Relampago. Posted January 9 Posted January 9 1 minute ago, superglowy said: So grassroots build up progressive candidates and Primary establishment Dems with no need to further empower Republicans. Why is that never progressives answer? This is what progressives tried to do with Bernie and other Justice Dems and then the Democratic Party kneecapped and plotted to primary these people and their campaigns, essentially telling progressives they are not welcomed in the party. Why do liberals not want to take responsibility for this? Let's even entertain the idea that Bernie would have lost both primaries whether the DNC cared or not— sure, we can say that. Still, the reality is the DNC did this and made it clear progressives will not be welcomed in the party. So why would progressives want to be a part of a party that has made it so clear they do not share their values and if they try to push for those values, they will fight back harder than they do against Republicans. Democracy should work because the politicians are supposed to listen to their constituents. The constituents do not need to compromise their values in order to vote or abstain. I know this sounds like a purity test, but I truly believe that a Democratic would just need to *truly* advocate for a single-payer healthcare system and progressives would go feral defending them. They don't even need to touch on minimum wage, climate change, immigration, etc. We are literally begging for the bare minimum: give people access to healthcare so they don't have to die. I don't think it's too much to ask for. And maybe it wouldn't even pass in the end, but just advocating for M4A and normalizing that conversation would be such a big help in the minds of Americans. 2
lyk251 Posted January 9 Posted January 9 25 minutes ago, Relampago. said: This is what progressives tried to do with Bernie and other Justice Dems and then the Democratic Party kneecapped and plotted to primary these people and their campaigns, essentially telling progressives they are not welcomed in the party. Why do liberals not want to take responsibility for this? Let's even entertain the idea that Bernie would have lost both primaries whether the DNC cared or not— sure, we can say that. Still, the reality is the DNC did this and made it clear progressives will not be welcomed in the party. So why would progressives want to be a part of a party that has made it so clear they do not share their values and if they try to push for those values, they will fight back harder than they do against Republicans. Democracy should work because the politicians are supposed to listen to their constituents. The constituents do not need to compromise their values in order to vote or abstain. I know this sounds like a purity test, but I truly believe that a Democratic would just need to *truly* advocate for a single-payer healthcare system and progressives would go feral defending them. They don't even need to touch on minimum wage, climate change, immigration, etc. We are literally begging for the bare minimum: give people access to healthcare so they don't have to die. I don't think it's too much to ask for. And maybe it wouldn't even pass in the end, but just advocating for M4A and normalizing that conversation would be such a big help in the minds of Americans. Why are you guys don't try to fix it when DEM in power and the rights of your people are not at risk ? How will GOP in power help you reach your goals ?
Relampago. Posted January 9 Posted January 9 I do have to laugh at Republicans pointing fingers at California/LA, being ravaged by yet another once-in-a-lifetime disaster. Meanwhile, Ron Desanctimonious fumbled the hurricane recovery in Florida and other states/people rejecting FEMA assistance. Can't wait to see what hurricane season 2025 brings, and how they twist that when Trump inevitably fumbles that as well, just like he did with Maria. 1
superglowy Posted January 9 Posted January 9 1 minute ago, Relampago. said: This is what progressives tried to do with Bernie and other Justice Dems and then the Democratic Party kneecapped and plotted to primary these people and their campaigns, essentially telling progressives they are not welcomed in the party. Why do liberals not want to take responsibility for this? Let's even entertain the idea that Bernie would have lost both primaries whether the DNC cared or not— sure, we can say that. Still, the reality is the DNC did this and made it clear progressives will not be welcomed in the party. So why would progressives want to be a part of a party that has made it so clear they do not share their values and if they try to push for those values, they will fight back harder than they do against Republicans. Democracy should work because the politicians are supposed to listen to their constituents. The constituents do not need to compromise their values in order to vote or abstain. I know this sounds like a purity test, but I truly believe that a Democratic would just need to *truly* advocate for a single-payer healthcare system and progressives would go feral defending them. They don't even need to touch on minimum wage, climate change, immigration, etc. We are literally begging for the bare minimum: give people access to healthcare so they don't have to die. I don't think it's too much to ask for. And maybe it wouldn't even pass in the end, but just advocating for M4A and normalizing that conversation would be such a big help in the minds of Americans. How then are progressives going to usher in this wave of change with Healthcare and M4A and gun control and increased minimum wage etc. if they can't win Democratic primaries? This is them competing in friendlier waters, how then do they take out the GOP and restructure these pillars of American life? There this constant narrative that democrats 'won't let them'. THATS who is gonna usher in a progressive utopia? People who are only able to get power if someone hands it to them? I understand how it should work but these are insane times. Republicans have gone full tilt evil and have the power to handicap any political movement that tries to beat them. Democracy may very well be crushed under an American fascist regime that wants to roll back civil rights to the early 1900s and all you hear is '….yeah, but the democrats aren't good enough good guys, so it pleases me that the bad guys are gonna be in control, that'll show 'em'. I understand the push for M4A, but when you end up not getting that but also losing any ground in getting that along with other rights, what's the point?
