Biden won the previous election (barely) because Trump’s incompetence was on full display and people were angry about it. It’ll happen again, but unfortunately, elections are pretty much done in the USA. Between fuckery and intimidation, we’re unlikely to see a ‘fair’ election until a major revolution occurs in the USA.
Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives
Dems do not care to “learn”. They do not want to help you. They do not want to undermine the capitalist empire. They aren’t hapless, they just don’t work for you.
You know how ACAB? Because a good cop will quickly get checked to doing bad cop things out of fear, or they leave (willingly or in a body bag).
I’m starting to think that with politics. You go in with the dreams of change. Then you see the bloat and bullshit. You try to pass a bill to make sure that all kids have the right to free food, and some fuck face screams at you and doxxes your family on Rogan and now you got death threats.
I don’t have an answer.
Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives
Pretty much. I think that the higher you go politically, the more that good people are filtered out by the system.
The democrats are very good at fighting a change inside their own party. They’re very bad at fighting republicans on the national stage. Case in point, voter suppression in the last election, the stolen election of Gore v. Bush in 2000 (Gore had majority in Florida in the end, did you hear CNN reporting about it?)
The democrats are very good at fighting a change inside their own party.
The democrats are only good at fighting a change inside their own party.
The Dem base has been fully bought out by corporate interests. They are “controlled opposition” in every sense. A vestigial remnant of their 1940s peak that mostly exists to rein in the excesses of the prior conservative leadership (although, one could argue even FDR ultimately filled that role).
(Gore had majority in Florida in the end, did you hear CNN reporting about it?)
The degree to which Florida has been fumbled by Dems for the last 30 years cannot be overstated.
The degree to which Florida has been fumbled by Dems for the last 30 years cannot be overstated.
As much as they messed up there, I have to point out that a significant percentage of the voters went for Nader (although would have preferred Gore to Bush). That stupid idiotic moronic idealism cost them and the world two pointless wars in the Middle East, whose ripple effects can still be felt. Nevertheless R’s just stole the election and the D’s rolled over I suppose in order not to cause instability and keep the corporate overlords happy. Can you imagine how angry the R machinery would have gotten if the roles were reversed (possibly some of the D base as well, but just because they’re not similar scum as R voters)?
Centrists will blame progressives any time they lose, even if they actually lost because the Supreme Court handed Republicans a victory.
Yes, the Republican supreme court was the real problem. However, with Nader’s votes it would have been more difficult to claim victory, as Florida would have been a wider margin win for Gore. What were those Nader votes good for? Absolutely nothing.
That stupid idiotic moronic idealism cost them and the world two pointless wars in the Middle East
Agreed. Moronic idealism to back corporate interests over the working class by the Dems certainly screwed us over.
Imagine if the Dems actually stole policies from Nader, and sucked in those Nader voters? Imagine how much better we’d be as a nation?
Agreed. Moronic idealism to back corporate interests over the working class by the Dems certainly screwed us over.
That’s not idealism my friend, just cold opportunism and cynical realism.
Imagine if the Dems actually stole policies from Nader, and sucked in those Nader voters? Imagine how much better we’d be as a nation?
This is a good point. However Gore was a good candidate. Not perfect, but good with a chance of winning. Nader was perhaps perfect for some people, but he absolutely could not have won anything in that election.
but he absolutely could not have won anything in that election.
Unlike Gore, who won the election, of course…
That stupid idiotic moronic idealism cost them
Nader pulled from D and R voters in equal measure. That’s not why Gore lost. Miami-Dade county was deliberately obstructed from completing its vote counting by Republican campaign staff
Both Roger Stone and Brad Blakeman take credit for managing the riot from a command post, although their accounts contradict each other. Republican New York Representative John E. Sweeney gave the signal that started the riot, telling an aide to “shut it down”.
Blaming Nader for a judicial coup is asinine. Dems pivoting hard right as a result - by embracing Iraq Warmongering, financial deregulation, and rapid expansion of domestic O&G production - did significantly more damage to the party than Nader’s protest votes.
Can you imagine how angry the R machinery would have gotten if the roles were reversed
You hardly have to imagine. Just ask Republicans how they felt about the Perot voters in '92, when Clinton swept the EC with 43% of the total vote.
