Going further right didn’t help, now we need to go as left as possible
Radical ideas like Universal healthcare, paid maternity leave, free child care, taxing the rich.
Radical ideas the rest of the 1st world had had for 50 years and successfully implemented.
We’re well aware, and it’s honestly getting old hearing “wElL tHe ReSt Of ThE wOrLd,” yeah, the UK voted to leave the EU and ousted a party to replace them with Labour who don’t want to hold another referendum on the vote.
India continues to elect the populist and nationalist Modi as their PM, because he gives them bags of rice with his name on them and tells them it’s ok to hate Muslims.
Germany is flirting with fascism again, and they’ve got all the stuff Americans are apparently too fucking stupid to get done, right?
Dutch police just rounded up a bunch of pro-Palestinian protesters, protesting peacefully, and then started beating them for not moving fast enough.
Oh, and the majority of European countries are freaking the fuck out about immigration and the floods of immigrants trying to come into their countries. And funnily enough, your politicians speak about immigrants the same way our Republicans do.
But you’re right, the people who weren’t alive 50 years ago when all of this should have been done, yeah, that’s our fucking fault too, right?
I instead see them not learning a damn thing and putting up Nancy Pelosi as the Presidential candidate for 2028.
Or Manchin or Sinema or Liz Cheney.
In all honesty, Newsom is probably the candidate the party leadershit has already selected.
Will she achieve lichdom in time?
Acting as if she hasn’t already! There’s a reason that dude went after her husband with a hammer and not her. He knew better than to mess with a lich.
I fear it’s too late. Unless the party can be taken by force it won’t be enough and we only have 4 years. If dems didn’t snub Bernie this all probably wouldn’t have happened. Our choices used to be two flavors of corporate fascism, now it’s far right vs corporate. Dems are better on social issues, but it’s not enough.
Dems are clearly better on economic issues as well. Not nearly good enough, but better. The problem is that they will only go so far, and they won’t talk about it, out of fear of angering their wealthy patrons.
Well, why don’t you tell your Republican friends and families that the GOP dosent do shit for them?
Not sure why this applies to what I said, but my few Republican friends and family are uncomfortably aware of what I think about their politics.
You stated Dems are better at economics. Have you told your conservative colleagues that?
I’ve said this before, but I think it needs to be repeated:
The populist, anti-elitist lane on the left is wide open. I don’t know that a mainstream “Democratic” party can take that lane, and I don’t know if we should bother trying to drag them there. However, what I can say is that there is going to be some significant hay to make in that field.
I think Pramila Jayapal, Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Delia Ramirez, Jamaal Bowman, Summer Lee, Cori Bush, Katie Porter, anyone who has been rat-fucked by Democrats should all abandon their identification with the Democratic party and become independents. And in the time that he has left, at their lead, should be Bernie Sanders, who never needed to be told about the consequences of running with milquetoast policies.
Even if they caucus with Democrats, true progressives need to show them that their votes aren’t a given, and if they want them, they need to take a step towards their legislative priorities. Giving up our votes without leverage, giving in to the Washington groupthink: THIS LOSES ELECTIONS!
We shouldn’t focus on redeeming the Democratic party. Let them sink. Focus on getting good quality, reliable progressive populists elected. The Democratic party is a fucking anchor and we’re better off without it. Let those unwilling to let go of that Washington groupthink sink with it.
While this strategy may feel good, it makes the minorities Republicans want to hurt the cost of doing business. Even if Democrats can’t deliver on anything substantial in the short term voting for them in elections is useful.
First, it reduces the harm done to minorities. Second, it demonstrates there is a progressive voter block the democrats could shift closer to. Third, assuming we get more elections and the Democrats aren’t all in jail, it creates time for a progressive, like the Democrats your argument listed, to co-opt the Democratic Party. Like what Trump did to the Republicans and Bernie tried to do to the Democrats.
Rather than trying to achieve moral victory over Democrats, let’s leverage power for the people Republicans want to hurt.
Split the non Republican vote so you leave the door wide open for them? That’s the problem with first past the post…
Isn’t that what Trump is saying he is? I mean, they’re both claiming to be “against the machine…”
They have, they were just as beholden to money interests as the Republicans…
He’s annoying, but he’s right.
Kamala raised over $1 billion dollars for her campaign, most of which was from small donors.
If that doesn’t tell the Dems they don’t need oligarch money, nothing will.
Really awesome point! I hope that becomes apparent to them
Narrator: It didn’t.
It was celebrity money, you know, the same people that were telling people they were “just like them.”
