• PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    13 days ago

    So what you’re saying is no, Democrats don’t need progressives.

    Is that what you’re saying? It’s funny how I posit effectively a yes or no question and nobody can give a yes or no answer. You’re the fourth person in this one comment chain who hasnt said whether Democrats need progressives to win or not to make concessions.

    Yes… or No?

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      13 days ago

      It’s funny how I posit effectively a yes or no question and nobody can give a yes or no answer.

      Because you’re demanding a simple answer to a complex question. It’s not a “yes” or a “no”. It’s a “yes, but” or a “no, but” answer depending on how you look at it.

      • PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        13 days ago

        What is so complex about “Do democrats need progressives”?

        Either they are an instrumental voting block that needs to be taken seriously, or they don’t matter (and therefore deserve no blame if Joe loses).

        You want it both ways because you are not arguing in good faith.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          13 days ago

          The answer, as we’ve all been telling you, is neither of those. Leftists (because you’re not talking about progressives no matter how much you try to pretend you are) are inconsequential themselves. But their influence (lately) on uninformed voters is very consequential. People who would never call themselves leftists but are being suckered in by leftist talking points.