The two progressive lawmakers have addressed massive crowds in solidly red states including Idaho and Utah in recent days, as party of the national Fighting Oligarchy Tour.
A survey taken by Harvard’s Center for American Political Studies and Harris between April 9-10 found that 72% of Democratic voters supported politicians like Sanders (I-Vt.) and Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), “who are calling on Democrats to adopt a more aggressive stance towards Trump and his administration and ‘fight harder’,” rather than leaders who are willing to “compromise” with President Donald Trump.
72% of Democrats Want Party to Abandon Centrist Approach to Trump
Party: But who will help us become exponentially richer then?
Mother fuckers just play the fucking market if you’re so morally backrupt. Even when you’re selling us out you fucking take the most low ball barely consequential amount to flush millions of peoples lives down the drain.
Right: Genocide ALL undesirables without due process.
Left: Genocide nobody without due process.
Centrist: Clearly there is middle ground. So, lets genocide some people without due process.
Can’t i just have a little genocide? As a treat.
Well since you asked so nicely and as a centrist I’m so conflict averse I prioritize harmony over any sort of moral compass then yes, have as much as you want. Just stay polite or I’ll gently chastise you and then give in to you anyway.
Centrist approach?
USA has a conservative Party and a Neonazi Party
Two old rich white men arguing over the proper way to do genocide against brown people. Then they both get upset when brown people stop buying their shitty products.
Sounds about White.
Billionaires don’t deserve a seat at the table.
We wouldn’t let any other group of 3000 people contort our entire society to their will.
Won’t happen. There’s long been a gap between what registered party members want and what those in charge actually do.
We saw the same thing in the UK a few years ago when Jeremy Corbyn got a huge swell of support from the party proper, but all the other Labour MPs collectively rounded on him and conspired to kick him out of the party altogether because he was going to put a stop to their gravy train.
Kamala didn’t lose by being “Too woke”, she lost by saying “Maybe the Right can have a little fascism, ya know, as a treat?”
This is why I want to see AOC as a candidate and NOT Harris. We need a candidate who is less, “reaching across the aisle” and more “boots on necks.”
America doesn’t have a good track record for young, popular, progressive presidents.
This is just wrong. Go look at what swayed voters. The fact is, she never broke from Biden.
- The border was a shit show.
- The stock market isn’t the economy. Egg prices matter (it’s ridiculous but true for voters, and yes, I know it was bird flu related)
- People trust R’s more when it comes to the economy
- Many voters see Democrats as intolerable over educated snobs… That’s how they address ‘the deplorables’.
- She ran on a platform that speaks TO DEMOCRATS and not the greater population.
Centrist is not evil, it’s necessary to win elections. How many maps do you need to see to figure out you need to win some red districts? Support the fringe but run on a platform that speaks to the middle. Or… keep doing what your doing and never hold more than a minor majority again.
People shouldn’t trust R’s any further than they can throw then.
Anyway while I don’t agree that the border was a shit show, yes I do agree that Neo Liberals are snobs who fail to understand that no the stock market is NOT the economy.
You have some points but ultimately I find you misguided. After all Trump was about as centered as the leaning tower of Piza.
Centrist is not evil, it’s necessary to win elections
Oh really? Who is president again? Who won the popular vote? Between Harris and Trump, which was more “centrist”?
Your logic is sound, but the model your working from is completely out of touch with how voters and elections work.
First of all, the left to right spectrum is just one dimension of voter preference. Another, and currently more dominant, dimension is populist to establishment. What Democrats call “centrist” is really “establishment”, and American voters hate the establishment.
Voters also like leaders with conviction. Centrist Democrats cave on everything. After four years of attacking Trump’s boarder policy, Democrats flipped almost entirely. After four years attacking Trump on LGBT rights, Democrats abandoned the issue entirely. Not only does that signal weakness to disengaged voters, it also destroys trust between the party and it’s base. The base might show up on election day, but they aren’t going to want to canvass or do all the other volunteer work that Democratic campaigns depend on.
