Like:
People should be allowed to exist
Social programs aren’t communism
The system isn’t working for the people
Edit:
I’ve changed my mind on this.
Let the DNC go full MAGA and when they lose, because they will lose, they get the heat and we can eject them forever. At least sit them in a corner.
Progressives, you fight if you want but I don’t believe the elections will be fair so it’s a win win for you.
How influential are these moderates at this point? If the DNC leadership is still paying attention to them, they are pants on head retarded.
Leftwing people don’t fucking vote in primaries. People don’t vote third party enough for it to act as anything but a spoiler benefiting fascists. Realistically the US military would turn people into a bloody paste if we attempted to rebel.
And now we might not even get elections in the future because we have authoritarians in charge ripping the functions and institutions of the government itself to shreds. Like… we are so fucking screwed.
Far-left is the “fuck you” solution that the left would take. In other words, Bernie Sanders. They should just let that man speak.
Calling Bernie Sanders fart left… first thing the American people should do is reframe your left right references. The guy is centre-left. Democrat party is solid right and Republicans are radical far right.
Bernie Sanders is already the compromise.
Trying to shift further right won’t work. You can’t do “what the other party does” because they already do it and they do it better.
Find original messaging, take back the narrative. Then you get to tell the story you’re good at.
Trump does this exceptionally well. By spouting all kinds of shocking horseshit, the media doesn’t stop talking about him. This lets him dominate the narrative. You could see them panic when Kamala was nominated, because suddenly the DNC controlled the narrative for a bit, and polling showed Kamala taking the lead. That advantage evaporated as Trump seized control of the front pages again.
This doesn’t just happen in the US. Here in the Netherlands, the campaign was not initially but later on dominated by talk on migration from the PVV. Of course other parties tried to respond by talking about migration, which only helped to legitimise the PVVs talking points.
I agree with everything you said.
Then you get to tell the story you’re good at.
They forgot how. We’re going to have to make a new party, I’m afraid.
Do they think that Kamala lost because she was too far left?
As someone else noted, the right said that, because yeah, they’re going to say that. Here in about two years, they’re going to be saying Hitler and the Confederacy lost their wars because they were too woke. BUT WAIT there’s more! As I understand it, when they gutted the Biden campaign to make it the Kamalampaign, they foisted a bunch of the high-level HRC campaign staff on her, which, if you look at it, explains why so much of the Kamalampaign looks and smells exactly like the Hillary campaign. Of course, when these doofuses lost again, rather than showing a smidge of self-awareness, they promptly gave interviews saying that it’s clearly because they were too far left (socially, specifically, though I wouldn’t be at all shocked to hear that they meant it economically too).
They already say Hitler was a socialist.
Hitler had welfare and (tried) to spare a jewish friend. That makes him a commie!
The right had tried to paint it that way. Apparently their propaganda worked quite well…
I’ve been saying this for a number of months now you got to kill this party. Abandon it completely. We got to start a new party. We got to start a labor party. A worker party. A party of the people. Whatever we want to call it, but whatever it’s called it’s a party that’s not for the big corporate donors that control the Democratic Party. The Democratic party basically since the late '70s but certainly since the '80s abandoned the people the peoples issues. They’re not coming back.
The usa needs something like ranked choice before that becomes any way viable.
That’s not entirely true. We’ve had change-ups in which two parties are THE two parties before. Noteably, the GOP. But it MUST start at the local level. We can’t just wait until the presidential election and then complain about the voting system when all that’s left to be done is act as a spoiler candidate. We have to start now, in our own communities.
It’s also helpful when there is infighting among factions within one of the big parties. That’s one reason behind the success in getting the GOP off the ground so quickly: they made common cause with like-minded members and currently-sitting politicians of the older, underperforming Whig party. This is especially helpful when moving from local support to state and then federal level support, since you can put the apparatus of the old party to work for the new ideas (this obviously doesn’t mean absorb all the old party, just the ones that are already aligned with your mission).
The final piece is a central tenant of your platform that is both easy to understand and easy to justify simply based on morals and feels. The GOP had antislavery. We could have anti-oligarchy.
Dear US-Americans, it is time to form a new, progressive party.
A convent of dems in Virginia attempting to revive Jimmy Carter.