Then they spent it on high per hour political consultants who paid Beyonce to perform
Oh. I heard Oprah got a mil, but that could be fake
I heard Elon was born on the moon, but that could be fake too. I wish there was a way to know for sure, or at least see a small amount of evidence one way or the other.
Except Beyonce literally didn’t perform for Harris?
That’s a mere pittance compared to what the wealthy actually spend on conservatives and messaging. That’s 1 billion dollars every 4 years. Fox news, daily wire, OANN, and all the myriad of other propaganda outlets churn through more than that a year.
Yes, but we’re not talking about conservatives.
The Democratic party has a problem, and that problem is what Democratic voters want doesn’t align with what Democratic donors want. The voters want progressive policies passed, while the donors want the same neoliberalism that keeps them rich. And trying to appease one of those groups obviously alienates the other.
If any Democratic politician truly wants to help the American population, the fact that Kamala raised so much money in such a short amount of time, and the fact that many states passed progressive policies even though they voted for Trump, should tell them that they don’t need to kowtow to the wealthy because the voters will support them. Unfortunately, I don’t think they’re going to learn that lesson.
Republicans, of course, don’t have this problem because their voters and their donors all want the same thing.
The whole point of this was asking why Democrats are catering to wealthy conservative donors instead of progressive or left leaning voters. I just stated the reason why. The 1 billion dollars collected from small donors every four years for a presidential run is nice. But it’s nothing compared to what the wealthy dump into messaging and campaigning constantly. Until such time as small donors can even come close to remotely matching that. Sustaining entire media Outlet ecosystems to counter the propaganda from conservatives. Democrats aren’t going to give up trying to get some of that wealthy conservative money
I donated to Kamala’s campaign ($10), but then I realized what direction they were taking around the DNC and stopped giving them money.
Not all doners agreed with her platform, just like how not all voters did.
What happens to the amount they didn’t spend?
they’re in debt
X for doubt on that. Im sure they’ve said that though. That’s a lot of really expensive campaign parties for a three month run
Overall, they are stil about ~100mm in the black.
Iirc, they had 140mm in debt and 240mm in cash on hand.
They spent stupidly, they were buying ads in Kentucky and Texas, instead of focusing on swing states and progressive policies to bring dems out in force.
Maybe if they go bankrupt we can start a new party that cares what its voters think and doesnt shit the bed so often.
nothings stopping you right now
Money, time, and connections are pretty big things you need to start a new political party.
It’s not like advertising a garage sale. I like your spirit though.
another party failing won’t make any of that easier
They know that. Problem is the WANT billionaires money too ^^
They have 4 years to tighten up. I’m not optimistic. The only victory they have had since Obama was a fear victory… nobody wanted Biden they were scared of trump. That is played out.
The right did a good job of parading him around as an anti-establishment, for the common people candidate. I don’t think that’s true, but a lot of people do.
I hope the D party reorganizes as a populist anti-establishment party and holds a ranked choice primary with some young actually left leaning candidates who can’t be bought.
To be honest, if the D party don’t reform and earn my vote, I’m not giving it to them out of fear anymore. Before trump I had a “no lesser of two evils” policy for voting. And I’m going back to it. They had 4 years to plan, hold a primary, do some prosecuting of rich criminals, understand why Trump’s popular and strategize to beat it, literally fucking anything. Did they?
I’m over it, they can run a fair primary with some progressive candidates and let the people decide, and then I’ll vote. Tired of whatever they’re doing and it looks like a lot of others are as well. Hope they figure out the obvious issue they have and fix it. Since its a two party system they’re hogging the only route that the left has to success and fucking it up remarkably bad. Like I could do a better job and I’m an idiot.
While the plan you’ve outlined in your argument my feel good, it isn’t particularly useful for shifting the Democrats to the left. Under this plan, the causalities of this and future Republican administrations will be the cost of doing business.
Consider leveraging power by voting for Democrats in elections to benefit the people who will otherwise be harmed by future Republican administrations. edit: typo
I live in a really liberal state. So my vote doesn’t actually matter.
I’ll consider it, and I appreciate the kind response, but to be honest I think if people keep placating them with “lesser of two evils votes” nothing will change.
Hopefully the party can draw conclusions about the 10m people who sat this one out vs 2020, and figure out why.
Edit: do you have an article or transcript for the link? I’m not a video person I prefer to read
Votes in high population states count less than votes in low population states, because of the electoral college, but they still count.
This isn’t about placating the Democrats. It’s about not using minorities as currency for a moral victory over the Democrats. The moral victory may feel good, but it isn’t useful. A moral victory will not prevent key tipping points in the Earth’s ecosystem that will cause catastrophic damage to the environment. Nor will it protect minorities from the fascists who want to kill them.
