying because the populace likes what they're doing or is apathetic about it to care. But they will punish the Dems when they push too much with the right convictions. They are doing what they can to prevent bad things from happened, but they're not Judge Dredd. Being exiled to the sidelines like the Greens are won't help anyone. We've seen the results are of what candidates do what you're saying and they're in less of a position to block anything the GOP do.
 

alexiswrite

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,418
So we've resigned ourselves to letting the GOP walk all over us? We're cool with putting children in government cages? Selling weapons to the Saudis for their genocidal purposes?

The Democrats aren't too centrist, they're too cowardly. They have no convictions. They'll let the world end if preventing it meant stepping on too many toes. Which, come to think of it, they already are.

"Is the problem that I live in a representative democracy where the public largely don't care about the same issues that I do? No, actually the real problem is that some politicans are 'scared', yep that's it."

It feels such a cop out way to approach issues like this and avoid having to deal with the reality of public opinion.
 

AppleMIX

Prophet of Truth
Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,701
Maybe but the democratic party is already too left for about 1/2 of independents and the democratic party wants to win seats.
 

Deleted member 38573

User requested account closure
Banned
Jan 17, 2018
3,902
"Is the problem that I live in a representative democracy where the public largely don't care about the same issues that I do? No, actually the real problem is that some politicans are 'scared', yep that's it."

It feels such a cop out way to approach issues like this and avoid having to deal with the reality of public opinion.

This feels like a way to absolve those with power from doing anything to shift public opinion on fringe but important issues. Public largely didn't care about a lot things... Until they did. That doesn't magically happen.
 

GhostTrick

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,305
Depends on the point of view. From a french point of view, the Democratic Party would be a center-right, even right wing party.
 

tulpa

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
3,878
this is obviously true. and anyone with a depth of political knowledge, who follows and maintains an interest in international politics, should recognize at least some truth in it.

but it leads to some troubling questions: if this is a right-wing party, why are you in it? do you really believe it's realistic to transform this party into a leftist political movement? the democratic party has always been ruthlessly effective at crushing its left flank. why would you think that will change? even if you elect a president from that flank, won't you have to cull the entire congressional party of its traditional members to get anything done? do you really think that's realistic? if it's their party, and you're openly trying to take it over to sideline their political viewpoint, won't that just create decades of open intra-party warfare?
 

Maledict

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,084
It's a real shame this thread was re-opened to be honest. It's objectively wrong in its premise. And all it does is foster argument because it's a bloody stupid statement that reinforces people's incorrect assumptions.

The democrats would not be a centre right party in Europe. They wouldn't be a centre right party *anywhere*. There isn't a centre right party in existence that is trying to :

Increas taxes on the rich to pay for social programs
Deliver parental family leave
Implement stricter environmental and climate change controls
Believes in Keynesian economics in recessions
Better and cheaper access to healthcare for all

All of these are actual Democratic Party beliefs and aims and the house has passed legislation on many of them already. They all featured in the last presidential manifesto and will do again in 2020.

Forget the argument about electability and left versus centre left - it's a red herring. The *entire* premise of her statement is factually incorrect.
 
Oct 27, 2017
557
this is obviously true. and anyone with a depth of political knowledge, who follows and maintains an interest in international politics, should recognize at least some truth in it.

but it leads to some troubling questions: if this is a right-wing party, why are you in it? do you really believe it's realistic to transform this party into a leftist political movement? the democratic party has always been ruthlessly effective at crushing its left flank. why would you think that will change? even if you elect a president from that flank, won't you have to cull the entire congressional party of its traditional members to get anything done? do you really think that's realistic? if it's their party, and you're openly trying to take it over to sideline their political viewpoint, won't that just create decades of open intra-party warfare?

