SevMax2
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2019
- Posts
- 6,264
I don't give two shits about whether Bernie is or isn't a nominal Democrat. So the fuck what? He has moved the Overton window leftward more than any other public official in my lifetime. He helped draw me out of the center/center-right toward the left, and while I have my own issues with him at times, I can't forget that fact.
Bernie isn't about preaching to the choir, like so many Dems who refused to even go on Fox News. He's about convincing the unconvinced, and it worked in my case. So, fuck that whole damn narrative that he's unable to win over swing voters. It's total nonsense.
Wokeness scares off independent voters far more than economic populism, civil libertarianism, and anti-imperialism does. It's the Twitter pseudo-left, with their woke, hipster liberal, corporate version of liberalism/progressiveness that loses votes. It's cancel culture and the faux outrage du jour. People don't care about that. They care about what FDR cared about...what JFK cared about, what Jimmy Carter cared about...helping the multi-racial working class, both middle class and poor.
Do I think that socialism is an unwise label...probably. Populism would be better. Liberalism is still tainted by the coastal elites. Progressivism stirs up mixed feelings. But it's likely that future Berniecrats will avoid that dreaded "S" word and really win over more potential converts to the actual left. The populist left.
The Movement for a People's Party is one definite step in that direction, and they've wisely not nominated a candidate themselves yet. It's a nascent party or coalition, but I see a lot of potential there, particularly in "safe blue" states where progressives feel freer to defect without helping Republicans. Also as ranked choice voting eliminates the risk of a spoiler effect, not that such effect has ever been proven to my satisfaction (would an anti-war Libertarian Gary Johnson voter have really voted for Hillary instead, other than maybe William Weld?).
Bernie isn't about preaching to the choir, like so many Dems who refused to even go on Fox News. He's about convincing the unconvinced, and it worked in my case. So, fuck that whole damn narrative that he's unable to win over swing voters. It's total nonsense.
Wokeness scares off independent voters far more than economic populism, civil libertarianism, and anti-imperialism does. It's the Twitter pseudo-left, with their woke, hipster liberal, corporate version of liberalism/progressiveness that loses votes. It's cancel culture and the faux outrage du jour. People don't care about that. They care about what FDR cared about...what JFK cared about, what Jimmy Carter cared about...helping the multi-racial working class, both middle class and poor.
Do I think that socialism is an unwise label...probably. Populism would be better. Liberalism is still tainted by the coastal elites. Progressivism stirs up mixed feelings. But it's likely that future Berniecrats will avoid that dreaded "S" word and really win over more potential converts to the actual left. The populist left.
The Movement for a People's Party is one definite step in that direction, and they've wisely not nominated a candidate themselves yet. It's a nascent party or coalition, but I see a lot of potential there, particularly in "safe blue" states where progressives feel freer to defect without helping Republicans. Also as ranked choice voting eliminates the risk of a spoiler effect, not that such effect has ever been proven to my satisfaction (would an anti-war Libertarian Gary Johnson voter have really voted for Hillary instead, other than maybe William Weld?).