Hopefully the 10 million people will learn to leverage power by voting for the Democrats in elections even if they don’t get anything out of it. Because we all have something to lose by Republicans taking power in the short term. Even if we won’t all feel it until the long term.
The Democratic Party does need a populist narrative to appeal to a broader base, but the Democrats are unlikely to listen. The party needs to be hijacked the way Trump hijacked the Republican Party and the way Bernie tried to hijack the Democratic Party. Part of doing that is delaying fascism so that there are still elections and people to run against fascists. edit: typo
Edit: do you have an article or transcript for the link? I’m not a video person I prefer to read
- Go to the video.
- Go to the video description.
- Click …more.
- Scroll to the Transcript section.
- Click Show transcript.
- Click on a line of the auto-generated transcript to bring up the scroll bar.
- Click and drag the scroll bar to read the transcript.
Bit late init
Monster grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the strength to change the things I can, and the Noodle to know the difference.
RAmen
I suggest we all get together and form a party. We can hold it somewhere well known; maybe a waterfront, or harbor. I hear Boston is a nice place. Very patriotic even. We can even have refreshments; maybe a nice tea? Who’s in?
Like that’ll ever happen.
The party is held by a group of political elites who are all about the establishment and power.
There needs to be a new party, a labor party, to represent the working class Americans.
A reverse tea-party movement. That could work. We were laughing when the tea party started because it seemingly broke GOP unity, but they managed to shift the Overton window so far to the right that the GOP now is the tea party, and Dems are GOP lite. Reversing that trend is extremely necessary.
It would be easier for progressives to take over the DNC and state Dems than to form an entirely new party and make it viable.
Why not both? It’s easier to force your way under and into that tent/coalition with an organized front to do the talking. A political party that has well defined goals and objectives, while speaking for a big group, is bound to be better at working within a broader coalition than what we have now.
That would be ideal, but the people who are already there will never give it up.
And the problem with creating a new party is that it will divide the votes, while the conservatives are all united under the Republican party. Unless they split too. Maybe the non Trumpists can split off and form a more traditional party. But again, they’re too afraid to split THEIR votes.
I agree.
I voted for Harris because Dems are supposed to be the establishment. Supposed to be a return normal boring politics.That’s obviously not going to work. Now we need an actual working class, under a few million dollar a year takehome party.
Or maybe they should just leave the Democratic party and start a new progressive party? We have less than 4 years, but that’s also the most time we’ll ever have.
The problem with that strategy is that our democracy uses a first-past-the-post voting system which trends towards a two-party system.
Oh, I’m all for ranked choice voting, but in order for it to have any meaning we also need a plurality of parties. They also need time to build and I’m sure these two would start a good one if allowed.
Although the likelihood of political parties having any weight at all past January is anyone’s guess…
Without rank choice voting any progressive party would act as a spoiler for the Democratic Party. Debilitating ourselves in this way isn’t particularly useful for leveraging power to create better outcomes for the environment and minorities.
Then the Democratic Party had best make sure that progressives have no reason to split off and form their own party, huh?
Why does it always fall to progressives to get behind Democrats and never the other way around?
Debilitating ourselves in this way isn’t particularly useful for leveraging power to create better outcomes for the environment and minorities.
Oh thank god Democrats don’t throw vulnerable populations under the bus every chance they get.
Then the Democratic Party had best make sure that progressives have no reason to split off and form their own party, huh?
The FPTP voting system ensures that they do not have a reason.
Why does it always fall to progressives to get behind Democrats and never the other way around?
The FPTP voting system and entrenchment of neoliberalism in the minds of the American public for over 40 years from both mainstream political parties starting with Reagan. This is may be the case for western countries and democracies more broadly as well. Currently, neoliberal ideas cause a contradiction when a person encounters progressive or socialist ideas. Along the lines of:
Why would we fix our institutions if they are flawless? What’s the hurry to solve our problems if we are at the end of history?
Some useful and correct resolutions of these contradictions are:
Our institutions are flawed because they were made by us, flawed humans. The time to advert climate change, fix systemic inequalities, the reduce the wealth gap is now. Incremental changes will run out the clock, as they don’t address the root causes. There will be hundreds of millions if not billions of causalities unless these issues are addressed sooner rather than later.
Neoliberal ideas must be pulled from the minds of Americans like a weed. Or like one of those radishes in Super Mario Bros 2. Then people will be able to embrace ideas like systemic change to institutions and wealth redistribution from the rich to everyone else.