Nader pulled from D and R voters in equal measure. Nader’s Wikipedia page disagrees. Miami-Dade county was deliberately obstructed from completing its vote counting by Republican campaign staff Blaming Nader for a judicial coup is asinine.
Yes, we should not forget that the Republicans were the real villains here. And that the Democrats should have protested much harder. However, the point is that Gore was initially declared winner, but because his margin was not significant enough, there was room to obfuscate the victory. Had he gotten Nader’s votes, it would have been more difficult to claim Bush victory.
You hardly have to imagine. Just ask Republicans how they felt about the Perot voters in '92, when Clinton swept the EC with 43% of the total vote.
Yeah, it was mostly a rhetoric question. I was mainly thinking all the bullshit about stolen election in 2020.
“Unfortunately,” Geevarghese lamented, “Democratic leadership is failing disastrously to meet this urgent mandate. Ahead of tonight’s forum, the DNC is actively working to silence rank-and-file Democratic activists and base voters calling for a ban on dark money in primaries and the rejection of corporate funding. In a last-minute move, they shut the event off from the public and even deliberately shared the wrong address for where grassroots supporters are allowed to gather.”
How can anyone defend the DNC at this point?
How can anyone defend the DNC at this point?
I know you’re not new to lemmy.
lol true ✌️
Because the alternative is trump and there is no legitimate 3rd option.
A resounding failure by the DNC with two years before the next election (if those even matter anymore) is literally the best time to be critical.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results all that. DNC keeps failing to beat Republicans, time to try something else.
Trump isn’t running for DNC chair.
Though party leadership would vote for him over any progressive.
This would have been valid 3 months ago, but now elections are over. THIS is the time to complain and look for an alternative, so that we don’t get caught pants down in 2 years
The alternative is the working class rising up, and casting off our chains. Can’t get that, until we raise class consciousness, though.
Hey, this propaganda is now 3 months out of date.
What’s the new Boogeyman to excuse selling your country out to billionaires that consistently take away your rights?
Even this analysis doesn’t capture the real problem.
Asserting that the DNC “fails to learn” implies that they have some goal they’re not meeting.
They don’t.
Their goal is to rake in as much corporate soft money as possible, and by that standard, this past election was a resounding success. And nothing else, including winning elections, matters to them.
So they’re not really “failing” at anything. In fact they’re succeeding nicely. It’s just that they’re succeeding at being corrupt, self-serving and deceitful.
If progressives know how to win elections better than the DNC then why don’t they just win enough elections to control the DNC?
The goal of leftists is to complain and by that standard, this past election was a resounding success. And nothing else, including winning elections, matters to them.
*the goal of American Democrats.
The Democrats aren’t even leftist anymore
Exactly.
The goal of Democrats is to win elections. Democrats aren’t leftists.
The goal of leftists is to complain. Leftists don’t want to win elections.
Sounds like YOU want to complain.
The OP is not about me.
deleted by creator
This implies a fair primary process.
To extend a bit, the DNC controls the machine to run elections. They are friends with the corporate donors and the “left wing” media. Without their support it’s very hard to brand yourself as a full blown democrat candidate, which eventually will matter to the voting public.
How did any progressives get elected if our primaries are unfair?
How do progressives win against the GOP when they don’t play fair?
According to leftists, control of corporate donors and the media makes the DNC extremely strong. But simultaneously, the DNC is extremely weak.
control of corporate donors and the media makes the DNC extremely strong
You seem to be a bad listener, because you got it backwards. The DNC doesn’t have control over corporate donors and the media, corporate donors and the media have control over the DNC. They’re not actually weak, their supposed incompetence is a choice. They’re not actually incapable of winning elections and passing good policy that helps the people, they’re unwilling. The interests of the Democratic leadership and the interests of the people are misaligned, and they only appear weak because they misrepresent their values and goals.
Ok, so if leftists can’t win a primary because they have no support from donors and media, then how are they supposed to win a general election?