My model is based on what won the last election.
- The border
- Prices at the grocery store. It’s ridiculous but it is what it is.
You make a good point. There are many factors at play, but if Democrats think centrist is establishment then we need to change that because your right, that won’t win anything
Your examples of caving… Attacking Trumps border policy - but… Biden was president?! And Democrats did nothing to fix the problem. Yes, border control is a problem. We needed a leader and got nothing.
LGBTQ rights. I’m sorry to have to say this, but that’s not going to win you an election. Democrats (and me personally) can continue to support LGBTQ rights, but you can’t make it one of your primary platform.
Look at it this way… You need a sales pitch for purple and red districts that speaks on their issues. And go there and sell it!
- Live and let live policies for the people
- Do a better job of advertising your successes fighting for workers rights and pay.
…and so on.
Hell, watch Fox news for a few hours a day, take a shower, then build your plan to beat the Republicans on their own turf.
The border
Both Biden and Obama before him deported far more undocumented aliens than Trump could manage. Biden completed more of Trump’s wall than Trump did. Family separations started under Obama and continued through Biden - with the caveat that people who go through the effort to understand it know that it was much worse under Trump because it was vindictive and intentional instead of being done on a limited bases to streamline cases.
The fact is that, no matter what the Democrats do or say, Republicans will always be seen as “tougher” on the border. They will always be willing to use more racist language and false narratives than Democrats. Trying to out-xenophobe Republicans is a losing fight for Democrats. What Democrats need is fewer xenophobes, and they don’t get that by running to the middle, or trying to ignore the issue. They get it by telling the truth boldly and consistently, and mocking ridiculous Republican talking points instead of playing into them.
Republicans don’t shape their policy to what polls tell them voters want, they shape what voters want through effective rhetoric, Democrats seem to think that voter opinions are immutable and that they need to find a well tuned platform to please more voters than they piss off until they get to 51% in each district. Republicans destroy them by constantly shifting the poles under Democrat’s feet.
Prices at the grocery store. It’s ridiculous but it is what it is.
This is part of the anti-incumbency global tidal wave narrative that Democrats have been using to explain away their loss. I don’t argue that it wasn’t a factor, but I think they owe us a better explanation. The guy they lost to was Trump. The race should never have been close enough for that to tip it over. The one glaring exception to that global phenomena was Mexico that had a very similar election with an aging left wing male president attempting to hand power to a much younger female protege, in opposition to a far right candidate. In their case the left candidate won, and they did it with a social-Democrat platform, not by running to the middle. This is in a country that is far more conservative than even the US, with a much more firmly established cultural patriarchy.
Yes, border control is a problem. We needed a leader and got nothing.
Oh, I agree wholeheartedly. What we needed was immigration reform and a whole lot more judges to clear the backlog. The Democrats proposed a viable plan (far too right for me, but an understandable compromise to get Republicans on-board) and the Republicans rejected it to keep the issue alive for Trump. Then the Democrats assumed voters would see that and, what, stop being concerned about the border? All that did is send the message that electing Trump would get legislation passed because Biden couldn’t do it. The Democrats didn’t even try to convince anyone that the Republican plan was wrong-headed and would do far more harm than good. It was a disaster, and the kind of disaster that Democrats create for themselves on a regular basis.
LGBTQ rights. I’m sorry to have to say this, but that’s not going to win you an election.
The whole reason that the anti-woke movement gained so much traction is that Democrats have abandoned the issue or made compromises for years. I agree that standing for LGBTQ rights is not going to win elections, but giving up the high ground can certainly lose elections. Democratic (and corporate) tokenism also played a huge role in driving the anti-DEI narrative. Standing boldly and consistently for minority rights is politically a defensive strategy for Democrats. Democrats can’t win elections if they lose the culture wars. That just lets Republicans control the narrative.
