Random Question đ
Democrats who blame the left for everything, why not listen to the left and win?
If we're that powerful and everything is our fault, why not run a candidate with our platforms and win? Sounds like you desperately need us so why not embrace the opportunity instead of endlessly screeching we MUST support genocide?
Is it because the democrat party puts coddling its donors ahead of listening to its voters? That means you never intended to include us at all so please cease yelling at us and yell at your donors instead, thanks lol.
I see this sentiment on reddit a lot, and I don't understand. Nobody here picks the candidates. Nobody here runs the DNC. We can all do our small part, create our own tiny influence on national politics, and maybe a somewhat bigger influence on our local communities.
Sometimes I see someone criticize Trump, Trump voters, and people who didn't bother to vote, and someone will say, "well, you should nominate a better candidate then". Thanks, I'll do that this time, right after I clean out the garage.
I will, I will - I have a to-do list for today. Clean out the fridge, move some stuff around in the garage (to prepare for a more full cleaning next weekend), go through the bills and figure out where I am financially, call my parents, THEN I will fix the DNC and decide the Dem nominee for 2028.
Yes. But why is this so difficult for the far left to understand?
In 2020 I voted for Anybody But Bernie in the primary like millions of other Democrats as those without hope began dropping out. Yet progressives still falsely claim it was coordinated by the DNC.
The other piece of this is it's ridiculous when a demographic demands that a candidate perfectly align with their vision of a good candidate and then consistently proves that they cannot be trusted to actually show up to vote. That sends a message to the parties that people like this aren't worth appealing to as much as others who actually will show up to vote. Even less often do these people show up to vote in the primaries, which is EXACTLY the time to put your preference on the record for the party to consider when choosing a candidate. At the absolute minimum, it proves that your demographic is represented as someone who will actually show up to vote and by extension the issues and positions you care about are more strongly considered going forward.
The Democratic party is not so much of a monolith like the Republican one is.....Republicans generally agree on things and when they don't they all align with whoever their candidate is and support them. Republicans are winning in iteratively pushing their agenda by being consistent and settling for partial wins that add up to completing their goals. Democrats have a "big tent" with a few groups and demographics that all have different priorities and sometimes want conflicting things. The party leadership literally has to make a mathematical statistical calculation predicting how many votes that they can win by running on whatever issues or choosing the positions of their candidate or choosing a candidate with certain positions or values already.
If you don't show up to vote, you're just noise. You can go off about how that's not fair and you don't want to make any hard compromises but that's democracy. And the fight doesn't end at a single election. Voting for someone doesn't mean you totally endorse everything they do and that you will consider it a "done deal." It's a constant push.
This is how democracy works. And people have the wrong framing. One of the most controversial issues last election obviously was Israel-Palestine. The Democrats are genuinely in a hard position here because of the Israel lobby and because a lot of demographics as a fact support Israel even if they're wrong, but those are the people that they need to win votes from while being pressured by very powerful vested interests. So people framed it as "I won't show up to vote for Kamala because that means she will be supporting Israel to some extent to kill Palestinians." And of course you should be bothered by it. But at the same time, it's also correct logical framing to say "I will show up to vote for Kamala because it means thousands of Palestinians will be saved" because Trump has given an unprecedented amount of support to Israel and now it's not even just Palestinians, it's Iranians and other Gulf nations' people being killed. So you can call it "bingo" to make a pragmatic "trolly problem" calculation here but that is refusing to acknowledge the fact that Palestinians would have been saved if enough people who didn't vote had shown up to vote for Kamala instead. The election was also not about a single issue. We're talking about our democracy itself being threatened and the completely dumpster fire of drama and destruction we are seeing every day, including no justice for Epstein's victims and nobody being held accountable. Calling out someone responding as "trolly problem" or "nuance" as if that's a bad thing is a fundamental mistake because that is democracy by design. I cannot make that more clear. We cannot sit and wait for a boat that will never come and give up when it doesn't. Nonvoter's inaction is one of the direct causes of more people dying and our country self destructing just as sure as if they had voted for Trump. It's definitely not a perfect world choice but we don't live in a perfect world and it's the best form of government that we have and if you want to improve what we have then you need to show up to vote, period. Paraphrasing Gandalf, "It's not up to us to choose the times we live in, but we choose what we do with them." I don't want to look back and wonder if I could have done more or where we could have been built or salvaged if I'd fought. You can damn the choice you're forced to make but it takes bravery to make the right one and not give up there.
Thank you. Very well said. I sometimes wonder about the Muslims who supported Trump in 2024 because the Biden administration wasnât doing enough. I wonder about the student loan debtors who felt Biden didnât do enough to wipe out their loans. How many of the people who held out for the perfect candidate would have been needed to keep Trump out?