The only answer is mass movements. If you can’t beat them with money you have to beat them with numbers. We have to continue the slow process of building dual power from the bottom up by engaging in mutual aid and taking into our own hands what the Democrats refuse to.
Money is power in this country, but at its core it’s only an abstraction of labor power. Unions can win elections and even run their own social programs if only more people choose to fight. Existing unions need to radicalize and more radical unions need to form.
How did any progressives get elected if our primaries are unfair?
They got elected despite the party’s interference.
How do progressives win against the GOP when they don’t play fair?
The GOP doesn’t control national elections like the DNC/DCCC/DSCC controls primaries.
Multiple progressives lost their primaries recently and blame AIPAC funding. Criticizing democrats for catering to donors. While losing to democrats because they catered to donors.
All while claiming they can win elections better than democrats.
The GOP will also be catering to donors.
I was talking about the way the party runs (or eschews) its primaries. You pivoted to international donors.
I’m talking about winning and losing primaries. You’re cherry picking examples.
Yes, money is power and power is politics. What is your point exactly?
Progressives will continue to lose for this reason.
What makes you think that I’d be interested in defending a claim I didn’t make?
What makes you think I wanted to know if you’re interested in defending a claim?
Actually, that was a rhetorical question
And amusingly enough, you provided an additional illustration of the real answer.
When people are struggling economically, they’re looking for a change candidate. Running on everyone being better off than their actual bank statements and credit card bills say was always a shit strategy. Cozying up to Liz Cheney and her lot was secondary to that.
Okay but then what was the alternate winning strategy? The whole world was undergoing massive inflation, the US actually did better than basically every other country. There’s no way to turn around a global pandemic followed by unprecedentrd global inflation in short order. Egg prices went up because of avian flu and culling but no one wants to hear that. What could democrats have run on instead?
This is exactly it. It’s white Trump wins. Why people are willing to overlook all of his craziness- because his platform is one of radical change. He may be crazy and he may be full of shit but at least he is talking about change. And when you’re hurting and you see the entire country hurting and you see nobody in charge giving a fuck, or worse telling you this is how it’s supposed to be, you want radical change.
Essentially: the status quo of the past 30 years is dead (and its never coming back), some people just haven’t realized it yet.
Very hard to identify the end of an empire while your living in it.
Ok, “leader of Our Revolution”. If Democrats are a failure then form your own party and show Democrats how it’s done.
If Democrats are a failure then form your own party and show Democrats how it’s done.
I mean, there is the Green Party, for example. Not one I’m a fan of.
But the problem with third parties is the fact that the system is engineered to only allow two parties to exist.
We could do a repeat of what they did in Nevada, and just wipe the entire incumbent Dem Committee seats, and started over with a new set of folks, all leftists. And then, the Dems did nothing but tear them down, until they got those seats back.
3 wasted years of Dems fighting leftists, just to obtain power. Not to enact changes, not after learning any lessons. Nevada is back to just another rubber stamp for oligarchs. A controlled oppo team.
I’m not a fan of the Green Party, either. Among other things, they gave us Senator Sinema.
But if leftists want to demonstrate that they are better than establishment Dems at winning elections, then leftists will have to win elections. Starting with primaries.
And yes, others will try to “tear them down” from all sides. Intraparty fighting never ends, even after winning an election. Just ask Joe Biden. That’s the nature of politics, which leftists often don’t want to face.
This is not leftism. What you’re proposing is just a shiny new liberal party. This hypothetical new party would be subject to the same mechanisms and forces that corrupted the democratic party. Give it 50 years, and we are back at square one: capital will swallow any agency that your proposed party once exhibited.
I really encourage you to do some reading on Marxism and leftism before you throw around the term so carelessly. https://socialistworker.org/2012/07/20/what-is-a-vanguard-party
Decrying actual leftists for not participating in american electoralism that is wholley orchestrated by capital is going to fall on deaf ears. Leftists have no interest in creating a new capitalist party and subsequently refining capitalism.
Then I was right. Leftists don’t want to win elections.
But Democrats do. So why should Democrats listen to leftists?
So why should Democrats listen to leftists?
What are you on about? Democrats, in one of the most embarrassing defeats in recent history, literally just made it clear to the world that they would rather lose than cater to leftists. Biden decided that carrying out genocide in Gaza was more important than defeating Trump.
