At best, “support our troops” was a version of that dumbass magical thinking that, in earlier times, held that the U.S. lost in Vietnam because Americans didn’t clap for Tinkerbell, err, I mean, support the war. Mostly, it was a thought-terminating cliché.

Yeah, as you rightly point out, it was never about the soldiers themselves.

It’s not accelerationism at all! It’s fatalism.

Accelerationism is, “It has to get worse before it can get better.”

My point here is, “The system that only allows for getting worse will never get better.”

A big issue with this approach: The United States is not a law of nature; it doesn’t have to exist. The system may only allow two options, but it does not guarantee that either one of those options will keep the system viable. Reduced harm is still harm, and at some point we needed to stop doing it.

Not believable; Epstein died over 5 years ago. All the girls in that book are way too old for Gaetz by now.

Parents? My friend volunteered as a poll worker on the University campus here. At his location, 25% of the students voted for the orange fascist.

Right, and this isn’t rhetorical combat. You are correct, and I was continuing the train of thought.

He’s 78 and displaying moderate dementia symptoms. I wouldn’t worry about a third term.

Heck, people are still producing new games for the Commodore 64.

And Emmett Till could still be very much alive, had he not been lynched.

Still not great from a messaging perspective. Better ways to reach people who aren’t politics nerds or policy wonks:

Medical care will be affordable, so you can go see your doctor any time you or your family need to. If your kid gets sick, you can be there for them and help them get better without worrying about how to pay for care. You’ll get paid better, no more of the “boss gets a dollar, I get a dime” crap. No more stress about setting aside a college fund for your kids. They’ll be able to go to school, guaranteed. Strong American morals mean we’re not going to send our tax money to fund war and atrocities on the other side of the planet. If you lose your job, the government will have your back with enough money to survive on until you get back on your feet, no questions asked.

Goddamn, why can’t Democrats say this stuff, instead of word salad like, “Launch a National Health Equity Initiative to address health challenges that disproportionately impact Black men.” WTF does any of that even mean?

It’s wise not to share the details, but the broad strokes are important: Information is the game. Getting it, distributing it, analyzing it. Successful authoritarian regimes always strive to keep people uninformed, terrified and unable to act.

Defend the information networks at all costs. Only with good information can we effectively do those things that it’s not wise to detail in public.

You say that, but “vote blue no matter who” is exactly this argument under the paint.

I’m on this kick of pointing out that the utilitarian ethical calculation still works with 100% Hitler and 100.1% Hitler. Harm minimization, baby!

Oh boy, if you haven’t, read its history. Its real history. Wild stuff.

Reminds me of that joke about how there are only two races: White, and political. It’s disheartening to see folks (some here on Lemmy) confusing listening to the concerns of brown-skinned people with leftism. The Arab-Americans in Michigan, for a relevant example, are just people with a range of political opinions like the rest of us.

I just typed another reply to the effect that Democrats can’t express strong values because of the inherent contradiction of being a corporatist party trying to appeal to workers for votes. I would add that it’s not only a bad look, but a bad political tactic: If you don’t state your values, your opponents are more than happy to fill in the blanks with whatever batshit nonsense serves their purpose.

Agreed, just a little left-wing populism would’ve gone a long way. I’m cynical, so I see it as that the Democrats can’t be or do those things, because the need for campaign donations has turned them into a fundamentally neo-liberal party that stands for wealth and corporate greed. Like the GOP used to be, before it departed for Crazy Town in a lifted pickup truck.

See also: Joe Biden breaking the rail strike. (Before somebody points he followed up by getting some of the unions some of what they wanted, eroding union power generally was the headline news.) Can we imagine him nationalizing the rails and forcing the companies to strike a deal with the unions in exchange for using them? It would have been a stunning political sensation, but would’ve crossed Democrats’ corporate benefactors.

Yes, totally agreed, and I feel this discussion circling straight back to the OP point: Whose job is it to dismantle the machine, and counter the misinformation? It’s us; there’s no global referee that we can appeal to. How do we do it? Through the political process, because we don’t want violence and civil war. Since the winner-take-all voting system mathematically leads to two parties, our agent in the political process is the Democratic Party.

So, it’s not the DNC’s fault that the misinformation machine exists, but it is their responsibility to fix it, and we can certainly blame them because they’re really bad at it.

That is exactly what they were hoping for, actually.

That’s a bold statement only a day after a campaign based on going hard-center crashed and burned.