Democrats are gonna blow it on a fucking centrist again
They’re trying to avoid centrists, they want right wing
They basically want the American Keir Starmer.
That’s way too left for them
Starmer is a transphobe Zionist who sucks up to Trump instead of trying to negotiate with the EU.
He said he supports trans rights previously but most recently what you refer to is his office citing a court ruling on the matter
Though pro-trans is a right wing take so you have that, it’s still left of most Americans. He has spoken out against Israel’s actions
The Labour Party believes speaking out against Israel is antisemitic by default. It’s literally in their constitution.
They also align themselves with JKR on trans rights.
They’ve also cut benefits for disabled people, have just announced that carers will no longer be hired from abroad even though there’s a desperate shortage of them, are refusing to deal with the pollution caused by the water companies, etc ad nauseum.
Democratic voters need to find their balls and brains to deny the establishment their choice instead of reluctantly getting behind the MSNBC boosted candidate. The best thing we can do for the Democratic party at this moment is criticize the fuck our of establishment bullshit.
They kinda did. That’s how Harris lost
As much as I hate Harris, that was a dumb decision.
Criticize? Get into your local party. Get progressives in as dog catchers, then city council, then mayor, then state legislator, comptroller, a tourney general, then governor, then national representative, senator, then president with a party that will support their agenda.
If progressives are the only ones who win primaries then progressives will be the candidates.
That’s absolutely a legitimate path, though you better have a network of like minded folks doing the same thing in at least 30-40 states if you want to succeed at the transition to the national scene. You are also talking about at least a 40-50 year effort.
I also wonder what the plan is to keep this new party from becoming just as corrupt as our other two. Remember that Kyrsten Sinema and John Fetterman both ran as progressives. I’m sure it could be managed to at least some degree, but it would be no easier than cleaning up the Democrats.
You also won’t just have to vet your politicians, you will also need to vet your primary voters. You are going to have to recruit them from many of the same crowd that keep voting in the Schumers and Pelosis of the Democratic party.
I’ve been playing in my head with the idea of trying to create what would amount to almost a new religion, but devoted to shared reality instead of anything supernatural. Get people together once a week for refreshers on how to recognize and push back on all the various psyops the world is plagued with. Kids go to Sunday school to learn about logical fallacies and contemplate ethics and moral questions inside various logical frameworks. It would be a beautiful thing.
Democratic voters need to find their balls and brains to deny the establishment their choice instead of reluctantly getting behind the MSNBC boosted candidate.
If it looks like that’s going to happen, they just won’t bother with primaries.
Again.
I hope everyone here is finding and boosting viable third party candidates. We’ve got several long rows to hoe, but we can make the garden grow.
A candidate being third party precludes them from being ‘viable’ in our system, at least in the federal elections. It’s more advantageous for an independent or progressive democrat to take the primary, but they’ll always be at a disadvantage under the DNC. Maintaining a high populist energy through the midterms and into 2027 will force them to recon with it. Hopefully Bernie and AOC can keep up the oligarchy tour and keep it in the headlines, and maybe if they do more democrats will join the cause.
Its been so long since we’ve had a candidate who embraced a people first platform instead of triangulating and offering the barest minimum of information of what they strongly support. Just that would be an overwhelmingly welcome change. The whole election process has become enshitified.
viable third party candidates
There is no such thing.
If we want to win a Democratic primary then we will have to overcome the Democratic establishment. If we want to skip the primary and win the general, then we will have to overcome both parties. It’s much easier to completely shut out third party candidates in the general than to freeze a popular candidate out of a primary.
The biggest barrier any progressive candidate has to overcome is that there is a massive core of disengaged Democratic voters who just want to beat the Republican, and they have totally swallowed the myth of centrists doing better because they appeal to the right.
Having to overcome that at the same time we have to overcome the very real narrative that a third party candidate will just split the Democratic vote is absolutely impossible.
The only two things that might save Republicans in 2028 are Democrats winning big in 2026 and doing nothing, and the bulk of the progressive movement backing a third party.