That’s the usual explanation leftists give. But I’m not sure Democrats should listen to that, either.
Especially since the largest shifts towards Trump in 2024 occurred in the Latino and Gen Z male demographics. Both of them are more centrist than average Democrats, and they are the demographics that Democrats need to win back in 2028.
Do you think any of that loss might have been caused by the Dems declaring a great economy, and telling voters to stop whining, and just vote Blue No Matter Who?
Maybe to avoid losing presidential elections?
Just an idea…
If leftists ever won a presidential election, then they might have useful advice to others who wanted to do the same.
But they never have, and apparently they don’t even want to.
So, no interest in trying to represent the working class…
And also wondering why you think they deserve to win…
What if I told you, that elections are a way for the ruling class to justify the oppression of the working class?
Then I would conclude that you are not interested in winning elections.
And therefore you shouldn’t give advice to people who do want to win elections.
Hey man, I want our Empire to crumble, not prolong it’s life.
While crumbling, I want to limit damage as best as possible.
The Dems are the ones who care about winning elections, and holding power. The only way to do that is to listen to the working class.
Trump lied about his intent to fix the problems, but he did, minimally, agree they existed.
I don’t believe leftists actually know “the only way to win elections and hold power”, considering they have accomplished neither.
Probably because neither is our goal? I mean, leftists want no state, no classes, and no money.
The party is dead until they figure out a way to even the media landscape. Harris was a very good candidate with a good campaign relative to the binary alternative option.
But it doesn’t matter because Republicans control the narrative on everything and it doesn’t help that Democrats blow at messaging and recognizing the all-out war we’re in.
People knew what Harris was selling, at least the people who could be persuading to vote Democrat. The DNC’s absolute failure at communication is definitely a problem, but the catastrophic loss they suffered this election can’t be explained by that alone. Many people, with full knowledge of what a Trump administration would mean, sat out of this election. People who would volunteer in democrat campaigns either sat out or voted for Harris quietly. The DNC’s biggest “failure” (they didn’t fail at enriching their corporate donors, so to them it’s a success) is relying too much on being the less shitty shit sandwich.
I’d actually argue people didn’t know what Harris was selling. There was a very well written and well thought out policy platform written up on their campaign’s website, but none of that reached all the Americans who refuse to read anything. The campaign trail was very focused on how Donald Trump was a threat to democracy, but they refused to really draw attention to the Nazi iconography and truly terrifying promises Trump was making. In fact, an awful lot of the campaign trail was backing Israel, promising a more secure boarder, lying about how great the economy was, and promising to reach across the isle to work with the mythical “good Republican.”
And, to give the average American the benefit of the doubt, I don’t think many of them knew the potential dangers of a Trump re-election. I think a lot of people saw the weakly worded Democrat warnings as typical political mud-slinging. Both sides were calling each other the devil incarnate, and both sides refused to back up their claims, so it’s hard to be surprised that Americans just saw it as noise. I think most of them are just scared they won’t make it through the year, like my friends and I are, and got suckered in by the orange man telling them that everything sucks and he’ll make it better.
In fact, an awful lot of the campaign trail was backing Israel, promising a more secure boarder, lying about how great the economy was, and promising to reach across the isle to work with the mythical “good Republican.”
That’s what I was referring to by “what Harris was selling”. She did have well-thought out policy on her website, but she abandoned or watered down said policy whenever her corporate donors requested a “clarification”. One example is her promise to instate a wealth tax, which she continued to water down throughout her campaign until she ended up with an unfulfilled promise from Biden’s campaign.
I can’t seem to find it when I try to look for it, but I saw around here after the election a statistical analysis of Harris’s campaign trail that found that she, as election day came closer, progressively stopped using phrases related to progressive economic policy such as “unions”, “wealth tax” or “housing crisis” and used words related to democracy and Trump such as “democracy” and “rule of law”. Harris started out as a genuinely promising candidate if you ignored her attitude towards Muslim Americans (which would turn out to be her undoing), and as the campaign progressed turned further and further into a right of center corporate stooge until she became Kamala “border wall” Harris and lost all seven swing states to Trump.