When Bernie wins, the party structure will have to change, by using what Obama could have done but never did: directly mobilizing his base for movement outside electoralism.
But, the most likely outcome is that the centrists and corpos will split and create the Liberal Business Party.
 

alexiswrite

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,418
This feels like a way to absolve those with power from doing anything to shift public opinion on fringe but important issues. Public largely didn't care about a lot things... Until they did. That doesn't magically happen.

You also need to acknowledge that politicians can't magically force the public to care about things, even if they care about that thing.

I think we even have data now showing that presidents advocating for a policy generally doesn't move the needle for that policy in a positive way.

The critique you're making right now, seems more applicable to media institutions that political ones.
 

BADMAN

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,887
What is this "letting" shit? The GOP have the power at the moment to make those polices happen, the Dems don't have the power to stop it - that was decided by the voters in 2016 and 2019.



Better to be a "coward" doing the most within the system than risk giving the GOP far more control over the government than they already have. The Dems don't have the luxury of doing what you're saying because the populace likes what they're doing or is apathetic about it to care. But they will punish the Dems when they push too much with the right convictions. They are doing what they can to prevent bad things from happened, but they're not Judge Dredd. Being exiled to the sidelines like the Greens are won't help anyone. We've seen the results are of what candidates do what you're saying and they're in less of a position to block anything the GOP do.
The Democrats are losers. They lose because they cave to public opinion. The Democratic party is the SW: ROTS party. Do you see the GOP giving a shit about public opinion? No, because they MAKE the public opinion. Do you honestly think that if the Democratic party took a stand on not funding ICE and the internment camps for children that it'd hurt them in the election? Of course not. Everyone would have forgotten about it by the time voting came around.

Of course, we don't actually know if the public would "punish the Democrats" because they've never fucking tried to bend the rules. They SHOULD be Judge Dredd on issues like internment camps. IT'S FUCKING NAZI SHIT. If your case to me is that we have to allow Nazi shit to happen in this country because the GOP won the election and the Democrats can't do anything too crazy, well... maybe that's why people don't like the Democrats. Maybe that's why I call them cowards. They're so afraid of losing what little power they have that they refuse to stand up to tyranny. They refuse to stand up for the women being starved, harrassed, beaten, and sexually assaulted in ICE detention. They refuse to stand up for the toddlers being torn away from their mothers to live in some re-purposed walmart with little to no watchdog supervision.

They approve military budget increases to sell more weapons to people who kill children. People who inflict genocide. Although selling weapons to foreign countries is part of their platform so I guess that's somewhat irrelevant to the conversation.
 

Pixieking

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,956
It's a real shame this thread was re-opened to be honest. It's objectively wrong in its premise. And all it does is foster argument because it's a bloody stupid statement that reinforces people's incorrect assumptions.

The democrats would not be a centre right party in Europe. They wouldn't be a centre right party *anywhere*. There isn't a centre right party in existence that is trying to :

Increas taxes on the rich to pay for social programs
Deliver parental family leave
Implement stricter environmental and climate change controls
Believes in Keynesian economics in recessions
Better and cheaper access to healthcare for all

All of these are actual Democratic Party beliefs and aims and the house has passed legislation on many of them already. They all featured in the last presidential manifesto and will do again in 2020.

Forget the argument about electability and left versus centre left - it's a red herring. The *entire* premise of her statement is factually incorrect.

Yeah, I like AOC, but she's either being politically naive, or showing a ludicrous willingness to disingenuously bend truth to create excitement.

To add to your list:

A centre/centre-right party that is

Pro-Right to Choose
Pro LGBTQ+
Pro electoral reform
Pro equal pay
Aware of the racial and gender splits in the country and is willing to entertain how to make things more equal
Pro religious freedom

is a centre/centre-right party that I wished existed in more countries.
 

tulpa

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
3,878
When Bernie wins, the party structure will have to change, by using what Obama could have done but never did: directly mobilizing his base for movement outside electoralism.
It won't have to change. It might change.
But, the most likely outcome is that the centrists and corpos will split and create the Liberal Business Party.
I think you seriously underestimate the dedication Democrats have to their party and its brand. And I think that's the point that she's suggesting but not really saying. It's not your party. It's pretty much always been this way, although it has at times taken actions that are seen as "left wing" through the distorted lens of 2000s US politics. It's their party, and I have no doubt they will fight ferociously, on every front, to maintain it as their party.
 

