Get ready for the next DNC nominee no longer being the “lesser evil”!
deleted by creator
Of course they will. Liberalism is a center-right ideology, they’re closer to fascists than leftists.
As time goes on, I think it’s less and less strange our dominant conservative party is called the “Liberal” Party of Australia.
They practically the same party as the democrats. So I guess the name makes sense.
The US is so far right it hurts and Australia is not even that left wing these days.
The only thing I’m proud of is that our media is practically 100% right-wing/corporate interest captured, and we STILL manage to elect left of centre governments from time to time.
Preferential voting is something very near and dear to my heart.
It’s just a way to get minorities to vote for you.
Their good old performative “Fight for Equality” which very pointedly ignores Wealth Inequality and Wealth Discrimination which curiously, are not only the biggest of them all by a huge margin, but are even the mechanisms that multiply many-fold the negative consequences (and hence the hurt) from other kinds of inequality and discrimination, AND stop the descendants of the victims of past discrimination from pulling themselves out from the hole past discrimination threw their ancestors into (in simple terms: if you were thrown into poverty by discrimination, the poverty keeps the hurt going even after the discriminatory actions have stopped and will make it very likely your descendants are stuck there and keep on suffering).
They’re literaly doing the very minimum (when measured by actual effects) they can for Equality whilst claiming they’re “Fighting for Equality” as loud as they can, in order to claim they’re “helping the disfavored” and hence are there for the many not the few.
so you’ll campaign against them for one reason or another and help trump to a historic third term?
That’s pretty much a given.
and conspire to defeat whatever progressive is winning, even though they’ll be the only one that can defeat trump’s third term
Okay this was true until the DNC leadership election, but the current leadership leans just left enough that they could go either way.
Except the chair has stated he is fine with
bribesdonations from “good billionaires”, so we all know it’s going to be the status quo again with them.I mean if you believe in your own moral integrity and the work you’re doing it makes perfect sense to be willing in principle to accept billionaire money. Now I’m not saying he will or won’t be more of the same, but unless you’re a hardline leftist (which I don’t think anyone is expecting Ken Martin to be) the only correct answer to “will you accept billionaire money” is “yes”.
The DNC’s issue isn’t a lack of money, they didn’t lose because they didn’t buy enough interviews with podcasters.
They lost because outside of Bernie and the Squad, they had no ethics, basically stood for nothing, and at times outright accepted bribes to support genocide.
The only correct answer is to grow a spine and say “no”.
Right, which is why Ken Martins first act was to put the most centrist, business friendly, working with the far right focussed, uber zionist rebuttal person he could find to Trumps state of the union, Slotkin. he had to prostrate himself at the AIPAC altar first thing. Turning over a new leaf at the DNC, clearly. Things are all so different now. And look at how the new DLC is embracing progressives so warmly right now.
Fair enough. I didn’t know about the state of the union stuff.
Be LOUD. Get in touch. Make it unambiguously clear that we need to pivot radically left.
Of course they will. Either pick them or they’ll send it all to hell. Even now they probably think this Trump stint will make voters desperate for their next candidate.
Captive audience, it’s why they felt so confident cozying up to Republicans like the Cheneys, because what are the left going to do, not vote?
It’s great really, you perpetuate a problem and constantly blame the people trying to actually bring about much needed change for the problem.
many of the DInos benefit from the same donors as the gop, im betting the megadonors at least implied threatening to cut them off if they dont support trump.
Writing was on the wall here. Need to get rid of the dinosaurs to have any chance at all.
It’ll be Shapiro or Blinken. Its still all about the $$ at the DNC. Nothing else matters.
Or Newsome
I really hope not. He’s as corpo as corpo gets.
They probably like Newsom even more after he sat down and platformed Bannon and Kirk, as if giving a voice to open and unashamed Nazis isn’t disqualifying.
Yeah I agree. It’s really two flavors of the billionaire supporters and no real second party.
