not from the US but like… sure a lot of ppl who voted for that party instead of the other one this time are still fairly right wing and will have to cater to the too.
But that’s what happens when you have a 2 party system lol.
Even if you’re running the party like it’s a cynical numbers game there are two possible scenarios.
A. You could try to win more votes by moving to the right and peeling off center-right Republicans. Mostly old people who were proud of being asociated with Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher but ashamed of being associated with Donald Trump and Tommy Robinson. You do this at the expense of losing however many people on the left wing who are barely willing to vote for you now, who if they see your new platform is sucking up to Israel harder, backing the blue, and throwing trans people under the bus, will just stay home.
B. You could try to win more votes by moving to the left and motivating the mostly young people who currently aren’t voting at all because both parties just answer to lobbyists and let billionaires get away with everything and nothing ever happens so what’s the point. They will vote for meaningful, structural change. They will vote for whoever comes out as standing for the polar opposite of every single thing conservatives stand for, and promising to fight for it hard.
You can bet on either path working out- again, even being completely mercenary and strategic and not taking a principled stand on anything. One or the other group of potential voters has to be larger.
Here’s the thing, in my whole life I have only ever seen Democrats- as a party- try doing A. Again and again and again. We have seen 3 decades of results demonstrating how effective a strategy it isn’t.
Might B work better? I don’t know, no one does, because they’ve never once just fucking tried it.
So I don’t believe it is even a strategy at all, not a serious and good-faith one. It’s a ruse; an op.
But the Democrats aren’t the only ones doing it. Look around the world, right now everywhere’s got some gutless, triangulating, unilaterally-compromising centrist party that’s good for business and good for business as usual and polls well with the low-information normies but when it comes down to it they will side with the far-right against the far-left 10 times out of 10.
not from the US but like… sure a lot of ppl who voted for that party instead of the other one this time are still fairly right wing and will have to cater to the too.
But that’s what happens when you have a 2 party system lol.
Even if you’re running the party like it’s a cynical numbers game there are two possible scenarios. A. You could try to win more votes by moving to the right and peeling off center-right Republicans. Mostly old people who were proud of being asociated with Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher but ashamed of being associated with Donald Trump and Tommy Robinson. You do this at the expense of losing however many people on the left wing who are barely willing to vote for you now, who if they see your new platform is sucking up to Israel harder, backing the blue, and throwing trans people under the bus, will just stay home.
B. You could try to win more votes by moving to the left and motivating the mostly young people who currently aren’t voting at all because both parties just answer to lobbyists and let billionaires get away with everything and nothing ever happens so what’s the point. They will vote for meaningful, structural change. They will vote for whoever comes out as standing for the polar opposite of every single thing conservatives stand for, and promising to fight for it hard.
You can bet on either path working out- again, even being completely mercenary and strategic and not taking a principled stand on anything. One or the other group of potential voters has to be larger.
Here’s the thing, in my whole life I have only ever seen Democrats- as a party- try doing A. Again and again and again. We have seen 3 decades of results demonstrating how effective a strategy it isn’t.
Might B work better? I don’t know, no one does, because they’ve never once just fucking tried it.
So I don’t believe it is even a strategy at all, not a serious and good-faith one. It’s a ruse; an op.
But the Democrats aren’t the only ones doing it. Look around the world, right now everywhere’s got some gutless, triangulating, unilaterally-compromising centrist party that’s good for business and good for business as usual and polls well with the low-information normies but when it comes down to it they will side with the far-right against the far-left 10 times out of 10.
You fix that by spitting the party in two that agree to work in core issues but have their respective different agendas.