I noticed that as well. Her campaign went from electric excitement to, well, I don’t know quite what I’d call it. Resignation maybe? It reminded me a lot of the Hillary campaign by the end, and I continually got the impression that Kamala wasn’t really in the driver’s seat for her campaign. Here’s the moment that I started getting nervous, and someone in the campaign should have started smashing the panic button: Obama lecturing down to black men for not supporting Kamala enough.
HUGE yikes moment when you start finger-wagging a group that’s supposed to be your base for not supporting you enough. Obama’s a smart dude, so I really have no idea wtf he thought he was doing here, and no idea why anyone ever thought staging and publishing this was a good thing to do. This should have been a red flag visible from space in so many ways.
The enthusiasm of the first week of her campaign announcement was through the roof, and I will never forgive the DNC (and her, to be fair; she capitulated) for knee-capping it.
I was genuinely more excited about a campaign than any in my life when Walz and her had their first rally. The first rally I ever watched. And I lived through Obama 2008. That was peek for me. By the end of the campaign I was resigned to vote for her. I did and I contributed money but it was solely because Trump is eviler. I will never forgive them for valuing killing Palestinians than defending our democracy.
I think the DNC sucks and messaging could’ve been better.
But I frankly also believe that for anyone who supposedly what Harris and Trump were selling and found the choice difficult then you’re kind of a moron. Ethically; logically… Zero sense. Yes, Stagnation is infinitely better than fascism intentionally sabotaging the system.
So I choose to hope people actually didn’t know how good Harris was relative to how bad Trump was because mostly rich white men control the vast majority of what people see.
People need to remember… The demographics of Lemmy let’s just say aren’t even remotely reflective of the American electorate. You’re lucky if people watch more than the Fox News in their physician’s waiting room or work breakroom, supplemented by their social media feed and YouTube algorithm peddling Red-pilled incel bullshit and trash like Joe Rogan.
Like, do you think people are actually tuning into AP or NPR or BBC or ProPublica investigations? You think they’re reading long form written journalist pieces or PBS Frontline documents ties? Fuuuuck no. It’s closer to work-drink-sports-talk shows-church-work-bar-sports-social media, rinse repeat.
You’re stupid if you’re unhappy with the status quo. You’re stupid if you have a problem with genocide. You’re stupid if you can’t afford groceries! Can’t you see that billionaires are doing just fine? You’re stupid if you notice that the party abandoned you and still demands unearned perfect fealty no matter what they do.
Anyone who disagrees with the republican-adjacent wing of the party has to be stupid because otherwise we might have to listen to them. And we’ll never do that. They’re stupid and we hate them.
Did you vote for Kamala? Then you’re not stupid. You did what you could, now we have to do more.
I disagree with the “voters are stupid” rhetoric because those people tend to ignore the Democrats’ responsibility in their own loss, but if you read further, that’s not what this person was doing.
Did you vote for Kamala? Then you’re not stupid.
I sure feel stupid for doing so. Voted in favor of a pro-genocide candidate, got blamed for her loss because I griped.
I disagree with the “voters are stupid” rhetoric because those people tend to ignore the Democrats’ responsibility in their own loss, but if you read further, that’s not what this person was doing.
It sure looks like they were arguing for further appeasement of the right because everyone who disagrees with them is stupid.
Their central criticism is that people are lulled into more right-leaning positions by right-wing propaganda, which is true: the right wing has bought basically all media. Everybody takes marching orders.
So, people are stupid, but this is a deliberate move: stupidity benefits the right.
If by “appeasement of the right” you mean “accepting of the genocide,” I will fault no person for caring about what’s happening over there. If the democrats wanted to win, they should have let go of their psychotic, white-knuckle grip on the Israel military fund. It doesn’t surprise me at all that this severely weakened their bid for the presidency.
That said, I can’t say we’re in a better position now with Trump. My hope for the people of Gaza now is either maga incompetence, or that Trump and Netanyahu make some kind of fascist quid-pro-quo deal not unlike the “Trump saves TikTok” publicity stunt.