Personally, I would be ok with J.B. Pritzker. Don’t love that he’s a billionaire. On the other hand, he’s the best governor Illinois has had in ages and seems to be trying to do right by his constituents.
How can you say that when Rod Blagojevich is there… with his hand out… asking for a bribe?
Democrats are going to push even harder to appeal to Republicans in 2028 by nominating David Duke.
I would not be happy about Pritzker as the dem nominee…
…Because then he wouldn’t be my governor anymore :(
Pritzker’s the man. It pains me to praise a billionaire but he’s been an AWESOME governor. Wish we could get a Pritzker-type for Chicago mayor instead of these chucklefucks we keep electing.
Democrats would rather lose their power “temporarily” than lose their influence permanently with a progressive.
We need a third party like four months ago. We are running out of time to challenge the standing democrats.
We need a third party like four months ago.
Then tell one to do the back-breaking work over decades to start having members in Congress so they have a shot at winning a presidential election.
There isn’t some cheat code for a 3rd party candidate to become president.
This is so often overlooked. A 3rd party could win EVERY SINGLE AVAILABLE SEAT in a presidential election year and they would still only control the executive - Congress and the judiciary would still have a supermajority of not-thems, and you couldn’t change that in one term, or even two. Not to mention every governor, state legislature, county board…
You’re missing the magical thinking of people thinking Rachele Fruit can get another eighty million votes next election cycle and the democrats and republicans will hug and start voting her laws in.
We already have multiple.
inb4 Russia: liberals will say that about any new party, too
First past the post can only be beaten if you manage to swell enough support for a third party to be viable and not split your vote. And because of maths, this is a huge obstacle to overcome.
Some back seat democracy for ya (I am not from the US, from Australia): you need to hammer on about voting reform, and mostly voting reform, until you have it. This needs to be the number one issue in everyone’s minds until you have it.
“We need to beat Trump” is a band-aid at best, and is unlikely to win over any conservative voters to your cause (and, you will need them to get a third party to have any chance, in my opinion).
Your system is beyond repair without it (in my opinion).
Y’all need preferential voting, and/or proportional representation. Or whatever change means future reform is possible.
You already have multiple parties, who each stand no chance against the spoiler effect without a massive campaign to get democratic voters (and maybe some Republican voters) to switch to it.
Anything short of that means you’ll get another Republican government.
And at this rate, this means your barely-counts-as-a-democracy will be dead.
Just here to point out that the 3rd party candidate with the most votes was Jill Stein with a whopping half of a single percent of the total votes cast.
There is no viable 3rd party. And there won’t be until they start working to get elected at the local/state level and start getting members in Congress.
Let’s make it happen through joining the Equal Vote Coalition, we can enable third parties to have a greater chance at winning this way.
Help start a ballot initiative in your state here.
No offense, but AOC is an awful choice as well. She has no chance to win, and I really hope she is not pushed to try.
That’s the crucial difference between Democrats and Republicans. Republicans pick a candidate they love and they think will represent them. They fire up their base, and that momentum carries them all the way through to election day.
Democrats are too clever by half. They try to play strategy and select the candidate that is most electable, where “electable” simply means boring, centrist, and moderate. They end up nominating candidates that can’t excite the hearts and passions of anyone. The only thing they can then run on is, “at least I’m better than the Republican.” Politics is about passion. Always has been, always will be. Democrats strategize themselves right into loss after loss.
You can bitch about it and say that we should select candidates based on purely technocratic matters, but that’s not how human beings work. We’re emotional irrational creatures. We want leaders that will stir passion in the soul. And those are the type of leaders people vote for. And really, you’re better off voting based on character than policy statements anyway. The policy statements for a candidate are usually nothing more than a wishlist and are quickly forgotten.
men still cant get over the fact that a woman and poc was nominated, made the mistake twice, cant overcome sexism and racism in conservative poc groups either.
