Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

newengland_schmuck t1_iryi7fw wrote

Ashley Kalus won't say if she wants Donald Trump to run for president again in 2024

Democrat Dan McKee says Joe Biden should run for re-election

ARE THESE TWO ARE ONLY CHOICES???? Ugh

48

radioflea t1_irz0oqk wrote

I said it before but I’ll say it again thank your fellow Rhode Islanders who decided to not participate in the primary election. This is the end result, elections have consequences.

45

dc_dobbz t1_is0da0n wrote

Yes and yes. Though, personally, I’d rather see primaries eliminated all together and move to a single round ranked choice ballot.

6

Remarkable_Baseball7 t1_is1i8zv wrote

Amen to this ! The non primary voters are probably the ones complaining the most about the two choices

4

Thac0 t1_is0igfd wrote

Hey I voted Gorbea 🤷🏻‍♂️

3

radioflea t1_is0iqww wrote

I still can’t believe how poorly her turnout was.

9

newengland_schmuck t1_irz2yp1 wrote

Not just RI... look at the POTUS candidates. That's the main reason we're so divided as a nation... mostly zealots vote in primaries and they elect the extreme candidates to further their agenda. Wish more people would realize this.

1

degggendorf t1_is2u45r wrote

> elect the extreme candidates

Ah yes, the noted extremist Joe Fucking Biden LOL

But I'm not going to argue against more people participating in primaries either.

3

brick1972 t1_is0c2w9 wrote

The primary system outside of Trump largely leads to more moderate candidates, not more extreme. This is borne out over almost the entire history of the country. Yes there are some exceptions but especially since the Civil War it's been true - marked exceptions would be FDR (but not as clear cut as you might think) and you could also make an argument that Reagan was extreme, though this seems more obvious in retrospect than it was obvious in 1980. You need to look at some of the candidates who lost primaries.

Anyone who says democratic POTUS candidates need to be less "extreme" are actually Republicans.

1

newengland_schmuck t1_is0elus wrote

Still say party zealots get candidates elected...ranked-choice voting would eliminate the extremists

2

brick1972 t1_is0gsuc wrote

I don't want to get into a protracted argument, but the presidential primary system for POTUS is different than primaries in general. First to the pole while on a country wide tour collecting votes has some real flaws. But, it does weed out extremists. This is just true.

If you want to say that party insiders determine the narrative particularly for POTUS, that's fine, but it's the position of the extremists that this happens and they are excluded because of it.

I have a hard time seeing someone like McKee as voted in by ideologues or extremists. Unless there is such a thing as extremely meh.

3

dgroach27 t1_is0ibyk wrote

Oh great more moderate democrats, that makes me sooooo excided! I love virtue signaling, milk toast progress, and having no backbone against republicans!

edit: milquetoast lol. I'm a stud with words

−1

newengland_schmuck t1_is0lzs3 wrote

Yet here we are where our government can't do a damn thing because of the party-lines. Total BS and it's destroying America. We need elected officials who will work together rather than only support one party. Sometimes you need to give a little to get what you want

4

dgroach27 t1_is0n5ao wrote

The left has been giving for decades and right has basically been doing whatever they want, let's be real. The second you take the your foot off the gas of progress there are immediately steps back. So no the solution isn't moderate democrats and moderate republicans where there will be "give and take" but at the end of the day they're basically the same. Take off your privilege glasses and look at the country, does it really seem like moderate, nondistruptive policies are going to help?

1

newengland_schmuck t1_is1318l wrote

"Take off your privilege glasses" make assumptions often?

3

dgroach27 t1_is16szs wrote

I guarantee that you have some sort of privilege that could taint the way you view the world. The vast majority of people in the US do.

2

newengland_schmuck t1_is19akc wrote

Regardless, assumptions like this weaken your message and escalate the rhetoric from both sides

1

dgroach27 t1_is1dnot wrote

It's hardly an assumption. It doesn't always feel like it but living in this country is a privilege and your views are certainly shaped by living here.

Frankly, I don't care if some privileged centrist thinks my message is weakened by my "assumptions". Complaining about that tells me that you don't really have a good response.

Answer me this, republicans (and many democrats) didn't want gay people to have the ability to get married. What is the give and take with that? Only married sometimes?

1

newengland_schmuck t1_is1fxsy wrote

WTF are you talking about? You scream, the zealots on the opposing side scream louder. Doesn't change anything but increase the division. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

2

dgroach27 t1_is1h532 wrote

Yeah it's definitely the people who want universal healthcare that are the problem and not the one's who are ok with bounty on people who get abortions. I'm not willing to compromise with republicans because that will only result in minorities and the disadvantaged getting hurt. If you are, well, that's on you. I think democrats need to grow a backbone and actually push back against republicans the way that they have been forever. Had a filibuster proof majority and didn't codify Roe, have control of Congress and the White House and have barely done anything outside of the recent student loan forgiveness and weed stuff, how much more inaction and mediocrity do you want from them? Who are these "zealots" on the left that are causing so much division?

2

newengland_schmuck t1_is1irdm wrote

Watch Fox news, they will show you. I often feel like there are two realities.... the one shown of Fox News and the one on CNN. Both are garbage in my mind; it's not news, more like 90% opinions and party bashing. Sucks. I agree things need to change, but if you demand it all at one time you're going to get resistance from those who want things to stay the same.

1

dgroach27 t1_is1jzxq wrote

Except the people that Fox News bashes want healthcare for people and workers rights and the people that CNN bash put bounties on people who get abortions, want to limit voting, and spout off about replacement theory. I agree CNN sucks (probably for different reasons than you) but you just can't equate the people that those networks bash. Like, Bernie Sanders and AOC are not as bad as Tucker Carlson and Ron DeSantis. If you think so, sorry but your brain is broken.

2

newengland_schmuck t1_is1lhqx wrote

Not my point of view, but please remember Fox News has been the top cable network for the last 6 years... you need to better understand your opponents

1

dgroach27 t1_is1zwfd wrote

Oh I fully understand them, that's why I will never compromise with them. I know if they achieve their end goal, most people, political parties aside, will suffer.

1

newengland_schmuck t1_is21j5m wrote

If you are not part of the majority, you can't change anything without compromising. It's f'ing scary how many people watch and believe everything they hear on Faux news

1

dgroach27 t1_is2kefn wrote

Moderate democrats have the majority right now and they’re getting fucked by republicans. They’re compromising with them when they don’t have to. Completely spineless

1

uterinejellyfish t1_iryn34m wrote

I feel for you guys... I'm just over the border in CT and I'm glad we have Lamont. He's actually a good choice, especially given the history of politicians in general.

5

derpbeluga t1_irysxji wrote

It was annoying. She simply said that she didn't want to answer the question, but instead wanted to talk about something else.

3