435

'It's very possible': Trump floats imprisoning his political opponents (www.nbcnews.com)

submitted 5 months ago by Rapidcreek@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

131 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[+] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -13 points 5 months ago

The issue is some people really support the horrible shit Biden is doing, and if the Dem candidate won't do it, then they'll vote Republican.

It happened when Obama managed to beat Hillary in 08. Moderates had a movement to vote Republican over Obama, and they did.

They were just statistically insignificant and Obama had a landslide win that flipped multiple red states and got us the House and Senate.

It's really really hard to get Dem voters to compromise their morals though, moderate Dems need someone horrible they can stand next to and say "we have to stop them!".

The issue is it didn't work in 2016, barely worked in 2020, and by all indications won't work in 2024.

We know what works. But the DNCs corporate donors would prefer a Republican to progressives. So they donate huge amounts during a primary and by the time it's the general there's no way for them to lose.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 8 points 5 months ago

It happened when Obama managed to beat Hillary in 08. Moderates had a movement to vote Republican over Obama, and they did.

Have you got any source for that at all?

[+] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Sooooo many.

It's not a secret, it was openly all over the place back in 08.

But I feel old realizing some people just weren't politically active back then.

Here's a pre election poll

https://news.gallup.com/poll/105691/mccain-vs-obama-28-clinton-backers-mccain.aspx

Here's a post election article

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/who-were-those-clinton-mccain-crossover-voters/

Here's a pre election article

https://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/26/clinton.backers/index.html

Here's the Wikipedia article on it

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_and_liberal_support_for_John_McCain_in_2008

But this is something that is easily searchable and was an absolute huge news story...

If most people have already forgotten about it, maybe that's the disconnect I've been experiencing? Why people don't realize how much Dems have changed in the last three cycles?

They just genuinely don't know what it was like before trump?

That actually makes a lot of sense, and honestly I should have thought about that.

Before we can get people on board with what we should do, we need to make sure they're aware of what has happened. People don't understand how much they've lost over just a few decades.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 5 points 5 months ago

So, by the stories you posted yourself, there were people who switched from McCain to Obama after Obama beat Hillary.

Kind of like the 2008 election had two good candidates who respected the system and each other.

Nice try.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -5 points 5 months ago

https://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/26/clinton.backers/index.html

You missed one I guess

Well. At least one.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago

You're hilarious.

Yes, one person is exactly the same as a mass movement. The subject got headlines because she was rare.

You were trying to imply that after Obama got the nod there was a mass migration from the Dems to McCain, and that loss was only made up by a massive Left tsunami that had sat out the primaries.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

So you didn't read the Wikipedia link either?

During the campaign, there was significant media discussion of Democratic Hillary Clinton voters backing McCain, in particular members of People United Means Action (also known as PUMA, originally standing for "Party Unity My Ass," and also known as "Just Stay No Deal") and those sympathetic to it.[40] After Clinton's June 8 concession, 40% of women who supported Clinton described themselves as dissatisfied and 7% described themselves as angry; 25% said they would support McCain in November.[41]

Polling data According to Gallup Polls from June 9 to August 17 McCain's cross-party support fluctuated between 10% and 13%. In the poll for August 18 to August 24 support for McCain among Democrats peaked at 14%. From October 13 to October 19 polls showed McCain's support among Democrats to be 7%, which was the lowest thus far.[42] The CNN exit polls placed his Democratic support at 10% with the same percentage for liberal support. These results may not represent the general voters due to early voting.[43]

According to exit polls on Election Day, McCain won the votes of only 10% of Democrats nationwide, the same percentage of Democrats' votes that George W. Bush won in 2004.[5]

Or the poll it referenced? I linked that too

You were trying to imply that after Obama got the nod there was a mass migration from the Dems to McCain,

Nope, I said:

It happened when Obama managed to beat Hillary in 08. Moderates had a movement to vote Republican over Obama, and they did.

They were just statistically insignificant and Obama had a landslide win that flipped multiple red states and got us the House and Senate.

Like, it seems the issue is your drastically underestimating how disproportionately moderate party leads represent the very very tiny percentage of Dem voters who are "moderate". The moderates are not the bulk of the party, they never were.

But to be honest, it doesn't seem like you're interested in actual talking about this, you keep trying to turn this into an argument...

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 0 points 5 months ago

According to exit polls on Election Day, McCain won the votes of only 10% of Democrats nationwide, the same percentage of Democrats’ votes that George W. Bush won in 2004.[5]

So, literally no mass movemnet by "Moderates" trying to screw over the Left.

I don't want to talk about it because it's meaningless.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Recap of "ancient" history:

On 9/11/01 terrorists attacked America...

This made everyone embrace a shitty leader and even questioning them led to social outcasting for years

The facts that 08 matched the first election since 9/11 is too illustrate how fucking huge it was...

But honestly, if I don't block you now, you're going to say something else that is so easy to explain I take the two seconds. You haven't learned anything yet, I doubt you will if I put more time in.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago

Bush won in 2004 by about 3 million votes, 50.7% of the vote to 48.3.

I was actually around in 2001 and went to numerous marches against the Iraq invasion. New York City, which was the place hit hardest on 9/11 went against Bush. They also hosted a few of those anti Iraq invasion marches.

You're the one who keeps rewriting/reimagining history.

[-] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

But honestly, if I don’t block you now,

There it is.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago

That was a rabbit hole I should have never gone down. Have a nice weekend

[-] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago

You too my friend. Enjoy yourself

this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2024

435 points (98.0% liked)

politics

19144 readers

1768 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

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:

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.
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.
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.
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.
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