Excuse we, what?
Listen, you seem to be confused. The Democratic party isn’t there to protect your rights and pioneer progress. They’re aim is to win elections. If appealing to the right is what wins them elections then that’s what they’ll do. It worked for the Republicans so there’s no reason to believe it won’t help the Democrats win too. They’re not there for your benefit. They’re there for their benefit.
OP is right though: the Democrats and the Republicans are not like parties in every other democracy, i.e. expressions of specific political ideologies. They are institutional electoral machines, of an institutionally two-party state. They have their altered their ideological core before: prior to FDR the Democrats were basically just populist racists. They can easily alter their ideological core in the future as well. It just so happens that in the latest party system the Democrats have been the machine used by the American centre and centre left.
Their idea to win elections is to try to beat Republicans in a constituency that is already entrenched for Republicans. This plan is dumb as shit without even talking about ideological reasons to oppose it.
Ok but appealing to the right hasn’t won them any elections. The right hates their guts.
They were campaigning with a fucking Cheney
This is Concern Trolling at its finest
Edit: Dear Downvoters, I mean the group that gave these terrible ideas is clearly a Right Wing fucker Concern Trolling, not OP
I’d like a list of those who subscribe to this theory to ensure not a single one of them ever gets a vote from me again. I’m an overseas voter and my “home” state is so gerrymandered to shit it doesn’t really matter what I do anyway.
Thing is, though, if you elect even these guys, who supposedly exist because trust them bro, they’ll still vote for your policy stances the majority of the time as they always have.
If you vote for a Republican, or if you vote fringe group candidate or don’t vote at all, the Republican might show up at your house at night and break in through the tiny bathroom window before tangling all of your appliance cords together and whacking you with the bundle of appliances while you lay in bed before pulling out a razor an assailing you while you’re confusedly trying to fight your way out of a bundle of appliances, carving their names into your stomach while they yell out strange cow-wrangling sounds and various slurs which may or may not apply to your ethnicity. Then they’ll call you a slut who was begging for it with the way you dress and the method you use to pay utilities, before taking money out of your wallet to buy cocaine with and leaving as the police enter to coerce you into silence.
And also 79 Million people will lose medical coverage and all of the elderly become homeless, but mostly just that first thing I said.
The district I vote in is heavily gerrymandered and it really does not matter who I vote for at all for some positions. Many local positions have had only various flavors of republican and independents even run and, in spite of living overseas, I dutifully combed the internet to find out which of them was least extreme for local positions (surprisingly difficult, made more annoying by many of the state’s sites blocking overseas IPs and some candidates having basically no web presence).
I have no idea when the last time a non-republican filled any of the roles at all. I have, for many elections, voted blue no matter who. I still mostly plan to do that, but anyone subscribing to the philosophy of cutting off the “extreme” left and ragging things more right can fuck right off. Not, as I said, that it will matter since the republicans will win the area by double-digit percentages every time.
What’s not mentioned in this excerpt is that this was sponsored by Third Way, a think tank that is singlemindedly devoted to convincing Democrats to cut the left out of the party. God knows the DNC has its problems, but it’s misleading to frame this as a mainstream Democratic conference.
“Moderates say party should go moderate” shocker
A good bit of literature has studied the problem and arrived to recommendations that overlap in parts & depart in others with this playbook.
A former parliamentarian of the Hungarian government studied its slide into illiberalism, and suggested remedies for the current, similar trend in the US. Resist in the courts & media, and build a powerful social base at the state & city level throughout the country. The latter means
the Democratic Party must reconnect with the working class to preserve liberal institutions
Doing that means
- “creating new and strengthening existing local organizational structures, especially labor unions”. Do not focus “on issues important to the active base only” such as “media freedom or democracy”: this leads to “failures of mass mobilizations”. “[E]ngage with [ordinary people] outside elections, focusing on issues that matter to them”.
- “[T]o push through popular reforms that elites oppose”, free “the party from elite capture” by shifting financing “from the corporate elite to small and micro-donations”.
- “[C]ommit to left-populist economic policies”.
- “[L]earn symbolic class politics”, “embrace the mundane and be down to earth”.
you don’t protect democracy by talking about democracy — you protect democracy by protecting people
I’m seeing the playbook overlap a bit with points 1 & 4, diverge from point 2, and not treat point 3.
