People who unironically belive that you can create real change by “voting harder” are the same people who think you can climb the economic ladder by “pulling yourself by the bootstrings”
If voting could change things, it would be illegal.
The guy is still running and the people can still vote for him. I’m not even sure that this endorsement is that necessary for this position:
The party hadn’t endorsed a mayoral candidate in 16 years prior to backing Fateh.
Whatever the feelings about the DFL and how they handled it, the power of the vote would seem to be intact. It’s a bit premature to be fatalistic about voting in this particular scenario.
The Democrats who are refusing to respect “blue no matter who” as they support Cuomo anyway is worthy of criticism, but even then he is still the official candidate and the people can vote. The Cuomo supporters are acting poorly, but again, the vote at least still matters.
Raise awareness as well about these moves, but don’t be dismissive of the voting.
We need a true leftist workers party so bad in America. Democrats are center right.
In Europe, most "worker’s " parties have become center with a tiny dash of left for “color”. The sad thing is that real left parties are musty old “real” socialism parties, either populist or tankies.
What we need is a “fourth way” of politics, a system that makes billionaires impossible, that fosters public services, including housing, cares for the needy, etc, but also promotes entrepreneurship, taxes progressively, guards society against the excesses of capitalism, etc.
Planned economies defininitely don’t work.
What we need is a “fourth way” of politics, a system that makes billionaires impossible, that fosters public services, including housing, cares for the needy, etc, but also promotes entrepreneurship, taxes progressively, guards society against the excesses of capitalism, etc.
Oh, you mean, social liberalism?
Social liberalism: Social liberal parties stress civil and human rights and favour a social market economy.
Or the New Deal democrats of the Great Society reforms?
The Great Society sought to build on the legacy of former President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal reforms of the 1930s, and planned to use the power of the federal government in order to address economic inequality, improve education and healthcare, and promote civil rights.
There’s that word people on here hate again: liberal. You guys are reinventing positions from willfully forgotten history of liberals & the Democratic party.
Tell that to China, with their 5 year plans. Capitalism is also not the way to move forward - it heavily promotes inequality and strife in the world.
Caring for the needy isn’t charity, it’s making sure they aren’t needy. Promoting entrepreneurship isn’t companies popping up left and right doing Uber but for dogs kind of idea, it’s solving the world’s biggest problems with new ideas.
You can’t guard society against the excesses of capitalism because capitalism promotes corruption, artificial scarcity, and waste of resources by design.
With this being said, to change how the western world acts we must recognize that the party system exists to sustain itself and we won’t have real change if we don’t change it for power to be given to real people and not career politicians (or build guillotines)
What we need is some way to have all our groceries in one bag, but that bag isn’t heavy.
The Democratic Party is a honey pot trap used to attract and neutralize progressive and leftist politicians and policies and ensure that the “Overton Window” of American politics never moves left. They will let you “talk” about universal healthcare, for example, but they will never, EVER allow it to move forward as a serious legislative agenda.
Never forget that Obama had two whole years of a significant Democratic majority in both Congress AND Senate, and still somehow couldn’t muster the cojones to pass anything even close to the socialised healthcare he’d campaigned on and had a huge popular mandate for.
Someone please explain why it is that when Republicans are the minority they have the ability to block absolutely everything the ruling party attempts, and yet when the Democrats are in opposition suddenly somehow it’s impossible for them to do anything?
still somehow couldn’t muster the cojones to pass anything even close to the socialised healthcare
You guys are really trash at recalling or just looking up recent history. Many of us were there when it happened. We remember how it went down.
Too many conservative, pro-life Democrats were against anything better, and they had barely enough Democrats to squeeze through procedural obstacles (filibusters) in the Senate. A number of them voted against the bill that passed.
quotations
The holdouts came down to Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, an independent who caucused with Democrats, and conservative Nebraska Democrat Ben Nelson. Lieberman’s demand that the bill not include a public option was met, although supporters won various concessions, including allowing state-based public options such as Vermont’s failed Green Mountain Care. Many voted against the bill that passed: it barely got through.
The White House and Reid addressed Nelson’s concerns during a 13-hour negotiation with two concessions: a compromise on abortion, modifying the language of the bill “to give states the right to prohibit coverage of abortion within their own insurance exchanges”
On December 23, the Senate voted 60–39 to end debate on the bill: a cloture vote to end the filibuster. The bill then passed, also 60–39, on December 24, 2009, with all Democrats and two independents voting for it
They chose this approach after concluding that filibuster-proof support in the Senate was not present for more progressive plans such as single-payer.
Then at reconciliation of House & Senate bills for passage
The remaining obstacle was a pivotal group of pro-life Democrats led by Bart Stupak who were initially reluctant to support the bill.
The House passed the Senate bill with a 219–212 vote on March 21, 2010, with 34 Democrats and all 178 Republicans voting against it.