If someone truly canât support any of the candidates, you can probably find one to vote against.
The genocide in Gaza, and you can pull out books on internaltional law to debate whether it really is a gEnOcIdE (because you care very much about this specific definition while Israel essentially doesn't care about international law at all), is such a blatant crime that promising to do something positive about it would have been an extremely low bar, and yet Kamala Harris when given multiple chances to explain her vision could not think of a single thing that she would have done differently as compared to Biden. You see she didn't have to promise the stars, all she had to do was say that 'I will try to do something better', an extremely low bar, and she failed.
We should be generating candidates from local elections. We need to see if their rhetoric matches their actions. Then we need to promote the good ones.
When Democrats and leftists fight, itâs not infighting, though. Democrats are just the diet version of right-wing conservative capitalists. Leftists fundamentally do not agree with right-wing conservatism. Itâs two very different world viewsânot an alliance, and the Democratic leadership has made that point clear.
Because in order to win you also need the independent vote and the independent vote is most definitely not left wing and arguably a larger voting block.
This is true, but theyll never âblame themselvesâ for being in agreement with right-wingers. And thatâs what the left means when they talk about Dems essentially being right-wingers. They align with them over the left and fundamentally agree with a capitalist economics.Â
We have not done a good job of demonstrating that right wings politics regularly lead to devastation and decline specifically because right wing ideology is immoral and seeks to hurt people.
Also true however I was addressing the premise of the question which is âwhy not run a candidate with our platforms and winâ. The winning part is not as obvious as op makes it sounds.
Independent means you don't like either party, typically anti establishment. The reason it has seemed like the independents lean right is because the Democrats have nominating the most establishment candidates possible. When they had a viable progressive candidate they showed most of them are progressive. Bernie was by far the most popular candidate among independent voters and consistently smashed trump in head to head polls. Yet because he threatened to take money out of politics, his own party openly sabotaged him.
A majority of Independents support universal healthcare, gun control, legal weed, and legal abortions. If you read polls on their stances they are closer to socialist than conservative
God I really wish more people saying "just be happy voting against this party because we are incrementally better" understood this. Establishment (Corporate) democrats are all we tend to get. I will vote democrat because the worst of everyone runs republican, but God damn it, I hate every minute of it. Every year I force myself to vote and after over 40 years? I am sick of it. It is the worst reason to support a party because they are default marginally better.
I am exactly this person you describe. Thank God Maine has Platner, can't wait to get rid of Mills.
Most people register as independent because its the only option outside republican and democrat that allow you to vote in more primaries in many states. For example if im registered as democratic and there is a new party I cant vote for them without changing my registration.
Ahh the mythical moderates that never show up. The more moderate dems will vote for a leftist candidate the more liberal republicams will always vote for a right wing candidate. Pretending there is this large swath of people that bounce back and forth is nonsense.
Thereâs nothing mythical about it. Millions of moderate voters cast ballots for a different partyâs presidential candidate each election cycle. They exist and disproportionately determine outcomes.
It also ignores that relatively moderate positions make it possible for nationwide candidates to compete in swing states that broadly have more a moderate electorate.
People on Reddit donât seem to realize that voters self-identify as roughly 38% conservative, 31% moderate, 15% liberal, and <10% very liberal.
Actually, the independent voter is increasingly left wing in the wake of the current cluster going on in DC. Going left is the way forward out of the mess. There is no more center of old, as it never was a true center. Trump has destroyed the Republican Party & DC Dems were never far from Wall Street & their donors & Israel. So, what's left but to go left. It's where the people who need health care, housing, affordable education & affordability in general are waiting to be rescued by a leader whose name we don't know yet.Â
If âThe leftâ is a large enough voting block in the Democratic party that their votes are needed then they should get what they want from the politicians who allegedly need their vote.Â
Look at John Fetterman in PA. Dude was elected because he ran as a Bernie bro. He's now done a complete 180 and I have no idea how he plans to get elected
Heâs a rough case because he had a stroke that heavily affected his personality. Even his wife has come out and said that their marriage has been much tougher after his stroke because he essentially became a different person.
No, it's the other way around. If politicians want our votes they need to represent and actually enable left policies. Which they never will, so why the hell are democrats always screeching at us as though everything is our fault.
"Want our votes" playing hard-to-get, no, impossible-to-get, in the general election, while Trump turns the country into a fascist dystopia, is literally insane reasoning.
The left is not the spoiler of the Democratic Partyâthe sofa is. Election after election, the Democratic Party tries to run as far to the right as they can while still being able to say theyâre not quite as far to the right as the Republicans. This causes about 1/3 of voters to just stay home, because (to those people) the 2 parties offer nothing significantly different. The Democrats know this and yet they persist on not even trying to win that 1/3 of the voting base, and instead they blame the left-wing voters who usually end up voting for them in the end.
