politics
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.
- 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.
- 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
view the rest of the comments
This is absolutely meaningless unless you put it in context and offer solutions. You aren't offering anything of value to the discourse of how to improve the country or the Democratic Party.
I have absolutely no issue criticizing the Democratic Party, especially right wing Democrats. The Democratic party is incredibly diverse from an ideological perspective, there are plenty of good progressives pushing for the policies we both agree on. The only way we can get that shit done is by gaining more support. So instead of painting the entire party as a bunch of corporate goons with nothing to offer, why not advocate for the progressive wing and grow their influence by primarying conservative Democrats? You want to get rid of hypocrisy and corruption, there's your road map.
My original intention here was to try to convince people to think critically when hearing a politician's stump speech, which I believe is adding value to the discourse.
I surely didn't have lofty goals to "improve the country or the Democratic Party" when I opened Lemmy today lol.
And I do believe the DNC and the donor class are a bunch of corporate goons who have little to offer, and almost all Democratic politicians are subservient to this superstructure.
Let me ask you, how do you suggest we overcome the institutional hurdles when running a progressive primary challenge? The last 2 progressive primary challengers I volunteered for had extreme problems finding vendors to supply them with the basic supplies that they need to run a campaign. This is because the DNC has a policy of blacklisting any vendors that work with a progressive primary challenger.
Organizing and bring more people into the tent. At the end of the day, there aren't enough progressives in the Democratic Party right now. We have not done a good job getting people who support progressive ideas out to vote. Claiming that all Democrats are bound to the DNC and corporations doesn't help, it actually hurts progressives more than anything. Why would a voter show up to a primary to boot someone like Gottheimer if they think it's a pointless endeavor?
Having DNC support is an advantage for sure, but that doesn't mean we can't win elections. Progressives have made gains every election in spite of the DNC. If you're already volunteering for progressive candidates, that's great, keep doing that. Recruit people. Donate money if you can. Talk to people you know. Instead of saying only the party is controlled by goons point out the opportunities we have to make the party more progressive and why it matters. We as individuals have to make up for the advantage that a conservative Democrat has being backed by the DNC. It won't come from anywhere else.
I've posted this elsewhere, but look at the "Conservative" playbook for the last 40 years. Right wing crazies were able to take over the entire Republican party this way. They've hit school boards, city councils, statehouses, and congress with hard right primary opponents for decades. They were able to slowly rachet the party further and further right.
Their goals are abhorrent, but the strategy is sound. This is a game of incremental progress and electoral strategy. We will never topple the Democratic donor class or establishment party members until we understand that. They've fortified their position. We need a siege, not a bomb. A bomb leaves us with nothing to improve. And whether we like it or not, right now the Democratic Party/DNC is what is keeping the GOP from erasing every bit of progress we've made.
Well it sounds like we agree on most things then, except on how to communicate to voters. I have found that being honest with voters about things like the corruption of the DNC and the serious flaws of the ACA actually helps to win them over.
Try to do a door knocking campaign and act like the Democratic Party is perfect, most voters will smell the bullshit.
It only takes a few seconds to say "yes most Democrats are corporate lackeys, but not this candidate, and here's why..." Acknowledging the flaws of the party does not suppress turnout. It is the flaws themselves that do the suppression.