Someone please explain why
Because Democrats & leftists are better at infighting than setting aside differences to win.
They simply don’t want to.
Once it can happen, when it’s a pattern happening their entire history it should be obvious.
The game is R: 5 steps right, D: 1 step left. But apparently americans can’t see it.
Totally their own fault.
it’s a running joke, especially now.
The game format inevitably results in a far-right stage eventually.
And yet they cry crocodile tears and are confused how they ended up there.Obama actually ran on the heritage foundation Romney care plan. It was Hillary Clinton during the 2008 primary that actually ran on a public option.
It was Hillary Clinton during the 2008 primary that actually ran on a public option.
Liar. Obama ran on a public option and no individual mandate. Clinton ran on no public option and an individual mandate.
Centrists are allergic to telling the truth.
no corroborating sources when linking them would have been trivial
You settled nothing. Why should anyone take anyone’s word on here for it?
He didn’t pass that either, though, only a massively watered-down version of it packed with every compromise the Republicans demanded, to make sure that the healthcare companies still got to keep over 15% of households in medical debt.
Socialized healthcare was filibustered by every single republican, and in the 72 days they had supermajority WITH INDEPENDENTS one of which opposed public option, they passed the medicaid expansion which gave healthcare and in some cases dental to tens of millions of people. The time period you’re talking about was also the most productive congress on record since the mid 20th century.
Can always count on finitebanjo to bring the excuses.
Clearly it’s not working because despite progressive stances being a wide majority we haven’t elected more than 48 DNC since 2013.
Citizens United essentially put the electoral system up for corporate sale. By 2013 it was fully in effect.
See I think that kind of defeatist logic is the trap - they flood the internet with pessimism and “there’s no point in trying” and “there’s no point in voting” to make sure YOU don’t try. To make sure all you do is sit on your ass at home and complain on the internet.
I never said any of that shit. The point is that, tactically speaking, we should be dealing with them as they are, and not giving them the benefit of the doubt, assuming they are on our side and operating in good faith, like the tired meme of Lucy pulling the football away from Charlie Brown.
The threat is existential, and there should be qualifying and disqualifying criteria, and that criteria should be set by US, not some party dignitaries, not some fucking “consultants” who are getting money from billionaire funded PAC’s and think tanks.
The only way to change America is to remove billionaires from existing. As long as they hold all the power, nothing will get better significantly.
Alright so what are YOU going to do to help make that happen?
That’s not defeatist.
Defeatism is deciding now, over 3 years before the next election and 15 months before midterms, that there’s no way you get someone elected who actually represents you, so you should just suck it up and vote for Kodos.
(((they)))
deleted by creator
Lol. “I’m not a Nazi! I blame all our problems on a secret mass conspiracy and infiltration of our society by a completely different race!”
Removed by mod
Yeah yeah, tell us more about how the Judeo-Bolshivik’s are harvesting adrenochrome under Comet Pizzaria. Sure love Nazi conspiracy theories in my “progressive” com
“Start small at the local level” centrists said, suppressing laughter.
“Local level is where real change starts. We never said we’d let it start.”
I’m bracing myself for downvotes / banning, but I’m posting (from Minneapolis) to provide some context.
A more extensive, contemporaneous description of the convention is here, and the NY Times article geneva_conveniencel later linked explains a bit more.
My understanding / the short version is that the convention was very disorganized / poorly run, and didn’t follow its own rules. Frey’s campaign / delegates noticed irregularities right away, raised concerns (now found to be justified) that were dismissed, and ended up walking out in protest. It was understood that Frey wasn’t likely to actually win the nomination, but could have feasibly prevented any endorsement (which Minneapolis DFL hasn’t given since 2009).
My take is that Minneapolis DFL, whether from incompetence, or improper bias in favor of Fateh, or a conspiracy of Frey supporters in leadership that just wanted to provide grounds to invalidate the results, really fucked up here. Maybe Fateh could have still won the endorsement if all the ballots in the first round were counted, but we’ll never know, because the second round would have been different. As it stands, I presume this is costing Fateh’s campaign a bunch of money to reprint campaign signs/materials, pull ads, etc, that cited the endorsement.
I don’t doubt that the establishment democrats would have found other things to complain about if Fateh had properly won this endorsement, but this was definitely not clean/proper, so withdrawing the endorsement is an appropriate course of action.
I would recommend you actually do some research before you try typing a long post trying to explain to people what’s going on.
From my understanding, this is not the fault of Fateh, but of the Democratic Party themselves, screwing up the excel sheet of one guy who probably didn’t even matter.
Claiming this is a valid reason to throw the entire victory of the democratic socialists overboard seems outrageous.
The entire election process was already set up, super confusing, which seems to be done on purpose to prevent less wealthy candidates from running.