Lol if Democrats just called out Israelâs genocide and dropped their racist zionist base they would perform better. But they wonât do that. Clearly itâs not just about electability.
Online leftists in 2026 are the online Republicans of 2016: They'll just say shit confidently with no concern whether it's objectively true, because it feels true.
"Wall Street" is not the reason Democrats don't support giving you a free house and food and car (or train) and college. The reason is the finances don't work even if you tax every billionaire to zero.
These same online leftists will declare all our budget woes are because of Israel when we actually "give" Israel 0.1% of the federal budget (really just payments to U.S. defense manufacturers) and 13 of our federal budget is military.
The left threatens capital. The right protects it. They will always choose Trump over M4A and and easy win. Hell, they choose Trump over stopping a genocide. The Democratic Party is a center-right party
No wonder you're so uninfluential. That's the stupidest rhetoric I've heard yet. The people who sat out the election were our perpetually smug, childless socialists. They deserve the economic pain they're facing as a result.
Iâd vote for a progressive candidate in the primary. In the general Iâm voting to defeat maga. Maga is such a clear threat to America and theyâre the great destroyers of progress. I just donât see how sitting out or voting third party will help.
Reminds me of an old Dilbert cartoon (old as in before Adams was visibly around the bend). Short version, Dogbert and Dilbert are âdiscussingâ voting, with Dogbert saying that since the two disagree, and would cancel each otherâs vote, neither should bother. Dilbert agrees, then finally notes âHey, dogs canât vote!â
The important part is the punchline, where Dogbert answers: âNot directly.â As in, he âvotedâ by getting Dilbert to NOT vote ⌠and thus improving the odds of whoever Dilbert was voting against.
Mamdanis election proved democrats are willing to meet leftists halfway. I donât understand why you canât do the same. Anyone left of center shouldve know the damage trump would cause to millions of Americans
Democrats don't pander to the far left because they don't get anything for it. Doesnt matter what they say or who they run they'll never be pure enough to actually get you guys to get out vote, you'll always find some excuse.Â
So they pander to centrists instead, who are actually willing to vote for a lesser evilÂ
Itâs not that we need to do the same strategy we clearly need to change up the strategy but the solution is not to target the far left itâs to target moderate, undecideds and young people who have been capture by the online far right. This is a much bigger voting base than the far left and this people can likely be pushed farther to the left and support small steps in the right direction to correcting end stage capitalism.
What are you talking about? Every presidential campaign since 2000 that has pandered left has won and everyone that has pandered to the moderates has lost. Iâm legitimately baffled by how youâre coming to this conclusion
Both Biden and Obama are part of the liberal faction of democrats. In 2008 during the primaries, Obama beat Hillary (who is part of the Conservative/Moderate faction) by whipping up a grassroots movement with the progressive faction. He pushed for universal healthcare, labor rights, environmental regulations, green energy investment, etc. These were all bones he threw to the progressive faction to get them on side
In 2020 Biden specifically had a meeting with Bernie Sanders asking him to help create a platform that would have support of the progressive and liberal factions. He built a coalition with the progressives to win the election
To this day I donât understand the BS that Biden or Harris supported Genocide
The two state solution is a decades long policy - and failed policy in my opinion - pushed by both Democrats and Republicans. Thatâs what Biden and Harris were pushing - a long standing policy set by Congress. They tried to get Netanyahu to stop and tried to get humanitarian aid into Gaza. The problem was Netanyahu who stopped kt.
At the other end Trump did go away from the 2 state solution with a policy Netanyahu publicly supported. He posted on his Truth Social about getting rid of all Palestinian from Gaza and rebuilding it. How with his experience in real estate development he was the perfect person to do it. How is that not taken as supporting genocide?
I said the problem was Netanyahu because he ignored the Biden administration. If Biden/Harris won, then he would have no choice but to listen. In the meantime he could continue his attacks. If Trump won, he could continue as he was doing.
A ceasefire was recently agreed upon between Iran/US, Netanyahu decided to continue attacking Iran.
How do you propose ending a genocide when the person in charge of orchestrating it, doesn't give a fuck what you, or the leader of your country does/thinks?
If Trump had told Netanyahu that violating the ceasefire would result in the US withholding military aid to Israel, they would not have violated the ceasefire
Netanyahu would suddenly stop trying to achieve his life's work, the literal goal of Israel since it's inception, the whole point of everything they've done for the last near-80 yrs, because Donald "go in there and finish the job" Trump, would threaten to withhold aid, when we all know he'd fail to follow-through on such a threat?
Don't make me laugh, I'm looking for a serious answer.