You need a sales pitch for purple and red districts that speaks on their issues.
You spoke earlier on how Democrats are seen as “intolerable over educated snobs” and I agree, but I see this as a perfect example as to why. Democrats act like policy preferences are some kind of unalterable genetic feature of “some people” and those people must be pandered to. People in red districts are first and foremost people. Look at how Bernie talks to right wing audiences. He doesn’t cater even slightly to right wing ideology, but he does speak directly to their issues with an integrity that they are not used to seeing. And, it works. Bernie is consistently the most popular Democrat in red districts, not the centrists who pander.
People trust R’s more when it comes to the economy
I hate that you’re right about this. I just saw an article yesterday that human intelligence actually is declining, and this is some of the strongest evidence. We truly live in the dumbest timeline.
The GOP are already working out how to blame the incoming great depression on Biden
I want to abandon the centrist approach, period. No more reaching across the aisle, no more insider trading, no more letting capitalists dictate how society should be. America has given capitalism a nearly free hand to determine the nation’s destiny, and it has lead to death camps, fascism, and stolen the prosperity that workers had earned with their sweat.
It is time to try a completely different approach to economics and an overhauled Constitution.
I don’t want to hate on it, but it’s like we don’t respect the Constitution as it is anyways. And the origins of this country was rich landowners. So technically we’re all just kind of like livestock. I guess simply what I’m saying is we have to actually become a real country. And that will require kinetic input.
It should have been a living document. This is how you know these idiots are a death cult.
72%? That’s CLEAR CUT that we MUST move MORE RIGHT!
-The DNC Literally!
Yeah I’m expecting the dnc to double down with Kamala and maybe Pete as a running mate.
Please god let this be different than 2016
I’m in the same boat as you, hoping, but if 2016 and this past November have taught me anything, it is that most Americans have the memory of goldfish as soon as election times come around.
Gonna keep my fingers crossed though!
Doesn’t matter what the people want, the democrat’s corporate masters make the decisions.
The actual question that 72% of Democrats support:
Do you support more Democrats like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who are calling on Democrats to adopt a more aggressive stance towards Trump and his administration and “fight harder”, or moderate Democrats who are willing to compromise on Trump issues important to their base?
The question is “do you want to fight Trump more” not “do you support AOC and Bernies progressive agenda”.
It’s interesting that they explicitly, rather than implicitly, chain compromise with Trump to the moderates, and fighting Trump to the progressives. Without that, that number might have even been higher. This reads to me like a solid condemnation of the moderates.
Also of the democratic party by a certain reading since Bernie is an independent and AOC is a Bernie plant hehe 72% would prefer more people outside the current party line.
Democrats won’t abandon their centrist positions as long as the Clintons live. If voters want a party to represent them, they need to get rid of the current ones.
THEN FUCKING DO IT.
If the party “leaders” aren’t with it, kick them the fuck out.
I think that’s what’s going to happen. AOC is taking on Chuck Schumer:
Theres no real taking on until they start calling for a new party
The problem is that the two parties are deeply entrenched and make it extremely difficult to launch third-party or independent challenges in many states. In some states, it may make sense to run as an independent or in a new party. In others, it may be better to challenge them in primarie. I think there may even be states where it makes sense to co-opt the Republican primaries to challenge a sitting centrist Democrat. Whatever the case, you’re under no obligation to remain in any party once you’re elected.
I want democrats to stop offering an olive branch. Stop trying to work with repugnicant MAGAts. They have shown you who they are deep down. They’ll spit on you soon than help you.
Abandon centrist approach and take a hard right turn? The Democratic Party hears you loud and clear! But seriously I do see the Sanders people in places of power I previously have not in the party - this is a very good sign in a very bad time
If we want leftist leadership we have to abandon the Democratic party.
I will be VERY surprised if the Neoliberals who have controlled the DNC for the last 50+ years would willingly give up control.
