They aren't the guys, full stop. They wouldn't be the right people to lead the party regardless of the moment or fight
They aren't the guys, full stop. They wouldn't be the right people to lead the party regardless of the moment or fight
You make it sound like it was simply the job title that people took issue with, not anything she did prior to running. Given she struggled to to get 1%, pretty sure she got chased by....pretty much everyone. It was clear from the jump she didn't actually believe in anything and was just pandering
lol special elections, that should move the needle. Again, 26% approval rating. Worse than republicans. Lost to the worst candidate in presidential history. Twice. I guess most people aren’t like you either.
And the irony of you saying “people like me” are unsuccessful politically is too rich considering the abject political failures of the current Democratic Party. People clearly love their useless centrist Dems
They have a 26% approval rating nationwide. Somehow worse than Republicans. Clearly this major legislation you speak of wasn’t so meaningful after all if voters think so poorly of Dems. Typically when politicians do good things, voters approve of them
Or give them any legislation that they’d want to vote for, even begrudgingly
What you're describing is pandering, and it's been failing Dems for many years now. It doesn't help that pieces of shit like Jeffries don't believe in anything except for whoever writes him the biggest check
Question: if this is apparently good politics, and it's what establishment Dems have been doing for the past few decades, why is the GOP repeatedly kicking their asses, getting everything they want, while Dems continually fail to deliver any material benefits for their base?
No self-respective progressive -- or even liberal -- wants any common ground with any Republican. And here's the other thing...any time you ask Republicans to find common ground, they laugh at you, as they should
Progressives don't want progressive legislation with some Republican seasoning. They want the most progressive legislation possible, because that's what they believe in. The problem is, Dem legislators don't believe in anything at all
No, people don't want bipartisanship. If you're on the left, your goal should be to pass every single piece of legislation by the thinnest possible margin because no Republican could possibly vote for it
He's not the person for any task
Good lord I hope this is sarcasm
Well, one of many reasons
We need to stop saying "for these times," he's the wrong leader for any time. A truly useless corporate stooge
If you think establishment Dems, including Hillary, ever had any genuine interest in M4A, you've really been living under a rock. They're as in bed with private insurers as Republicans
Give me a break, there was never any intention for the ACA to lead to universal healthcare. It only further entrenched the private insurance industry and made M4A an even more distant possibility
Primary the entirety of party leadership and/or wait for them to die. I hope for a better future too, but they don't. It's a party entirely beholden to corporate interests that's currently in terminal decline
Democrats haven't done this in the past 20 years, unless you count negotiating against themselves
I’d hope so, but they still exist in a party machine that’s shown itself to be thoroughly opposed to basically half that list
It's strange to think that whoever the Dem nominee is would have any interest in overturning Citizens United, universal healthcare, banning stock trading, taxing billionaires or unrealized cap gains, or increasing the minimum wage. No Dem nominee has fought for these in the past, why would they now?
It’s also pretty silly to talk about whether we’ve sent some money for civilian infrastructure, considering two consecutive presidents have unconditionally funded and supported their genocide and the complete destruction of Gaza
I have no idea how that’s possibly relevant. No one is talking about whether or not Hamas took aid. We’re talking about the Trump and Biden admins sending billions to Israel to commit genocide and bomb hospitals, rather than build schools or hospitals here. It’s pretty simple
...but the money *does* go to bombing hospitals in Gaza and committing genocide, and certainly not to building schools or hospitals here. I don't see how that's disingenous
The problem is both parties are the "make the rich richer" party, and neither represents the working class. GOP is just better at pretending to be the latter
Then the word "liberal" has officially lost all meaning
Every other post they've made is mainstream lib and blue maga. So it's just one person, but still pretty disturbing that a classic lib feels so comfortable telling a trans person they shouldn't have rights
Imagine the bar being so low for Dem nominees that the hope is this person will think that all people deserve equal human rights. But I guess Dems didn't meet that bar last time around
Will you be recording a podcast episode for this one?
But that rests on taking Lew to be a credible source. When the Biden admin spent a year and half denying what was happening and providing cover for Israel’s genocide (as well as the weapons to commit it)
I guess the part that was tripping me up is I’m realizing now you were taking Lew, and the Israeli and American governments, at their word…which is interesting to say the least
…but the entire interview shows him to be not credible, which obviously isnt surprising. And there’s a huge body of evidence to show that Israel has been killing civilians intentionally, man woman or child.
