Everyone is terrified of the word socialism, God damn
At this point the Democratic brand is so tarnished that this might be best to abandon it. More people now approve of Tesla than Democrats.
Republicans started their takeover by running a ton of local candidates. And in a lot of places having a D next to your name is an automatic defeat.
If republican voters agree with progressive goals - as many claim - then the best way to actually get things done is to run as a progressive independent in these local races.
Our two parties are engrained at this point, for better or worse, and will not change until we change our First Past the Post voting system. Everyone that’s disenfranchised with the Democratic party in this thread right now represents the owl voters in this video - watch it please, it’s very clear at explaining why what you are suggesting will absolutely NOT WORK and will allow the GOP to win in perpetuity.
I think most state parties are ok, and the DNC just got it’s furtherest left chair in 30 years…
But the idea behind this, that politicians are loyal to voters over party is a lot better than where party comes first. Because helping voters is hard, and if it’s not the priority it doesn’t get done.
When we help voters when able, we have the numbers for majorities.
I think this is the same shift for Republicans post-Obama. Every Republican started saying, “I’m an independent.” and the Tea Party started. Back then, Trump’s claim to fame was the birther movement, which eventually became MAGA & the presidential run.
Nowadays, I have very little respect or identification with Democrats. It feels like a failed party. I think they’ll either transform more left (see Bernie & AOC’s shifts & populism) or die out to something else. I like the Working Families Party because it focuses on the economic disparities rather than identity politics.
I’m glad we found more freedom for more people, but I think the Left has lost cohesion in doing so. We don’t need to all be the same, but the message used to be “Working class vs. Rich” and the Right manipulated that into its current populism. Now there’s the “Liberal Elites” that are out of touch, and recent events make it feel that way, not just propaganda any longer.
I’m just a bit worried about any potential schism among the Democrats because the electoral system in the US is still incredibly broken and will always gravitate towards a 2-party state.
To me, it seems easier for the Democrats to rebrand as more left-leaning than they currently are and try to remain a united front, rather than splinter into several competing parties.
If anything is to supplant the Democratic party, it would need to be one party supplanting the whole of the Democrats, or else Republicans will remain a plurality and retain control of the US government until the electoral process changes or their numbers diminish.
Well, I suppose one way to look at it is that we needed the unified front against Trump, but didn’t get it. So for now, and especially for the midterms, maybe now’s the time to get an alternative party started?
And then they can choose to run a presidential candidate in 2028 or not, depending on the momentum they get?
I dunno. Mostly thinking out loud here.
So long as they don’t sit on their hands doing nothing and then decide to run one candidate in 2028. You don’t lead by taking the top seat, you lead by building a base that wants you to lead.
Nowadays, I have very little respect or identification with Democrats. It feels like a failed party
Yeah, but lots of us reached that point decades earlier…
08 Obama was the lone bright point going back forty years of the party.
Hell, at Carter’s time he faced a fractured party because he was moving to far right. So really it’s more like 50 years.
Dems have lost the plot for longer than most of us have been alive, and I’m all about reducing the strength of the party as an organization.
But we still need a DNC and state parties if only to facilitate primaries, that’s a very important function.
What would it take to get a primary system up and running for Independents (or more accurately I guess it would have to be a proper party for a primary to make sense)?
I assume it’s some combo of setting up the event hosting ($$$) and somehow coming up with the rules for deciding on how to operate the primary (schedule, thresholds for qualification, voting system, etc). And unfortunately I have no idea how to accomplish either.
What would it take to get a primary system up and running for Independents (or more accurately I guess it would have to be a proper party for a primary to make sense)?
A lot, because you’d need a national and one for each state…
But the time to talk about this was anytime in the last fifty years up till a month ago when we got a DNC chair who will let a fair primary happen…
You’re trying to fix a problem we literally just fixed, and in doing so likely hand control back to neoliberals.
You want to know why it took mainstream media up until the last month to start talking shit about Dems?