When asked about socialism, if a person responds with ‘socialism doesn’t work’ or ‘the Soviet Union collapsed’ those are the tells that a person needs to full internalize neoliberalism as a scam.
And maybe a history lesson about how the Soviet Union was actually an authoritarian communist dictatorship and not a socialist country. The government owned the means of the production, not the people, and the government wasn’t representative of the people.
Oh thank god Democrats don’t throw vulnerable populations under the bus every chance they get.
It’s better than the Democrats intentionally murdering people in camps. Neoliberals in office aren’t going to solve our problems, but it gives us time to do the work to solve them. Like educating people and co-opting the Democratic Party in one of their primaries. Like Trump did to the Republicans and Bernie tried to do to the Democrats. edit: typo
It’s better than the Democrats intentionally murdering people in camps.
The would in a heartbeat if they thought they could get one Republican vote for doing so.
Neoliberals in office aren’t going to solve our problems, but it gives us time to do the work to solve them.
Neoliberals ARE our problem. We’ve had half a century of incrementalists demanding that we just wait a little more for them to get around to moving the needle to the left, and instead they move so far to the right that they’re buddy-buddy with Netanyahu and the Cheneys. Incrementalism says “too soon” until it’s too late.
The would in a heartbeat if they thought they could get one Republican vote for doing so.
Again, don’t lie. The Democratic Party can of course move that far, but they have yet to do so.
Neoliberals ARE our problem.
Neoliberalism is the problem. Neoliberals can be tomorrow’s socialists. But we have to put in the work and educate people. My argument already refuted this point, I recommend reading it.
A few weeks ago, I’d have agreed with you, but now? The Democratic party that just lost 10 million votes… We’ll spoil that party? The one that just lost a fair election to a convicted felon? You want to protect them from being spoiled?
We have 4 years, which is, again, the most time we’ll ever get to try something like this because that’s how 4 year election cycles work. What is it exactly that they’re doing successfully you don’t want to spoil?
We’ll spoil that party?
Yes, running third party candidates in a FPTP voting system is how the spoiler effect works.
You want to protect them from being spoiled?
Because of the FPTP voting system our democracy will always trend towards a two-party system. Until we enact systemic change, we will be stuck with the Democrats and the Republicans. As long as the Democrats are further to the left of fascism we should vote for them and avoid limiting our power with third party candidates.
We the people and our interests are what avoiding the spoiler effect protects.
What is it exactly that they’re doing successfully you don’t want to spoil?
The Democrats are neoliberals. They are easier to push on social issues and the environment. The Democratic Party is the party progressives and socialists are going to want to co-opt with a populist candidate. Like Bernie tried to do and Trump did to the Republicans. But more to the point, they do not want to kill minorities and destroy the environment.
Rather than seeking a moral victory over Democrats we should look for ways to leverage power for the people Republicans want to hurt. Doing otherwise makes the harm done to minorities the cost of doing business.
It’s adorable that you expect anyone to buy that the Democratic Party is movable after they just spent a whole ass year refusing to budge on fucking genocide.
The Democratic Party is the party progressives and socialists are going to want to co-opt with a populist candidate. Like Bernie tried to do and Trump did to the Republicans.
This is the key part I recommend you read.
Also, this is off topic, but Harris did pledge to end the war. It was in the news. She called for a ceasefire at least three times. If you care about the Palestinians, then voting for the party that wants to end the war is more useful than allowing the party that wants Israel to finish the job to take power.
I mean yes, that’s been the playbook for 8 years. More like 16 if you count what people actually thought Obama was going to be (and had record turn out). Try, try again?
The lives of millions of minorities and the Earth’s climate are at stake now. Minorities will notice the difference in the short term, but we will all notice the difference in the long term. Assuming we still have elections and a Democratic Party going forward, yes. We delay fascism and co-opt the Democratic Party. edit: typos
The Tea Party did not spoil a GOP election. The GOP caved and adopted their platform.
The Democratic Party will do the same thing with the Guillotine Party.
Then become one of the two parties.
There already are two. We must co-opt one with a populist candidate. The Republican Party was already hijacked by Trump. That leaves the Democratic Party.
Bernie tried twice, Democrats demonstrated their ability to stop that shit in its tracks. It will not work.
The only solution is for progressives to abandon the Party and start their own to replace it. The US has replaced parties before, it can be done again.
It didn’t work with Bernie for more reasons than the parties resistance. A lot of people on the left that dislike the party don’t seem to understand that you still have to join the party and get involved with it if you want the party to move left. Party members and active involved people shape where the party goes. We absolutely can shift the Dems left, but it means holding our noses and becoming the party. The Dems have always been an open door, big tent, party. Walk into the tent and change minds…
The Dems didn’t let a single Palestinian-American speak at the DNC this year. The tent is big enough for Cheney, not us.