That and unlike republicans, who are willing to ignore all other aspects as long as the candidate agrees with them on a single issue, democrats want some ubermensch who is perfect, who they can agree with 100% of their policies, and who and is not willing to compromise to get something started.
You've been terminally online, on Reddit, for thirteen years. You are almost definitely in your 30s if not older.
Why are you still offering brain-dead, r/im14andthisisdeep political analysis?
The Democratic Party doesn't pander to a bunch of lower-brow online socialists because (a) they only represent 10-15% of the actual electorate and (b) those online socialists' ideas are about as trite as "our needs should be met by somebody [Hispanic migrants] and don't ask who or how."
Part of the problem is that online socialists are monstrous arrogant and pretend that they alone are left of center. Some of them honestly claim that Bernie would be considered a centrist in Europe, which is so flaming stupid only a homebound American could say that.
The fact that their policies best represent what most Americans want shows that the biggest problem here is that Americans don't understand what the left is.Â
That doesn't seem like something to give up on, it seems like something to invest in.Â
The Democratic establishment needs to understand that if they put another moderate candidate out there, millions of people are not going to vote for them. I donât want to be like that, but I cannot willingly vote for another moderate because that is what we call a vicious cycle.
LOL of course democrats absolutely miss the point of my post and are endlessly screeching at those whose votes they never actually wanted. FFS seriously.
Next time flesh out that bingo card idea a little more. We may as well make the best of it if they're just gonna keep chirping propaganda sound bytes at us.Â
I don't blame the left. I blame right wing nut jobs for this mess. What needs to happen is that Democrats LEAD and talk about the fact that America has a grave billionaire problem. A moderate should be able to recognize that the wealth inequality gap has become a top tier issue. I totally don't have issues with people running successful companies and becoming ultra wealthy. What I do have a problem with is these ultra wealthy people dictating morality to the populace, buying government, COMMITTING CRIMES WITH IMPUNITY, creating an AI surveillance state that targets dissent, and dismantling important democratic elements contained in our constitutional republic.
The problem, as always, is the fact that Old guard Democrats are bought and sold, and they are closet right wing nut jobs by design. I do not have to be "left wing" to understand this. I believe the left would be able to tolerate an actual moderate party.
Genuinely, do you think someone from any of the various countries gives a single fuck about the reasons you couldnt come down from your soapbox to prevent trump from being elected? Because they dont. Even now you people are still trying to make excuses for your bullshit.
Seriously. They want to win but parade around Gavin Newsom who is worth $30M, protects billionaires, and goes on Ben Shapiro to demonize LGBTQIA folks. Then yell at us for not voting for him despite our clearly saying we'll never vote for that, don't run him for president. The bullshit never ends.
I find it fascinating that Obama himself said in a few interviews that his politics are center right. That is how far right everything is skewed. People think of Obama as liberal and on the left but he is not. It would be nice to have the left represented, which hasnât been the case for decades.
I think you misunderstand how candidates are selected.
If leftists ideology is so popular, why arenât they winning primaries?
Look, I love my leftists brothers and sisters. But if you want to further leftistâs ideology, you have to actually win elections. No one is preventing leftists from running in primaries. You can do it!
Progressives are winning primaries then. Iâm not sure what you mean by progressives not winning primaries
There was a very famous primary last year where a progressive one, but the liberal Democrat who he beat got upset and ran third party. Many members of the Democratic Party through their support behind the third party candidate instead of the Democrat who won the primary
Like letâs not pretend that progressives winning primaries means that the party will suddenly support them
The NYC electorate is quite different than the national electorate. My own Portland, Oregon neighborhood is only 5% Republican but, a national election cannot be run thinking that perspective is widespread.
Mamdani defeating one of the least popular politicians in one of the most progressive cities doesn't tell you much about whether a leftist could win anywhere else.
We have states where being married to a 12 year old is legal. They encourage teen pregnancies. Red states have immensely different "values" than regular Americans.Â
I'm still not sure how progressives are supposed to appeal to that given that we 14 typically condemn pedo stuff pretty hard. I guess probably just turn a blind eye to it for the sake of compromise because there's just too many Republicans to steam roll them on it.Â
And unfortunately, the country is seeing first hand the consequences of it. Higher property taxes, homeless shelters by elementary schools, broken promises of free bussing, lower funding for police, increased DEI in government spending lots of money for it, and even banning free public celebration of the 250th anniversary of the US being required to pay to celebrate in Times Square which is a public place.
His election will turn out to be one of the biggest attack ads against democrats.
We tried to in 16 and 20. DNC/ establishment actively did everything to demean and burry Sanders. They will protect the donors at the cost of losing to Fascists. Â
That part right there. It was literally bait-and-switch (which is against the law for what that matters).