If by “appeasement of the right” you mean “accepting of the genocide,”
And adopting republican border policy, running anti-trans hate in their own ads, courting the endorsement of Dick Cheney, promising to appoint a republican to the cabinet, and yes, continuing to sell arms for genocide.
If the democrats wanted to win, they should have let go of their psychotic, white-knuckle grip on the Israel military fund. It doesn’t surprise me at all that this severely weakened their bid for the presidency.
Agreed.
That said, I can’t say we’re in a better position now with Trump.
Of course we’re not. But this is what Democrats preferred to listening to anyone on the left flank of their own party.
You’re stupid if you’re unhappy with the status quo. You’re stupid if you have a problem with genocide.
Nah. Not what I said. You can be concerned with these things as I am but still find the choice to vote for Harris very easy.
You’re stupid if you can’t afford groceries!
You may be ignorant if you believe grocery prices were in the control of Biden / Harris, especially in the wake of a divided Congress. Even so, the choice to vote for Harris should’ve been incredibly easy.
Can’t you see that billionaires are doing just fine?
Yes, the rich are the problem. I agree. Still should’ve been easy to vote for Harris as opposed to not vote, vote 3rd party, or vote Trump.
You’re stupid if you notice that the party abandoned you and still demands unearned perfect fealty no matter what they do.
All this skirts the underlying point: for anyone who supposedly saw what Harris and Trump were selling and found the choice difficult — even in spite of all those aforementioned factors — then you’re kind of a
moronignorant. Ethically; logically… Zero sense. I’ll rephrase because at least ignorance suggests one can change.You can be concerned with these things as I am but still find the choice to vote for Harris very easy.
If you’re a monster who is just fine with genocide, sure.
I voted like you wanted. I hate both of us for it.
Well since you voted for Harris, I guess you’re not whom I’m speaking to, now, are you? Why then are you making this about you?
I voted for her. I did not find it easy. Anyone who did find it easy after the genocide support is a fucking psychopath.
But I frankly also believe that for anyone who supposedly what Harris and Trump were selling and found the choice difficult then you’re kind of a moron. Ethically; logically… Zero sense. Yes, Stagnation is infinitely better than fascism intentionally sabotaging the system.
It’s not stagnation, to make that clear. The Dems were promising a slower slide into rock bottom (they coopted the Republican border wall if you remember that). That aside okay, and? That doesn’t contradict my point. You can consider voters morons, which I don’t agree with but let’s set aside. That is something and whether they were operating off incomplete information is something else; your argument here seems to be built on wishful thinking.
People need to remember… The demographics of Lemmy let’s just say aren’t even remotely reflective of the American electorate.
I mean yes but the idea that the average voter is an uneducated, critical thinking-lacking sack of potatoes who never thinks about politics beyond election day is also wrong. The median voter maybe, but the average voter no. The average voter is an average; the concept includes everything from progressives to far right MAGAsz and I’ll note that part of the reason Biden won in 2020 was his popularity with the former. To take Gaza for example, there’s this poll. People are paying attention more than you seem to be thinking.
Wow that article is damning. As a feeling, thinking human being, I hate what Israel has done. But I am shocked that it was on non-voters’ minds so powerfully. I encourage everyone to check out that link above. It’s not just a poll, it’s an article that answers questions you may have about bias etc.
Calling it a “catastrophic loss” is a bit rich.
I mean Trump won all seven swing states and turned like three non-swing states into swing states. His margins weren’t very big but in the electoral college he absolutely wiped the floor with the DNC.
It was pretty bad.
Literally the worst result since the Republicans won California.
Wait. Do progressives seriously think that going fascist lite wasn’t the right thing to do in this last election? What the fuck are they smoking.
According to that guy I follow on Facebook the air in American cities has higher concentrations of the poisonous chemicals O2 and H2O, and that’s why they refuse to accept the Truth brought to us by Trump and supply-side Jesus.
No war but _____ war?
Dems are captured. The only way around that is voting in as many independent members to congress as we can possibly get. Even AOC has traded fighting for us for securing her position as a mouthpiece for the party. Such as lying to voters pretending that Biden and Harris were working tirelessly on a ceasefire.
