Is this supposed to be a full article? I'm confused by its brevity.
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
Convincing people that no matter who you vote for, we'll keep paying for the genocide is not a good strategy.
All that will do is make empathetic people not vote, and when turnout is low, republicans win.
Dems can't run in fear based politics about what the other side wants to do, the people that shit works on are already Republicans.
Dem voters want to hear about what Dems will do to help.
It is very very hard to change that, because it's literally how our brains work.
Dems tend to have larger prefrontal cortex (empathy and critical thinking) while Republicans have waaaay more amygdala activity (fear, flight/fright/freeze).
What appeals to one group, doesn't appeal to the other. But both groups cater to conservatives and hope they can guilt trip high empathy voters.
https://neuro.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.neuropsych.16030051
The people running the Dem party need to learn some fucking empathy and realize just because deep down they're closer to conservatives than liberals, and that voters aren't motivated by the same shit.
I mean, we could just replace party leaders with empathetic people who understand their voters, but I'm not holding my breath.
You’re 1000% correct with this analysis
Dems can't run in fear based politics about what the other side wants to do, the people that shit works on are already Republicans.
This is what’s so disheartening about the modern day DNC, as this seems to be their only campaign strategy since 2016. In a way, what they’re actually doing is normalizing and manufacturing consent for the repugnantcon platform.
“Not Trump” is the lowest possible bar, and the most pathetic part about it is sometimes Biden manages to fall short of it. Get off the fear based bs and lead with some substance Dems!