Another article reviews research observing a decades-long trend of class dealignment: workers abandoning the left-wing party & joining the right. As unions have weakened and Democrats abandoned them, the party has increasing relied on & shifted appeal to urban middle class professionals & minorities. The review names 4 paths researched or discussed to reverse dealignment.
- inclusive populism: “appeal to working-class voters’ sense of resentment at economic elites and stress how elites use racial resentment to divide segments of the working class that share a common interest in economic justice”
- anti-woke social democracy: make “a clean break with factions of the party that embrace unpopular social and cultural messaging that alienates working-class voters”
- deliverism: “pass and implement large-scale economic reforms that benefit working Americans”
- institutionalism: reinvigorate a “labor movement capable of advancing working-class interest in politics and [re-embed] Democratic and progressive politics into the lived experiences of working-class communities”
It looks like the playbook is going with anti-woke social democracy & institutionalism, rejecting inclusive populism, not mentioning deliverism.
They seem to think the way to win the working class is to go more MAGA-like (anti-woke social democracy) instead of trying a competing strategy like inclusive populism. It also looks like they’re choosing not to break free of elite capture, which seems like a huge mistake.
Thats going to be a hard sell, let us know when they figure out that being intolerant (beyond the paradox of tolerance) is going to spoil their ballot against the cult of the GOP.
Jesus Christ, is this real?
Big cities have problems, but they are still far better off than small town rural America. There isn’t some specific failure happening in large cities, you’re seeing the broad inevitable enshittification of Capitalism as a system.
Democrats must be some serious masochists, they would actually rather take the blame thenselves than admit capitalism is wrong.
DNC: we tried bootlicking billionaires and it didn’t work, what if we double down on bootlicking billionaires even harder.
It’s also reported here. This fits with the reports of complaining that Democratic Congresspeople have been doing about the progressive wing of the party wanting them to fight back against DOGE. They and party leadership may well be aiming to not just talk like it, but fully become the new Republican party, in hopes of having a stampede of “moderate” Republicans who aren’t happy with Trump come their way.
Also, big donors are angry at them, so I guess they’re trying to win those donors back.
It’s always about the dollars, not about the votes
The top of the Democratic party basically wants to become the party of big money and try and steal this mantle from the Republicans.
Obviously, this isn’t going to work because the donors will just go for the party that will give them more, and they will always be the Republicans party.
This is basically just the campaign advisors trying to get as much money into the campaigns as possible, because they get a cut of every ad buy. They’re not interested in making things better for the people, just looking at their bottom line.
The blue MAGA are here on Lemmy and I ran into couple of them. They keep shouting to the rooftops that the Democratic party did nothing wrong and berate Trump voters as stupid and ignorant. But they are tone deaf when you point out that the Democratic party is not willing to run on the platform on Medicare-for-all, build more social housing and increase federal minimum wage (and ditch Israel), which made the party unappealing and lose consistently. Basically, blue MAGA don’t want to go left, because even if they are socially progressive on issues, they benefit from wealth inequality because they themselves are affluent in spite of being socially progressive.
Edit: yep, the blue MAGA came out of the woodwork. They think Medicare for all, affordable housing, and increasing minimum wage are red fascism.
“26 replies” but I cant see any of them because I have those kinds of idiots blocked
I see that you have more experience of them than I do.
Turns out that the prominent posters, pugje$u$, is one of the blue MAGA.
They keep shouting to the rooftops that the Democratic party did nothing wrong
Yeah I don’t believe you. People aren’t saying that. That is you taking the liberty of recharacterizing their thoughts.
im not even from the US and i see this shit constantly on Lemmy
I have been accused of loving Democrats for saying things like “what are Democrats supposed to do about voters who would let trump win?” It’s as though nuance was outlawed and people cannot understand that a problem can have multiple causes.
And yes I’ve heard all that about being inspiring. The reality is that educated people would’ve made very different voting choices. Americans are incredibly ignorant. Democrats can’t hypnotize people into not being idiots
I find the concept of “voters were just to dumb, cant do anything about that” to be quite representative of what is wrong with the party. It is elitist, it is factually false and it is deeply undemocratic.
