Quote:
Originally Posted by dobbles
Yet, here we have an election where democrats won the presidency, made small gains in the senate, but lost a handful in the house, and we have all this handwringing about the democratic party being too extreme?
|
The logic you're advancing here is that because the other side is excessively extreme, just completely awful, that there shouldn't be any concern if the democrats want to follow suit.
The response from a principled position is, someone has to continue to stand for sanity. Don't hold up a mirror to this garbage. Your response to one side veering off into utter crazytown shouldn't be to veer off in precisely the opposite direction. Even if the democratic version of "going to the extreme" is far milder and less bad than the republican version, it's still bad.
The response from a pragmatic position is, who gives a crap what the other side is or isn't doing? The question should be, "how do we beat them". And that's the argument that's playing out right now. Certain centrist democrats are arguing that cowtowing too much to certain fringe elements of the party has made it harder to beat the republicans. Whining about that, complaining that it shouldn't be this difficult to beat them because they're
completely insane, is meaningless and serves no purpose. The debate is over the strategy going forward, and from the perspective of at least a lot of people, that strategy involves
shutting the #### up about defunding the police and intersectional wokeness and how half the country is racist or condones racism, and focusing on what will actually
win votes. Because ultimately, all this griping about how the republicans and their base are awful and stupid and evil does not appear to help do that.
Since we're posting clips from The Hill, this is completely on point.