From my understanding, this is not the fault of Fateh, but of the Democratic Party themselves
Oopsie.
They get no benefit of the doubt. This was on purpose.
From my understanding, this is not the fault of Fateh, but of the Democratic Party themselves […]
This is what I said.
Claiming this is a valid reason to throw the entire victory of the democratic socialists overboard seems outrageous.
The reason it matters is because of the nature of successive rounds of voting. When the missing (~175 / 1000) votes got counted (in retrospect), it showed an additional candidate should have been included in the second round of voting. And the democratic leadership pushed ahead with the flawed second round of voting without addressing the problem. I don’t remember all the details, but I believe the final vote also broke their own procedural requirements (in addition to Frey’s delegates having already walked out in protest).
I don’t know their procedures (and welcome a source/explanation), but clearly the absence of an endorsement since 2009 indicates it’s not easy to get the endorsement, and having an additional candidate in the second round of voting certainly seems like it has the potential to reduce the chances of a candidate securing the endorsement. I think it’s entirely reasonable, particularly in that context, to withdraw the endorsement.
Edit to add: I also agree that the primary/convention system, procedures, etc, probably do favor candidates supported by “the establishment”.
I can provide additional context as a convention attendee.
After the first round of voting, it was clear that Omar would have a majority. He earned 43% of the vote and other non-Frey voters were expected to vote Omar after seeing the results and knowing that 60% was needed for an endorsement.
At this point, Frey’s campaign started shenanigans that drew boos from the crowd. They called many times for rule changes and stall for time to prevent a second vote. Late into the night, Frey’s campaign went so far as to ask their delegates to go home to prevent a quorum.
Every deviation from convention rules was voted on and approved using procedure. Was it a shitshow? Yes. But in my view, it was done within the rules.
Don’t worry about convenience, they’re always spouting Russian Propoganda.
“Everyone to my left is Russian!”
Would be awesome to get a link to a news source as opposed to a Twitter screenshot.
It’s the money. Campaigns are increasingly expensive by design. That and Citizens United basically made it so moneyed interests never have to worry about grassroots ever again. That’s (very tangentially) why the internet is also getting so unpleasant, I think, to poison the discourse. If people were nice to each other all the time, we’d band together more easily. Paid trolls exist for a reason.
Kamala Harris out raised Trump. That’s why she’s now the president.
Only if you don’t count Elon Musk buying Twitter and China using TikTok to promote and endorse Trump. If you really add up all of the costs to endorse candidates and not just campaign contributions, Trump probably wins by a margin of hundreds of billions.
🪤
On reddit, for my criticism of the Democratic Party, I am often censored on liberal spaces besides r/50501.
I follow the rules always, I cite sources, I am polite, and I am a US citizen. I am not influenced by Russian propaganda (to the best of my knowledge), and I’d like to say I have decent stances; I advocate for nonviolence and human rights, and generally advocate for progress and civility.
The “trolls” (I do my best to always assume good faith) here have nowhere near as much power here on the fediverse as on reddit.
On reddit, once you block someone, it shuts down discussion completely. Users there strategically block after their first rebuttal to prevent any of your responses from showing up and to gain the last word. I often waste time researching and typing a response, only to find out I was blocked and my response is only showing up for me. The only way to get around this is to edit your comments from before they blocked you, and it is very awkward (and usually results in lots of downvotes when you can’t properly respond to someone calling you a Russian troll).
If OP blocks you, you get kicked from the thread completely. You can neither see the thread after that point, nor respond to anyone else. Even your comments on the thread are invisible on your user profile (so unless you do voodoo and find the comment permalink, it’s difficult to edit your comment with a response).
Mods also abuse automod to trick you into thinking your posts or comments are showing up for others (like setting it to remove everything for a specific user). They do this to avoid accountability when they can’t easily explain what rule you broke or when mods censor based on ideological grounds. I also get censored automatically by automod often and find that my posts or comments don’t show up randomly - presumably I hit automod filters, but I still worry every single time that my account is shadowbanned.
If automod and the blocking functionality isn’t abused, any divergent opinion or perspective gets completely buried by downvotes. Like me pointing out how rigged things are for progressives (it’s hard for me to stomach people acting like the Democrats need to move right because progressive policies are “extremely unpopular”).
Anyway, moderation has been very fair here to me, I just want others to know that reddit is completely busted for healthy discourse and some of the tricks users and mods use to create echo chambers.
It’s a lot of energy to invest in a discourse that is being oppositionally refereed. Under better circumstances I’d say it was laudable, and on Lemmy the effort is certainly less wasted, but I’m starting to wonder if maybe the better part of our energies are better spent on in-person political efforts.
I agree - I struggle a lot with my health, but there has to be something I can do in-person. Our direction needs to change as a society.