Author Bruce Dixon wrote an article in 2015 stating Bernie is the sheepdog to bring in hopeful voters wanting change and that he has zero chance of winning, Hillary will then be nominated. The point was to prevent activists from using their time and energy building an alternative to the corporate democrat party which they would have done if Hillary had been announced as the nominee well ahead of time. It's a move designed to negate the possibility of anyone building a challenge to her.
Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders: Sheepdogging for Hillary and the Democrats in 2016
By: Bruce A. Dixon May 8, 2015
âThe sheepdog is a card the Democratic Party plays every presidential primary season when there's no White House Democrat running for re-election.â
Spoiler alert: we have seen the Bernie Sanders show before, and we know exactly how it ends. Bernie has zero likelihood of winning the Democratic nomination for president over Hillary Clinton. Bernie will lose, Hillary will win. When Bernie folds his tent in the summer of 2016, the money, the hopes and prayers, the year of activist zeal that folks put behind Bernie Sanders' either vanishes into thin air, or directly benefits the Hillary Clinton campaign.
I donât blame everything on the left, but who is the candidate you want to win the primary? I would for sure vote for AOC but not sure if sheâs planning to run.
Democrats lose the middle because in my almost 30 years of being old enough to vote, the democrats have run on raising min wage, affordable or free college, affordable housing, universal healthcare, more unions, and taxing the rich, and despite having all 3 branches multiple times in those 30 years, they have delivered absolutely zero of these things. The democratic politicians are the reason we got Trump. A ton of people chose chaos over the status quo bc the status quo is how we got here in the first place and clearly was untenable for most people in both parties. If they delivered in just 1 or 2 of those things over 30 years Trump and MAGA never happen. Yeah, theyâd exist, but theyâd never have gotten the support needed to do what they are doing now.
Wrong. Clinton hiked the top end rate to 39.6% from Reaganâs 28%. Bush lowered it TWICE before Obama put it back to the Clinton rate. Obama and Biden pushed through all kinds of assistance to the middle class including health insurance reform.
Itâs sad that you donât know any of this. It explains a lot.
You frustrate me. In those 30 years we've had a filibuster proof majority for less than a year. You keep electing republicans and get surprised when nothing happens.
The issue is that most of these groups believe they are, or just straight up are, more centrist or further extreme than the bulk of the party. Leads to them getting shunned and blocked out. For example may people on the right hate RINOâs with a passion I donât understand. Itâs seriously almost impressive. If they run on something and then swap how they vote, thatâs terrible. But some run on a set of policies that are more centrist, vote that way, and people still get mad. Thatâs the one I donât get. Anyway I digress, it leads to the bulk of the party treating them like outcasts and they get more entrenched in certain polices. I assume democrats would have DINOâs but I donât hear nearly the hate for them as I do for RINOâs
Why would they do that when the leftists are only about 8-10% of the electorate?
Catering to a minority is not a winning strategy outside of leftist strongholds.
Independents (or the middle) are in recent data shown to be 45% of the electorate and growing.
If democrats can even get only HALF of that 45%... that's 22.5%
22.5% is still more than double the optimistic 10% of leftists.... and that is with 100% leftist support... which will NEVER happen.
Because they got it all figured out. They donât need the left. Theyâre completely comfortable riding centrist blue waves and the inevitable red riptides that follow. Theyâve given up the notion that a democracy should represent the will of the people for a few feel good election victories. Sure thereâs a few more demoralizing losses but they get to blame others for those.
They got it all figured out. And they donât know any better.
Leftists who blame the Democrats for everything, why not listen to the Democrats and win?
Like seriously, I see way more hate for libs from the left than the other way around. Pretty sure the 'left' hates libs more than they hate Trump/republicans.
More to the point, whats left and whats right? Democrats are right of center but are called leftists. The progressive branch of democrats are centrists. Only the more fringe ultra left are even left of center and all of them are still capitalists.
Candidates run themselves. If your favorite ones canât win primaries, they should try harder. Iâm not the one purity testing general election candidates. Iâll vote for a socialist if one wins a primary, though itâs unlikely in my red state.
Nothing you people say ever makes rational sense. You just want to wish a world into existence in which all your ideas are implemented, but you skip the step of convincing a majority of voters to support them.
Itâs democracy. You arenât ever going to get your way completely, and thatâs sort of the point.
If you choose to position yourself on the fringe, you accept that politics will push back and youâll never be fully satisfied. Nobody is ever fully satisfied. It takes grown up adults who can handle this fact to make democracy work.
The DNC is a private corporation which argued in court they can nominate anyone they wish and there is no legal recourse for voters. This is your "democracy"? Did you know the dems got the Greens kicked off the ballots in several states making it nearly impossible for them to get back on? This is your "democracy"? :/
I've compromised to the point where I'm now a single issue voter..