Actinium

Teyvat Traveler
Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,792
California
I don't know how the current party really accurately compares with global or historic averages but it sure as shit ain't far enough left for me right now.
 

behOemoth

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,611
The left party in Germany isn't even left anymore and the Democratic Party of the us is in well alignment with Merkel's union party.
 

Ichthyosaurus

Banned
Dec 26, 2018
9,375
The Democrats are losers. They lose because they cave to public opinion. The Democratic party is the SW: ROTS party. Do you see the GOP giving a shit about public opinion? No, because they MAKE the public opinion.

The GOP do give a shit about public opinion since they live in fear of getting primaries from the right. They make public opinion because they spent decades building a support and propaganda network on a massive scale the Dems can't match and it'd take years for them to make a dent if they started building it right now. Fox News is a powerful device, and that's the tip of the iceberg with how entrenched they are in culture. They're in churches, in You Tube accounts, police forces, court rooms and more. There is nothing remotely like that which exists inside or outside the party on the left. That's a great advantage in winning elections and shaping public opinion. They did such a good job of this the Frankenstein's monster turned and them and got Trump into the White House.

Do you honestly think that if the Democratic party took a stand on not funding ICE and the internment camps for children that it'd hurt them in the election? Of course not. Everyone would have forgotten about it by the time voting came around.

Yes. Sadly, in America this is a dangerous position for many politicians to take, despite it being something I wish they would do more openly. Do I don't like this but I understand why some do it. They're constantly on the knife edge in congress, fighting both within their party and outside it against conservative forces to keep the country together. It'd be worse without them there.

Of course, we don't actually know if the public would "punish the Democrats" because they've never fucking tried to bend the rules. They SHOULD be Judge Dredd on issues like internment camps. IT'S FUCKING NAZI SHIT. If your case to me is that we have to allow Nazi shit to happen in this country because the GOP won the election and the Democrats can't do anything too crazy, well... maybe that's why people don't like the Democrats. Maybe that's why I call them cowards. They're so afraid of losing what little power they have that they refuse to stand up to tyranny. They refuse to stand up for the women being starved, harrassed, beaten, and sexually assaulted in ICE detention. They refuse to stand up for the toddlers being torn away from their mothers to live in some re-purposed walmart with little to no watchdog supervision.

We saw the results of this in 2016 and 2019 with elections, the majority of those politicians lost to moderates. 8 people survived. 8. Being Judge Dredd is not applicable to the Dems due to how the system is made and the fact their own constituencies aren't made up of people who agree with that mindset. Nobody wants Nazi shit in America but nobody has found a solution to fight against them properly within the system or outside it. I wish they would. America's not the only county with issues of far right extremists. What you're missing is what happens afterward - what happens when the Dems lose the power they have against tyranny? What are they supposed to do inside or outside the system? We've seen the horrific downside to losing on a tremendous scale in the UK, I don't want that repeated in America.

Many Dems have visited ICE detention facilities, they haven't ignored them. They just think the best way to stop this is is with elections since they don't have the authority within the government. Voters never gave them it. A majority in congress would be very useful right now. The Dems have many politician working against ICE in their ranks, building momentum.



They have been trying but it's not as simple as you think. Extralegal avenues are of course not an option for them, and it's not like the left is doing that for obvious reasons.

Something missing from this discussion is the leftist alternative. Why do you think they'll do any better then the Dems? Without the Dems they're supposed to be the ones which pick up the fight in politics but right now they have less impact in congress than the moderates do.

