CmdrShepard42

I still somewhat cling to this same belief although I think it's a futile effort as you're not just competing against randos online, but networks of bots, disinformation campaigns, state actors, and an army of gullible individuals who parrot their rhetoric. You just can't compete against that as a single person.

There is no excuse for this kind of behavior from Democratic voters. The above argument suggests Harris is not competing against Trump, but competing against the ideals of the Democratic voters. If this was really a matter of candidate vs candidate, on the issues, Trump would have lost. But this time Democratic voters fucked themselves because everything on their list wasn't met. And now nothing on their list is met.

I never said leftist.

So who are you referring to, the right-wing neoliberals of the party whose ideals align perfectly with people like Biden, Harris, George W. Bush, and Reagan?

Maybe appealing to right-wing ideals isn't a winning strategy for a party who's supposed to be representing the left, but maybe they need to lose a few more elections over it just to be sure.

And how many elections are you (and DNC leaders) willing to lose by insisting that you're correct and everyone else is the problem? That running as a "diet Republican" is the correct strategy instead of appealing to the left? Liberals have spent the last 8 years (and more) attacking leftists and spouting Republican rhetoric and now you want to blame those same leftists because your strategy failed yet again (for nearly the third time in a row)? That's rich.

We had it on the ballot here in Oregon, and it got rejected. It probably didn't help that I didn't see a single bit of outreach from state Dems who've been controlling the state for the past 40 years, but that's probably because they're more concerned about retaining power for the party than actually fixing things, so they didn't want it to pass.

It's definitely a valid concern. In 2020, Trump had federal police descend on Portland in plain clothes and unmarked vans to literally kidnap protestors off the streets.

Gore lost because George Bush's brother, Jeb, invalidated a bunch of ballots and stopped a recount as governor of Florida.

Besides that, this argument is absurd as it would be just as valid to say that Gore spoiled the election for Nader and if Gore hadn't run, Nader would have been elected president instead of George W.

Quit trying to externalize the blame for the actions of the party leadership. These faults should have been clear to you in 2016 when they handed the White House to Trump, and again in 2020 when their candidate only narrowly defeated Trump (especially at a time when Trump had already wrecked the economy and COVID was skyrocketing and this was fresh on everyone's mind).

You seem to keep insisting that everyone else needs to adjust to meet you in backing candidates that keep losing when maybe you should be the one adjusting to meet others. Sliding further and further right isn't a winning strategy for Dems and that should be quite obvious by now.

Those same dems who thought that seeking endorsements from Dick Cheney was a good idea?

Biden barely beat Trump in 2020 and is now much older and the incumbent who people typically blame all the current issues on. They made the right choice forcing him to step down but he never should have run for a second term in the first place but instead defeat Trump and run a single term like he said he would in 2020. The DNC should have spent the last 4 years grooming someone more appealing to the public instead of trying shift the party to be more like the Republicans.

Agreed. These people are demonstrating the exact behavior that Nader is talking about that put Trump in the Whitehouse in 2016 and now it looks like again in 2024. What the fuck do they expect to happen when running as "diet Republicans" against "Republicans?"

Of course people don't like to take their medicine and will now lash out and blame everyone else for the mess they've caused again.

People who vape are using nicotine much, much more often because it's just so much easier now.

Do you have some proof to support this? And even if it's true, why is that your concern to the point where you feel justified in jailing individuals for using it?

The whole idea of vape as a means to quit smoking was a myth created by vaping companies.

This is false on multiple levels. First, because people who vape instead of smoke are no longer smoking, and second because countless people have used them to quit using nicotine as you can buy different strengths of juice and taper yourself down to 0mg/ml juice which is something that I've personally witnessed numerous people do.

Nicotine is also bad for you, not just the smoke.

The smoke is what gives you cancer. Nicotine does increase your blood pressure and heart rate, but so do cheeseburgers and soda, and I don't see you or anyone else trying to assign criminal penalties to individuals for using those.

And then there's the issues of the other compounds inside vaping liquids that should be heading into your lungs.

Like propylene glycol which is used in asthma inhalers? Vegetable glycerine which is used in sports drinks to candy to heart medications? What harmful chemicals are you referring to?

You're equating the harms from second-hand smoke with vaping here, which don't exist as they're caused by the chemical reactions that occur when you burn plant matter.

I'm not arguing that it's okay for people to vape where they're not supposed to, but you're blowing things out of proportion here. The real danger to your lungs while in a gathering is from catching COVID from one of the individuals nearby you.

Are you going to tell him "no?"