Yes I’m aware that people think nonvoters are helpless and then somehow find that better than being dumb
What Democrats are supposed to do is sell those voters on a platform of meaningful change that addresses their fears and concerns. It’s a candidate’s job to win voters over to their side, and if they can’t do that, you have to actually ask questions about what went wrong and learn lessons from it instead of throwing your hands up and declaring it’s everyone else’s fault but the DNC’s. Otherwise that attitude is what will lead to doing the exact same thing in 2028 and getting the same results.
throwing your hands up and declaring it’s everyone else’s fault but the DNC’s.
The worst of the mindless drivel I find so incredibly frustrating. Things can have more than one cause, as you’re so clumsily trying to ignore. When voters need convincing to exit a burning building, that would indicate a problem with their mentality as well. I’m done arguing about this extremely simple concept.
The point is that blaming voters isn’t actionable or useful. It isn’t a lesson we can learn for 2028. And when that’s what people keep deflecting the conversation to, it sure seems like a way for the DNC to avoid taking responsibility.
When you ask the question “what are Democrats supposed to do?”, the answer is not “nothing”.
Rendering the voters blameless is ignoring a reality that necessarily is a part of strategizing moving forward.
When you ask the question “what are Democrats supposed to do?”, the answer is not “nothing”.
No shit? They didn’t do “nothing”, they did ineffective things half assedly. But sure it’s really helpful just to think of everything as black and white. It’s been working out SO well recently. Now, get back to defending not voting as somehow blameless
There are plenty of them if you lurk long enough. They will harp “vote blue, no matter who” and repeating the meme “leopards ate your face”. The litmus test is to mention that Democrats did not go left enough which is why people voted for Trump (who promised the always appealing tax cuts amidst the growing inequality and radical reshoring of companies), and blue MAGA will bury their heads in the sand and keep calling Latinos, black folks and white working class and others who are working three jobs, living pay check to paycheck, and can’t afford to pay for medical insurance as ignorant, racist, misogynists, Uncle Toms, etc.
Sure it was stupid to vote Trump, but it was more stupid of Democrats to lose to an orange man by not appealing and refusing to acknowledge those who have economic anxieties brought by mismanaged globalisation. It would have been an easy victory, but blue MAGA and DNC do not want to alienate the same donors that fund the Republicans (I mean, look at the screenshot where it says to court big donors instead).
Sure it was stupid to vote Trump, but it was more stupid of Democrats to lose to an orange man by not appealing and refusing to acknowledge those who have economic anxieties brought by mismanaged globalisation.
Average red fascist preferring literal fascists to the dreaded Shitlibs™
You have it the other way around. It is the Shitlibs™ preferring literal fascists by not going left enough on common sense policies that the rest of other developed countries take for granted. By not running on popular policies, Shitlibs are tacitly allowing literal fascists to take power. Instead, all the Shitlibs/blue MAGA say is “I am not my opponent. And you will be happy with our breadcrumb policies or the other guy wins! (But we don’t care, we get paid by our corporate donors regardless)”
You have it the other way around. It is the Shitlibs™ preferring literal fascists by not going left enough on common sense policies that the rest of other developed countries take for granted.
“They didn’t go far left enough; therefore, the smarter choice was to vote for the furthest right option available.”
👏
By not running on popular policies, Shitlibs are tacitly allowing literal fascists to take power.
Tell me more about these popular policies. Or rather, tell me more about their popularity in the US electorate.
This user’s recent post is a pretty good indicator of how little they understand
“They didn’t go far left enough; therefore, the smarter choice was to vote for the furthest right option available.”
They didn’t offer any meaningful change at a time when voters were upset with the status quo, therefore the voters chose a fascist who was offering something rather than nothing.
At the end of the day, we lost. And we have to talk about why we lost if we want to learn any lessons next time.
They didn’t offer any meaningful change at a time when voters were upset with the status quo, therefore the voters chose a fascist who was offering something rather than nothing.
Doesn’t make it a smart fucking choice. If anything, context makes it stupider.
At the end of the day, we lost. And we have to talk about why we lost if we want to learn any lessons next time.
And unfortunately, ‘policy wasn’t left enough’ isn’t the answer.