They approve military budget increases to sell more weapons to people who kill children. People who inflict genocide. Although selling weapons to foreign countries is part of their platform so I guess that's somewhat irrelevant to the conversation.

There's a lot more to the military than that, and this ignores the possible blowback from the public with politicians who would do this. Not everyone is safe from the consequences like Bernie is, then we have less politicians to block the Republicans in congress. Not because they don't want to but because doing that is much harder then you think. Very few politicians are going to burn their careers over bills, regardless of how they want to stop injustice.
 
Last edited:

3bdelilah

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
1,615
It's a real shame this thread was re-opened to be honest. It's objectively wrong in its premise. And all it does is foster argument because it's a bloody stupid statement that reinforces people's incorrect assumptions.

The democrats would not be a centre right party in Europe. They wouldn't be a centre right party *anywhere*. There isn't a centre right party in existence that is trying to :

Increas taxes on the rich to pay for social programs
Deliver parental family leave
Implement stricter environmental and climate change controls
Believes in Keynesian economics in recessions
Better and cheaper access to healthcare for all

All of these are actual Democratic Party beliefs and aims and the house has passed legislation on many of them already. They all featured in the last presidential manifesto and will do again in 2020.

Forget the argument about electability and left versus centre left - it's a red herring. The *entire* premise of her statement is factually incorrect.

What good does a manifesto do if you've got many Democrats doing the opposite in practise? Increasing taxes on the rich and cheaper access to healthcare, don't make me laugh. If they did, they would unanimously support Medicare for All. That's literally a combination of increasing taxes on the rich while offering affordable healthcare.

If you wouldn't categorise the Dem Party as centre, then what? Centre-left? Don't make me laugh. Social democracy is centre-left, and if you claim that's what the Dems are doing, then we have a huge difference of opinion regarding what centre-left means. They're centre at best. In fact, they remind me a lot of the Dutch party D66, which is considered centre-left socially and centre-right economically. That's exactly how I would describe the Democratic Party, so AOC is right here as usual.
 

Rangerx

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,494
Dangleberry
As an Irishman yeah this is so obviously. The Democrats are slightly to the left of our main centre right party. It is absolutely laughable to suggest the Dems are close to resembling what real left wing politics looks like.
 

Deleted member 426

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,273
You don't have to be socialist to be left, but just being anti republican doesn't qualify either. The democrats are fundamentally a centre right party.
 

Achire

Member
Oct 27, 2017
454
The Democratic party is not competing for votes in Scandinavia but in the US. If you forget this fact, you get annihilated like Labour under Jeremy Corbyn.
 

Dever

Member
Dec 25, 2019
5,345
What a surgical and surprising observation - nobody from Europe.

I'm from Europe and I don't think it's particularly insightful. Politics isn't absolute. Our "far-right" party isn't opposed to the welfare state, so in that sense they're further "left" than the US democrats. But in terms of immigration, they're probably further "right" than Trump.
 

Maledict

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,084
Usually the use of 'factual' and 'objective' in this context, without further elaboration is used to mask flimsy rational. Please explain?

There is literally no evidence to back up this statement, and a mountain of evidence to show otherwise *including the actual policies and actions of the democratic party*. They led a Keynesian response to the financial crisis for heavens sake!

People are confusing leftist with left wing, or their desire for the democrats to be more left wing as somehow not making them a left wing party. Or even more bizarrely, claiming that centre left means social democrat? (Presumably then actual left wing is communism?).

Every analysis of party platforms in any context puts the democrats on the left of the political spectrum. They might not be as left wing as you want, or move fast enough, but that doesn't make them right wing or conservative.
 

TheHunter

Bold Bur3n Wrangler
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
25,774
I'm just gonna leave these graphs here, any maybe ya'll will understand why the US is the way it is. And why calling the dems "rightwing or center right" is disingenuous.

1.jpg


World-Data-composition-nationality-pie-chart-Germany.jpg


Can't quite put my finger on why our politics are messed up.