The problem is that you really can’t criticize the DNC without inadvertently endorsing the GOP. It’s a fact of life in a two party system.
What are you talking about?
I can criticize the DNC, RNC, Dems, and GOP.
I can endorse the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and their DSA National Convention they just held a week or so ago in Chicago.
You see the political spectrum like this:
Dems >---------------< GOP
I see the political spectrum like this:
Left >--------< Dems >--------< GOP
The Dems get hate from both sides, so they want to collapse that by disrepresenting the Left and absorbing the Right. It will never work out for them
The most third party senators we’ve ever had was 4, right before the GOP swept every chamber in 2024 and before that in 1941.
We currently have ZERO third party reps in the House. Not a single one.
If you’re going to shit on dems then it is imperative that you shit on the GOP harder because if we turn people away from the DNC there is NOTHING left. We’re basically splitting our vote up while the Republicans fall in line.
He’s too far right to understand anything like this. His alt on piefed.world has defended racist institutions and thinks if you call out liberals doing bad policies, you’re a Tankie.
He’s a dumbass who thinks he knows better.
That’s a convenient stance for people who love everything the DNC does and want to shut down all criticism.
Maybe if Democrats didn’t unquestionably ship weapons to a state exterminating an occupied people, I’d shut up and fall in line. Maybe.
Congratulations, you and people like you convinced 8 Million DNC voters to stay home in 2024, now Trump is president and a Fox News host with white supremacist tattoos is head of the DoD and pushing for the death or exodus of every single Palestinian, Israel put tanks on the ground in Gaza for the first time in two decades and started bombing Rafah with weapons that the DNC withheld previously. Blood is on your hands.
My impact was nil. Did you not read my post? I get censored and buried.
If you want someone to blame, look within, and tell the Democrats to do the same.
Running a rushed campaign with no substantive policies, tirelessly lying about tirelessly working for a ceasefire, appealing to the right, not holding primaries, pushing a senile, self-proclaimed Zionist (Biden) until the last minute (who supported the genocide unquestionably) surely didn’t have anything to do with the loss.
Point is, there are a lot more than 8 million untapped voters. 1/3 of the country doesn’t vote. Encourage Democrats to tap into that demographic, and pressure genocidal states just a little bit. It’d go a long way.
My impact was nil.
No, you don’t understand. Anyone who even thought something approaching an unkind thought toward netanyahu singlehandedly threw out every vote cast for harris.
If that helps you sleep at night.
Your source for that article cites the Israeli officials, who btw endorsed Trump.
Nine top Biden officials admit that there was no pressure.
I feel like it’s very optimistic of you to think that people suck balls on the Internet because they are paid and not because a lot of people are just generally shitty. I kinda hope you’re right even tho that equates to a rather dystopian present. But the more I meet people, the more I realize that people just kinda suck. Like there are some truly abhorrent people out there… and they’re multiplying lol.
Had a coworker harping on why its only right companies raise their prices if they can. People can just go somewhere else. Sure, bud. Not even gonna crack at all the shit wrong with that. Defending education is bearing its fruit in multitudes. I’ll see you in the precious metal mines.
It’s both. The ‘Trolls from Olgino’ (Internet Research Agency) definitely have been poisoning online debate for over a decade now. I’m old enough to remember that when people were mean on the internet, it used to be an attempt at punch-down humour. These days cruelty is a comedy-neutral norm. That, I contend, is manufactured.
Organized people best organized money.
Well
Not in this specific example it didn’t
But yeah
The city-chapter held their election in a very questionable manner and removed the third place from the running very early on, resulting in calls for either a refund of contributions or a complete redo.
Removed by mod
Everyone knows the democrats will do this every time. “Vote blue no matter who” is a crock of shit and every single person who gives you shit for not voting for Harris and her shitty campaign that pandered to the right and Israel can be directed to party leadership’s behavior here and in New York
If they can run the risk of handing over mayorships to republicans because the “blue” candidate isn’t correctly blue then logically I can say I’m not going to back any genocide enabling, insider trading, corporate slaves who will sell out any marginalized group to keep their entrenched power (see newsoms pandering anti trans bullshit to charlie kirk).
“Vote blue no matter who” is a direct result of FPTP voting. Until that’s fixed, yeah keep voting blue…if there isn’t a more progressive candidate.
We need a viable third party and the time to start one was November 6, 2024. We’re past the point to make a dent in the midterms (assuming we have elections) but we have time to run progressive candidates.
The time to do something different always seems to be some other time than now.
Yep! Especially if the dogma is “3–4 years ahead of the next election” while having one every 2 years.
Building a party doesn’t mean aiming for victory right next election. It takes time. It will take a lot of time starting from now, or from next year.
The best time to start it was before xxx. The next best time is now.
