You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
-44 points

Feel free to join in self-censorship, but I don’t think that is healthy for the working class.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

Creeps like you thinking they speak for the workers isn’t healthy for them either.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-34 points
*

Edit2: words, phrasing

Your label of smearing those that do not agree with everything you say says more about you than it does of what I share.

Gatekeeping the working class, nice.

We just have a difference in opinion; there is no need to project or assume the worst of people that do not fall in line with your way of seeing the world.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

says you shouldn’t assume Makes a bunch of assumptions

Most coherent Jimmy Dore fan.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

This is something I have to comment on. This user says that it represents the working class, while advocating for switching votes from the political party closest to its platform to a third party.

A reminder of how politics works in the USA. Suppose you have a school with 100 kids voting for class president. The school is equally divided between the Jocks and the Nerds. The Jocks are represented by a pretty and charismatic, but quite vain and assholish, cheerleader. The Nerds are represented by a dull nerdy kid, complete with boxy glasses and a pocket protector. And the School is preparing these young Americans for life in the USA, so the election is First Past the Post.

The school has a slight lean towards the Nerds. As in 51 kids would vote for the dull nerdy kid rather than the pretty jerkish cheerleader. 49 would prefer the cheerleader. Now, the cheerleader has a single nerd in her orbit, a bookish girl who’s good with maths. She sits down with the cheerleader and points out ‘if the election were held today, you’d lose 51 to 49.’ The cheerleader throws a temper tantrum, and then demands to know how to win, because her pappy didn’t raise no loser. Bookish girl tells her ‘You need to suppress the vote and distract the voters on the other side. If you peel off at least 3 voters, you’ll win 49 to 48. Make a scandal up, present the other side with an alternative, and convince those nerds to stay home or vote third party, and you can win this.’ The cheerleader and the bookish girl come up with a plan – a scandal and a third party candidate.

The scandals are easy. One of the cheerleaders, friends with THE cheerleader, comes up with a rumour that the nerdy boy came on to her at prom. This gets the feminists in the boy’s coalition up in arms, and they scream they won’t vote for him because he’s a skeesy boy who puts his hands on girls uninvited, despite no proof that he actually ever did something like that. And the distraction? Bookish girl. Cheerleader pretties her up, and positions her as an alternative to dull nerdy boy. And they also set up a few other distractions for election day, which will be outside of school hours. Enter a book club meeting and a video game tournament…during voting hours.

Election day comes. 4 gamers are playing at the tournament and two bookish kids are at the book club meeting, and not voting. 51 votes becomes 45 votes. Another 15 kids vote for Bookish Girl Candidate, in a mix of ‘she’s pretty’ and ‘Dull Nerd Candidate is a skirt-chaser!’ That takes Team Nerd down to 30 votes. Of course, Bookish Girl Candidate was never in it to win, so she would have voted Team Cheerleader if it was closer, but between her and the 15 kids, Team Bookish Girl got 16 votes. But First Past the Post means Team Jock wins with 48 votes, and all 51 Nerds get the exact opposite of what they want for the next schoolyear as the Book and Game club get closed down in favour of more Jock activities.

Accounts like jimmydoreisalefty and others are the Bookish Nerd Girl in this example. They are here to convince us to stay home or vote Third Party, while screaming that Dull Nerd Boy shouldn’t ever get our vote for a litany of reasons. Listen to them at your peril. They do not have your best interests in mind. They want Cheerleader to win, and to take away your Book Club and your Game Club. Or put more realistically, they want Team Trump to win and take away your civil rights and subject you to an authoritarian nightmare in the order of what Putin, Xi, Orban, Kim, Netanyahu, and other authoritarian strongmen dictators have planned for their nations.

This isn’t Left-Wing vs. Right-Wing. It’s Egalitarian vs Authoritarian, and the Authoritarians smell blood in the water. Be careful and mindful how you use your vote.

PS: Yes, I agree with Leate_Wonceslace here. This user is not an honest debater. It’s here for nefarious purposes: To enable Trump to steal the election and force Project 2025 on us. Keeping this in the here and now, and keeping it real.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 9.9K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 214K

    Comments