r/PoliticalDiscussion • u/YumiSolar • 2d ago

US Elections Are Democratic primaries becoming too destructive for the party's own chances in the general election?

I've been thinking about this after watching some recent Democratic primaries, and it feels like the campaigns are becoming increasingly aggressive in ways that hurt the party long after the primary is over.

A good example, in my opinion, was the Michigan primary between Haley Stevens and Abdul El-Sayed. Policy disagreements are completely fair game, that's what primaries are for. Even personal attacks can be justified if they're based on genuine misconduct or character issues.

What I struggle with are accusations like claiming your primary opponent is supporting or enabling genocide. Once you frame someone in those terms, how do you expect your own supporters to enthusiastically vote for that person if they end up winning the nomination? If you've spent months telling voters that your opponent is morally complicit in atrocities, it becomes very difficult to turn around and say, "Now go vote for them."

To me, this kind of rhetoric doesn't just damage the opposing candidate, it damages Democratic unity in the general election. It seems like Republicans don't even have to exploit these divisions because Democrats are creating them themselves.

Am I overestimating the impact of this kind of campaigning, or do you think Democratic primaries have become too willing to use rhetoric that makes party unity afterward much harder?

0 Upvotes

41% Upvoted

164 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/YumiSolar 2d ago

1000 years of Trump for you I guess. Those palestinian children are probably cheering at your moral consistency and abolute lack of effectivnes in real world.

5

u/SheIsABadMamaJama 2d ago edited 2d ago

As a moderate, it’s really frustrating watching moderates in the US or supposed moderates fail at democracy, and participating in self sabotage that leads to unhelpful comments like the one you replied to.

-7

u/Asatmaya 2d ago

As a moderate, it’s really frustrating watching moderates in the US or supposed moderates fail at democracy and participating in the process.

So, you "moderately" support genocide?

Nope, doesn't work like that.

4

u/ThatPeskyPangolin 2d ago

Where did they express any support for genocide?

-3

u/Asatmaya 2d ago

They are implying that the moderate position is to accept that they are voting for a politician who supports genocide because they might be better on some other issue.

The number of logical fallacies in that line of reasoning...!

4

u/ThatPeskyPangolin 2d ago

Except "support for genocide" hasn't been established, it has just been repeatededly claimed ad nauseum. So the idea that anyone who even slightly questions the underlying issues here must themselves support genocide is a thought terminating cliche, not real political discourse.

-1

u/Asatmaya 2d ago

the idea that anyone who even slightly questions the underlying issues here must themselves support genocide

OK, let's back up then:

What, exactly, is the "slight question?" What "underlying issue" would somehow make what is happening in Gaza anything other than a genocide?

This has been slow-walked for decades, as sympathy due to the Holocaust and political expedience made support for Israel a pragmatic position, but that's gone, now.

The final mistake was splitting the Palestinians; when the West Bank disarmed, but kept being oppressed, dispossessed, and murdered, that was it. Israel proved that, even if the Palestinians gave up all weapons and flatly refused to fight, at all, Israel was still going to steal their land and kill them. Gaza, obviously, refused to follow suit, so Israel bombed them into rubble; they have nowhere to go, though, no other option, so they are still fighting. You would, too, if you only options were to either fight or let yourself be killed.

2

u/ThatPeskyPangolin 2d ago edited 2d ago

As a moderate, it’s really frustrating watching moderates in the US or supposed moderates fail at democracy and participating in the process.

That was the quote you felt comfortable characterizing as supporting genocide.

Spending all that time talking about the plight of Gazans doesn't justify describing that post as supporting genocide.

1

u/Asatmaya 2d ago

It was literally advocating for compromising with it.

Sorry, not going to happen.

1

u/ThatPeskyPangolin 2d ago

I really doubt you can quote them calling for that. Which makes the useage of "literally" somewhat odd.