You can always do something but its efficacy will vary. For example, spinning up a third party candidate a week before the election would be pointless.
If you look at my post history on Nov 5 has several posts on starting a third party. Right after the election would have been perfect. A lot of runway to find candidates, push them into the spotlight, have them lead the protests against Trump.
But we were understandably numb.
The second best time was after the inauguration. The third best time was after the first protest. The fourth best time was after the second protest.
We’re about 8 months before the first primary. We could start a third party after the Labor Day protests.
With me being out of work, I’ve given serious thought about starting one here locally.
Most Democrats don’t want to fix FPTP because it keeps people voting for them. If a Democrat doesn’t explicitly oppose FPTP, then their actions say they support where we are right now.
We spend so much time yelling at internet people for not understanding the obvious logic of FPTP, yet give legislators the benefit of the doubt election after election. Yes they fucking know, it slapped everyone in the face in 2000.
There have been third parties for decades but they won’t become viable until after they have been not viable. This scale of coordination takes more than 4 years. The first person you know who will vote against FPTP is you.
Until that’s fixed, yeah keep voting blue…if there isn’t a more progressive candidate.
Except it goes out the window when the party isn’t able to keep progressives off the ballot.
We cannot vote our way out of this
Idk how many times the democrats need to prove this, but the DNC exists to protect capital interests against socialist policies and candidates.
This isn’t a problem with FPTP systems, its a problem of class conflict, and our whole fucking system was built with it in mind. Democrats will sooner partner with fascists to arrest progressive opposition than allow them to pull the country to the left of them.
It’s much less of a problem in PR systems.
There is no electoral system that can overcome a sufficiently organized and motivated capital class.
Are you suggesting we abolish democracy?
What democracy is there to abolish?
The one that they keep spending billions of dollars every year to influence, including spreading the myth that your vote doesn’t matter, to discourage voter participation.
I’m suggesting we abolish the capital class.
Alright that sounds awesome but is also super vague and leaves out all the important steps like the how and the when.
Exactly, it’s a voter problem. We have a ranked choice voting system in Australia with cumpolsory voting, same as everywhere, we mostly elect fools and asshats.
But then some some 2000 years ago
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses
Juvenal originally used it to decry the “selfishness” of common people and their neglect of wider concerns. The phrase implies a population’s erosion or ignorance of civic duty as a priority.
80% simply don’t really give a shit.
Susan Sontag was asked what she had learned from the Holocaust, and she said that 10% of any population is cruel, no matter what, and that 10% is merciful, no matter what, and that the remaining 80% could be moved in either direction” —Kurt Vonnegut
It’s not a voter problem, it’s a capitalism problem.
In a capitalist democracy, it’s capital that sets the rules for governance, not the other way around. You can have a social democracy, but you can’t undo capital in a capitalist democracy by voting.
You’re incredibly defeatist. You absolutely can, that’s why they keep spending so much money trying to influence our vote.
Australia uses IRV, not STV, which is basically just FPTP with a fancier ballot. And nobody else on the planet uses this for multi-seat legislative assemblies. Only Australia.
But if you’re advocating for increased educational funding so that voters aren’t idiots, I’m all for that, too.
The issue is that with ballot access laws, third parties have to have a ton of momentum. And Democrats systematically engage in lawfare to kick third parties and other individuals off the ballot - look it up, they fight anyone to the left of them with more cohesion than they fight Republicans or Trump.
Yup. I wanted to vote for the socialist candidate last election, and democrats sued her off the ballot.
That did not result in me voting for Harris, but it did convince me to refuse to vote for any down ballot democrats.
My party also had no candidate on the ballot because they were sued by the Dems. Not sure who they think they’re winning over with that.
That’s because their donors tell them who to fight, and it’s almost never the people to their right because Republicans don’t threaten the donors’ wealth.
They do now. Attempting to influence the federal reserve board isn’t good for the rich (or anyone else).
He’s trying to overheat the economy to get a gold star before it collapses.
I argue that the rich and powerful want another crash or collapse, otherwise why are the very rich, big corporations, and other institutions not doing anything to fight back against Trump’s policies?
The answer is obvious to me: fascism isn’t a threat to capitalism and there are historical parallels to support my assertion: https://youtu.be/7f_V9zZNzTY
Every single time there are economic problems, the rich get bailed out (or barely feel a hit) and are enabled to take more and more power, wealth, and influence while the 99% toil.
The rich’s game of capitalism only “collapses” if they want it to.
Seriously, people… throwing out your best option because you want better one down the road…
It’s a strategy… I used it to protest the DNC in 2016… BUT IT REQUIRES YOU STILL HAVE A DEMOCRACY AND NOT A FASCIST DICTATORSHIP RUN BY AN INSURRECTIONIST. YOU FUCKED IT.
Who fucked it?
