🇺🇸 Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC P - Part 3

[Man in the Suit]

Nah, it's fine if you're anti-abortion and/or block any even mildly progressive piece of legislation so long as you have a D next to your name instead of an R.

Don't need legislation when you got the real progressives having twitter feuds with Susan Sarandon.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

They are going to back Sinema and Manchin's reelection should they run. That doesn't mean anybody else has to. I wouldn't if I lived in that district or state but I get their reasoning for a 'big tent' strategy. Progressives cannot win in every state or district in the United States and replacing him with a newbie is a gamble.

Cuellar has won every election since 2004 and has a pro-Democratic voting record obviously excepting reproductive rights (where he is vote does NOT affect the passage of legislation there) and he did much better than Biden did in 2020 there by being to his right with that there.

TX 28th Congressional District - 2020 election
Biden (D) 51.6%
Cuellar (D) 58.3%

It doesn't have to a be progressive. The idea that you have to swing completely to a progressive is nonsense. There are middle grounds. The Dems can't argue they have principles, and then have no red lines.

While Manchin is one thing, Sinema certainly is another. Any strongly backed Dem in the primary would crush her if they ran it correctly. Sinema didn't win because she's a conservative. She didn't even run as a conservative.

What is the point of a big tent party if it ruins voting on policy? I have heard so many here complain about Manchin and Sinema, and now you are arguing in favor of backing not only Manchin, but Sinema, who can easily be replaced? That means they aren't an excuse for why legislation doesn't pass. It means they Dems want them there. Which means they are no longer an excuse for why they don't get things done. They are simply cool with the blame being place on them.

Also overall, what you just described has not been their ****ty strategy. Even in solid blue districts they back conservative candidates, who they know will be an issue with plenty of policy they say they want. Why?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

They actually did run on solid platforms in 2018. 2020 was a more the Dems not adapting to the pandemic in terms of their voter outreach.

What was the solid platforms and how many of them did they deliver on, that didn't involve, "stop Trump"?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Don't need legislation when you got the real progressives having twitter feuds with Susan Sarandon.

They spend more time attacking the left then they ever do attacking the Republicans.

Geninue question for those that like to complain about leftist, how is this suppose to get them to vote for the Dems? Most of them do, but why is it always "their fault" the Dems can't win independents in higher numbers? That they can't win over every last leftist? When does it become the Dems fault for having bad platforms and attacking the people they say should vote for them?

 

[Sithborg]

Also overall, what you just described has not been their ****ty strategy. Even in solid blue districts they back conservative candidates, who they know will be an issue with plenty of policy they say they want. Why?

Institutional trauma. Gingrinch's Contract with America strategy was a wide success, and lead to devastating losses. Hell, the leadership is ancient enough that they still have memories of Regan's victories. Hell, Reagan is definitely the source of it all, as that era was the key to the eroding of traditional Democratic views.

 

[Sithborg]

What was the solid platforms and how many of them did they deliver on, that didn't involve, "stop Trump"?

They focused on healthcare, which the GOP had just failed to kill. 2020, yes, was a lot more Trump focused, which is why the downballot hurt.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Institutional trauma. Gingrinch's Contract with America strategy was a wide success, and lead to devastating losses. Hell, the leadership is ancient enough that they still have memories of Regan's victories. Hell, Reagan is definitely the source of it all, as that era was the key to the eroding of traditional Democratic views.

Yeah, I'm going to go with those in power being entrenched and being very wealthy with how the party is run.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

They focused on healthcare, which the GOP had just failed to kill. 2020, yes, was a lot more Trump focused, which is why the downballot hurt.

You're going to have to give me some examples of this being the driving force. Because I lived it to, and that is not what I saw. Also, what were the improvements on healthcare coming out of 2018?

 

[Sithborg]

You're going to have to give me some examples of this being the driving force. Because I lived it to, and that is not what I saw. Also, what were the improvements on healthcare coming out of 2018?

Nothing, because we still had a split Congress. Running on a platform is not the same as actually delivering.

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

The Pelosi endorsement probably doesn't help anyway.

Nobody really cares about her in the same way nearly all the Rs lap up Trump's flop sweat.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Don't need legislation when you got the real progressives having twitter feuds with Susan Sarandon.

More on this. The correct answer here would be, whatever our differences, the errors of the past should not stop us from doing better going forward. Help us. Whatever Sarandon and her 5 supporters have to say in response, is whatever. But what Swalwell did here is a great example of how you divide a voting base from a level of actual power. And those celebrating it, are the same ones who can't fathom why actual leftist might not vote Dem. Not that it matters in the power centers that the party loses all the time. They're they should be winning independents. And do you know what independents like? Leftist policy. The same policy Dems like to say is terrible and thus make toxic. Meaning they have nothing but, "we will be nicer conservatives" then the Republicans.

I hate my life.

 

[Snow Queen]

When I look at the Democratic establishment, the impression I get isn't fear. The impression I get is old, rich, out of touch people want to continue to maintain their wealth and power. When Pelosi goes on the defense over the idea of politicians playing the stock market or Biden professes having no sympathy for younger voters, I don't think that's fear. They are who they are, and they keep showing us all.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Nothing, because we still had a split Congress. Running on a platform is not the same as actually delivering.

Running on a platform you know you will never deliver. Now that definitely sounds like the Dems.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

When I look at the Democratic establishment, the impression I get isn't fear. The impression I get is old, rich, out of touch people want to continue to maintain their wealth and power. When Pelosi goes on the defense over the idea of politicians playing the stock market or Biden professes having no sympathy for younger voters, I don't think that's fear. They are who they are, and they keep showing us all.