Relampago. Posted January 9 Posted January 9 Just now, lyk251 said: Why are you guys don't try to fix it when DEM in power and the rights of your people are not at risk ? How will GOP in power help you reach your goals ? Why do people think progressives want Republicans in power? It's more like we want neither (or at least one to do better and have better policy), it's not an either or question. But to answer your question, progressives are always trying to fix things regardless of who's in power. That's kinda the difference between progressive parties and the Democratic Party. Progressives organize and continue pushing for their goals even when defeated electorally. Democrats seem to double down on their failed campaigns and run the same campaign time and time again, if not worse! See: Clinton -> Biden (actually a decently progressive campaign in comparison, it just didn't come to fruition fully in the end!) -> Harris (ran arguably the most conservative campaign of the three and mega-bombed!) I anticipate that the strategy won't change in 2028 either, although I hope it does. I think Democrats will see the national shift right and think, as they always do: We gotta go FURTHER right! Be ready for mass deportation to be added to the DNC Platform soon! /s 1
VOSS Posted January 9 Posted January 9 8 hours ago, Vermillion said: While Karen Bass really dropped the ball here redirecting hundreds of millions of firefighter funds Rick Caruso her mayoral opponent complaining throughout this piece wouldn't have fixed the water infrastructure either. Also the LA Times entire reporting direction is no longer objective due to its new owner so there's that to deal with. And no, I'm not just talking the opinion bent either. Wait, are you telling me the new LA Times owner did not block the Kamala endorsement due to Gaza, as was claimed? Color me shocked. 1
Vermillion Posted January 9 Posted January 9 1 minute ago, VOSS said: Wait, are you telling me the new LA Times owner did not block the Kamala endorsement due to Gaza, as was claimed? Color me shocked. There's context here to this framing I clearly need to be caught up on, apparently. Also the font size was not deliberate, so sorry about that
Relampago. Posted January 9 Posted January 9 4 minutes ago, superglowy said: How then are progressives going to usher in this wave of change with Healthcare and M4A and gun control and increased minimum wage etc. if they can't win Democratic primaries? This is them competing in friendlier waters, how then do they take out the GOP and restructure these pillars of American life? There this constant narrative that democrats 'won't let them'. THATS who is gonna usher in a progressive utopia? People who are only able to get power if someone hands it to them? I understand how it should work but these are insane times. Republicans have gone full tilt evil and have the power to handicap any political movement that tries to beat them. Democracy may very well be crushed under an American fascist regime that wants to roll back civil rights to the early 1900s and all you hear is '….yeah, but the democrats aren't good enough good guys, so it pleases me that the bad guys are gonna be in control, that'll show 'em'. I understand the push for M4A, but when you end up not getting that but also losing any ground in getting that along with other rights, what's the point? Are Democratic primaries friendlier waters to progressives though? Let's remember that Bernie was *extremely* popular with independents, many of whom either cannot or don't vote in primaries, but can vote/do vote in the general. This is the case with many other progressive candidates as well. DNC plotting aside, that's an important distinction when comparing primaries to generals. But even then, you have puppeteers like Jim Clyburn throwing weight around to the same old, same old Democrat that entices socially conservative Democrats in SC to vote en masse for the anointed candidate, and gives said candidate immense momentum given SC's early primary. As if the voters in SC are a good representation of what the general voter is/what they want. It's also not about "letting" progressives do anything. For me, I think elections should be made as fair as possible, but it's become abundantly clear that the DNC loves to pull strings and plot behind closed doors. And you know what, more power to them! If they truly think that wins elections, then it's their party, they have the power, and they can do whatever they want. But that being said, progressives can do whatever they want, and if the DNC actively shows and tells us that they don't care for the candidates and policies that we like, then we will take our business elsewhere. On top of that, all these shady shenanigans is eroding the trust in the Democratic Party, along with all the other lies they tell (Biden being a puppet president!!) doesn't seem like a winning strategy to me, but hey… It's their party! And like I said, I don't think anyone here is excited for a Trump presidency. We're terrified too. But instead of sitting on our hands, we're trying to wave the flags again and give the signal to Dems about what can possibly help them get back to winning again, but it's just met with cries of "UGH! Republicans are about to take power again and you're STILL complaining? Why do you take so much joy in this?!" Well, we don't. We're sad. But we've been sad and disappointed for years and years now, so maybe it's just something we're used to at this point. Nobody here is actively trying to *sabotage* the Dems any less than Republicans. The user base here is simply more liberal, so liberal talking points get combated more often. But speaking for myself, I voted Clinton, Biden, and then Harris. I even canvassed for 5 weekends for Harris. All 3 were very disappointing in their own ways. I think it's pretty clear after this election, everyone is tired of the same old Democratic Party for the elites and they can't be told "you're gonna lose your rights!" anymore. It's not enough to vote out of fear. People can't feed their families or get healthcare or jobs. Will Republicans make this better? Obviously not. But the Democrats won't do anything to capitalize on the MASSIVE failures of the Republican Party, because they are somehow more inept. That's just not a party anyone wants to vote for, even outside of progressives. So if the Democrats want to win, they need to properly restrategize. And lashing progressives is possibly the worst thing they can do to change up the strategy, especially cause they've been doing it for about a decade now. 2