I guess it's just a coincidence the European countries that our dems would be "rightwing" are just happening to be rejecting all these brown folk.

For some reason.
 

TheHunter

Bold Bur3n Wrangler
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
25,774
There is literally no evidence to back up this statement, and a mountain of evidence to show otherwise *including the actual policies and actions of the democratic party*. They led a Keynesian response to the financial crisis for heavens sake!

People are confusing leftist with left wing, or their desire for the democrats to be more left wing as somehow not making them a left wing party. Or even more bizarrely, claiming that centre left means social democrat? (Presumably then actual left wing is communism?).

Every analysis of party platforms in any context puts the democrats on the left of the political spectrum. They might not be as left wing as you want, or move fast enough, but that doesn't make them right wing or conservative.
This.

Stop this "social dems are center left" bs. No, they are leftwing.
 

Powdered Egg

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
17,070
Sanders is Obi-Wan, AOC is Luke Skywalker.

She's totally right on this. The Party is a major disappointment with the half-steppin. I wish there were more major parties in the US.
 

Vitet

Member
Oct 31, 2017
2,573
Valencia, Spain
I used to thought this on all aspects a while ago (from Europe).

Right now I think they are progressive on some social issues because of the huge diversity and social movements in the US, but in a lot of aspects they tend to the liberal spectre (what we call centre or centre-right here).

If Americans think Bernie is socialist and all to the left that is possible, you will be terrorized on some parties here who even consider themselves or part of themselves straightly communists.
 

Palette Swap

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
11,201
Europe here, and I think it's way more complicated than that, particularly as it depends a lot on the status quo in your country, the direction you move the needle in, and the appetite of your electorate for it.
The only absolute I see in American politics is that the GOP is overall a far right party by all the metrics I can think of.
 

Sunster

The Fallen
Oct 5, 2018
10,011
I used to thought this on all aspects a while ago (from Europe).

Right now I think they are progressive on some social issues because of the huge diversity and social movements in the US, but in a lot of aspects they tend to the liberal spectre (what we call centre or centre-right here).

If Americans think Bernie is socialist and all to the left that is possible, you will be terrorized on some parties here who even consider themselves or part of themselves straightly communists.
that's why I'm getting the hell out of this country. people on this forum think "Sanders wants unicorns and rainbows!" when in reality the things he wants are standard procedure in the developed world.
 

Erpy

Member
May 31, 2018
2,996
this is obviously true. and anyone with a depth of political knowledge, who follows and maintains an interest in international politics, should recognize at least some truth in it.

but it leads to some troubling questions: if this is a right-wing party, why are you in it? do you really believe it's realistic to transform this party into a leftist political movement? the democratic party has always been ruthlessly effective at crushing its left flank. why would you think that will change? even if you elect a president from that flank, won't you have to cull the entire congressional party of its traditional members to get anything done? do you really think that's realistic? if it's their party, and you're openly trying to take it over to sideline their political viewpoint, won't that just create decades of open intra-party warfare?

Because that's literally their only option. The Democrats at this point just barely have the numbers (electorally, not popular vote-wise) to negate the rural state-favoring tilt of the political system and if any of the factions in the party, be it the left-wing or the moderate center, were to break off it would just guarantee perpetual Republican reign. So if you want to influence policy instead of sitting on the sidelines and posting manifesto's on Twitter all day long, you have to do the long and hard work of engaging in a long-term tug of war with other factions, sometimes getting some, sometimes giving some and trying to gain a bigger foothold one school board, sheriff's office, prosecutor's office, state rep/senator seat at a time in a bottom-up approach, all the while keeping a careful eye on whether you can afford to push left just a teensy bit more without giving the Republican candidate in the general an opening to take over.

Lots of folks don't have the patience for this and are hoping for some top-down quick-fix like Bernie's proposed "political revolution" to give their faction a sudden edge, but in the end what you call decades of intra-party warfare is just the normal process of what it means to be part of a big-tent party like the Democrats.
 