There are 2 sides of this. Why is it always “vote for me or else…” and never “propose a good platform for us or else…”?
Dems are actively trying to demolish the leading candidate in NY. They’re about to do the same thing in this case. But “it’s us of fascists”. You think you’ll have a better chance later? You won’t, that’s part of the playbook!
In France, Macron propped the far-right before his second term, so that on 2nd round of presidential elections (direct election in 2 rounds: 1st many candidates, 2nd only the 2 highest scores from the first), he would face the far right candidate, and then “vote for me or else…”.
This has to stop. They’re not naive and stupid, they know very very well what they’re doing: coercing you to vote for them.
I know what they are doing too. I also know what their opponents are doing, and understand that you need a functioning democracy to have any hope of a better candidate down the road. Maybe Hitler’s opposition sucked too but can you imagine they would have made things any worse?
There is no perfect strategy, everything is case by case, everything involves weighing pros and cons, and you are under-estimating the cons of an eternal fascist dictatorship under these pedophile-protecting/genocidal/theocratic/insurrectionist/anti-LGBTQ thugs by a massive degree when you think this will all be worth it at some point. Keep convincing yourself this is all just dem propaganda if it makes you feel better but this is fucking reality and it’s time to wake the fuck up.
Democrats weren’t offering a functioning democracy. They were offering a hostage situation in which they were threatening everyone with fascism if they didn’t vote for the genocidal shit they appointed without a primary.
Hitler’s opposition sucked too but can you imagine they would have made things any worse?
They literally appointed Hitler
You’re going straight to that permanent fascism today. Trump won. The Dems are disgusting a growing part of their voters base. If you were redoing elections today, I’m not even sure the outcome would be different. It would come down to who repels their voters the fastest.
How soft the Dems are with Trump is a mirror of what we see in France: the “centrists” are totally compatible with fascism! They can “work with that”. If not the actual politicians, their big donors, who are really setting the direction, will have no issue adapting to a dictatorship. They will play the us vs them game, but you get closer and closer to total fascism.
Re-electing the Dems as they are will not move you away from it. It will just make the journey longer.
We are all responsible, nobody is more responsible than somebody else. Compromising on politicians that don’t even come close to representing the American people is not going to win 2026 or 2028 and get us anything different than MAGA.
Yes, just like me on 2016. Still waiting on my wonderful 3rd party progressive candidate to take back America. Maybe once they start rounding up and deporting non-Republican Party members we’ll finally see someone come along?
Yes, let us take comfort in our delusions of the future while the world crumbles around us.
It’ll get me a world where I’m not actively hunted down for my sexuality or skin color, so that would be nice.
Yeah, so long as you win every election forever, while running increasingly unappealing candidates. Which is the strategy you tried, and it failed.
That’s not the strategy I tried.
Then what is?
Will they win though? Kamala cemented it in my head that Democrats appealing to centrists and old-school Republicans isn’t effective strategy.
deleted by creator
Your valid criticism is just purity testing to these people. I’m not sure what causes people to blindly worship the party to the degree that they do, but there has to be a way to bridge the gap.
The system isn’t working at all here in America.
We are voting blue because the alternative is literal fascism as we’re experiencing here, we don’t have the political system set up for third-party voting, that begins at fucking HOME.
Get involved in your local governments and stop whinging about the federal elections. Your largely-ignored local and state elections are what gave all this mess the power it didn’t deserve.
I mean, there’s still a CHANCE to turn it around and restructure our government and our voting so we have actual choices, but right now, because everyone has been swayed or turned apathetic, we don’t have a viable means for voting for anyone that isn’t picked by the right or the further right.
Instead of shaming people for voting for Harris, we would do a lot better telling people who in their local states and cities need more support.
The left needs to get it’s fart-huffing head out of its collective ass and stop trying to bicker and shame each other performatively. You want real results you get involved from the ground up. Otherwise you’re just displaying how much better you are for internet points.
The left needs to get its fart-huffing head out of its collective ass and stop trying to bicker and shame each other performatively.
So as one of those terminally online, over-educated, ‘dreamer’ leftists, I’m pretty tired of being vote-cucked in cycle after cycle by Democrat faithful and the DNC with “…but have you seen the Republican candidate?” messaging. I’m mad about the policy platform, but recognize the electoral games. You can convince me of the ‘lesser harm’ arguments, but that increasingly does not work with regular voters.
Voting is transactional, not aspirational. Reward voter’s loyalty with policies and governance that actually improves their lives, instead of protecting the Dow and NASDAQ. Someone who is struggling to pay for shelter and healthcare doesn’t give a flying fart about ‘muh institutions’ or ‘procedural issues’ they want results. They’ve been chided and goaded in past elections and didn’t see demonstrable improvements, but instead a widening wealth gap and decreased purchasing power amid windfall corporate profits.
right now, because everyone has been swayed or turned apathetic
Because this what the “vote blue no matter who” modality brings. Cynically wielding the right to ensure electoral compliance doesn’t work. Offering no real concrete policies or cross-party priorities like they used to doesn’t make people want to vote for you.
