But if people actually wanted to change the Democratic party and replace the leadership they would do EXACTLY what this non-DSA member just did
Yeah, and this is where we disagree. DSA progressives do actually want to change the democratic party, but their overall strategy is to endorse national players who have the appearance of “getting shit done”. Mostly because they’re trying to promote an incredibly propagandized against form of governance for the US. A strategy that is clearly working with Mamdani as its current poster child.
And we can be honest. If DSA members had made a huge stink about intraparty politics before now, the average voter wasn’t going to see it or care all that much. The average voter assumes politicians to be corrupt, so trying to paint them as such doesn’t really do much, especially if they’re viewed as “getting things done” (see, Trump)
I do think it is time for the DSA and Progressive caucuses to rock the boat, but that’s because their coalition is clearly more electable than their “centrist” counterparts, but making the move earlier would’ve just made them look ineffective and whiny in the eyes of the average voter.
That’s completely false. For example, Zohran won his election while staying principled with maximum opposition of the Democratic Party. But he still turned anyways after his election. And is now endorsing all the top Zionists so no change will ever happen in the party.
Your stupid strategy has been disproven twice in recent elections once in 2016 with Bernie getting DNC shafted and once in 2020, when the progressives had massive leverage but refused to use it.
At some point you’re just going to have to admit that you love to keep falling for it.
I know we’ve been having this conversation over a couple threads for the last few days, but I want to point something out to you. I’ve stated before that Mamdani’s begrudging endorsement of Jeffries is because of political strong arming. You retort every time that its actually some moral failure on his part (he’s become a part of the machine). Here we now stand in a thread where it’s blatant that political strong arming is occurring in keeping the ducks endorsing Jeffries and still you claim a personal failing from Mamdani. I know I’m not gonna change your mind, but I really do want to hear how both of those things can be true. That the DNC is throwing their metaphorical dick around to keep the party outliers in check and also Mamdani is actually a secret centrist and its entirely on his two-faced nature to explain his evil endorsements.
Because being willing, or indeed capable, of caving to the strong arming instead of publicly and loudly making everyone aware of it 100% is a moral failing.
I’ve stated before that Mamdani’s begrudging endorsement of Jeffries is because of political strong arming.
This, itself, is an indictment of Mamdani. This reveals what he actually is: an opportunist. They can strong arm him because he feels threatened by their ability to obstruct his reforms and policies, and instead of revealing their perfidy to the public and fighting them he just bends the knee. He decided the fighting was over when he got elected and now it’s time to compromise.
How can you look at that and then conclude he has no personal failings? If the DNC throws their dick around, rip it off.
What political strong arming are you talking about? Him wanting to become mayor and fill a few potholes is what you wanted to accomplish?
The goal was supposedly to replace the whole DNC from the inside, but I guess you just completely forgot about that, now that Zohran is endorsing them.
Zohran is doing the exact opposite of winning political capital. He is losing all of his political capital by endorsing Jeffries and the others. There is nothing worse for him electorally.
Yeah, and this is where we disagree. DSA progressives do actually want to change the democratic party, but their overall strategy is to endorse national players who have the appearance of “getting shit done”. Mostly because they’re trying to promote an incredibly propagandized against form of governance for the US. A strategy that is clearly working with Mamdani as its current poster child.
And we can be honest. If DSA members had made a huge stink about intraparty politics before now, the average voter wasn’t going to see it or care all that much. The average voter assumes politicians to be corrupt, so trying to paint them as such doesn’t really do much, especially if they’re viewed as “getting things done” (see, Trump)
I do think it is time for the DSA and Progressive caucuses to rock the boat, but that’s because their coalition is clearly more electable than their “centrist” counterparts, but making the move earlier would’ve just made them look ineffective and whiny in the eyes of the average voter.
That’s completely false. For example, Zohran won his election while staying principled with maximum opposition of the Democratic Party. But he still turned anyways after his election. And is now endorsing all the top Zionists so no change will ever happen in the party.
Your stupid strategy has been disproven twice in recent elections once in 2016 with Bernie getting DNC shafted and once in 2020, when the progressives had massive leverage but refused to use it.
At some point you’re just going to have to admit that you love to keep falling for it.
I know we’ve been having this conversation over a couple threads for the last few days, but I want to point something out to you. I’ve stated before that Mamdani’s begrudging endorsement of Jeffries is because of political strong arming. You retort every time that its actually some moral failure on his part (he’s become a part of the machine). Here we now stand in a thread where it’s blatant that political strong arming is occurring in keeping the ducks endorsing Jeffries and still you claim a personal failing from Mamdani. I know I’m not gonna change your mind, but I really do want to hear how both of those things can be true. That the DNC is throwing their metaphorical dick around to keep the party outliers in check and also Mamdani is actually a secret centrist and its entirely on his two-faced nature to explain his evil endorsements.
Because being willing, or indeed capable, of caving to the strong arming instead of publicly and loudly making everyone aware of it 100% is a moral failing.
This, itself, is an indictment of Mamdani. This reveals what he actually is: an opportunist. They can strong arm him because he feels threatened by their ability to obstruct his reforms and policies, and instead of revealing their perfidy to the public and fighting them he just bends the knee. He decided the fighting was over when he got elected and now it’s time to compromise.
How can you look at that and then conclude he has no personal failings? If the DNC throws their dick around, rip it off.
What political strong arming are you talking about? Him wanting to become mayor and fill a few potholes is what you wanted to accomplish?
The goal was supposedly to replace the whole DNC from the inside, but I guess you just completely forgot about that, now that Zohran is endorsing them.
Zohran is doing the exact opposite of winning political capital. He is losing all of his political capital by endorsing Jeffries and the others. There is nothing worse for him electorally.