Yeah, i see that as I am being down voted. Despite that, I wouldn’t mind her, and would be fine voting for her. I just live in an area that’s all R and I’ve absolutely seen how much every one of them hate her. To win this they not only need the people who didn’t vote to go but also turn a percentage of R voters to D and from what I see she has the least likely chance of doing that based off the years of propaganda and political memes they spread of her.
All the R you know will never vote for any D. Basing our candidates on their taste is pointless.
Also the republicans that put Trump into office are less than a third of eligible voters. We don’t need them, morally or mathematically.
i dont think youwere downvoted, i dont see any downvotes on your comment.
The reason Bernie never won the dem primary is that less people voted for him
no, the reason why Bernie never won a primary is because Hillary and Wasserman circumvented voters choice because Clinton wanted to be the first woman president over putting forward the only candidate that could have went head to head with Trump in 2016.
and before anyone says I’m wrong, tell me why Wasserman stepped down as the DNC chair?
Clinton was never an appropriate candidate that could ever hope to go against Trump. Both of them are to blame for the current state of our country because they were blinded by achievements over what is best for our country. it’s a common problem for democrats.
I have no doubt we would be in a better place today if Bernie had been presented as the democratic choice for president in 2016.
Clinton received the majority of votes in the primary. How did they “circumvent voters’ choice”?
But opposition to Wasserman Schultz, both public and private, had been gaining steam following the publication late last week of leaked emails which seemed to show a plot by DNC officials to damage Bernie Sanders during the Democratic primary.
The emails fed the criticism from progressives and Sanders’ supporters that Wasserman Schultz and her team were hostile to his campaign from the start and had done their best to help Clinton win the Democratic nomination at the Vermont senator’s expense.
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/wasserman-schultz-wont-preside-over-dnc-convention-226088
Amid furor over an email leak that revealed a bias against Bernie Sanders inside the Democratic National Committee, U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz announced Sunday she will step down as chair.
https://www.npr.org/2016/07/24/487242426/bernie-sanders-dnc-emails-outrageous-but-not-a-shock
“I know that electing Hillary Clinton as our next president is critical for America’s future. I look forward to serving as a surrogate for her campaign in Florida and across the country to ensure her victory,” she said. “Going forward, the best way for me to accomplish those goals is to step down as Party Chair at the end of this convention.”
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/debbie-wasserman-schultz-resigns_n_5795044ae4b0d3568f8397f7
so tell me. why would Clinton have more votes? OH YEAH! because of the bias that Wasserman forced upon the DNC!
I could go on and on with reports just like this but I’m pretty sure my point has been made.
Clinton and Wasserman were working together to circumvent voters choice in order to ensure that Clinton was THE candidate. Unfortunately they gambled with our democracy and lost.
it’s worse than whatever you’re thinking too. the only reason why they were caught is because they were trying to cheat. wikileaks wouldn’t have had anything to leak had they not try to fuck over Bernie.
Superdelegates. They are supposed to make their votes when things are nearly settled. As a collective, they voted for Hillary before the contest even started, which gave people the impression that Hillary was winning.
This is like a judge giving their opinion, before letting jurors discuss their decision.
Superdelegates don’t vote until the convention, potentially they could have still nominated Clinton if Sander’s won the pledged delegates, but it never came up, since he didn’t. Like I’m not contesting that the party establishment favored Clinton, but you can’t say they circumvented the will of the voters when the nominee was the person who won the popular vote.
Throughout the primary, the media counted all the superdelegates as Clinton votes, regardless of their theoretical obligation to vote for whomever won their state’s primary. Voters were relentlessly bombarded with the notion that it was impossible for Sanders to obtain the nomination. Yeah, she got more votes, but like, shit wasn’t fair, man.
All voters fall out of coconut trees.
I love the hate the DNC gets now. I’m also confused how the DNC’s mandate isnt to be entirely apolticial.
