This is where is gets more complicated. To pol-sci specialists of authoritarian breakdown, American parties are in fact too democratic. The smoke-filled-room elitism of super delegates, and so on, has historically been a very good way to stop demagogues gaming the system. The essential reason you guys are having to suffer Trump is that the Republican party couldn’t stop him. The party had become an empty shell, a brand waiting to be taken over by whatever unscrupulous demagogue could win its primary. The Democrats, with their supposedly undemocratic super-delegates, are at this point America’s only genuine political party. It’s not a bug that the DNC leadership can assert a direction as you suggest, it’s a feature.
Populist candidates only succeed when there is massive discontent among voters. If either party had attempted to work for their voters he would be irrelevant. Arguing the people that caused the problem need more power is a non starter for me.
Trump became the GOP nominee in 2016 because the Clinton campaign claimed colluded to elevate him to the nomination in a “pied piper” strategy, because they believed he was the only candidate Clinton could beat.
The Dems continue this strategy still. They dump millions into the primary campaigns for far-right lunatics, because they don’t believe they can beat or differentiate themselves moderate republicans. And it’s not like this is a conspiracy- they openly defend this strategy.
Trump became the GOP nominee in 2016 because the Clinton campaign claimed colluded to elevate him to the nomination
This is conspiracism. Sure, it was convenient for the Democrats, but Trump did not get where he is “because” of Democrats. Trump became the nominee because the Republicans were a hollowed out party with nobody in charge and a voter base that become radicalized and completely unmoored from the official free-market ideology. The Democrats had nothing to do with that.
As for interfering in Republican campaigns since then, yeah sure, and it’s even a strategy that worked somewhat. I agree it’s cynical and risky and generally a bad idea.
It’s really pathetic bootlicking of the ‘party elites,’ and obscenely undemocratic, to insist that there needs to be someone “in charge” to overrule the democratic choices of the party base.
The “democratic choices of the party base” is precisely why you’ve got Trump on the ballot. Democracy is a good thing but you can have too much of a good thing. America’s founders understood this. They thought the electoral college would be the filter to prevent authoritarian populists getting into power. In the end it was the parties that ended up serving this purpose, until the Republican party broke. So, yes, I absolutely do think you would be better off as a country if your political system had an elitist mechanism to stop would-be dictators getting their hands on power.
I’m loving the lack of self-awareness. Trying to play both sides as if y’all love democracy, but losing your minds when anyone suggests any government that isn’t an oligarchy.
You’re the one that is loudly cheering for election fraud and calling it “too democratic”.
Telling me (a leftist that watched both parties get taken over by corporatists/fascists BECAUSE the DNC literally stepped in to artificially subvert the will of the voters in 2016, which allowed Trump to win easily) that the crimes that they committed were “too democratic” is enough to stoke the fires of rage against you for the rest of my life.
The Democrats, with their supposedly undemocratic super-delegates, are at this point America’s only genuine political party. It’s not a bug that the DNC leadership can assert a direction as you suggest, it’s a feature.
I’m beginning to understand why people clamor for better blocking features. I am just expressing a viewpoint and I have never so much as downvoted anyone else here, you included.
With your hysteria and insults and false accusations you are poisoning this discussion. I’m done here. Others will judge for themselves.
You said that election fraud is a feature not a bug.
You literally asserted that. That was the base point of ALL of your “discussion”….oh and the stupid point about making people who don’t vote have to hold the office themselves. Sounded like something Ted Nugent might suggest.
I don’t like Fascists that are happy about the corrupt state of the country I have to live in. I don’t consider people who actively fight FOR my worst interest to be friends.
JubilantJaguar was telling you how it is, not how it should be. They didn’t say any of it was good or right or that they were happy about it in any way. You jumped to thinking they agreed with the poli-sci academics who said the parties were too democratic.
