272
Ahead of Chair Vote, Progressives Say DNC 'Failing Disastrously' to Learn From Loss to Trump
(www.commondreams.org)
this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2025
272 points (96.9% liked)
politics
19614 readers
4661 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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.
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.
Democrats definitely don't want a stateless society. So they definitely should not listen to leftists.
In which case, I cannot argue with. Which means the Democrats most certainly do not support the interests of the working class, and just want power over others. Which means, none of us should be voting for them, or the GOP.
Plenty of people in the working class don't want a stateless society, either.
Plenty of people in the working class want a fascist dictator too... That's why its our job to work on raising class consciousness still.
And yes, the majoritarianism argument is to be had, as well.
So by "interests of the working class", you don't mean "listen to the working class". You mean "tell the working class what their interests are".
Classic leftist. And you accuse Democrats of wanting power over others.
No, I mean "listen to, and address them"... ie, the economy is in the shitter. The working class is telling you its in the shitter. So, agree that's what they are facing, and then doing something about it, that actually solves the problem.
So, no, I do not mean "telling them what their interests are", we already know what the interests of the working class is: Economic security, housing security, food security, and access to health care and education.
A lot of working class folks think the causes of those issues are: Brown people, women working, women voting, not being christian... etc etc. All of those are easily debunked as the cause, so the job is to educate them by showing them the root cause of those issues: The current ruling class of oligarchs, not their fellow workers.
Are you listening when the vast majority tell you they don't want a stateless society?
A stateless society is an end goal, and there's much work between now and that. Sure, they don't want one now, they say, but ever notice how often the complaint is "The government is hurting me, and I want it to stop..."?
Eventually, the solution to that is to get rid of the problem... The state. But that can't happen until class consciousness has reached the revolutionary point, and the US is double timing it's way to that, given the current Gini coefficient.
In the meantime, however, we CAN work to take power from the state, and giving it back to the people, one step at a time.
Please don't fall into that trap of thinking there's a Magic Button that just turns everything Full Communism.
No, I haven't noticed that.
In fact, that sounds like something Ronald Reagan used to say:
Reagan wanted to shrink the state too. Maybe you really should direct your advice to the GOP.
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?
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....
If leftists think Trump best listens to the working class, then leftists should start advising Republicans instead of Democrats.
Trump agreed with the working class that the economy is in the shitter. He lied about wanting to fix it.
Harris declared anyone who thought the economy was in the shitter was hallucinating, and they just need to shut up, and vote for her, because "I'm not Donald".
That's the difference. And Harris' strategy was a losing one.
No leftist has any illusion on if either oligarch truly wanted to represent us, rather than their actual constituents: other oligarchs.
So lying to the working class is your winning strategy.
Thanks, Lenin.
I suppose that's a take... I mean, the Dems could of course lie to the working class, just to win votes. Like they did under Obama, Clinton, etc. Or, they could, you know, not lie to the working class, and actually enact change?
You just told me the difference between Harris and Trump is that Trump lied to the working class, and that's why Harris lost.
The only logical conclusion is that you believe lying to the working class is a winning strategy.
The difference is Harris lied to the working class too, by stating the economy is doing great. Or, she's completely disconnected with the reality of the working class?
No, that's your very, very, myopic reading of what I wrote... Especially after clarifying. It's almost like you're being purposefully obtuse, or something.
The economy is traditionally measured by GDP growth, unemployment, and inflation. All those numbers were good when Harris was running.
If you want to redefine "good economy", that's on you.
Ah, so we only care about the numbers that show if the economy is working for the oligarchs, and not the working class?
I don't care if the economy is good for oligarchs, and makes it easy and profitable to exploit the working class... And, honestly, the working class voters don't care if stonks go up, if their stomachs are empty.
I'm not "redefining" a "good economy"... There are many numbers behind an economy.... Wealth distribution, maternal deaths, infant deaths, educational outcomes, monetary velocity, etc etc.
We can pick any set of numbers to talk about, but objectively, the economy is not good, nor has it been good, for the working class since 2002 or so.
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?
I don't know.
But I do know who Democrats need to win back if they want to win in 2028. And those voters are mostly centrists.
Ah yes, the centrists! You know the ones who "both sides" everything, and turns out? They just vote Trump?
How many more centrists do you think the Dems will need to court? Wasn't Dick Cheney enough? You know, the war criminal?
How about, like, maybe just trying to listen to the working class?
Im dying to know: what sort of voters do you think democrats were focusing on grabbing for this past election?
Centrists. The ones who decided this election. And also decided the 2020 election.
So, by "centrist" you mean Reich Wingers?
So, to win, they just need to become a more right wing party? I'm sure that's a winning strategy... Which it may be. Its certainly not a strategy to represent the working class, though.
By centrist, I'm specifically referring to Latinos and Gen Z males. They were Biden voters in 2020 and shifted to Trump in 2024. Democrats need to win those groups back. And they don't seem to care much about class war.
That's not what a centrist is.
Have you bothered to look into why younger Latinos and Gen Z males flocked to the fascist candidate? It wasn't because fascism is closer to the center than the Dems are... Spoiler, go play some multiplayer FPS to hear why.
Nobody knows for sure why, not even people who play FPS games.
What is clear is that Democrats need to win them back. Democrats don't seem to think leftism will win them back, and I agree.
I dunno, the racial slurs, homophobic slurs, misogynistic slurs tend to give it away to me...
We disagree on the latter, maybe. But then what's your solution? Dems become just as openly fascist as the GOP?
I mean, just say you don't want a liberated working class at that point, and just start saying the quiet part out loud: The Dems and the GOP are two faces of the same ruling oligarchs.
If the goal is power, for power's sake, do you really want those people telling you what to do? Do you enjoy the image of a boot stomping on a human face for all eternity?
Democrats won in 1992, 1996, 2008, 2012, and 2020 without resorting to open fascism. That's five of the last nine elections, which is roughly what you'd expect in a two party system.
I'm confident they can do it again in 2028.
No. But that's an image of what has historically happened after leftists took power.
It's also what I expect from a uniparty, with two faces, each getting "equal time".
Maybe. If we have elections.
Ah, you're one of those people that also think North Korea is a Democratic Republic ran by the people, huh?
I forgot all about North Korea.
So no. I was thinking of all the faces stomped by Lenin, Mao, and Pol Pot.
Right, you think North Korea is a Democratic Republic ran by and for the people, because, well, they claim to be.
Now, extrapolate that to the USSR, which honestly wasn't even socialist since about 1918 when they decided to murder workers for going on strike, and also murdering the people who actually made the revolution happen.
And, the Nazis too... They weren't actually socialists, you know, right?
So you're saying that democrats focused on catering to centrists for 2025, lost spectacularly, and the new strategy needs to be.... catering to centrists?
The DNC needs to hire you. Something something, the definition of insanity is....
I'm saying Democrats successfully won centrists in 2020 (and 1992, and 1996, and 2008, and 2012) but failed to do so in 2024.
They need to understand why. But the solution is probably not "be less centrist".