- cross-posted to:
- usa
- politics@hexbear.net
- cross-posted to:
- usa
- politics@hexbear.net
While there is no official definition for the term, Blue MAGA has been used to describe those who are fierce advocates of the so-called “vote blue no matter who” initiative and are not willing to criticize Democrats in any way.
The term has also been used for Biden supporters who have pushed misleading comments, or attacked the media, while defending the president. The suggestion being this unbridled support is more commonly associated with Trump’s loyalist MAGA following.
You must log in or register to comment.
It’s not a thing. It’s just the difference in having only two choices: one is a nightmarish hellscape that will destroy this country, and the other is not that. It’s pretty fucking simple.
Am I blue MAGA if I’m gonna vote blue no matter who but hate every second of it?
Removed by mod
Nah, ozma wouldn’t do me dirty like that
I missed it. I wouldn’t do you dirty SHL. Whatever it was.
They said you’d call me some kind of centrist or appeaser or something. We may have our differences but you’d never insult me like that.
Nah, you’re good comrade.
Removed, civility.
Blue MAGA has been used to describe those who are fierce advocates of the so-called “vote blue no matter who”
ohhhhh! genuinely i have had it backwards this whole time i thought it just meant people using leftist rhetorical tricks to advocate for Trump. still downvoting this article because the concept is clearly just a strawman. seeing it 8.7mil times in the .ml modlogs made that obvious to me.
bLuE mAgA: a dog whistle that edgelords like to use to insult people without breaking the rules.
Stop trying to make Blue MAGA happen, it’s not going to happen.
BlueMaga very much exists, and has for years. The VBNMW crowd are the largest contingency
This is simply a lie. Maga labeled themselves Blue maga is something you labeled someone else as a pejorative…and it doesn’t really exist except in your mental gymnastics head.
Those things are not the same.
We called them Pumas in 2008, but it’s the same people.
For those not aware, PUMA was the movement Hillary’s team started. It was Party Unity My Ass, and was trying to get Dems to vote against Obama in the general in an attempt to show progressivism wasn’t popular and the party needed to move right.
It didn’t work, but they were always going to say the party had to move right anyways. Doesn’t matter what happens, they’re gonna keep saying it.
https://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/23/preston.puma/
They’re rarely rational and if you question any of their talking points they start screeching insults.
They showed back up in 2016, I don’t know why people act like they’re a new thing now. They’re like fucking cicadas, every 8 years or so they show up and make a shit ton of annoying noise. Then after the election they seem to disappear overnight
And then a lot of the PUMA voted for McCain! Hah!
And Obama still flipped a bunch of solid red states and carried downballot races there too.
We didn’t need them then and we don’t need them now.
Like, if we just kept running young (under 50) charismatic candidates with progressive sounding campaigns wed be set.
People want to pretend Bill and Barrack weren’t two of our youngest presidents or that they didn’t run progressive campaigns. That’s what the voters want, that’s what works, so that’s what we should give them.
Instead the party keeps using trump as an excuse to run candidates no one wants like Joe and Hillary.
It’s fucking insane. Like if you’re in a life or death free throw competition so you shoot blindfolded. It doesn’t matter if your opponent is so bad you might still win, it’s too big of a risk to be fucking around.
That’s what happens when the people making the decisions are never forced to suffer any of the consequences for their actions.
Lmao these idiots using “blue maga” are pretty sad.
I’ve not seen a single person defend Biden the way brainwashed republican idiots defend trump. But it’s nice to know they also think maga is idiotic and try to attach blue to it to make it seem like both sides are the same.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Saib Bilavel, historian and associate editor for Three Essays Collective, suggested that “Blue MAGA is real” while sharing a headline from The Hill noting MSNBC host Joy Reid said she would still vote for Biden if he was “in a coma.”
Keith Orejel, an assistant professor of history at Wilmington College in Ohio, posted on X, formerly Twitter: “We are like two days away from Blue MAGA arguing cognitive decline is a made up ailment invented by the New York Times.”
The Blue MAGA accusation has also been attached to those who have pushed false claims about Biden and his popularity, while urging the president to remain in the White House race.
The post was fact-checked by X’s “readers added context” feature, which noted that Biden’s numbers did largely go down in the wake of the debate, and CNN’s viewership has remained unchanged.
Elsewhere, the DemsMight PAC says it is proud of the “Blue MAGA” label, suggesting that supporting Biden no matter what is vital in order to stop Trump winning November’s race.
“I’m BlueMAGA and proud of it, if that means standing up for democracy, stopping Trump, Project 2025, Agenda 47, MAGA and staying in the fight with the most legislatively successful president in modern American history: Mr. Joe Biden,” the PAC posted.
The original article contains 712 words, the summary contains 214 words. Saved 70%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