This is where is gets more complicated. To pol-sci specialists of authoritarian breakdown, American parties are in fact too democratic. The smoke-filled-room elitism of super delegates, and so on, has historically been a very good way to stop demagogues gaming the system. The essential reason you guys are having to suffer Trump is that the Republican party couldn’t stop him. The party had become an empty shell, a brand waiting to be taken over by whatever unscrupulous demagogue could win its primary. The Democrats, with their supposedly undemocratic super-delegates, are at this point America’s only genuine political party. It’s not a bug that the DNC leadership can assert a direction as you suggest, it’s a feature.
Populist candidates only succeed when there is massive discontent among voters. If either party had attempted to work for their voters he would be irrelevant. Arguing the people that caused the problem need more power is a non starter for me.
Trump became the GOP nominee in 2016 because the Clinton campaign claimed colluded to elevate him to the nomination in a “pied piper” strategy, because they believed he was the only candidate Clinton could beat.
The Dems continue this strategy still. They dump millions into the primary campaigns for far-right lunatics, because they don’t believe they can beat or differentiate themselves moderate republicans. And it’s not like this is a conspiracy- they openly defend this strategy.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/12/democrats-interfere-republican-primaries/
This is conspiracism. Sure, it was convenient for the Democrats, but Trump did not get where he is “because” of Democrats. Trump became the nominee because the Republicans were a hollowed out party with nobody in charge and a voter base that become radicalized and completely unmoored from the official free-market ideology. The Democrats had nothing to do with that.
As for interfering in Republican campaigns since then, yeah sure, and it’s even a strategy that worked somewhat. I agree it’s cynical and risky and generally a bad idea.
https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/
It’s really pathetic bootlicking of the ‘party elites,’ and obscenely undemocratic, to insist that there needs to be someone “in charge” to overrule the democratic choices of the party base.
The “democratic choices of the party base” is precisely why you’ve got Trump on the ballot. Democracy is a good thing but you can have too much of a good thing. America’s founders understood this. They thought the electoral college would be the filter to prevent authoritarian populists getting into power. In the end it was the parties that ended up serving this purpose, until the Republican party broke. So, yes, I absolutely do think you would be better off as a country if your political system had an elitist mechanism to stop would-be dictators getting their hands on power.
I’m loving the lack of self-awareness. Trying to play both sides as if y’all love democracy, but losing your minds when anyone suggests any government that isn’t an oligarchy.
Either an astroturfer or bootlicker.
Throwing around insults doesn’t get you to win the argument.
This person is such a fascist that they’re pretending anti-democratic cheating is a “feature of democracy”.
Chill. Your arguments would be more persuasive that way.
These aren’t arguments. They’re facts.
You’re the one that is loudly cheering for election fraud and calling it “too democratic”.
Telling me (a leftist that watched both parties get taken over by corporatists/fascists BECAUSE the DNC literally stepped in to artificially subvert the will of the voters in 2016, which allowed Trump to win easily) that the crimes that they committed were “too democratic” is enough to stoke the fires of rage against you for the rest of my life.
Please stop insulting me and accusing me of things I didn’t say. Thank you.
You literally said these things. Stop trolling.
I’m beginning to understand why people clamor for better blocking features. I am just expressing a viewpoint and I have never so much as downvoted anyone else here, you included.
With your hysteria and insults and false accusations you are poisoning this discussion. I’m done here. Others will judge for themselves.
Go ahead. Block me. What discussion?
You said that election fraud is a feature not a bug.
You literally asserted that. That was the base point of ALL of your “discussion”….oh and the stupid point about making people who don’t vote have to hold the office themselves. Sounded like something Ted Nugent might suggest.
I don’t like Fascists that are happy about the corrupt state of the country I have to live in. I don’t consider people who actively fight FOR my worst interest to be friends.
JubilantJaguar was telling you how it is, not how it should be. They didn’t say any of it was good or right or that they were happy about it in any way. You jumped to thinking they agreed with the poli-sci academics who said the parties were too democratic.