But like I said, there are scenarios where he is actually worse than Collins, so a political difference could appear in prioritizing those edge cases
Who cares? Are there any other states into which self-proclaimed progressives are taking so much effort to promote a “slightly better” (actual Nazi mass murderer) candidate? This is all so clearly an orchestrated multi-million dollar campaign by the DNC establishment with their very polished Nazi turd. There’s nothing progressive going on here.
I never said progressives should make an effort to promote him. I said multiple times that we shouldn’t. Just let the situation run its course and queue up the next bozo.
If Platner goes right with Fetterman, that hurts democrats in the eyes of progressives. That is a good thing for socialists, because it gives us a basis to criticize the democrats and affect consciousness around them. But we should not put any effort into promoting him, even tactically, because doing so could harm radical movements in the eyes of the working class.
Do you understand the difference between, “I hope he beats a republican” and “I will do whatever it takes to get him elected”? My position is literally " I dont care and neither should you" and you’re telling me to not care differently.
You seem really invested in the idea of not checking a box for him. You haven’t addressed any of my points, and have started making up things I didn’t say to attack the idea of checking a box that, by your own admission, doesn’t matter if it is checked or not.
I am interested in knowing under what conditions a vote for Platner is worse than a vote for Collins. If you can’t come up with even a single one, then what are you even talking about?
Hurt the Democrats? It hurts the progressives. It’s like nobody has learned a thing from Fetterman. Running some guy with a shady past and all the red flags isn’t going to help the progressive movement. It’s only going to turn off people in the future when the inevitable betrayal comes.
And people should be turned off by a “progressive” movement which endorses Nazi mass murderers. Because it isn’t a viable political strategy. Which loops back to my point.
This is like promoting Kamala against Trump instead of picking someone better. Even if Platner wins it won’t help in the long term.
If I’m supporting Platner, by advocating voting against Collins, by your own logic, you are supporting Collins. I know you aren’t supporting her in your heart, but I’m not supporting Platner in mine. I want her out, I wanna change the situation.
By refusing to even entertain the idea of a vote for Platner, then the material effect of not voting for Platner, of opposing a vote for him, is to allow the incumbent Susan Collins to remain in her seat.
Social conditions are deeply contradictory. If you tell people not to vote and people listen, Collins wins. If you tell people not to vote for Platner and people listen, Collins wins. There is no room for objective morality in Materialism. We have to accept imperfect action and imperfect consequences.
Its the same as democrats who condemn people who refused to vote for Kamala as Trump supporters. We either come to an understanding that there is more going on than this or that objectively moral outcome, or I am supporting a Nazi and you are supporting a far right status quo republican incumbent.
I can accept that you probably would say “don’t vote” on a moral basis, I can see how this election is divisive, perhaps by design, but I’m not arguing with you, you are arguing with me. I can say “hey maybe people should vote for Platner and get Collins out,” but your response is that I’m advocating for people to vote for a Nazi. Meanwhile, you haven’t even tried to convince me that he actually is one, or lay out a scenario where a vote for him is actually worse than a vote for Collins.
You aren’t trying to be objective, and I think about politics objectively, up to a certain degree. So if my appeal to vote against Collins means I’m supporting voting for Platner, which is what you are asserting, then your non vote, or vote against Platner means you are supporting voting for Collins. I believe there are different ways to look at this, but everything that you say supports exactly this campist framing.
When there are two opposing sides, support for one is against the other. So maybe instead of saying “vote for Platner” I should say “vote against Collins”.
I’m not advocating for progressive groups supporting him at all!
I’m saying that maybe people in Maine should check a box for him.
If he is a Nazi that could also work out for progressives as a propaganda point (you are certainly wearing the tread out on it) and help sell the idea of party discipline for the masses, another win for socialist politics, and another loss for Democratic party, since socialists tend to like the idea of party discipline
Fetterman hurts the Democratic party in the eyes of progressives. That is good for socialists who want to split the dems and create a legitimate alternative to the Democratic party.
There are numerous examples of a left challenger overturning shitty Democrats. AOC, Jamaal Bowman, Summer Lee, Marie Newman, Abdelnasser Rashid, and Chris Rabb are all examples of progressives taking a win off of moderate Democratic incumbents. While many of these examples are far from perfect, they prove a trend of replacing shitty moderates with progressives.
Its also not a foregone conclusion that he will vote in lockstep with republicans 100% of the time, and if he does then a more progressive candidate could primary him. The only instance where you might be correct would be if he becomes a literal Fetterman, and even though I tend to agree that is a very strong possibility, you can’t prove that and there is little real indication that is the case. Its far more likely he is an idiot than it is he is a Nazi. He would have covered the tattoo if he was a Nazi trying to infiltrate progressive politics. Its far more likely he is going to be a moderate than a ringer for the extreme right. But I wouldn’t rule it out.
You dont have to agree with me! But stop lying about what I’m arguing.
Edited a rude first comment that I wrote out of frustration
I’m not a progressive party though, I’m just some moron online. I dont consider checking a box a actual work that progressives should do. I would not advocate an endorsement or knocking doors or doing propaganda.
Maybe you think voting is the be all end all. I do not. Maybe you think individual votes are the same as party support. I do not. The senate is a fundamentally undemocratic institution and its probably a waste of time to run as a socialist for Senate.
But voting is just checking a box, and we let the undemocratic political machine do what it does, nothing more.