I don’t think it is easier. The DNC controls the processes and all the systems within their own party plus the media biases, while a third party who makes it to the general only has to contend with the normal difficulties of the media. They’ve done different kinds of maneuvering each of the last 3 primaries to prove this, not to mention other things like tipping the scales in local primaries or choosing that old guy over AOC for that committee seat they were fighting for.
A lot of anti-establishment voters went from Bernie to Trump, so I think the right candidate can maneuver this middle path, not by being a centrist but by appealing to people who hate the establishment in this country but want someone other than Trump after he no doubt fucks up again.
while a third party who makes it to the general only has to contend with the normal difficulties of the media.
When you look at how Democrats control primaries, it’s almost entirely through their cozy relationship with the media. It was more direct in 2016, but in 2020 it was a consistent message from the media that Bernie was less electable and Trump had to be defeated.
If you were familiar with running as a third party in even local elections, you would know that just getting on the ballot as a third party is a massive effort. Also, the controls that Democrats have over the primary process, Democrats and Republicans together have over the general election process.
choosing that old guy over AOC for that committee seat
That has nothing to do with popular elections, but it does bring up a good point. Do you think AOC would have been more likely to get that seat if she were in a third party? Once you start getting people into office, you will still be dependent on coalitions with Democrats to get anything done.
A lot of anti-establishment voters went from Bernie to Trump, so I think the right candidate can maneuver this middle path
Here is the thing that drives me nuts. You are not proposing anything that hasn’t been tried over and over again. Third party advocates point to the limited gains of progressives within the Democratic party, and ignore their own elong history of total failure. What you “think” defies pretty obvious reality.
To be clear, we’d need a large movement in this country to abandon the Democratic party before I think it would work, but I think it’s worth pushing for because the Dems seem like a lost cause, unless all of the leadership and entrenched establishment within there is changed at the same time. It’s the same reason you can’t change a corrupt police department by joining as a good cop. It just doesn’t work that way. Besides, it’s happened before in this country with a popular enough leader (it’s why we don’t have Whigs anymore, or a Bull Moose party).
I am so fucking sick of doomerism.
Neither party has ever had a real primary for an incumbent president. Neither party has ever not had a primary without an incumbent president, since we started having primaries. I’m not defending it, because it’s an affront to democracy, but if your looking at the past to predict the future, then you should do it right.
Their corporate donation spice must flow, and a progressive platform isn’t what is requested.
Organize now and win primaries later. Shove a progressive down the DNC’s throat like Trump shoved himself down the RNC’s throat in 2016.
2016, 2020, and 2024 made it obvious the Democratic Party will never let a progressive win the election. They will do whatever they need to do to mess with the election to prevent that from happening. 2016 they manipulated the media heavily, used delegates to manipulate numbers early to build support for her, manipulated graphs to make him seem like he was doing badly, constantly misconstrued Bernie’s ideas in media interviews, gave her debate questions, and showed empty podiums Trump would sit at instead of Bernie speeches. 2020 they brought in Bloomberg who only entered to make sure Bernie didn’t win, also did some media manipulation, kept trying to coopt some of his ideas in a more watered down form, and then called everyone but Warren, who shared the most voters with Bernie, to drop out at the same time after it looked like he could win. In 2024 they basically didn’t even have a primary, with no debates, interviews with candidates, or anything, and even skipped it in some states. Once that process was over, he just handed the candidacy over to his VP.
They will always tip the scales and will never let it be fair if there is a danger of an outsider winning. The Democratic Party is a bunch of donors and industry staffers in a trench coat. I’ve basically given up on having any hope in it, this last election and it’s support for “the most lethal army in the world” while we’re enabling a genocide was the last straw.
HR Clinton and Bernie Sanders were actually neck and neck until she pulled out ahead. It was really close. Then in 2020 far less people voted in the primaries, likely due to defeatism like yours.
Also, Every single dem is a Public Option proponent and wants to overturn Citizens United. It just means fuck all without 60 senate seats.
I think every election cycle there’s probably people who get jaded, hence all the non-voters.
And it’s only 60 senate seats because they’ve decided it needs it. The majority sets the rules like that, they could make it happen if they wanted to and change them if they wanted to. The only time they’ve ever done it is to approve some Federal judges. Otherwise, they usually let the Republicans overturn norms, which just makes us go further right.
There haven’t been more dems than Repubs in over ten years, there haven’t even been more than 50 dems total without independent caucus, so that sounds like a bad idea to change the rules at that time, tbh.
Average progressive primary voter: see above
Average centrist primary voter: “Boy do I love phonebanking for Average Centrist #39!”
Who the fuck ever told you politics was fair? Who said change is easy? These things didn’t happen randomly, they happened because people had their fingers on the scale because they could put their fingers on the scale. Organize, mobilize, and slam your fist so hard on the scale so hard that change becomes inevitable, or don’t and moan about the result.
Trump won because he threatened to run as an independent and spoil the Republicans chances. The DNC would rather let the Republicans win then let a progressive independent win. If we can’t get a real progressive on the ballot, we can’t wait for election day to do something about it
He won because all the carbon copy neocons split their primary votes enough that he had the biggest plurality for months. He had a solid lead by the time the field narrowed enough
Who is Jasmine Crockett and why do we care? (Edit: other than “texas lawmaker”)
Also, this isn’t a surprise. Lots of sexists won’t vote for a woman.
Who is Jasmine Crockett
What is a search engine?
and why do we care?
She’s not a centrist so you don’t.
Also, this isn’t a surprise. Lots of sexists won’t vote for a woman.
AOC is having a moment so suddenly the party is pushing the message that women can’t win. If they had some genocide-happy corpodem they intended to foist on us, they wouldn’t be holding back all women just to stop one progressive woman.
It’s gonna be Pete, Newsome, or fettermen. ᕕ( ᐛ )ᕗ progressives are gonna loooove these options /s
Establishment dems would view Gavin as the safest of those white boys, but I thought he didn’t want to run.
I certainly will not vote for Newsom or Buttigieg. Unless some other incredible candidate comes out of the woodworks, I’ll be AOC or bust if she decides to run.
Which just means another loss.
Why not vote for whoever you want in the primary and then whoever wins that in the general?
vote blue no matter who huh.
Surely this fascist government is preferable to milquetoast Democrats huh?
Because I’m not going to vote for pre-tea party Republicans under any circumstance. I didn’t vote for them then, and I won’t vote for them now.
AOC with Crockett as vice pres.
AOC and BERNIE!
Sanders will be 86 by the time of the next election. It’s time to stop pushing for him. It’s not going to happen, and probably wouldn’t be a great idea if it did.
Just have both of them run, while having their opposite number on the VP ticket during the primary. They can agree to have the one with the smaller numbers drop out and give their voters to whoever has a better campaign between them. This way, we get “Must vote for white dude” votes and “we need younger leader” votes.
There is no bloody reason for them to play by “traditional” rules, seeing as how the DNC and GOP don’t give a damn about fair play.
Sanders will be 86 by the time of the next election.
We care about age now that we no longer have to pretend that biden is lucid.
The last couple of years have really opened my eyes as to how many Americans are just fucking morons with, like, monkey-level brains.
Quiet voice == losing his mind and not lucid.
Loud voice == strong leader!
And by the way and by the way and by the way and by the way and by the way and by the way and by the way I’m a better golfer than you
That’s an interesting one: That dig requires a measure of empathy, a capability often diminished by dementia. Biden had to understand the mindset of his opponent to pick something that would get under his skin in particular. Boy howdy, did it work! The target was totally unable to recognize the bait, and brush it off.
Nah. He did a great job baiting trump in 2019 but in 2024 he wasn’t on his game he wasn’t even in the same city as his game. Trump essentially did brush that remark off, he basically just "no u"ed at it.
Heh, this discussion underscores my point. Here we’re parsing how much age has affected Biden, how much he’s slowed down, how much he struggled to articulate his ideas, which were at least indicative of a fundamentally-sound mind. I mean, he said, “We beat Medicare,” but we all knew what he was trying to say. Meanwhile, his opponent was a gibbering baboon, who got easily emotionally triggered (not a quality I want in a President), and his best response after getting visibly angry was “no u.” But hey, at least he was able to bellow it out, and that feels like strength to monkey brain, so we can pretend he’s not manifesting more and more dementia symptoms as time goes on.
We finally beat medicare.
oh Bidens only problem was a quiet voice, huh?
No, but he could maintain a train of thought for longer than 2 sentences.
Are you looking for another president who has to be wheeled onto the stage to repeat “and by the way” over and over for 90 minutes?
You were happy with “we finally beat medicare” because he was far enough to the right for you.
I don’t know what you’re even trying to say, but if you’re advocating for a president who would be 90 years old at the end of his first term you’re a fucking idiot. So with that in mind, I don’t care what you’re trying to say.
I’m saying that “too old” means “too far to the left” and that the party would run a fucking mummy as long as it didn’t want to raise the minimum wage or implement universal healthcare.
Ötzi/Imhotep 2028!
I’m saying that “too old” means “too far to the left”
I’m saying that 86 is too old to run for president regardless of policies.
the party would run a fucking mummy as long as it didn’t want to raise the minimum wage or implement universal healthcare.
I’m not the party so idk why you’re giving me shit about this. Maybe spend your time bitching at Ken Martin or David Hogg instead.
Is no-one going to tell them?
They have definitely heard. They just don’t care.
deleted by creator
Tim “Expand Isreal’s Borders” Walz? Tim “lost his own home district in the presidential election” Walz? Nah, hard pass.
Putting a woman at the top of the ticket again would definitely be a way to show them, “hey we are willing to walk into the same trap as many times as it takes to prove our point about equality.”
Not enough women think a woman should be president to make the idea viable, and that’s not my fault.
I think the issues with Harris and Clinton was that they were both boring, pro establishment candidates and Harris especially was a prosecutor right the BLM movement was demanding police reform. The DNC can’t or won’t read the room.
It’s an uncomfortable truth but there’s a lot of sexism out there that simply believe that a “man” … any man is better than women in positions of power. Like I heard about Latinos for Trump believing Trump would just simply be better than Kamala on the economy due to his gender.
To be clear, I definitely don’t agree with it.
It’s just self reporting your own misogyny if you think it’s cause they were women and not because of who they were as people
Oh please. We live in a very sexist world, and you’d be a clown to deny this has bearing in the political world
Those sexists wouldn’t be voting for a Democrat, anyway.
We live in a very sexist
worldcountry.FTFY. Non-shitholes manage to follow women leaders just fine.
I find it funny, that you still buy into this narrative. Most western countries and many countries were women are considered to be discriminated more than in western countries had women leading governments. This includes far right parties such as in Italy.
Neither Hillary nor Harris lost because they were women. They lost because they had political positions driving away progressives and presented themselves in an uncharismatic and “high-and mighty” way that alienated the conservative bases they tried pondering to. If you want to win you have to at least pretend to care about normal people, not belittle them.
Two questions.
-
Can you reference statements or interactions where these women represented themselves as high and mighty?
-
Isn’t part of trump’s appeal to his base (regardless of them saying “he’s just like us”) that he claims to know more about, or be better than someone else, at literally everything?
Nice link, but the prompt for number 1 was…
Can you reference statements or interactions where these women represented themselves as high and mighty?
The article has no direct quotes from Harris or Hillary. The closet thing I could find was a complaint that for the month of October, Harris appeared with Mark Cuban more often than the UAW leader.
It also has some pretty dumb takes.
That’s gonna be a ‘no’ for me. Try again?
For #2, Trump has a way of talking and carrying himself that makes him seem obviously like not one of the political elites around him. His plans are also wildly different than theirs (to the point of stupidity) and he seems ready to upend existing systems, which working-class people who those systems haven’t helped like. Hillary was one of the most establishment candidates to ever exist, and Harris kept herself as basically 100% aligned to Biden during the election (and to other classic establishment Republicans like the Cheney).
People also seem to forget that Kamala had no primary to prove her chops, and had to work with less time to campaign due to Biden’s stupidity. While not a great candidate, she got fucked over by the DNC’s myopic habit of anointing candidates.
She also had Biden financially backing a genocide, with no pushback from her, to contend with.
It’s hard to say how much that was a factor. We know that the campaign’s staff were instructed to record voter concerns about Gaza as “no response,” but independent polling organizations found that most voters ranked the issue well below the usual, immigration and the economy. IIRC, only in Michigan was the number of protest voters high enough to perhaps swing the election.
So your argument is that Trump doesn’t present himself as high and mighty? The dude had AI Photoshop him as the fucking pope…
It’s almost as if what appeals to right wing voters doesn’t necessarily appeal to left wing voters. Those right wing voters don’t like women appearing to know more than men, but do like men who carry themselves as of they know everything and can do no wrong.
I know it wasn’t you that made the point, but…
Neither Hillary nor Harris lost because they were women.
Yep… It was because they were women.
Fascists want a strong-man leader, so yes, he and they produce photos of him with rippling muscles, riding a wind-swept horse, and while nailed to Jesus’ cross all at the same time.
But they don’t consider him an “elite” either. He’s supposed to drain the swamp, remember? They think he’s out of the establishment and will destroy the system that took affordable homes from them with his big, strong, racist muscles.
Now, I don’t think any of this is inconsistent, but even if you could find one, yeah, the common person is not a well-informed, forged in the fires of philosophical rigor, politically strategic agent of the people’s will—they believe a lot of irrational things. This is why the leopard eats their face so often.
The real difference between the parties is that the republicans have a story. They sell snake oil and salves to cure your ailing economy, while the Democrats sell… I mean, nothing, really. They sell the idea that things are just fine as they are, something nobody believes.
-
Which woman matters.
I sure hope it’s Joe Biden!
/s
Biden would run again if given the chance. Thats how stupid and egotistical he is.
It’s already newsom. They just haven’t done kabuki primaries yet. If they deign to at all.
No one wants more California policies and politics. He is a hard sell to most of the US states.
“kabuki primaries” 😂
Newsome is such a corrupt slime. He let PG&E get away with literal murder for shareholder profit. He was married to that god awful Guifoille lady. He’s also related to Pelosi and now he has a podcast where he talks to Nazis. California should be leading the way with healthcare, education and job protections but we’re not in fact California enabled and coddled the rise of broligarch facism. People always talk about the homeless crisis in California that was in large part caused by the tech broligarchy. Strap in America because there going to be a homelessness and then a mass incarceration explosion. Voting for Newsome in his ivory tower would just be a vote for the broligarchs.
Crockett said Democrats have ‘this fear’ about voting for a woman again after Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton lost
Both had a VP named Tim. Need to run a third trial where a safe white man runs with a VP candidate with the name Tim to confirm that isn’t the issue.
Your Republicans and most Democrats are two sides of the same medal
They’re both funded by the same
peoplecorporations, so many of their goals are the same.
I am an extremely safe looking whiteboy and I’d love nothing more than an AOC pres and Crockett vice pres ticket. That shit would be awesome.
It’s Beshear isn’t it?
Guillotine for president 2028
His name is Andy.
Andy Beshear is pretty centrist which is why he can get elected in Kentucky. And I know the opinion of centrists around here, they’re conservatives. He might be able to win a general election, but can he win a Democratic primary? Well if he’s the Golden boy, the party will shoo him in just like they did Hillary, even if there are other candidates that maybe could be more popular. Nothing like democracy in action in the Democratic party!