I tried to run for a small local position with the DNC using one of their arms that is for “funding and supporting small progressives” well that first bit is a lie. First question they asked me was how much money I had and if I had rich family to fund my campaign.
I told them not really but I would rather talk policy and maybe alternatives to spending money and they told me to pretend to be religious to find a good church to get donations from cause there are some rich churches.
I told them I was a Buddhist and happy for it, and they suggested I either find some other wealthy Buddhists cause they were sure I should be able to find some or maybe I should consider not running at all and just donating to this group or volunteering for free to them.
This will take acceptance and support from the people that run the party and all the wealthy party owners that view themselves better than working class because of their connections and wealth.
The Democrat establishment wants power and for that they have to win elections. So having an anti establishment candidate is preferable to them over a Republicans victory. If anything good came out of the last election, it is that Trump as horrible as he is can still win elections against an establishment Democrat, so the Democrats have to change.
Also changing the parties does not work. The problem is systematic and the US really needs to change its election system, to get better politics.
They sure didn’t look like they wanted to win this election.
They switch candidates in the middle of the campaign, because Biden’s polling was that bad.
Third party doesn’t work. You have to do what trump did, 1 man coup from the inside.
Apparently Republican voters are gonna set the mark at R regardless of who it is, so how about having someone like Bernie run in the Republican primary.
Trump tried once and it worked. Neoliberal ideas are entrenched in the minds of Americans. Neoliberalism only allows change to the people in charge of systems as it asserts, incorrectly, that our institutions are flawless. Since neoliberals only consider changing people, it is much easier for a fascist to convince a neoliberal to change the people in society. Where as it is much harder for a progressive or a socialist to convince a neoliberal to enact systemic change or redistribute wealth respectively.
In short, people with neoliberal ideas in their head need to fully internalize neoliberalism as a scam.
Abandoning the Democrats will not result in them being replaced. They will continue to exist by moving further to the right, as Democrats like Chris Murphy have already proposed.
Starting a successful third party is mathematically impossible under a FPTP system. Third party candidates can only be spoiler candidates.
Where’s the Whig Party?
Why must one of those parties be the Democrats? I don’t see no fucking Whigs around, do you?
Because unlike the Wigs, the Democrats are not divided over slavery. They can just move to the right on contemporary issues as Chris Murphy details here.
I think you mean popular, not populist, but yes.
No, I mean populist. Populism is what is popular right now.
https://www.wordnik.com/words/populism
A political philosophy supporting the rights and power of the people in their struggle against the privileged elite.
Trump didn’t run on any economic populism this year and won. Kamala did, and lost. It’s the electorate stupid!
She scrubbed all economic populism from her campaign in the last couple months and pivoted to campaigning with neoconservatives.
Trump ran on a populist platform that wasn’t limited to economic populism. Harris didn’t have any compelling narrative whatsoever.
It’s the electorate stupid!
It’s worth while for the electorate to learn the right lessons. Otherwise there wouldn’t be people in this comment section trying to get everyone to learn the wrong lessons.
We have already seen a third party take over a major party. The current problem with the GOP is because it absorbed the Tea Party.
With the right symbol to rally behind, we can do the same thing to the Democratic party. We need to build the Guillotine Party.
I am so down for it as long we get to use the symbol at least once for real.
Removed by mod
No, it’s a problem for the people empowering the right by refusing to vote for the leaning right of center, neoliberal Democrats. People are attempting to get a moral victory over the Democrats by refusing to vote for them. This strategy makes minorities the cost of doing business.
Removed by mod
No, the far-right exists because of late-stage capitalism and over 40 years of neoliberalism pushed by both mainstream parties since Reagan. The Democrats lost in large part because of their refusal to adopt a populist narrative. They didn’t go left enough. But refusing to vote for them or espousing accelerationist rhetoric because of that is self-defeating, harms minorities, and opens to the door to devastating climate change scenarios. edit: typo
ReAgan
Fixed. Thanks.
Wow, if only there had been an anti establishment candidate running for president as a democrat in 2016… too bad…
Yeah if only he hadn’t lost the popular vote TWICE in the primaries.
If only the popular vote in the Democratic primaries meant anything at all.
The delegates too. But are you just gonna ignore MORE people voted Hillary and Biden over him to fit your narative?
“Party” goons =/= people.
It’s kinda hard to count the votes afterwards since candidates are forced to drop out before the primaries actually finish. Heck we usually don’t even make it past 6 states primaries out of 50 before a winner is announced.
