this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2024
7 points (100.0% liked)

Political Discussion and Commentary

204 readers
148 users here now

A place to discuss politics and offer political commentary. Self posts are preferred, but links to current events and news are allowed. Opinion pieces are welcome on a case by case basis, and discussion of and disagreement about issues is encouraged!

The intent is for this community to be an area for open & respectful discussion on current political issues, news & events, and that means we all have a responsibility to be open, honest, and sincere. We place as much emphasis on good content as good behavior, but the latter is more important if we want to ensure this community remains healthy and vibrant.

Content Rules:

  1. Self posts preferred.
  2. Opinion pieces and editorials are allowed on a case by case basis.
  3. No spam or self promotion.
  4. Do not post grievances about other communities or their moderators.

Commentary Rules

  1. Don’t be a jerk or do anything to prevent honest discussion.
  2. Stay on topic.
  3. Don’t criticize the person, criticize the argument.
  4. Provide credible sources whenever possible.
  5. Report bad behavior, please don’t retaliate. Reciprocal bad behavior will reflect poorly on both parties.
  6. Seek rule enforcement clarification via private message, not in comment threads.
  7. Abide by Lemmy's terms of service (attacks on other users, privacy, discrimination, etc).

Please try to up/downvote based on contribution to discussion, not on whether you agree or disagree with the commenter.

Partnered Communities:

Politics

Science

founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Who decides what policies the DNC chooses for their national platform? Obviously corporate donors effect the bottom line of the organization, but who are the power brokers internally at the DNC that make the decisions to create those policies that favor corporations over people?

This is their leadership team, but something tells me they're not the ones making the decisions to not advocate for Medicare for all, or other widely popular left wing policies.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 6 points 3 hours ago (10 children)

It’s a combination of:

  1. Political consultants whose grasp of reality for normal people and the problems they face is nonexistent
  2. Donors, who add to that lack of understanding an explicitly hostile attitude to anything left-wing if it will cost them or their clients money
  3. The politicians themselves, who rarely if ever interact with anyone outside of these three groups

There are some exceptions, of course, but they’re rare. DC is really an incredibly strange and sociopathic place on a human cultural level.

This is why I don’t understand the attitude that the way to progress is to keep punishing the Democrats until they figure it out on their own. The ones who haven’t figured it out, which is most of them, aren’t going to figure it out, any more than Google is going to realize that ruining search was a bad idea and they need to start making products people like again. It’s just not in their DNA to think that way.

[–] m_f@midwest.social 3 points 2 hours ago (3 children)

I'd agree that it's a bad idea to try and convince any existing leadership to move left. The post came across as more of a "How can we take over the party like the Tea Party did to Republicans" though, which seems productive.

[–] WanderingVentra@lemm.ee 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

The tea party was still an astroturfed movement by many of those same rich people that were in power, like the Koch brothers.

[–] m_f@midwest.social 2 points 2 hours ago

That's true, but it was still an effective hostile takeover. Can it be done without support from billionaires, or did it only work to the tea party because it was bankrolled by them?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)