Dem policy should move leftward, mind you. But not because it’ll win us votes. Policy is of marginal importance to everyone save a handful of terminally educated political junkies like us. Dem policy should move leftward because left policy will be better for the country and move the country itself left in the long-term.
Elections, though? We have to win those using different criteria than “What’s good for the country.”
Or at least, we did. God knows if we’ll have meaningful elections again at this point.
Removed by mod
You couldn’t be more transparent if you tried
Removed by mod
I appreciate you clearing up your AgEnDa
But they are tone deaf when you point out that the Democratic party is not willing to run on the platform on Medicare-for-all, build more social housing and increase federal minimum wage (and ditch Israel), which made the party unappealing and lose consistently.
Oh cool, those are winning issues in the Dem primaries, right?
So you are indeed one of those.
It is as if Bernie, a more popular candidate, wasn’t deliberately sidelined. It is as if Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, another popular politician, wasn’t selected to head the Oversight committee and chose instead a geriatric, monied politician. It is
And finally, ask yourself, is not running on those popular platforms gave Democrats the win in elections? Or are you going to call people dumb? Who is really the dumb one for losing against annoying orange?
So you are indeed one of those.
“BlueMAGA is when you look at a fascist-voting electorate and don’t see The Indomitable Rise Of The Proletariat™ in a fascist electoral victory”
It is as if Bernie, a more popular candidate, wasn’t deliberately sidelined.
More popular as measured by…?
It is as if Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, another popular politician, wasn’t selected to head the Oversight committee and chose instead a geriatric, monied politician.
That has nothing to do with Dem primaries or the electorate, man.
And finally, ask yourself, is not running on those popular platforms gave Democrats the win in elections?
No. If it was, why would Bernie not have won the Dem primaries? If these positions were so overwhelmingly popular when expressed by politicians and not as abstracts, why would Bernie, an undeniably charismatic, fucking spotless politician with years of experience and a sharp wit, lose to Clinton, and then Biden?
Or are you going to call people dumb? Who is really the dumb one for losing against annoying orange?
I didn’t realize intelligence was measured in votes. I guess I have to concede that your position is correct - by that measure, fascism is smart, while all the losers are dumb. Like the Dems. And the PSL.
After all, if they were smart, they would’ve won, right?
I’m a two-time Bernie voter. If there was a real primary in '24, I probably would’ve been a three-time Bernie voter. I marched for him back when my leg was good. I donated. I hammered on doors.
People are not as left as you think they fucking are.
Your comment is strange and contradictory, which I have suspicion of on what your trying to do. But I will bite.
Dem primaries-- much of whom are full of blue MAGA and rigged by DNC elites-- selecting a non-popular candidate who will do the bidding of corporate donors will not win the actual election. Bernie is popular when polled on national level (by the way, in a hypothetical election between Trump and Bernie, showed the latter would be way ahead). But if polled among the elites and blue MAGA such as yourself? Of course he is not popular.
Dem primaries-- much of whom are full of blue MAGA and rigged by DNC elites-- selecting a non-popular candidate who will do the bidding of corporate donors will not win the actual election.
Rigged how?
Bernie is popular when polled on national level (by the way, in a hypothetical election between Trump and Bernie, showed the latter would be way ahead).
Okay, so it should have been easy for him to get out the vote in the primaries, right?
But if polled among the elites and blue MAGA such as yourself? Of course he is not popular.
I literally pointed out that I’m a Bernie supporter. Did you forget to read the comment before replying or something?
Would you like to remind me what Bernie’s weakest demographics were in the Dem primaries, in 2016 and 2020?
Anyone who genuinely support Sanders would not be begging the questions and pretending not to know how the DNC deliberately sidelined him; nor not know how popular his policies are when polled among Americans, which the polls are easily searched on the Internet if one types how popular a given Bernie Sanders or the general progressive proposals are.
You are not really fooling anyone feigning to be Bernie supporter but an actual DNC sock puppet. It is not my problem though, it is the Democratic party who will keep losing (not that they care, they mind more not alienating their rich donors that also fund the Republicans).
You are not really fooling anyone feigning to be Bernie supporter but an actual DNC sock puppet.
Lord.
