• ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    They are progressive black local leaders representing their community. Not racists. Not “corpo dems” haha.

    And they are saying minorities, the elderly, and the poor are more likely to be undermined because of lack of resources to be made aware of said changes. They did it last year, and many people in those districts didn’t make a second vote. Which means their vote counted less than others.

    Under voting isn’t a theory. It’s something that’s demonstrably occurred in these specific districts. They can see how people vote and notice that it is happening.

    Saying one demographic is more likely to be left unaware of said changes, after looking at the data, and noting the negative impact, is not the same as saying “black people are stupid.” That’s where your mind went for some odd reason, though.

    The local dem chapters in these types of districts aren’t Hilary Clinton, bro. They’re the opposite.

    Nice try. You’re disingenuous and desperate AF.

    There’s people who hate nuance, and there’s people who have a clear agenda. And they’re typically the same people. And that’s why you jumped straight to the “they’re racist corpos” when it’s objectively the opposite.

    Just to be clear: I am generally for ranked choice. And I’m generally for calling out corporate dems. But I’m not cool with disingenuousness, even/especially from people I otherwise stand in agreement with on issues in general.

    Calling these particular people racists is exactly what Trumpers would do. Btw. Same shitty playbook.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      Saying one demographic is more likely to be left unaware of said changes, after looking at the data, and noting the negative impact, is not the same as saying “black people are stupid.” That’s where your mind went for some odd reason, though.

      except that they didn’t need to tie it to race at all. you’re right. they have polling data. “These wards were severely undervoting in the last election because of a lack of awareness; ranked choice disenfranchises our constituents” is really all that needed to be said. Unless you think race is actually the contributing factor and not - just here me out here- adequate resrouces spent on awareness campaigns in those wards prior to the vote and in the polling stations day of.

      But awareness campaigns and extra pollworkers to make things go smoothly… don’t help keep status quo with democrats and republicans sharing power by agreement because ranked choice (among other reforms,) absolutely would weaken their power. as out outsider looking in and only knowing this… they really don’t seem all that progressive, here.

      Nice try. You’re disingenuous and desperate AF. There’s people who hate nuance, and there’s people who have a clear agenda. And they’re typically the same people. And that’s why you jumped straight to the “they’re racist corpos” when it’s objectively the opposite.
      You’re missing my point. People who tend to miss points tend to be… well just read you’re own quote back.

      I do appologize for the assumptions. being anti-rank-choice tends to be a corpo-dem position; not a progressive one. Because it makes… you know… progressives… easier to elect. (more broadly, 3rd party.)

      once again. the point is there’s zero need at all to tie this to racism, which they very much did. IMO, “its confusing” is not a valid argument for not doing something new. people can learn and get through it- particularly with help. “its confusing” is a very good argument for taking steps to clear up the confusion. which of these two options do you think supports their constituents better?

    • rambaroo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Lmao. DC Dems are 100% corporate. You act like someone can’t be black and a corporate shill at the same time, which of course is racist.

      This is solely about suppressing competition from independents and third party candidates. They’ll use any argument they can to maintain the monopoly on power they have in DC. You’re falling for it.

      • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Because you say so. And these black people who live in these districts are racist against themselves too. Sure, buddy. Quite apt.

        People who use words like shill whenever they have nothing else to say are funny. You probably believe in pizzagate.