6d ago

AOC loses key vote in House Oversight race to Gerry Connolly

www.axios.com Just a moment...

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context

168 comments

If they follow that logic they'll never win, because the number of people who will unconditionally vote Dem is demonstrably not enough to win an election.
- They don't care about winning if it means lowering themselves to the level of trying to court voters.
  
  They court voters all the time. They don't court nonvoters.
  For the same reason, campaigns don't depend on getting youth to finally turn out to vote. It's a strategy that has never worked.
  
  They court voters all the time. They don’t court nonvoters.
  They conveniently designate those they don't want to listen to as nonvoters, and pay no actual attention to whether the demographics they ignore are voters or not. "They don't vote" is a pretext and has never been anything else.
  
  They don't have to "designate" people as nonvoters. A nonvoter is someone who doesn't vote. Nonvoters designate themselves.
  
  Until the election has passed and they haven't voted, only then are they nonvoters. Before the election, calling them nonvoters is just an excuse to ignore them.
  
  No, there is a specific term for people like that: "First time voters". And they are courted by all parties.
  
  It's never occurred to you that parties need to actually try to retain voters to keep them from staying home in disgust?
  
  Again, the vast majority of nonvoters are politically disengaged. They don't stay home out of disgust, they stay home because they don't care.
  
  Again, they weren't nonvoters until after the election. They were ignored before the election.
  Now keep ignoring what I'm saying and repeat yourself. I voted in 2024, but that won't stop you from declaring me a nonvoter so you can ignore me. It's way easier than listening.
  
  I know you aren't a nonvoter, and I never said you were one.
  Nonvoters include people who don't bother to register and people who say they don't plan to vote. So they can be identified before an election.
  And despite what many seem to think, the vast majority of nonvoters would not become voters even if a candidate had done X, whether X is "support Palestine" or "support trans people" or "stop talking about trans people" or whatever else.
  People love to project their personal politics onto nonvoters, but the fact is that nonvoters are nonvoters mainly because they do not care about politics.
  It's really no different than other human activities. For example, I don't watch NASCAR races because I do not care about NASCAR. And NASCAR drivers ignore me, which is fine. Because even if they were highly interested in me, there is literally nothing they could do that would make me want to watch NASCAR.
  I am a NASCAR "non-watcher". Well, turns out lots of people feel the same about politics as I do about NASCAR.
- Democrats won over 200 federal elections last month. Believe it or not, Harris was not the only Democrat on the ballot.
  
  That 200 wasn't enough to keep the Senate or win the House so I'm not sure what your point is.
  
  The point is that "Democrats will never win" is obviously false, since many of them win every year.
  
  Are you fucking serious? I have better things to do than engage with whatever this is, but you should really think hard about a lot of things if you really believe what you just said.
  
  Yes, I'm serious. Are you? Because "Democrats will never win" is about as serious as someone who says "The 49ers will never win" after watching last week's game.

168 comments