Tovarisc

Member
Oct 25, 2017
24,407
FIN
The Democratic party is not competing for votes in Scandinavia but in the US. If you forget this fact, you get annihilated like Labour under Jeremy Corbyn.

You can acknowledge the reality that Democratic party isn't really party of the left when comparing to rest of the world and still cater all the pork to your base.
 

TheHunter

Bold Bur3n Wrangler
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
25,774
Do you have any ACTUAL data to back up that hunch or are you just going to use old data to back up your feelings? its been 20 years since 2000 and correlation != causation.
...that is actual data dude. They're 10 years apart and population demographics don't change that fast.

Like if you're just gonna ignore that homogeneous population means less issues and political strife that's on you dawg.
 

Vitet

Member
Oct 31, 2017
2,573
Valencia, Spain
...that is actual data dude. They're 10 years apart and population demographics don't change that fast.

Like if you're just gonna ignore that homogeneous population means less issues and political strife that's on you dawg.
If I'm not mistaken, it's by nationality, not by ethnia. So there can be german people from other ethnies on these graphics.
I'm not saying it's the same of the US, it's obvious that the US has a more diverse population, but I think the comparison it's not fair.
 

TheHunter

Bold Bur3n Wrangler
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
25,774
If I'm not mistaken, it's by nationality, not by ethnia. So there can be german people from other ethnies on these graphics.
I'm not saying it's the same of the US, it's obvious that the US has a more diverse population, but I think the comparison it's not fair.
I couldn't find direct ethnic data; the point still stands. Germany is more homogeneous than the US. Almost all of the EU countries are.

So going "lol look at you guys, Dems are right" is bullocks especially when you discount social progress and demographics.

In Sweden you hear free healthcare and go "duh". In the US white people hear that and go "What about the black folk?". Makes getting socialism all the harder.
 

Steel

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
18,220
If I'm not mistaken, it's by nationality, not by ethnia. So there can be german people from other ethnies on these graphics.
I'm not saying it's the same of the US, it's obvious that the US has a more diverse population, but I think the comparison it's not fair.
If anything the comparison is more generous to Germany as their percentage of white would increase if the graphs were broken down the same way.

To put it another way:
<1% of Germans are black.
 

Sloth Guevara

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,331
I'm just gonna leave these graphs here, any maybe ya'll will understand why the US is the way it is. And why calling the dems "rightwing or center right" is disingenuous.

1.jpg


World-Data-composition-nationality-pie-chart-Germany.jpg


Can't quite put my finger on why our politics are messed up.

I guess it's just a coincidence the European countries that our dems would be "rightwing" are just happening to be rejecting all these brown folk.

For some reason.

Not sure if relevant but Sweden consists of about 26% people's of foreign decent.
 
Oct 25, 2017
29,446
The problem is the Democrats as a unit and the Democratic public would have to all move as far left as possible to make a victory remotely possible.

However a huge portion of Democrats don't think its possible to win(or maybe even agree with those policies) so they would give too much pushback against it.

Funny thing is if Democrats vs Republicans wasn't so hardline you'd probably see more of the outlier factions.

We really need more legitimate political parties
 

mescalineeyes

Banned
May 12, 2018
4,444
Vienna
I'm just gonna leave these graphs here, any maybe ya'll will understand why the US is the way it is. And why calling the dems "rightwing or center right" is disingenuous.

1.jpg


World-Data-composition-nationality-pie-chart-Germany.jpg


Can't quite put my finger on why our politics are messed up.

I guess it's just a coincidence the European countries that our dems would be "rightwing" are just happening to be rejecting all these brown folk.

For some reason.

so either dems can't be as left as leftist parties in europe because of the racial makeup of the american populace, and thus, aren't left, or your argument is falling apart and you're about to do a racism.

uh oh!