The party has shown its ass multiple times, and the electorate isn’t as stupid as the beltway folks think they are. Look at the ballot affiliation reports and see how cooked the party is, 4.5 million people said ‘nah they dgaf about me’
He said his worry is that all of these different kinds of voters feel like the Democratic Party left them. They “all shared the broader fact that they are working class and not feeling like we were talking to them or actually going to help them, so that needs to be fixed,” he said.
we would do a lot better telling people who in their local states and cities need more support.
I stand by this, you can harp and debate and pontificate about what has been done and why and who it effects and how, but at the end of the day if you’re not building your smaller politics, your larger politics will do things you don’t want.
Liberal voters are uninspired and bored and make shitty choices so people who DO care have to get more involved. Give them leadership, give them options, shoot enough talking points at the great propaganda barrier that some get through and strike a few comfortable liberals and median voters who get all their news from AM radio and podcasters.
Take the money out of the hands of the Democrats and this won’t be an issue in the future, this arm-folded harumphing of the Dem party forcing people into choices they don’t like isn’t going to change anything by itself either, this isn’t reaching the median voters or liberals either and can be easily weaponized to make out those dissatisfied as “unamerican” or “radicals.” We have to stop spending money on corporations (saving money, stop spending on frivolous bullshit and entertainment) and start investing actual energy and time into rebuilding communities and socializing. We desperately have to stop doing the same thing expecting different results. There’s a word for that.
I’d argue that organizing a nationwide vote of no confidence for our entire government is imperative instead of playing games with the Democrats who prop up fascism by alienating people who want to achieve progress.
There is no precedent, but being held hostage to a broken system and playing in a rigged game will get us nowhere without extremely radical campaign finance reform and voting/election reform.
You need money to win elections, progressives and leftists or left-leaning individuals can’t compete with big money.
organizing a nationwide vote of no confidence
Let me know how that goes.
I’ve been at this for decades. Leftists broadly are incapable of organizing on the level that draws in the numbers needed for change, it’s just performative clubhouse demonstrations and performative boycotts, everyone is too lost in their own heads. It’s sad and it sucks but it’s literally the same kind of self-entitlement that the right is suffering from but wrapped in different wallpaper.
The liberal middle-ish class is the blood-bank for the parties to try to continue to extract money from, and as long as this class is moderately comfortable and has food they are going to pour money into whoever catches their eye for a moment on federal electoral stages, largely tune out of local politics, and not have strong principles one way or another. If you can reach these people (without preaching or shaming them for like, enjoying Duck Tales and other bizarre leftist campaigns of shame and finger wagging) then you have a chance of turning the country, but I literally cannot see that happening with the general attitudes that have set in on the left. Nobody is taking any of this seriously. It’s horseshoe theory on despair-inducing display.
Let me know how that goes.
That’s the attitude. I think my suggestion has merit.
Let me know how many progressive individuals get elected after a few more decades of capital doing whatever it wants to crush any forward movement of our society (if we even have elections anymore).
The fresh water crisis will get us before anyone can achieve progress on any level if we keep letting the government (or what’s left of it) and elections be bought out by capital.
the alternative is literal fascism
What the Democrats were doing in Gaza was literal fascism.
The left needs to get it’s fart-huffing head out of its collective ass and stop trying to bicker and shame each other performatively.
Lol, hypocrite.
You know when it comes to mayoral races you don’t have to be subjected to two party rules? That shit is only problem in the big presidential races.
Come on folks do as Sanders said lets build a new party from the ground up. At least what we should have been doing since 2016. Instead they keep thinking we can fix the Democrats. Goddammit no wonder we are lost.
Isn’t it cool how the Dems and the Nazis get equal criticism on Lemmy?
I mean, it’s mostly valid, and yet…
Not true! I attack actual fart-huffing leftists as well as democrats and nazis tyvm.
You attack anyone to your left, yes.
This is why Americans are my literal enemy for life. Worst fucking neighbours. Nothing you guys do is for the betterment of all.
So who did you vote for then?
I keep hearing how the new DNC Chair (whose name I only hear when people are telling me this) is doing things differently now and this is going to stop.
OK new DNC Chair whose name is in the news so rarely I can never remember it, it hardly seems like there could be a more fertile opportunity to stop working against progressives, so any day now.
Didn’t they just run David Hogg out of the DNC?
Somebody recently argued to me that his election was “fraudulent”. Interesting way to put it.
They went to court and successfully argued that they don’t have to follow their own rules.
They selectively care about the rules when it suits them.