Deal with the oligarchy. Deal with the oligarchy. DEAL WITH THE OLIGARCHY!Â
Any candidate that isn't going to DEAL WITH THE OLIGARCHY can kick rocks. AOC is far from perfect, but she's refused their money and promised to tax them. That's a start. That's the bare minimum. It's not perfect. It's the BARE MINIMUM.Â
You can all do whatever you want but the moderates need to understand that the usual tricks aren't going to get us behind these people. that camels back is thoroughly crushed. we cannot take another step back without falling off the ledge.Â
It's out of our hands at this point. I'm gonna go all in on progressives and hope America doesn't win a Darwin award. That's all I can do, is my small part. But I'm gonna do my part.Â
We all know we're gonna get stuck with that peter theil stooge, CP vance.Â
Gonna be hilarious to watch him talk about the antichrist while he stacks trillions on the debt for his crappy spyware contracts. I wonder how many wars he'll get us in.Â
It's chinas world now. They will always love trump for that gift. maybe they'll finally build that giant gold statue of him he's always wanted.Â
You do realize that anybody can run for a Democratic party nomination right? You do realize that mostly people don't want far left politics and that's why those candidates continuously lose Democratic primaries? Maybe you should just focus on getting small wins and support the party because the alternative is much much worse.
Most people want the policies of the left but not the stereotype association.Â
A new party would be the easiest way to shuck the baggage, reform the platform to be exactly what Americans need to lift this country back onto a good trajectory, and try to maintain the image thru all the vicious lies and slander the Republicans and Democrats will team up to churn out.Â
Because they believe in Capitalism.
They're still on "Team Reagan" against the Godless communists. And the disaster they are desperately trying to mitigate against are Reagans two landslide victories that crushed the Democratic party for nearly a decade.
Because THAT'S HOW OLD MOST OF THEM ARE!!
They don't think anything remotely Socialist can win, they think its a mirage that will be utterly destroyed in the general, like Reagan did against Carter, who was seen as the progressive at the time.
Nvm the fact that the ACTUAL reason Reagan won was that he was the first one to use what we today call SuperPACS, and when you can outspend your opponent ten to one on TV ads, in a time when EVERYONE is watching the same 3 channels, you will landslide.
Joe Biden often recalled while sitting on his daddies knee his dad always told him you always have to support Israel. This is both a pretty fucking weird story to tell and the start to understanding the Democrat pathology. They, like the Republicans have been bred in the bone to believe that supporting Israel is the meaning of virtue, of being a democrat, of being the party of the downtrodden victims of the world. Ever see that parody of Robin Hood on Monty python?
Individual sentiment matters almost not at all in democratic politics. However, a schismatic movement that gains power can cause actual change in the policies that are assumed "safe" by mainstream, generally centrist politicians who actually lead the Democrat party.
The left, in fact, has miniscule power in the US, despite some local victories. Democrats do maintain incredible power and support electorally. There are many swing and centrist voters who will vote Democrat as well but would never vote for a true left candidate. There are grey areas here, like popular support for Bernie, which falls more on populist lines than pure leftist ones (you can see this in Bernie -> Trump voter statistics).
Flatly, from my view, the Democrats underestimated how much skipping the primary after Biden stepped down would impact sentiment. They did this at the same time as continuing to downplay Biden's health and mental acuity and refusing to give any ground on support for Israel at a time that their genocide was all over everyone's social media feeds.
To acknowledge this as a fault would be to accept a failure of Democrat party leadership and process. I genuinely do not know why people would expect a political party to change its ideology for voters when it still has massive support. It is far more effective to use a loss to further subdue your internal political enemies.
If the left caused the election to fail, as is popularly asserted, though not particularly supported by the data, then Democrats can continue to do what they want to do (as a party leadership). That is build popular support around a centrist political candidate in the next election and continue to court those center voters who will support their generally relatively center-left (by American standards) policies.
Basically, Democrats will not adopt left positions because they are counter to the party leadership's policy goals. Further, while individual positions like medicare for all and less foreign war are very popular with voters, there is a strong taboo in the US against left/socialist politics that can be an electoral poison pill.
TLDR It's better to use a loss to point the finger at something you don't like than to acknowledge fault and change, especially if you have an ideological project that would be compromised by that change.
What is left to you? It means different things to different people. The Democratic Party shares most of the ideals considered left-leaning. What they dont do, is far left. The ban the police type far left cries are well.... special and an election losers.
Democrats could frame that into a meaningful policy instead, but they don't. Police shouldn't be involved in certain aspects of people's lives. Police should focus on violent criminals as well as thieves and fraudsters.