They proved in 2016 they would rather lose to Trump than allow leftists to change things at the expense of their rich doners.
Nah. We can and should do a tea party style takeover. The iron is hot, let’s strike.
And that’s really the only way to do it in a two party FpTP system.
Political parties that don’t have enough support to run local candidates aren’t serious political parties and never will be.
Trump gets elected
This poster: *surprised Pikachu
I said I would be surprised if he didn’t get elected.
Neoliberals preventing popular leftist movements and blocking meaningful change will get Trump elected again yes. Just like it did in 2016, unless the Neoliberals go away
They won’t go away without a fight anyway, so might as well take over the party rather than making a small new one to compete with the big old one. Neoliberal Dems have a submission kink (judging by their attitude to MAGA) so the left needs to dominate them, not politely compete with them.
Nothing more dominating than a whole new party with actual vitality to it. I think many moderates who lack wealth would jump ship to a Progressive party, if it looks strong. This is why Bernie and AOC have the potential to succeed where the Geronocrats failed.
That is ultimately why Trump got to where he did - by being more lively than the other bastards. Milquetoasts get roasted by default, and the vast majority of the Geronocrats have the vitality of a corpse.
Yeah but Trump did it within the party, right? The Tea Party laid the groundwork and then MAGA took over when Trump won the primary seemingly out of nowhere. Now the old GOP is dead and buried, it’s just the name that remains, but it’s Trump’s party now. (I know the policies are just an acceleration of Bush era politics, but that’s because the old conservatism and current fascism want mainly the same things, it’s just more openly sadistic now… and cultish: swear allegiance to Trump and talk about any policy with “President Trump wants…” like he’s a goddamn emperor). There’s no room for a John McCain or Mitt Romney in the MAGA GOP — hell, even Liz Cheney is siding with Dems now. The problem is the Dems need to change into a party that would give her the finger on principle, which they haven’t. Hell, they’re not only campaigning with Cheney but begging for appeasement with MAGA… That’s a bridge too far for most of their supporters, and that’s why the Dem party is now at its most hated and vulnerable to be taken over by true progressives. Parties can change over time so we shouldn’t dismiss the option, because really they’re only institutions which are as good or bad as the people comprising them.
That said, by all means, I’m not opposed to AOC and Bernie doing this via a third party, just that the infrastructure isn’t really there for them to win. People are uncertain about third parties (even Trump changed his mind because he initially wanted a Patriot Party but gave up on the idea) and it might lead to a three-way race in future elections where Dems eat up votes from the hypothetical Progs. I don’t know if it’s more likely to succeed, it might be in some places — I remember a guy running as an independent and nearly winning in a down-ballot race. Also, thinking back, the third parties just tended to put pressure on the Democrats to implement policies (like with FDR), but they didn’t actually govern. I’m rambling at this point, but I guess the main idea is that I’m just worried that the system needs to change in some fundamental ways for third parties to have any chances. Maybe I’m wrong.
I agree with being lively though. That has to happen with either approach.
Like 60% of Americans want a third party
https://news.gallup.com/poll/512135/support-third-political-party.aspx
People say that but in practice third parties don’t end up with many votes, so there’s a disconnect: either the current third parties aren’t known or appealing enough, or people aren’t voting them because they’re scared of throwing their vote away (a consequence of FPTP), or there’s some serious disenfranchisement going on and that requires fixing the system before third parties will be viable. Hell, even the Dems are barely viable, they always eek out victories even when winning the popular vote. All that gerrymandering and voter disenfranchisement probably hits third parties way harder.
My guess is that third parties will only be viable when something like Ranked Choice Voting gets implemented instead of First Past The Post. Also, a better selection of third parties because the current one is kinda pathetic.
when something like Ranked Choice Voting gets implemented
RCV is illegal in at least 4 states right now. The GOP is making it illegal everywhere they can.
