There’s two kinds of people in this regard:

• The “I escaped the alt-right pipeline” types, i.e. people realizing there’s a cult and leaving it, and getting to understand more about where they’ve been and how they’ve been manipulated by an entire media ecosystem. They stop hating trans people, abortion, etc., practically changing their whole worldview as if leaving a religion. These I believe are legit because they make an effort to comprehend wtf happened so that it doesn’t happen again, and they likely attempt to pull others out as well.

• The casual types you described who will dodge a bullet here and there because a candidate rubs them the wrong way but they’re still fundamentally the same: concerned only with incoherent grievance politics, and therefore deeply susceptible to the same manipulation tactics.

Stages of grief

Exactly. It doesn’t only apply to grief — any major change of beliefs will need to go through this process… unfortunately.

There’s a saying in my country: don’t get drunk on cold water. Meaning don’t gaslight yourself into wishful thinking, because hope can be a hell of a drug.

A third party win won’t happen overnight. The only way you can realistically get it is with ranked choice voting. Otherwise you’re stuck replacing Democrats (and why not, Republicans — in smaller races you can absolutely run a Bernie style progressive who keeps the focus on economics!) one by one because the institutions are already in place, and they’re really powerful! Also, remember they’re just institutions: parties don’t have ideologies, people do.

And before you think to vote for people like Jill Stein or whoever else while hoping that maybe this year the miracle will happen (i.e. getting drunk on cold water), remember that there’s a lot of groundwork that needs to be done by that candidate for them to be viable, and it essentially boils down to this: the whole country needs to know about that person and recognize them on the street come election year — if that’s not the case, then they’re either delusional, underfunded, or most likely an opportunist (possibly even an intentional spoiler paid by the opposition, like RFK was in the Dem primary).

Source: me. I’ve been on the third party hope train back in 2020, emboldened by “leftists” such as Jimmy Dore, BJG, Richard Medhurst, etc.

That’s kind of true: you can’t get them to see reason, only spite.

I wrote another reply to the person who posted but I don’t like repeating myself, so I’ll just give the cliff notes:

Trump’s “America has been treated very unfairly” rhetoric is more likely just an extension of his own persecution complex, which in turn is just standard fascist rhetoric about how “we were once great, but we’ve allowed ourselves to be humiliated by our adversaries… but now we’ll be great again and take our revenge on all of them”. It’s nothing new. And while I have a high opinion of Yanis, I think he’s just wrong here, and I think that’s exactly why UnHerd (a sussy “alt-left” pro-TERF publication) was happy to publish his article.

I like Yanis but I really don’t think that’s what Trump is doing.

I’m sorry, but Trump’s “America has been treated very unfairly” is more likely just an extension of his own persecution complex, which in turn is just fascist rhetoric, always with the grievance, eternally playing the victim card (“they humiliated us but we will get our revenge”), so I feel like Yanis is trying to interpret the well-known fascist humiliation fetish into a coherent economic vision… But it just isn’t. Trump’s woefully incompetent, so the only way what Yanis is saying would make sense is if his Heritage goons or oligarch buddies whispered stuff in his ear… although I would be highly doubtful even then that this is the plan, because their priority here seems to be to loot and plunder the state and turn it into a kind of Russian oligarchy with Christofascist characteristics. They’re way too high on power, as can be seen by how much they say and do right in the open, thinking they’re untouchable.

And I didn’t even mention the whole Curtis Yarvin network states tehnofeudalism, which Yanis should know about since he has a whole book called Tehnofeudalism, and I hope he mentions Yarvin and Peter Thiel in there and isn’t just saying how WEF style neoliberalism will eventually usher in tehnofeudalism, right? Right?!

PS: UnHerd is a pretty sus publication with a very TERF-ish bent. While they do sometimes get prominent lefties to write for it, it’s always for articles like this that are useful to them as they don’t really challenge the MAGA worldview (source: a MAGA acquaintance recommended me a recent Yanis interview rehashing this very article, and his takeaway was how smart Trump is). Tread carefully, there’s always an angle with this site.

IMO the Democratic Party is just an institution. It can be taken over the same way MAGA took over the GOP. I agree a multi-party system would be better, but that requires Ranked Choice Voting and I’m not sure if even regular voting is safe right now (although this is an opportunity to reform voting into popular vote + RCV, since it’s clear the current voting system isn’t enough to protect democracy). But I digress.

With the current system you need progressives to primary the crap out of corpo Dems. Parties don’t have ideologies, people do. Change the people and you change the party. (Incidentally, this is what Project 2025 is trying to do with the state: replace all the government workers who oppose them with Trump worshippers.)

This sounds nice but in practice will backfire. You need the systems to be universal, so that everyone, including the richest, have a stake in wanting to see them improved. Otherwise you’ll get a two tiered system where the public versions are trash because they’re underfunded and the private versions (what the rich use) are great but also expensive af.

You want things to work like insurance, where everyone pays in but only the people who need them use it. I want Musk to pay a fuckton into Social Security, not nothing at all because he doesn’t use it. Even now there’s a problem with Social Security in particular because, even though everyone has to pay it, it puts a cap/limit on how much you pay, so Musk currently ends up paying his share in the first day of the year, and his contribution amounts to the same as a teacher or something.

Universal programs with progressive taxation, that’s the way. Low taxes at the bottom, high taxes at the top.