It’s because the neoliberals just lost power
Now is the time to rally around the new Dem party, not make a new one
Dude should be saying we need our own tea party movement where we take over the Democrat party. Not that we need to fracture ourselves even more.
That said, I think there is an argument for independent runs in purely local politics in areas that only have Republicans run for things and have a hatred for Democrats they can’t seem to move past.
Regardless. Bernie should know how our system works by now, he should know that fracturing has and will always be a stupid idea that only removes power from the leftists and progressives in the country and then gives it to the Republicans. Which then makes the Democrats move right because the progressives have left the building. This is just fucking stupid on a non local politics scale and Bernie should know better.
Dude should be saying we need our own tea party movement where we take over the Democrat party. Not that we need to fracture ourselves even more.
He already started it in 2016.
That said, I think there is an argument for independent runs in purely local politics in areas that only have Republicans run for things and have a hatred for Democrats they can’t seem to move past.
Yes. Or even run in the Republican primary (might be easier to get on the primary ballot than to get on the general election ballot).
Bernie should know how our system works by now,
Yes, and he’s saying run as independents despite very much knowing how the system works.
So then he’s saying “Split your votes and make sure no one you support ever gets into power anywhere above the local level because the democrats suck and the system is broken”?
I think he is saying in the nicest way possible, the the democratic party no longer represents us and we should be using our vote so we can have representation that does.
I get what he’s saying, but the history of third parties in the US says this is futile. Then again, the last thing the Democrats need right now is extensive party in-fighting when they should be united.
Most people united after Hilary was made the candidate; and they lost. People united after Harris was the candidate; they still lost.
Best thing to do is start from scratch, away from this bullshit democratic party.
As it stands, they will never agree to what the people want. Free healthcare is one example.
Watch the video! It’s why what Bernie (who I absolutely love as a senator) said won’t work.
We can’t do SHIT until we fix our voting system.
Well, then we’re not doing shit. That’s not going to happen at this point unless the system collapses completely, which you really don’t want to happen.
Hell, run as Republicans and infiltrate.
worked the opposite way for fetterman
I think he may have actually been progressive before the strokes.
Fuck yeah, there it is. Let’s go. New party. This one’s dead. November was the DNC’s last chance. Time for a new party. DNC leadership and political consultants aren’t allowed anywhere near this one.
I love it but it’s real risky
Can it get any worse?
The decision needs to be made right now, because there are always going to be those that encourage voting 3rd party like 3 months before the election even though none of the groundwork has been done for the previous 4 years.
If the work is started now it’s a lot better then 3 months before the election where it really just syphons votes away from at least preventing Republicans from winning.
Here in the Netherlands our house of representatives has 150 seats and they’re filled by 15 parties, the biggest of whom has 37 seats, the second 25. People sometimes suggest that political fragmentation makes things more complicated, because usually at least 3 or 4 parties are needed to form a coalition. I don’t really think it matters because I look at it this way: there are different views on things in society and compromises need to be found one way or another, it’s where this takes place that’s different. In one case it’s on the conference of 1 or 2 big parties, in the other case it happens in parlement/government where the many small parties meet. The benefit of a many-party system is that people actually got a choice, if you’re on the left and don’t like what a particular party is doing, you can pick another leftwing party. You don’t have that option in a 2-party system, you’ll probably stick with your party despite everything you don’t like about it. Here, if a party really fucks up, they’re done for, a party can get 20% one election and 1% the next one. The system is more dynamic. At the same time, the actual governments usually have an overlap, like there will be different coalitions, but our center-right party has been in the coalition for over a decade now. There may be a certain charm to knowing that every other election a completely new set of people forms the government, but that also has many downsides I think. There’ll be little continuity, republicans undo everything democrats have done and in 4 years we’ll see the reverse. Haven’t heard any really convincing arguments against political fragmentations. It’s just the path towards it that may be difficult if you’re in a 2 party system, because as soon as you go third party, you’re hurting your side of the spectrum. What would be helpfull is if it would happen on both sides simultaneously. Can’t you setup a structure where people from both sides would together commit to voting third-party?