Didn’t you say “ends up killing children inadvertently”? As I understood it, that was the reason you used the passive voice. The ambassador said they don’t have the intent…which has clearly been proven false. I’m not sure how that’s not what we’re talking about
I'm not sure how you could follow what's been happening for the past two years and have any question about intent at this point. They literally shoot children in the head.
Precisely. So then the active voice would be appropriate.
Why do you use the passive voice when it's about Israel murdering children, but the active about the other side? Just because every mainstream liberal outlet does it, doesn't mean the average person has to "Children being killed" -- how about "Israel killing children is an abomination"
Literally anyone with half a brain could tell you Trump would do everything he’s done. Maybe she shouldn’t have run like a center right Republican and actually give people something to vote for if she were so prescient
Then I guess don't be surprised or upset when the Dem party continues to morph into 2000s era Republicans, considering they know they can do literally whatever their corporate donors want and you'll still vote for them
I am talking about the future. This will continue to happen as long as Dems continue to feel entitled to our votes. If our bar for a Dem nominee is "not a fascist," then the party is truly fucked.
And this is exactly why candidates like Harris consistently move right, alienate their base, and lose. Because they feel entitled to our votes, and act accordingly
You sound unwell
The only similarity between Obama and Kamala's candidacies was that they're both people of color
Obama campaigned as a change candidate (and then of course went on to be as cynical, centrist, and status quo as every other establishment Dem) Kamala campaigned explicitly as a status quo candidate, at a time when the vast majority of voters loudly voiced their dissatisfaction and struggle
And then her consultants said no, no, forget about progressives, they're stupid. what we need are the Republicans. being pro-genocide didn't really help either
I'm not sure leftists cared about "politics of joy," because that doesn't mean anything and it's more Dem focused-grouped nonsense. To the extent they ever "liked" her (more like tolerated), it was calling Repubs weird and talking about cracking down on corporate price gouging
the funniest part is to use "absolutely" only to then qualify the entire thought
"I absolutely defend trans people, sometimes"
It's really funny thinking that your metric of "votes relative to the other candidate 8 years prior" is better than other wacky metrics, like the popular vote or electoral college
This assumes that Jeffries would care what his constituents think or want, which seems like a faulty assumption at this point
This might help, Pelosi was also terrible at this. It has nothing to do with the fact that he's Black, but more to do with him being a terrible leader beholden to corporate and AIPAC interests
There are very good reasons why Dems have been even lower approval ratings than the GOP, but I know blue maga is incapable of grasping that
And also missing the genocide he covered up, lied about, and unconditionally supported and funded
That sweet chart is also missing the part where Biden helped throw the election to Trump by covering up his physical and mental decline and insisted on running long after it was clear he couldn’t
That’s one way to tellingly dodge the point entirely. And to answer your question, it’s the same party that let the expended child tax credit expire at the same time that inflation was spiking and student loan pause ended
I know they think voters are stupid, but even the stupidest voters can realize that establishment Dems only care about the wealthy and corporate donors
You can’t spend decades telling people we cant do things and then keep expecting them to pull the lever. Especially when the GOP seems to have no problem doing the things they say they’re going to do
And if Dems had done a better job of actually delivering the reforms they pretended to care about, maybe we wouldn’t have Trump and the GOP in power (that, and having a pudding brained geriatric insist on running again when he was clearly mentally and physically unfit)
Yeah I’m not talking about right now. I’m talking about the years of Dem majorities when things like green new deal, Medicare for all, or even something as simple and obvious as increasing the min wage were pie in the sky for people like Pelosi
Holding the people you elected accountable to actually do their fucking jobs is not undermining Dems. That’s not how democracy is supposed to work
Yeah if politicians thought like this in the 60s, we’d still have segregated bathrooms. If only people like Pelosi had any interest in using their massive platform and power to influence public opinion. But no, they’re feckless weaklings who can only point at a chart and say “not now”
…it’s the military, I wouldn’t hold your breath waiting for them to act morally or with integrity
Not only are gay rights on the chopping block now as others have pointed out, but part of the reason the road was slow and painful is because of establishment Dems exactly like Newsom who resisted and said no, we can’t move too quickly on giving humans equal rights
Would we still be calling it a purity test if he wanted to curtail the rights of all nonwhite people? Or if he said women need to be 25 before they can get an abortion?