Who cares? Are there any other states into which self-proclaimed progressives are taking so much effort to promote a “slightly better” (actual Nazi mass murderer) candidate? This is all so clearly an orchestrated multi-million dollar campaign by the DNC establishment with their very polished Nazi turd. There’s nothing progressive going on here.
I never said progressives should make an effort to promote him. I said multiple times that we shouldn’t. Just let the situation run its course and queue up the next bozo.
If Platner goes right with Fetterman, that hurts democrats in the eyes of progressives. That is a good thing for socialists, because it gives us a basis to criticize the democrats and affect consciousness around them. But we should not put any effort into promoting him, even tactically, because doing so could harm radical movements in the eyes of the working class.
Do you understand the difference between, “I hope he beats a republican” and “I will do whatever it takes to get him elected”? My position is literally " I dont care and neither should you" and you’re telling me to not care differently.
You seem really invested in the idea of not checking a box for him. You haven’t addressed any of my points, and have started making up things I didn’t say to attack the idea of checking a box that, by your own admission, doesn’t matter if it is checked or not.
I am interested in knowing under what conditions a vote for Platner is worse than a vote for Collins. If you can’t come up with even a single one, then what are you even talking about?
Hurt the Democrats? It hurts the progressives. It’s like nobody has learned a thing from Fetterman. Running some guy with a shady past and all the red flags isn’t going to help the progressive movement. It’s only going to turn off people in the future when the inevitable betrayal comes.
And people should be turned off by a “progressive” movement which endorses Nazi mass murderers. Because it isn’t a viable political strategy. Which loops back to my point.
This is like promoting Kamala against Trump instead of picking someone better. Even if Platner wins it won’t help in the long term.
It feels like you are completely talking past this person trying to make your point.
deleted by creator
A lot of irony in this comment
Its ironic how hard you’re defending Susan Collins’s senate seat
I don’t recall defending Susan Collins a single time. Can you point out where I did that?
If I’m supporting Platner, by advocating voting against Collins, by your own logic, you are supporting Collins. I know you aren’t supporting her in your heart, but I’m not supporting Platner in mine. I want her out, I wanna change the situation.
By refusing to even entertain the idea of a vote for Platner, then the material effect of not voting for Platner, of opposing a vote for him, is to allow the incumbent Susan Collins to remain in her seat.
Social conditions are deeply contradictory. If you tell people not to vote and people listen, Collins wins. If you tell people not to vote for Platner and people listen, Collins wins. There is no room for objective morality in Materialism. We have to accept imperfect action and imperfect consequences.
Its the same as democrats who condemn people who refused to vote for Kamala as Trump supporters. We either come to an understanding that there is more going on than this or that objectively moral outcome, or I am supporting a Nazi and you are supporting a far right status quo republican incumbent.
I can accept that you probably would say “don’t vote” on a moral basis, I can see how this election is divisive, perhaps by design, but I’m not arguing with you, you are arguing with me. I can say “hey maybe people should vote for Platner and get Collins out,” but your response is that I’m advocating for people to vote for a Nazi. Meanwhile, you haven’t even tried to convince me that he actually is one, or lay out a scenario where a vote for him is actually worse than a vote for Collins.
You aren’t trying to be objective, and I think about politics objectively, up to a certain degree. So if my appeal to vote against Collins means I’m supporting voting for Platner, which is what you are asserting, then your non vote, or vote against Platner means you are supporting voting for Collins. I believe there are different ways to look at this, but everything that you say supports exactly this campist framing.
When there are two opposing sides, support for one is against the other. So maybe instead of saying “vote for Platner” I should say “vote against Collins”.
I’m not advocating for progressive groups supporting him at all!
I’m saying that maybe people in Maine should check a box for him.
If he is a Nazi that could also work out for progressives as a propaganda point (you are certainly wearing the tread out on it) and help sell the idea of party discipline for the masses, another win for socialist politics, and another loss for Democratic party, since socialists tend to like the idea of party discipline
Fetterman hurts the Democratic party in the eyes of progressives. That is good for socialists who want to split the dems and create a legitimate alternative to the Democratic party.
There are numerous examples of a left challenger overturning shitty Democrats. AOC, Jamaal Bowman, Summer Lee, Marie Newman, Abdelnasser Rashid, and Chris Rabb are all examples of progressives taking a win off of moderate Democratic incumbents. While many of these examples are far from perfect, they prove a trend of replacing shitty moderates with progressives.
Its also not a foregone conclusion that he will vote in lockstep with republicans 100% of the time, and if he does then a more progressive candidate could primary him. The only instance where you might be correct would be if he becomes a literal Fetterman, and even though I tend to agree that is a very strong possibility, you can’t prove that and there is little real indication that is the case. Its far more likely he is an idiot than it is he is a Nazi. He would have covered the tattoo if he was a Nazi trying to infiltrate progressive politics. Its far more likely he is going to be a moderate than a ringer for the extreme right. But I wouldn’t rule it out.
You dont have to agree with me! But stop lying about what I’m arguing.
Edited a rude first comment that I wrote out of frustration
So you’re advocating for him.
I’m not a progressive party though, I’m just some moron online. I dont consider checking a box a actual work that progressives should do. I would not advocate an endorsement or knocking doors or doing propaganda.
Maybe you think voting is the be all end all. I do not. Maybe you think individual votes are the same as party support. I do not. The senate is a fundamentally undemocratic institution and its probably a waste of time to run as a socialist for Senate.
But voting is just checking a box, and we let the undemocratic political machine do what it does, nothing more.