1345
submitted 4 months ago by fukhueson@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] someguy3@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

If you want to move the Overton window, you vote. That's the perspective you need.

[-] bamboo@lemm.ee -1 points 4 months ago

The Overton window is not something that can be changed electorally. Candidates can only get on the ballot in the first place if they’re within the Overton window, as anybody outside the window is “radical” or “extreme”, and the existing political powers forbid their candidacy. The electoral window is moved outside the electoral process, and only then can the electoral system permit new candidates with new ideas.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago

Lol yes it can. Why are we having idiotic discussion to disband the EPA? Because Trump won an election. That moved the Overton window, drastically at that. Why can't Biden do ______? Because the Republicans still have a very real chance of winning. When the GOP has no chance of winning, then the Overton window can move more.

[-] go_go_gadget@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

When the GOP has no chance of winning, then the Overton window can move more.

Then Biden should be listening to the people he's depending on to get re-elected.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.ca 0 points 4 months ago

You get more from the center than you do the fringes. Aka you can't do radical policy unless you know you'll still win.

[-] Ledivin@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

So... were just ignoring the current candidates? And the current debates and policies that each have pushed?

[-] john89@lemmy.ca -2 points 4 months ago

Yeah. You need to vote for candidates that don't just look out for rich people.

[-] bamboo@lemm.ee 7 points 4 months ago

Those people are never on my ballot, unfortunately.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.ca 0 points 4 months ago

How do you get that? By moving the Overton window. And how do you get that? By VOTING. But it seems you want to yell at a cloud instead. Something tells me you'll just keep at this 'whoo is me', so I'm out.

[-] john89@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I said "we need to vote for candidates that don’t just look out for rich people."

[-] Facebones@reddthat.com 1 points 4 months ago

Wrong. The party that can "move left" went to court to assert their right to do what they want regardless of voters, and have an equal hand in moving the goalposts anytime a third party comes close to the requirements for inclusion. Hell, just look at their messaging - they don't even talk about Republicans or their policies, they just namedrop trump then blame leftists for all their woes.

"MoVe ThE oVeRtOn WiNdOw (even though they openly and pointedly snipped completely off anything left of mid right genocide Joe)"

The answer is guillotines and anyone who says otherwise are well off liberals who would rather have Trump than redistribute wealth and resources.

[-] PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world -4 points 4 months ago

Meanwhile, the Overton window has been shifting right radically. Seems like this lesser of two evils nonsense is actually doing the opposite of what you claim.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Moved because Trump won an election. But you want to suggest that's just random? C'mon.

*Btw it's moving the Overton window, not lesser of two evils as you want to put it. You want policy number 426? You have to vote for policy 1 first. You have to walk before you can run.

[-] PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

What are you talking about? We have been moving rightward ever since the Clinton administration, baring a handful of social issues. Are you genuinely telling me that we are more left leaning now than we were under the new deal politics before Reagan?

All we've progressed in is gay and civil rights, which is good. Economically and by most other metrics, we've slid Faaaaar to the right.

It's not a good look for your position on slow incremental change that the entire apparatus can collapse in one election.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.ca -2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

You said radical, that was Trump. You think Clinton change was radical? No that was Trump. Can't forget Bush either! You know the one that lied his way into war. But you want to suggest everything was all Clintons fault or something? C'mon be better than this weird game you're playing. Like really, do you think it would be more right or more left without Bush and Trump? That's the Overton window.

BTW Clinton had to be moderate because he was going against an incumbent.

Yeah I could go over different issues, but you're already trying to poopoo them away. So I'll broadly address economics with we have regulated capitalism. One party wants to remove regulation (Gop because I think you're trying to be obtuse) and be entirely free for all, no EPA or anything. And one wants proper regulation (again, Dems because think you're trying to be obtuse).

And because or your silly weird games, I'm out.

[-] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 0 points 4 months ago

And because or your silly weird games, I’m out.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out!

this post was submitted on 02 May 2024
1345 points (97.9% liked)

News

22890 readers
3591 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS