Good for him.
He doesn’t owe them shit
Ask AOC how that plays out
Jon carries a lot of water for the idea that the Democratic Party leadership are inept.
They are not. They accomplish every task they set out to.
The problem is that they don’t want the same things the voters in the party want.
They don’t want to “win”. The only thing they want is to maintain their proximity to wealth and power, and so they have cast their lot with the oligarchy, the same as Republicans.
The Democratic Party ”runs cover” (“block tackle” for you Europeans) for the Republicans while the Republicans overtly dismantle democracy. There is always a parliamentarian or a “blue slip rule” to help the Dems steal defeat from the jaws of victory. How many times do they need to strain credulity and invent some new excuse or mechanism for their failure for it to form a composite image of collaboration?
The Democratic Party is a honeypot used to attract and neutralize progressive policies and politicians, and prevent the “Overton Window” of American politics from moving left.
At every crucial moment they have supported the privatization and financialization of the commons, the wars of aggression, the surveillance & police state, and they will continue to do so until Palantir storm troopers are dragging people from their Blackrock housing to Amazon work camps to fulfill their mandated techno feudal district conscription period.
All of this is true, but by saying it you might somehow influence the outcome of an election in a manner that favors Republicans.
Therefore I hate you with every fiber of my being and denounce you as a Sockpuppet of an Enemy Nation.
I just haven’t decided if you’re a Russian Bot, a Chinese Wumao, or an Ayatollah Accomplice. Perhaps all three.
I think you’re wrong. Or rather, I think you’re mostly wrong.
Like, in no way do I think they are extremely good at what they do, unless your argument is that they don’t give a shit, which I also think is wrong. They definitely want to win. They definitely want to control things. They literally make more money (not the organization, mind you, the people who run the organization) when they are in control. It is silly to think otherwise. Heck, it is safer, too!
But, I think they are quite dumb, or maybe it’s better to think of them as out of touch. They rely on political calculus, but they’re using some pretty bad variables. Because otherwise, there wouldn’t be any progressive Democrats at all. Like, that is inherently detrimental to their centrism. Giving crumbs isn’t as useful to them as people say because it let’s others know how hungry they are for more of that. Hope is contagious.
I think they work with what they got, and what they got is so rapidly changing that they freak out and pick what they think is the safest option over and over again. And their base hates it, but they’ll deal with that part later, there’s just too many fires for them!
Like, sure, there’s a little bit of trying to control how progressive they can be, but they just… Suck at that, too. I dunno, man. A lot of people can skate by on incompetency, and that just feels more likely.
Sometimes I wonder if they don’t have a monthly secret meeting where they look at which issues appear to be up and coming and then flip a coin for which party takes which side of it. Kinda like debate club.
It often looks more like performance art. The dems pretend to take one side of an issue, and then rally their base about how the GOP want to stop the solution or tear down current protections. And of course the GOP takes the other side and rallys their base against what the “lunatic” dems want to do (which of course the dems would never do because then the issue would be gone), and they start proposing ways to tear down whatever law already favor the democrats side.
When the dems get in power, somehow very few of the things they proposed before actually happen. And the ones that do are so soft an executive order can undo them.
It’s just a shell game. Perception manipulation.
I’m not an american, but it seems like the only way americans will be represented by their government is if they out the 2 party system.
There’s this vibe of self-destruction in american society that is rooted in the 2 party system: one party is your mortal enemy and another doesn’t quite represent you - so everyone just low key feels like destroying the whole thing rather than working on making it better.
the only way americans will be represented by their government is if they out the 2 party system.
Have you seen the other options? Libertarians are a NAMBLA fueled trainwreck. Greens are… not great for a lot of reasons. Third Way is just fascism in a three piece suit. Reform is six oil companies in a trench coat.
You can’t multi-party your way out of this one.
America is a one-party state, of course. But in typical American extravagance they have two of them.
OK guys, I have the greatest idea! July 4, 2026 will be the country’s 250th birthday! Let’s have a fireworks show the world will never forget! Let’s make this a global celebration! To do so, we’re going to connect our nuclear weapons to a random number generator. A hundred nukes will be launched to random coordinates on the Earth’s surface. Who knows where they’ll end up?!
We only have a 2 party system on paper. Behind closed doors, they are working for the same goals. Make the rich people happy so they can be rich people with influence. The general population is just something that they have to manage on their way to their goals. Adding more parties will help, but it will eventually end up the same. As long as you need money to get elected, then money will control those who get elected.
If the constitution and the political dynamics are designed for bi-partisan system it’s pretty hard to evolve out of it. A third party can also play as the king maker and have an unfair influence compared to its size. Some countries have a more dynamic coalition system but that has biases as well.
America will never be fixed because that would require all anericans to look inward and accept their shortcomings. Americans are incapable of doing that
Ah yes, it’s not a train of systemic issues compounding over 250 years combined with weaponized wealth disparity to keep everyone sick, isolated and tired. It’s because they won’t pull up their moral bootstraps.
Give me a fucking break.
“Vote Blue, unless they’re trying to work for you”
fuck graham
Looking forwards to that Schumer congratulations call.
I’ll be waiting…
The fucking primary hasn’t happened yet…
His opponent suspended her campaign, he will make it to the general…
But Jesus Fucking Christ, we’ve been fighting since before Jimmy Carter to get a DNC that will leave downballot primaries alone and run fair presidential ones.
The current DNC won’t say shit about any candidate till after they win a primary.
Which is something Jon Stewart of all people should understand is a good thing. And I feel like neither him or Graham was as harsh on the podcast as the article makes it out to be.
The current DNC won’t say shit about any candidate till after they win a primary.
Just to be clear, that’s not true.
Maine’s primary is the most unusual of the three — and may be causing the most intraparty heartburn — because it is the only one where Democratic leadership has itself picked a candidate. Schumer and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the party’s official arm for Senate races, are backing Mills.
Per the Boston Globe on January 17th 2026.
And of course after this interview Mills dropped out and,
Meanwhile, Schumer and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, both of New York, said they would work with Platner to defeat Collins.
So the DNC and DSCC endorsed Mills before the primary. After Mills dropped out, they endorsed Platner. And while I’m glad they did, technically there is still another candidate and a write in candidate also running in the upcoming primary. It is not likely they’ll win, but they absolutely are endorsing before the primary.