I think it's fear. Fear for their own personal position. They are selfish. I get why some Leftist don't like Warren, but I never feel like she's a selfish person. I feel like she actually cares. Wakanda Forever Nancy? Conservative Clyburn? Conquering of Corn Pop Joe? It's all about their legacy, their bank accounts, their power.

 

[Sithborg]

Running on a platform you know you will never deliver. Now that definitely sounds like the Dems.

Wasn't 2018 when there was a lot of progressive wins, though? Namely the Squad?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Wasn't 2018 when there was a lot of progressive wins, though? Namely the Squad?

Individual races aren't the overall party platform. AOC won running against the party establishment and platform. Which is my big issue with a party that finds any reason they can to back a conservative. See Nina Turner's races. A solid blue district, where Turner was ahead, until the party establishment and local Republicans came together to stop a progressive from getting into congress.

 

[CaptainWagner]

The midterms and 2024 are going to be a disaster.

What is the point of having a party, then, if literally anyone can call themselves a Dem? Saying "their is no litmus test" is saying "there is no bar." It's pathetic.

Well Senator Warren you better find somebody ready to reform the filibuster, either 2 RepubliQans (good luck) or by increasing the Democratic Senate majority to >=52 while holding the House majority in November. Because these two chuckleheads have demonstrated they don't give a ****.

This is so pathetic. They're just proudly parading around bragging about singlehandedly blocking their own party's agenda with zero consequences. We spent the last six years watching any Republican that didn't toe the Trump line get bullied out of a career, but Dem leaders are too polite to be rude to these ******** in public. They should be barred from caucus, they should not be receiving a single cent of party funds.

How are we supposed to believe Dems actually care about abortion rights and LGBTQ+ rights and so on and so forth if, in the face of an existential assault, they throw up their hands and tell us to accept that members of their own party are free to get in the way?

 

[Snow Queen]

How are we supposed to believe Dems actually care about abortion rights and LGBTQ+ rights and so on and so forth if, in the face of an existential assault, they throw up their hands and tell us to accept that members of their own party are free to get in the way?

“What happens if you have a state change the law saying that children who are LGBTQ can’t be in classrooms with other children?” Biden said at the White House.

“Is that legit under the way that the decision is written? What are the next things that are going to be attacked? Because this MAGA crowd is really the most extreme political organization that’s existed in American history — in recent American history.”

This quote really annoyed me yesterday and it took me a while to put my finger on just why. There was a video I was watching the other morning that mentioned the thought that one of the issues Republican law makers have in writing discriminatory legislation about trans people is they often don't know enough about the subject to write it with any precision. This reminds me of that, but the inverse. Because the threat when it comes to kids isn't "segregation but for gay/trans people now." The threat is "we're going to make the social conditions for your existence so bad you're going to kill yourself for us." It's outing kids to parents, it's restricting access to medical care, it's taking children from their families. And that needs to be understood if you're going to effectively combat that. It's also not a hypothetical. The only thing that has temporarily stopped Abbott stealing trans kids from their family and undoubtedly forcibly medically detransitioning them is a legal discussion on if he himself had the power to enact it. Not that what he's doing is horrific. And I just... I'm tired, ****.

 

[Lily Adler]

This quote really annoyed me yesterday and it took me a while to put my finger on just why. There was a video I was watching the other morning that mentioned the thought that one of the issues Republican law makers have in writing discriminatory legislation about trans people is they often don't know enough about the subject to write it with any precision. This reminds me of that, but the inverse. Because the threat when it comes to kids isn't "segregation but for gay/trans people now." The threat is "we're going to make the social conditions for your existence so bad you're going to kill yourself for us." It's outing kids to parents, it's restricting access to medical care, it's taking children from their families. And that needs to be understood if you're going to effectively combat that. It's also not a hypothetical. The only thing that has temporarily stopped Abbott stealing trans kids from their family and undoubtedly forcibly medically detransitioning them is a legal discussion on if he himself had the power to enact it. Not that what he's doing is horrific. And I just... I'm tired, ****.

Classical democratic liberalism tells us the government cannot make decisions on moral issues such as abortion and gay marriage. They must remain objective and hope things work themselves out or in this case get settled in the court.

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

Fetterman reaches majority support in new Pennsylvania Senate [Democratic primary] poll (53%-14%)

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

 

[Holy Slapper]

What is the point of having a party, then, if literally anyone can call themselves a Dem? Saying "their is no litmus test" is saying "there is no bar." It's pathetic.

This is so pathetic. They're just proudly parading around bragging about singlehandedly blocking their own party's agenda with zero consequences. We spent the last six years watching any Republican that didn't toe the Trump line get bullied out of a career, but Dem leaders are too polite to be rude to these ******** in public. They should be barred from caucus, they should not be receiving a single cent of party funds.

How are we supposed to believe Dems actually care about abortion rights and LGBTQ+ rights and so on and so forth if, in the face of an existential assault, they throw up their hands and tell us to accept that members of their own party are free to get in the way?

It's not about being polite, it's about these two people being capable of switching parties at ease. Something Republicans would never do. Republicans are easier to "bully" because of that.

 

[CaptainWagner]

It's not about being polite, it's about these two people being capable of switching parties at ease. Something Republicans would never do. Republicans are easier to "bully" because of that.

And? Force their hand. Dems are not going to get any less done if Manchin and Sinema leave the party altogether. At least it confirms to the base that there are standards to be in the party. As of now, Schumer, Pelosi and co. are loudly declaring that THERE IS NO STANDARD.

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

 

[Marvolo]

"Globally"...

Is that implying that the GOP wants to prosecute Americans living abroad that have abortions?