Nah. Oat, or pea milk.

Unless you’re one of them weirdos who actively likes 2% milk then sure soy or almond.

No Dems did have messages: We love war criminals. Fuck Palestine Fuck immigrants

They’re just… all Republican messages.

Sure they had some other milquetoast ass positions on stuff, but nothing big. No stopping genocide, no health care for all, no overhaul to social security to ensure its success, no overhaul to minimum wage to ensure it’s constantly updated to be a living wage in urban and suburban areas. No getting money out of politics. No positive immigration reform to help legalize those who’ve been working here who prop up the agricultural industry. Nothing big and important that wasn’t a Republican opinion. Because they’ve decided they’d rather be centrist republicans than do anything of use, they’ve done this since after Obama got elected. Hell, if it wasn’t for Obama care and changing opinion on gay marriage idk if Obama would’ve even been re-elected because they sure did a whole lot of nothing outside of that to try and “work with republicans”.

I mean I don’t doubt some of the people pushing it are (TERFs gonna TERF) but the movement itself seems… pretty straight forward? No dating/marrying/sex/having children with men.

Or is there more to it? Or again just TERFs, being TERFs inside the movement.

Buddha was Indian. And 6th century BC. It did spread to Asia, but it was not theirs originally. They did tend to adopt more philosophical things, like Confucianism and Taoism around that time.

But there’s also older stuff. Myths, gods, yokai, Djinn, etc. throughout Asia. With plenty probably fitting what your definition wants, but idk. I would start looking for stuff older than Buddhism, Taoism (or legalism), or Confucianism.

The rich is the correct minority to blame. Republicans or not.

Not saying money is the sole decider, but it helps. Also the difference between what you can donate to a candidate (like $3000) and what you can donate to the DNC (like $40000) is… quite large. Like 12x the amount of money… Kamala does not have 12x the amount of money as trump.

Also, you really think there’s just like… two blocks of voters in the primaries… and they’re exactly equal in number, and exactly spread evenly between all states and districts? Progressive/leftist/whatever you wanna call the “far left” makes up a fairly small amount, but one that literally turns out in higher percent than any other voting block. It does not mean they outnumber EVERYONE ELSE COMBINED.

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/01/05/americans-at-the-ends-of-the-ideological-spectrum-are-the-most-active-in-national-politics/

Here’s some data from Pew Research on it. You can look for some others they’ve done on similar stuff.

Yeah dude idk if you understand politics at all, so there are people. And those people get informed. Often by ads. And you see, the Clinton campaign was skirting campaign finance law by funneling money through the DNC and then taking that money for her campaign to run attack ads against a primary opponent when that money was promised to states and to whoever won the primary.

So yes, the person who won broke the law in order to gain the upper hand to win but it’s our fault for not voting harderer. So many of yall DNC worshipers think it’s all the progressives don’t vote, or only vote in the presidential elections, meanwhile they literally turn out way higher than any other block of voters in EVERY election.

The problem is money. Literally so much money they had to illegally funnel it through the DNC instead of a single campaign to gain that money.

So…. 72% of democrats is too low of a number for government run healthcare for the DNC to care? What happened to doing what a significant majority of your voters want?

Hell even private, still ensuring healthcare for everyone is still a majority.

Also, man you tell me vote if I want to matter then tell me I don’t matter. Which is it. That progressives as a whole need to vote if they want to matter? Literally the group by your own polls data you were using that votes the most. Like lol.

Anyways, again, while it may only be 6% as I’ve been saying we do not need a perfect representative. I do not expect a fucking communist president. Just do some of the extremely popular progressive platforms such as healthcare for all or etc. then do your normal liberal shit for everything else idgaf. But if you want to lose 12% of your base then whatever. Hope you pick up enough republicans I guess. Have fun with that. But don’t be surprised that the single group that has the highest % voter turnout ignores you when you actively antagonize them, shit on their ideals, and tell them they don’t matter, while simultaneously blaming them when you lose, and suing any party that represents them off ballots. Thanks for reminding me not to let them have my vote because they don’t deserve shit when they pull shit like this trying to pretend progressives don’t matter tho. I was almost on the fence.

Damn I didn’t know 69% was a small number of people.

https://thehill.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/04/wat_04242020.jpg

Or 55%

https://news.gallup.com/poll/642695/majority-disapprove-israeli-action-gaza.aspx

Or 60+%

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/10/23/7-facts-about-americans-views-of-money-in-politics/

Boy, I sure have unpopular ideas I would liked

But also, when you split shit 50%, 12% progressive is basically 24% of your base. Actively ignoring 24% of your base seems fucking crazy, but again. Sure dude. The 2016 election went so well for them when they actively antagonised progressives. I’m sure that great strategy will keep paying off.

Also I’ve voted in every major and minor election since I turned 18. But my favourite part is you’re supposed to vote. But you’re told you have to vote for one of two candidates because the others are spoilers. But then they look at less than a third of a percent of the vote going to progressive party and ignore us.

Always cool.

Also, PSL is constantly doing work, organizing, and helping out communities. Their website honestly doesn’t even have a thing on the front about their presidential candidate last I remember checking.

I mean I wasn’t saying you’re wrong just pointing that the representation doesn’t need to be “perfect”

But also voting for the party that has sued to keep 3rd party off ballots & runs attack ads on third parties to hope that they eventually allow ranked choice or star or etc. is kinda not exactly looking probable but hey, here’s hoping.

“Vote to kill your family or kill yourself.” Is quite the uh… great democratic message that really says “DNC, vote for us, because we’re not (all) openly facist.”

Like I know you probably did not brain that whole thing through there but like fucking lol.

Anyways my point was a counter to needing a perfect representative. They don’t need to be perfect, just need to actually care about what their constituents want/need. Yeah it is bad. Duh. We know it is fucked up that’s why people are discussing alternative ways to vote that do not boil down to Evil and slightly less evil. We don’t need pure good as a candidate. Just… someone who listens to those they want to vote for them?

Like… not actively supporting and contributing to genocide would be a cool start? Public health care would also be nice…

But there is a big difference between “perfect” and “beholden at all, in any fucking way, to their constituents.”

The DNC gets to refuse to run any progressive policies and say shit like “nothing will fundamentally change” because their entire policy is “at least I’m not Trump.”

Hell yeah when are we getting carefree life long contracts baby.

To be fair I think The Yellow Wallpaper at least has a fucking point instead of … what the fuck…

Ah yes, a nice short story about yellow wallpaper.

I wish it was e, so it could be true.

I mean I wasn’t particularly serious it’s more about the DNC even having anything close to that as policy which would be nice but they won’t.

Just man up and nationalize all major forms of insurance you fucker.

I mean, the genocide is for expansion. They want Palestinians dead to take their land. There are forms of expansion other than occupying land: colonies and such, as I doubt they do actually expand physically that far.

Neither do Britain and India… or Britain and Palestine… nor… a lot of places imperialism has sprawled to. To assume they stop the genocide at Palestine is silly.