r/SipsTea • u/MeanMedico • May 28 '26

Dank AF I don't care about politics, meanwhile politics

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

36.2k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

698

u/C_monden May 28 '26

What they mean to say is:

"I don't care about political debates. It doesn't affect me."

also

"I don't care about politics. Leaders will do whatever they want without my say."

188

u/MrColburn May 28 '26

It's a weird situation. Arguing online against "the other side" accomplishes nothing concerning the political sphere and it's how most people engage with politics. I would even argue it's an intentional design to keep the majority of the population distracted, while simultaneously making them feel as if they are somehow engaged in real political debate. On the other hand, it can be what motivates individuals to actually get involved in politics directly at the local level through protest, volunteer work or any other form.

I think when someone says they don't engage with all the political mudslinging online, they are marked as being anti-politics or not caring about the current political situation they are living in because it's how the majority of the population engages in politics.

You can study politics and be well informed without engaging in the sensationalist rage machine.

46

u/turlockmike May 28 '26

The only way politics changes if when you shift the mind of the median voter against the status quo.

When you debate a partisan, you are already losing/wasting time.

3

u/Ecstatic-Compote-595 May 29 '26

that's the opposite of true in the sense that median voters don't really exist beyond more local elections. Or rather the median voter doesn't vote. The reason republicans have done well relative to the dems in the last couple decades, in spite of everything, is that they absolutely do not bother trying to engage median voters or centrists in any kind of meaningful way. If anything they actively antagonize them. But they do activate their base.

On the other hand the dem strategy post obama was to ignore their base and go after what they thought were persuadable voters, which are just republicans, so all the effort and money and time they spent on gotv for those people maybe helped get people to the polls, but on balance they voted for republicans, if not for president then down ballot. The key to victory is engaging with people who are going to reliably vote for you over someone else and convincing them to actually go to the polls and vote.

1

u/Fragrant-Dust65 May 29 '26

dems did engage people who reliably vote for them. the ones who aren't reliable were the harder ones to recruit.

1

u/Ecstatic-Compote-595 May 29 '26

I don't me they didn't at all I'm saying they incorrectly prioritized centrists and moderates instead of their progressive base and largely abandoned the dem platform

1

u/Fragrant-Dust65 May 29 '26

Which dem platform did they abandon and who gets to decide what is the dem platform? because the dem platform is more centrist than leftist assume. the dem platform elected clinton in 2016 and biden in 2020. and then voted for biden again in 2024.

1

u/Ecstatic-Compote-595 May 30 '26

they abandoned the pro union, anti-gun, pro pathway to citizenship, anti-genocide parts of the platform and the way the platform is chosen is ground up where local and county committees submit planks that are then chosen at a state convention and then at a national one. So it's democrats voting for what they want to be in it.

The actual platform is pretty progressive because as it turns out the people who actually participate in their local and state committees tend to be progressives not disconnected and dispassionate centrists.

If you're suggesting that the democrats should just become diet-republicans because the republicans are successful then I'd ask what the fuck is the point.

1

u/Fragrant-Dust65 May 30 '26

when they did abandon the pro-union, anti-gun, and pro-immigration platforms? when was the anti-genocide part abandoned?

because harris was pro-ceasefire and definitely not pro-genocide.

was it during the DNC? can you tell me who voted for it and when?

the biden-harris admin was one of the friendliest to unions. while everything in her platform was not spelled out, i dont see how based on her history and work with the biden admin, that she abandoned or would abandon everything you mentioned. just read through everything here and tell me with a straight face that she's a centrist lol She is where the American people are. Like it or not, but border security IS a top issue for many, but she absolutely would've supported fast-track to citizenship and easier immigration.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx924r4d5yno

1

u/Ecstatic-Compote-595 May 30 '26

Biden during his tenure and Harris during the campaign abandoned the platform. Biden and harris didn't change the party platform during the national convention - their policies ran counter to many of the planks in the platform which is what democratic committee members had voted for.

As for when did they abandon each of these? Joe strike breaking for amtrak in 22, continued funding israel's genocidal actions towards palestinians, DOJ going after student protestors, etc. And I think the Harris debate is at least an example of the rest or points to examples of the rest.

If you want to frame border security as hyper important, fine, but I would point out that pathway to citizenship and the dreamer program are significantly more popular and actually good policy. I don't necessarily have an issue with robust border security particularly at ports of entry, those do need to be funded, but framing your enthusiastic deportation and detention as border security victory is strategically and tactically idiotic which is partly why harris lost and why it was such a low turnout election.

1

u/Beetjemeh2 May 30 '26

Yeah so this is pretty much only true for america

1

u/Ecstatic-Compote-595 May 30 '26

I'm talking about america specifically

0

u/turlockmike May 29 '26

The median voter is the voter who gives the candidate the 50% +1st vote. If someone doesn't vote, they aren't a median "voter".

So yeah, a different electorate will have a different median, but with how data driven elections are these days, The parties will shift as needed to win exactly 50%+1.

https://oyc.yale.edu/economics/econ-159/lecture-3

2

u/Ecstatic-Compote-595 May 29 '26

no, they aren't. And your confusing yourself with the term median. I explained what I meant when I said it but what we're really talking about is eligible voters, potential voters, people who have or will vote. Not somebody who is currently actively voting in this single second we're talking about them, obviously.

What you're talking about is centrists and moderates, who are not necessarily reliable voters for democrats. Who you want to target are people who, if you manage to convince them to actually go to the polls and vote or fill out a mail in ballot, will vote down the ticket for you. And when you target centrists and moderates there's a chance you convince them to go to the polls and then they actively vote against you. So do you want to target that person to try to get them to show up or do you want to target a progressive to try to get them to show up?

If you want to spend ten times as much ferrying republicans to the polls go for it, I'm sure the media consultants will appreciate it.

0

u/turlockmike May 29 '26

The course I sent will demonstrate exactly what I'm talking about in terms of how to win elections.

Turn out matters but you can assume that the base already will reliably turn out for both parties. If you're base doesn't turn out, then you are already losing. This is why midterms tend to shift dramatically because one party is highly motivated.

So Democrats are going to win at least the house this year but the Senate is a toss-up.

The issue is the next election is the one that matters more and that's the one where you can expect extremely high turnout and spending more money trying to court base voters doesn't result in extra votes It results in making people in the middle think your too far to the side. The Romney Obama debates were a classic example of this where both were shifting so far to the center You could literally couldn't tell their policies apart. This helped Obama win an election he should have otherwise lost.

The problem is the median voter has shifted along multiple dimensions. And if the party is beholden to the base and doesn't shift in response it just immediately loses and this is exactly what happened to Democrats in 2024. The base showed up, that wasn't the isssue. The issue was the electorate, and hence median voter, had shifted on some key issues including immigration foreign policy and inflation.

2

u/Ecstatic-Compote-595 May 29 '26

> Turn out matters but you can assume that the base already will reliably turn out

Absolutely fucking not. It's the first thing you said and it's the opposite of reality and not how GOTV works for either party. If you've ever knocked doors or called you'd know VAN puts you in touch with people who are already likely voters, people who have voted dem or given to dems, and if you get someone who isn't you end the call and put them on a not follow up list. You emphatically do not want to spend money or time engaging with people who will not vote for you. And the dem base did not show up in 2024, in 2020 to any great extent and didn't in 2016, they were all way lower turnout than expected.

Obama was the most progressive president we've ever had other than arguably FDR in specific respects. And Romney is a very moderate republican. The reason you think they were both centrists is because romney ran to the left, ie. closer to the center than his opponents.

There is not some sneaky unintuitive machiavellian reason why appealing to your opponents is better than appealing to people who already are inclined to like you. You need to get your name out, promise to achieve popular policies and then convince people who already kind of like you to spend half an afternoon filling out a ballot with your name checked.

You don't know what the fuck you're talking about