Like how any excuse stopped them from enacting their campaign promises, but the Leahy law was completely meaningless when they wanted to keep selling weapons for the genocide they wanted.
It did violate the DNC’s own election rules, yes. The candidates were paired on the ballots in a way that disadvantaged female representation.
It did violate the DNC’s own election rules, yes.
The unwritten one: “no one to the left of netanyahu”
Ken Martin has already neutered a notable progressive (David Hogg) by enforcing the neutrality of DNC officers in future primaries, while Hogg’s election to Vice Chair of the DNC was invalidated months after Hogg started making waves on the grounds of “gender diversity”.
by enforcing the neutrality of DNC officers in future primaries
Yeah, like it’s not only gonna be for the one primary where they wanted to oust Hogg.
I assure you that the national committee had abso-fucking-lutely nothing to do with this city-chapter scandal.
I’m not convinced that’s true, but this is hardly the only example of such, in any case, not even the only recent example, and not even the most high profile recent example.
coughCuomocough
When it’s no longer a pattern, people will stop pointing it out.
You’re mad that Cuomo didn’t get the endorsement? Why?
Yeah, and currently people seem to think that Gavin Newsome would be anything other than a stock standard Democrat if he manages to win a 2028 Presidential bid (if the US even has an election).
But it’s all just Social Media “clap back” and talking points. Obviously it’s better to have a contender willing to do that, but he’s unlikely to be much more than Biden 2.0.
Gavin Newsom is basically George Bush 3
the Dems of today are closer to 1990s Republicans than 2020s Republicans are
Not even close, if that were true then they’d have support of the private prison industry, but they don’t, Trump has completely polarized crime and all of the prison complex supports him and only him.
He hasn’t kissed the prison industry’s ass yet. Once he does, you’ll have another excuse.
🙄 🫸social populism
😍👍 trolling on twitter
True, but the whole “if we have elections” part is why I’ll back Newsom for now. Though I’m hoping a more socialist candidate gets the nomination.
Backing Newsom instead of demanding better is how Democrats will lose the election once again. Kamala didn’t lose because she was black or a woman. She lost because she pushed a centrist line. And supposedly Kamala was the last hope to have elections in 2028, so I’m not sure how this line of thinking works.
Especially at this point when nothing is locked in I don’t understand why people are capitulating against their own interests already.
At this point only the Democratic Socialists of America seems to have any standards within the Democratic party and the Dems are actively working against DSA as hard as possible. I’d be curious who the DSA would want to run as president though.
America is so lost. You guys are on the verge of utter collapse.
You’re talking to an ML user, he’s probably not even American lol.
“stock standard Dem” is looking pretty good right now.
Why? They had a big hand in causing this mess in the first place.
They haven’t had enough senate seats to have a hand in anything for over a decade. 48 or less for 6 consecutive whole congresses.
The opposition is literally killing people.
Democrats don’t “play dirty” to the left. Your need to constantly be a victim is why Trump is president.
And Cuomo is running as an independent because he’s just wanting to support the Democrat nominee?
Democrats & the left love infighting more than winning. Happens here all the time.
I read about this one earlier. It’s a city-chapter not state-chapter and the complaints came rolling in over how the chapter handled choosing their candidate and removing one of the other options too early, and threats of demanding refund of contributions from multiple members.
All in all it just sounds like the election itself was handled poorly and not any fault of any individual candidate.
EDIT: It’s so funny when people block you and then reply to you, so you can’t see what they’re saying.
What a complete lack of surprise it is to see you defending the party ratfucking another progressive.
Well.
Have fun trying to make a 3rd party viable when no 3rd party is trying to be viable and when their most popular candidate only got half of a single percent of the total votes cast in 2024.
And have fun doing that before 2026 or 2028.
Yeah, I’ll continue advocating for reforming an existing entity instead of chasing unicorns.
I’ll continue advocating for reforming an existing entity instead of chasing unicorns.
Almost every high functioning democracy in the world has managed to populate a credible multi-party assembly. To pick some random examples, the UK has ~14 different parties seated in its legislature, Canada has 5, France 12, Sweden 10, Germany 9, the Philippines 13, Japan 10. These aren’t cherry-picked either, you can pretty much choose any country and go have a look at its assembly makeup, and you’ll consistently see that the ones with only two parties are… not good company to be in.
The only thing stopping America from electing a government that represents the views of its people, are cheerleaders for the status quo using circular logic like yours.
Lemme know when you reform the Democrats, while they appease, playcate, and compromise with the fascists known as Republicans.
You’re welcome to keep advocating for reform. Just be aware that Democrats will almost certainly pull out every dirty trick in the book, including going full Fascist, if a reformist ever stands to win.
And have fun doing that before 2026 or 2028.
Have fun trying to reform the Democrats by then…
