We need to abandon the Democratic Party at this point. Democrats are not capable of winning national elections. The Democratic Party is not run by serious people who actually intend on winning power and wielding it wisely. Those still telling folks to vote for Democrats are not politically serious people. The only future can be found in parties like the Working Families Party. Centrists will simply need to hold their nose, quit dividing the left, and vote for progressive candidates. Remember, a vote for a Democrat is a vote for a Republican. Democrats can’t win national elections. In a two party system, we can’t afford to throw our votes away on parties that are doomed to lose.
They literally won one election ago.
That’s great, all we need now is another worldwide pandemic with millions of deaths to push through whatever idiot the DNC decides to run.
Americans: We’re very unhappy with the status quo
Dems: Best I can do is more status quoI’m watching from the sidelines but my gods, you guys need to take your politicians to account. Bricks for the current lot first, mind. The two “sides” aren’t equal - one is awful and the other is redefining how bad human beings can be without directly sending people to gas chambers.
Some of us have been trying. The masses tend to bully and tell us it’s all our fault, somehow. According to the Democrats and their base, progressives are simultaneously too weak and unimportant to listen to, and so powerful that we can swing entire elections. I’m still waiting to hear how that one makes sense.
And yet progressives say their policies are so supported and yet they can barely get Anyone elected.
Begs to wonder how that makes sense too or else they would’ve tea partied the dems by now.
I wish it were true but either progressives are too few or too lazy. Either way, same result.
See the part about the Democratic Party actively working against progressives, to the point of funding propaganda against them. The Dems saw the Tea Party and care more about avoiding that with progressives than they do about running candidates that can either beat the Republicans or serve the people.
And from what you just said: you’d better have never once blamed progressives for losing the Democrats an election if you’re taking the “progressives are too weak” position.
If progressives were numerous enough that wouldn’t matter.
Somehow the magats got their psychos in power over a number of years. Progressives don’t.
People aren’t going to like what you’re saying, but there’s an element of uncomfortable truth. Money and establishment power didn’t let the neocons beat back the tea party movement. I desperately want solid progressives, but the ones who appear on my local ballot are either obviously unfit or don’t garner enough votes from a “moderate” electorate. And I live in a rabidly “blue” area.
There is a hearts and minds campaign that progressives have continuously failed at, and blaming democratic elites solely for this failure is no more accurate than Democrats blaming progressives for their losses. Politics in a democracy is coalition-building, and we’re apparently all failing together.
Gonna continue to call bullshit here. The grassroots movement failing to gather momentum in the face of propaganda at the cost of the nation’s future is not the same as the Democrats blaming a minority for their own failures. Not even a little bit, can you please reflect a little on how absurd that claim is?
You’re also not comparing apples to apples here. First: the Tea Party was an unknown element, there hadn’t been a growing fringe movement like that within a major party for a century. The Democrats had the benefit of seeing that happen on the right. Second, the Republicans were willing to embrace the crazy of the Tea Party for the sake of their continuing victory. Very much in contrast, the Democrats are very clearly willing to sacrifice national victory in order to keep progressives down. Three elections in a row they’ve insisted on running the most centrist candidate possible, resulting two very predictable losses and one surprising victory.
Democrats insist on siding with money and corporations every time, their failures are their own fault, and very much also the fault of their supporters.
You’re talking about national elections, and I’m talking about presence in state and local elections. Candidates with a sustainable/viable chance nationally must first have an established local presence. That base builds credibility and sustainability for a movement, as others in the movement can also point towards local or state wins to justify their own candidacies.
I also happen to be familiar with my state Democratic party chairs. The idea that they could be systemically suppressing progressives in state or local elections would require a level of competence and political acumen I’ve never seen them demonstrate. They barely have control over their party, as is. I’m connected to the political world in my state both personally and professionally, and the concept of Democrats being able to exert this kind of control is actually laughable.
The bottom line is that you’re mad that Democrats don’t support your candidates, and Democrats are mad you don’t support theirs. Both attitudes are unproductive. In the end, if either progressives or Democrats wants to pick up votes, they’re going to need to actually persuade voters to show up and vote consistently, and not just in federal elections. This will include voters you don’t necessarily like or fully agree with. You know who ran candidates in and voted for every single school board race? The damn Tea Party.