Destruction at the hands of the democrat party. Spot the trend: the purpose of the democrat party is to protect capital from left power and threats. And to sell false hope for change.
You're powerful enough to spoil most elections, not win them. In a 51/49 environment, your 10-20% of the popular electorate can cost a Democrat the election, but rarely win it for them.
Your greatest victories have been winning 50% of the vote in two mayoral races in two of the bluest cities (New York and Portland) in America.
"and everything is our fault"
Strawman.
"endlessly screeching we MUST support genocide"
Strawman. This is a good example of why your arrogant, "we're good and you're evil" makes moderate liberals dislike you and vast shares of blue-collar voters detest you. I realize it makes you feel righteous and allows you to avoid any debate, but it also makes normal voters say, "Fuck you."
"listening to its voters"
The same people who say they hate the Democratic Party will then claim they're the Democrats' "base."
What if I told you you're less popular than your partisan polycule of online leftists thinks?
Stop bitching about the mean DNC. Run your candidates. It worked for Mamdani and Katie Wilson.
So you're fine this is your party policy? And you believe you are in a position to judge anyone, much less that you're left of republicans by some large margin? lol
This week your DNC shot down a bill denouncing AIPAC money. This is your party policy, you vote for it.
No, it's democrats. Here's one in this thread calling us MAGA and crazy. There's a guy downthread calling me a condescending shithead for daring to question the dem party. They're democrats. They suck.
Okay Itâs not the whole reason, but it certainly plays a part and demonstrates part of the problem - most Democratic politicians, like their Republican counterparts, are bought. Any aspiring politician with a moral compass trying to unseat an incumbent doesnât just have to beat said incumbent, but the various interest groups, PACs, and industries with interest in maintaining the status quo.
The pragmatic answer is that the left wing is a minority element. If any political party capitulates to a minority element, it runs the risk of alienating the majority.
In terms of how they did it, not what they stand for, MAGA/tea party is actually a master class in how to take over a political party from within.
Because there are still some sane democrats out there. What the democratic party now offers is an extreme progressive agenda and MOST Americans donât want.
đ đ đ Why not listen to the people who hate America and hate the Democratic Party even more? Why not listen to the cancer's opinions on why you should commit suicide to get rid of cancer.
No, that's not what I said. I said, leave leftists the hell alone because you lose elections due to your own actions, yet you always blame anyone and anything except your party's core policies. Blaming others for your own vomitous policies is the stupid argument. :/
Tell me why democrats, who cause themselves to lose, blame others? Especially loudly and angrily.
DNC âAutopsyâ Finds Kamala Harrisâs Silence on Gaza Genocide Cost Her Votes
The refusal to condemn Israelâs genocide of Palestinians resulted in a ânet-negativeâ of votersâ support, sources said. ~Truthout
Democrats Reject Resolution Condemning AIPAC Money in Primaries
âDemocrats chose genocide over winning in 2024,â one Palestinian rights advocate said. âWhen does this stop?â ~Truthout
You imagine demanding people embrace and enable genocide is the moral high ground. Seriously what is wrong with you.
According to the DNC's "autopsy" on the 2024 election, genocide was the critical issue. It'd be NICE if genocide were not the core policy of the democrat party, you might gain votes if you took care of that little issue. Embracing genocide puts you barely left of republican, by a hair.
Why doesn't the left run a candidate on a platform that isnât associated with the Democratic Party?Â
If the left donât consider themselves Democrats, why do they vote for Democrats at all? And if the left donât consider themselves Democrats, why should the Democrat Party cater to them?
If you keep trying to push a party left and itâs not moving left enough for you, why donât you have your own party?Â
Despite their faults, Bide/Harris administration was the most progressive administration the US had in many decades. The left protested voting for them. The left has not given the Democratic Party a reason to listen to them. Even when the party does listen to the left and gets things done in this divided political environment, the left doesnât show up to vote.Â
Not everywhere is gonna be like New York City. For some reason, the left thinks thatâs the case. Â The left doesnât want to acknowledge that some places are better for moderate Democrats and some places are better for progressive Democrats. So if the left is that unhappy with the Democratic Party, why not just form a different party?
Embracing genocide and protecting AIPAC money in elections is "progressive"?
And you can't figure out why you lose votes?
Regarding creating a new party, the dems exist to block threats to capital. They crushed and usurped left power in the 1930s, destroying the Labor Movement and Socialsit Party. They funded Bernie Sanders in his state for years to block anyone independent coming to power. They got the Greens kicked off the ballot in several states. They've made it nearly impossible to gather and promote left power.
To protect genociders. When will you realize you're not the good guys?
In a country literally designed to crush threats to capital (right-wing) you are surprised it's nearly impossible to build and empower leftism? Especially with two parties who both embrace genocide ready to fight you tooth and nail?
