Somebody explain all American political parties to me please

@salmon_rushdie said ^

Isn't the proof that Sanders did not get the nomination, and that after him Biden then Harris were the nominees, while the GOP was running the very hardcore Donald Trump..?

2024 is/was very different than now - the debacle of that whole primary/election cycle cost establishment dems a lot of credibility - specifically the same dems that hav...

Right, yes, which is why I think 2028 will be a pivotal year... Because of something else I think you understand:

A significant amount of the left is not legitimately allied with the more hardcore progressive platform.

They are NATOcrats, you could say. They will say everything in support of progressive social issues, but it's really your typical "Capitalism with a Welfare State at the service of biilliionaires & Infinite Wars abroad but we raise the Rainbow Flag."

This is what AOC may actually be: a CIA candidate in disguise as a progressive who will shake everything up.

@Decaffeinated said ^

Isn't the proof that Sanders did not get the nomination, and that after him Biden then Harris were the nominees, while the GOP was running the very hardcore Donald Trump..?

2024 is/was very different than now - the debacle of that whole primary/election cycle cost establishment dems a lot of credibility - specifically the same dems t...

That's fine, tbh cause just like with Trump - the neo-con base of his party happily supported him once he beat out the competition and energized the base -

Similarly, neo-lib dems will probably be thinking more pragmatically if it seems the best bet for them is in the hands of a progressive leader.

I doubt that about AOC,

But who knows - I didn't expect Tulsi Gabbard to go as AWOL as she did, there was a point where I really liked her and thought she would be a force to reckon with in the future

@salmon_rushdie said ^

But who knows - I didn't expect Tulsi Gabbard to go as AWOL as she did, there was a point where I really liked her and thought she would be a force to reckon with in the future

I am a big fan of her because she stuck to her guns on foreign policy issues. It probably cost her her career, eventually, in both parties.

I always respect a principled stand.

@Decaffeinated said ^

But who knows - I didn't expect Tulsi Gabbard to go as AWOL as she did, there was a point where I really liked her and thought she would be a force to reckon with in the future

I am a big fan of her because she stuck to her guns on foreign policy issues. It probably cost her her career, eventually, in both parties.

I always respect a p...

Kind of? Eventually... She willingly played politics for Trump in a myriad of ways (i.e. gutting our intel networks, using US intel resources to try and invalidate the 2020 election 5 years after the fact) until the whole Iran thing... I see it ultimately as pursuing individual ambition after being angry about the dem primaries more than staying true to core beliefs - I don't think the Gabbard who tweeted this could authentically turn around and work for a 'loyalist only' Trump admin and I don't think she was delusional enough to think that she could actually work good or maintain any semblance of independence under those auspices.

THIS CHESSLAYER12 KID WONT STOP BOTHERING ME DUDE HELPPPPP.

I think she would have accurately understood that Trump is a wildcard and it was the closest that she would ever get to being able to have authentic, principled power in DC outside of Congress, and she went for it.

I really respect her and Trump's stances concerning the Ukraine war - that the whole debacle has to end and that we cannot just string along this idea of infinite war will work out for us in the end against Russia.

Hundreds of thousands - perhaps millions - have died on both sides, unneccessarily, based on some narrative on the Donbass.

... But Gabbard does not understand the depth of geostrategy being played in the ME, and I think that we have to understand that the alliance network that keeps us working for the benefit of the Saudis and the Gulf Arab states, while seeming potentially misguided, makes a lot more sense when we factor in the long-term interests of the free world.

But there is very little chance that we will have a great chat about this if we stick to poilicy details... This is one of those things where I wish we had some plastic chairs, an awning, and an auntie serving us big coffees for a buck and lattes for 2 bucks, and we just sit and talk about the issues like two INTERRECKSHUALLSSS with all the time in the world.

So that is how I will roleplay this conversation.

It helps that i have limitless drip coffee right now.

@Adonis2015 said ^

THIS CHESSLAYER12 KID WONT STOP BOTHERING ME DUDE HELPPPPP.

the “report” icon is a triangle with an exclamation point in it.

you both aren’t even in this thread so it was surprising to see your post here.

also, you could block someone’s posts so you don’t have to see them. you click on their user name, then click on the menu, and one of the choices is block this user or something like that.

@ed01106

If you view homosexuality as disgusting and something you personally would never participate in but feel homosexuals should have equal rights, that puts you in the left not the right. I personally am uncomfortable with homosexuality and declined both invitations I have received to attend gay weddings, because I would be uncomfortable at such an event. However, I support their right to get married so that puts me in "ally" camp.

I don't support their right to get married, which is where the far right stance comes in. If we ever lived in a world where LGBTQ+ was criminalized, I would not vote for a bill to legalize it. However, I also wouldn't vote for a bill to criminalize it either in our current world and I remain distrustful of anyone that tries to scapegoat them as a community. I support people as a person, which is why I said I don't necessarily hate anyone, but in terms of policies, you could technically argue that I don't fully support equal rights if I'm not fighting for everyone to have the right to practice everything (and yes, before you point anything out, I do recognize that this is technically a form of hypocrisy).

Also, being uncomfortable is traditionally a far right stance, not left. Just sayin'.

That is a significant difference between the left and the right. Nobody on the left is trying to turn kids gay. (Despite what the trolls on Fox News claim).

I didn't say I believed that people are just magically being forced to be gay; it's a really ridiculous claim by the far right and I've never seen why they feel the need to double down on it so badly. However, I also don't believe that people are born a certain way, which generally that alone is enough to label me as an extremist and yeah.

They just want to let the kids who are gay not be discriminated or hated.

If someone came to me to come out because their parents disowned them for being LGBTQ+, or just came out in general, I'd listen and help as much as I could. That does not make me an ally; ally would be helping out someone much further than that and fighting for them. That just makes me a human with basic decency.

Running on a platform of supporting equal rights for homosexuals is not the same thing as saying "vote for me because I am gay"

Never said it was. I just mentioned that in passing to say that only focusing on gay people or making that the main focus of a campaign would draw a raised eyebrow from me; that's it -- obviously there's a big difference between that and a general campaign promise to prevent future discrimination.

To everyone else -- Thanks for the advice!

The issue though is that I'm not just looking at ideals; I also want to investigate how it would actually work in practice with the current candidates and political trends. I'd have a good chance voting for a center left candidate with my ideals and I've known that for a while and been hoping to quietly register as Democrat (I live in a relatively conservative family). However, like Salmon has pointed out, it's more likely that the left is going to be more progressive in 2028, and I would align much less with a more socialist democratic approach, so that does change things a bit...

Sounds like I don't align with any third parties though? That's sad lolz

In theory, joining the democrat party would still make sense for you—you could vote for centrists in primaries.

I don’t know if I think that the Dems are going to go full-blown progressive in the long term—right now, progressives represent anti-Trumps, and almost all Dems want to rein in the president; I think that once Trump leaves and MAGA fractures, the Dems will pull more towards the center again.

The other option is that polarization within the parties leads to the creation of one or two new political parties for centrists; Id actually like this, but I don’t see it as likely.