The post notably included the statement:
that’s not the kind of thing that should happen without the community agreeing to it
With no voices in support in the original post and currently the only two voices in support here being the mods themselves.
Democracy is "not for" a lot of people. They're lazy. They don't think it impacts their lives. They don't want to put in the mental effort to follow politics and make a good decision, so they just leave it to other people. You certainly know someone in your extended social circle who is just "not political".
But that doesn't change anything. The conservatives find a way to motivate their morons, they don't complain about non-voters and then just wish it were better. Some of your "not political" friends probably went out to vote for Obama.
Yeah, monarchies are usually inherited.
They'll keep rolling her out for campaigns like do with Bill Clinton. They view reaching high station in the party as being perpetually loved by the rank and file.
WHAT SOCIAL PROGRAM?? The Democrats didn't run on any of this woke mind virus bullshit you're complaining about. Trans people were the target of choice for the conservatives despite being basically a miniscule sliver of the population and Democrats just mumbled some generic pablum about privacy and compassion before changing the topic as quickly as possible. In no remote sense was "trans rights" a purity test for the Democrats, as clearly evidenced by all the fucking Republicans involved in the campaign.
This is just divorced from reality, and maybe that's the real sentiment you two have landed on, but it's not because the Democrats did anything to foster it.
I'm not nearly as much of a downvote magnet as either of you, and I still have some dude following me around claiming I'm a Stein shill despite every mention of her in my history being to shit on her. They've just got the one move.
Because the Tea Party was useful to just make the Republicans more unapologetically anti-government (something rich people like) while Occupy was demanding that Democrats become unapologetically antagonistic to rich people.
I'd even be happy to settle for someone in the middle of the party willing to fight for the party's supposed ideals. Remember when one of her slogans was "when we fight, we win"? Not "when we bipartisan, we win" or "when we coopt conservative issues, we win".
Is this intended to be a parody of a No True Scotsman?
Sorry dude, the problem is well beyond "leftists" and sooner or later you'll need to confront that.
This will be the main test of whether Trumpism rules or capital rules. The rich people love Republican tax cuts and deregulation, which was the main product of his first term (coincidentally everything the rich didn't like failed), but going after cheap immigrant labor or taxing their foreign sweat shops is going to stir up some behind the scenes conflict. Voters are stupid (e.g., "did Biden drop out" searches), they'll be surprised when the leopards eat their face, the rich people are well aware that the leopards are dangerous and hope that their leopard control devices can get them through unscathed with an even greater piece of the pie.
Biden's win was NOT a confirmation of his campaign's correctness. That should have been an easy election but he barely won.