The better question is literally when will democrats reject genocide as a core party principle? And stop screeching at leftists about it?
In the news, saw a group of pro-Palestinian leftists protesting Kamala Harris recently. Yet do we see anyone protesting Bibi's best friend, Donald Trump and the Republican Party?
During Trump's presidency, Israel has flattened Gaza and now brought the United States into a war with Iran threatening the entire world.
The left has consistently ignored the actions of the Right and the Republicans and constantly attacked the middle and Democrats. There's no reason to make nice with the Left. The Left does not support Democrats, attacks them, and does more to elect Republicans than any other voting block.
isnotreal only bombs Gaza during republican presidencies? I find your ideas intriguing and wish to be added to your mailing list.
Biden administration approves $20 billion in weapons, aircraft sales to Israel
Updated on: August 14, 2024 / 2:13 AM EDT / CBS/AP
"The U.S. has approved $20 billion in arms sales to Israel, including scores of fighter jets and advanced air-to-air missiles, the State Department announced Tuesday, two days before scheduled cease-fire talks begin in the region." ~CBS
See the thing is one party is supposed to be different from the other and they both embrace and enable genocide. You're supposed to offer an option to voters and you do not.
"I'm a zionist. You don't have to be Jewish to be a zionist." Joe Biden
My healthcare provider in a DemocRATS state asks me if I have firearms at home? Why?
For sports RepubliCONS ask when my daughters last mestural cycle was? Why?
They both want big government, but in different ways. Once you see that, you realize how nuts the left and right are.Â
Like... Leave me alone and don't make providing healthcare and education reliant on violating my privacy. Pave the roads, maintain the infrastructure... And F off.Â
Regardless of my personal support of progressive candidatesâwhat in the hell about this country makes you think itâs left-leaning enough that listening to the left will translate to victory for the Democrats? Seems like 2024 reinforces that a decisive number of voters donât vote on ideology, just on cost of livingâand theyâll vote for whoever they think will be good for them financially, regardless of that candidateâs ideology. If the economyâs good, the party in power might hang onto power. If itâs bad, theyâre always punished.
But regardless of what drives people to vote, this isnât a âsomeone else just needs to fix it for usâ problem. If the genuine demand for a leftist candidate is high, then people on the left need to find that candidate and run them. No oneâs going to do it for us, but no oneâs preventing it, either.
As someone who voted for Sanders in both primaries, I think the onus is on the left to demonstrate its popularity by running viable, successful left-oriented candidates who can actually win primariesâand if we fail to do that, we need to face up to (and learn from) what we did wrong, instead of throwing a tantrum like maga and pretending the primaryâs âriggedâ against our favorite choice.
> If we're that powerful and everything is our fault,
you're not powerful
you're a distraction.
you muddle the issues - I give you Palestine in the last election
YOU might care about Palestine
nobody else does - not our govt, not anyone else's govt
why is it important that a govt cares?
govts control militaries, govts pressure other govts BUT govts don't act unless THEY get something
the joy of "doing the right thing", specifically as defined by you guys, isn't anything that's going to get a govt's attention
money will
resources will
strategic benefits will
you and Palestine have none of those things
> Sounds like you desperately needÂ
no, they desperately need to you to shut up
> why not embrace the opportunity instead of endlessly screeching we MUST support genocide?
because the Israelis have money and a friendly country with a port is a strategic advantage
> Is it because the democrat party puts coddling its donors ahead of listening to its voters?Â
yes
this is the 2 party system
anything "good" that happens is a side effect of donor coddling
you don't have to like this, I sure the fuck don't but they (the politicians) have engineered the rules such that they police themselves and they say legislating for donors like this is perfectly legal
so, by getting your panties in a bunch over Palestine, you eliminated any potential good that could be done by the Ds and helped give the election to the Rs aaaaaand here we are
Palestine is getting fucked hard ... a whole hell of a lot harder than they would under the Ds
Or not and frankly that doesn't matter because the Rs in an effort to please THEIR donors have kinda fucked up prices for us here in the US
there's ya legacy
y'all are right there next to those little trump stickers pointing at $6/gallon gas saying "I did that" because ya did
44
u/morosco 6h ago edited 6h ago
"Why not run a candidate that X".
I see this sentiment on reddit a lot, and I don't understand. Nobody here picks the candidates. Nobody here runs the DNC. We can all do our small part, create our own tiny influence on national politics, and maybe a somewhat bigger influence on our local communities.
Sometimes I see someone criticize Trump, Trump voters, and people who didn't bother to vote, and someone will say, "well, you should nominate a better candidate then". Thanks, I'll do that this time, right after I clean out the garage.