It’s pretty dark that we’re now calling “should all humans have equal rights” a purity test. Democrats certainly fail, but it’s not because its progressive base has the gall to ask politicians to not be amoral pieces of shit
And this is exactly how Democrats get to keep moving right and become Republican lite
The precise details of what he’s saying are almost secondary to continuing to discuss the issue on Republican terms and move the Overton window right. “We just need to sacrifice a few more rights for trans people, then we’ll hold the line”
I’m sorry, did you just describe Liz Cheney as useful? That was one of the most disgraceful aspects of the 2024 campaign
No responsibility ever rests with the candidate or party, what a strange concept
I assure you this person like countless other progressives held their nose and voted for Harris. I know libs love punching left, but I’m yet to see any evidence that progressives are the reason Harris failed
“I promise we only need to keep moving right one more time, then we’ll totally stop being Republican lite”
Having no actual beliefs is a key job qualification for president in the DNC’s view
Roose is a uniquely incurious “journalist.” I’m not sure what the point of him is if he essentially paraphrases company press releases under a NYT byline (but I suppose that is the point)
Of course I cared about the progressive aspects of the platform, but if you help cause the reelection of Trump by insisting on running despite being objectively mentally and physically unfit, you deserve more than denigration
Agree to disagree. Can’t govern that effectively when your brain is pudding and can’t read a teleprompter, let alone communicate a coherent message for the administration People weren’t excited about him as a person or politicians when he was campaigning, understandably so
So his platform in 2020 got them plenty electorally, considering it helped get him elected
….that’s also what he campaigned on, far to the left of where he would have been, which is a big reason why he won (along with Covid). And I’m not sure id agree on his climate action in office, but that’s not really the point here.
You can always rest assured that when Dems fail again and again, they’ll say it’s because they moved too far left (even when that never actually happens) or because of progressive voters. Never because they ran to the middle and became republican lite
He would have never said or tried to do anything about student loan debt if it weren’t for pressure from the left, nor any green new deal stuff. Along with the child tax credit and some of the major tenets of covid recovery
Also there's literally a reason for unhoused. "Homeless" connotes a permanent attribute or state of being. Unhoused reflects currently lacking permanent shelter. LatinX was also focus-grouped consultant bullshit that basically only libs used
Let's try one who doesn't have terrible policies and isn't entirely lacking in charisma before we come to that conclusion
Also...can we stop acting like that language constitutes moving left? Harris literally campaigned with Liz Cheney and said she'd have an R in her Cabinet (what she called the only difference between her and Biden) Out of those three, the only candidate who actually moved left won.
I'm sorry, Harris -- the candidate who paraded around with Liz Cheney and said she'd have an R in her Cabinet (literally moving right of BIden) -- moved left?
This is truly an elite example of arguing against something that never happened
Biden in 2020 is literally the only instance of a candidate moving left as a result of progressive pressure, and he won. I'm genuinely flabbergasted at the concept of Hillary or Kamala moving left at any point. Kamala paraded around with Liz Cheney and said she'd have an R in her Cabinet
I love how it's accepted as fact that progressives who didn't vote for Harris caused her to lose the election, when I've never seen that backed up by data. But it's an easy way to punch left, which libs love to do, so no data needed
Don't bother, this person is deranged. No matter what you say they'll just scream hamas and hostages. regardless of the fact that even some mainstream libs are finally admitting it's a genocide, but blue maga is built different
I have no idea who said I don't support Ukraine. Seek help
It’s so embarrassing that blue maga is still calling people “tankies” for simply pointing out facts
You’re right, they only: knew Israel was committing genocide, knew Israel couldn’t commit said genocide without our weapons and funding, unconditionally provided weapons and $$, didn’t try to stop the genocide, and lied about the genocide in progress. But yeah they definitely didn’t support it
But I guess it's worth noting that one of those two endless "wars" was also a genocide which they fully supported
And then in 2024 came back with "can we offer you two more endless wars?"
As opposed to virtually every Dem in congress, who don't even have goals or ideas. Just a lust for personal enrichment and power
This person is detached from reality, don't even bother. Apparently they want him to be the first Congressional candidate in history to have a carefully crafted white paper for every policy he supports...which already have policies drafted anyway
You need to join reality and realize that no one votes based on a white paper
Lol again, his website literally has his platform. No voter gives a shit -- or will read -- white papers. There are literally policies and proposals for the things he supports in his platform. Those are written. What matters is how he'll vote and advocate if he gets to Congress
Lol voters don't give a shit about white papers. He has vastly better policies than Collins and most other Dems in Congress. What matters is what he stands for and how he'll move in Congress
“Meet your standard on trans rights” aka “thinks trans people are humans who deserve full equal rights and protection” Yeah that’s an unreasonable thing to expect of someone wanting their vote
Yeah, don't need to hear from the guy who unconditionally supported and provided cover for a genocide
I think you should probably seek help, you sound unwell