Vermillion Posted January 9 Posted January 9 They want Greenland for lithium mining. I figured it was something along those lines. 1
VOSS Posted January 9 Posted January 9 7 minutes ago, Vermillion said: There's context here to this framing I clearly need to be caught up on, apparently. Also the font size was not deliberate, so sorry about that https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/26/us/los-angeles-times-endorsement-soon-shiong.html
lyk251 Posted January 9 Posted January 9 Just now, Relampago. said: Why do people think progressives want Republicans in power? It's more like we want neither (or at least one to do better and have better policy), it's not an either or question. But to answer your question, progressives are always trying to fix things regardless of who's in power. That's kinda the difference between progressive parties and the Democratic Party. Progressives organize and continue pushing for their goals even when defeated electorally. Democrats seem to double down on their failed campaigns and run the same campaign time and time again, if not worse! See: Clinton -> Biden (actually a decently progressive campaign in comparison, it just didn't come to fruition fully in the end!) -> Harris (ran arguably the most conservative campaign of the three and mega-bombed!) I anticipate that the strategy won't change in 2028 either, although I hope it does. I think Democrats will see the national shift right and think, as they always do: We gotta go FURTHER right! Be ready for mass deportation to be added to the DNC Platform soon! /s Some "progressives/leftist " in atrls pushing infight while at war with bigger enemy made me think that . I don't see progressives do anything when DEM in power , i guess progressives need to get better PR and imo trying push progressives agenda while GOP in power is useless .
Vermillion Posted January 9 Posted January 9 5 minutes ago, VOSS said: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/26/us/los-angeles-times-endorsement-soon-shiong.html I'm aware of this, it's… nevermind.
Relampago. Posted January 9 Posted January 9 2 minutes ago, lyk251 said: Some "progressives/leftist " in atrls pushing infight while at war with bigger enemy made me think that . I don't see progressives do anything when DEM in power , i guess progressives need to get better PR and imo trying push progressives agenda while GOP in power is useless . Oh, you're hitting the nail on the head with progressives needing to be better at PR. Kinda need the Justice Dems (especially AOC) to stop cozying up to the party. I get she thinks she can make inroads with them, and I defended her trying to win the Oversight Committee seat, but atp it's a useless cause. Bernie has been getting more harsh on the Democratic Party's strategy post-election, but that should have been happening for the duration of Biden's presidency. No more of this "my friend Joe" or "my friend Nancy". **** them. Progressives need to grow a pair and lash the s*** out of these establishment politicians on both sides. They play way too nice. As far as the infighting on ATRL, it's a forum of gays talking about politics. Gays will argue about the best Rihanna hair color for hours and politics will cause hours long arguments, it's a recipe for arguments. Even with progressives outside of this website though, I think it's in the nature of politics to be heated and passionate. Too many people take disagreements as attacks. I've learned so much after canvassing and post-election, being able to talk to people who don't see eye to eye with me at all. I wish more people could do that. And yeah, the GOP won't support any progressive legislation for sure. But unfortunately Democrats won't either as they've openly said they would not pass M4A, they will always be a close ally to Israel, they pushed for the awful bipartisan immigration bill. And even when they do something right, like withdraw from Afghanistan, they run away from it. So as bad as the GOP is for progressive policy, Democrats.. really just don't support it either honestly. It makes me very sad. I DO think Democrats will inch their way to being progressive, as we see it now, in maybe 2-3 decades. But I don't feel personally invested in getting them there anymore after being rejected by them 3 times in my adult life. 1
superglowy Posted January 9 Posted January 9 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Relampago. said: Are Democratic primaries friendlier waters to progressives though? Let's remember that Bernie was *extremely* popular with independents, many of whom either cannot or don't vote in primaries, but can vote/do vote in the general. This is the case with many other progressive candidates as well. DNC plotting aside, that's an important distinction when comparing primaries to generals. But even then, you have puppeteers like Jim Clyburn throwing weight around to the same old, same old Democrat that entices socially conservative Democrats in SC to vote en masse for the anointed candidate, and gives said candidate immense momentum given SC's early primary. As if the voters in SC are a good representation of what the general voter is/what they want. It's also not about "letting" progressives do anything. For me, I think elections should be made as fair as possible, but it's become abundantly clear that the DNC loves to pull strings and plot behind closed doors. And you know what, more power to them! If they truly think that wins elections, then it's their party, they have the power, and they can do whatever they want. But that being said, progressives can do whatever they want, and if the DNC actively shows and tells us that they don't care for the candidates and policies that we like, then we will take our business elsewhere. On top of that, all these shady shenanigans is eroding the trust in the Democratic Party, along with all the other lies they tell (Biden being a puppet president!!) doesn't seem like a winning strategy to me, but hey… It's their party! And like I said, I don't think anyone here is excited for a Trump presidency. We're terrified too. But instead of sitting on our hands, we're trying to wave the flags again and give the signal to Dems about what can possibly help them get back to winning again, but it's just met with cries of "UGH! Republicans are about to take power again and you're STILL complaining? Why do you take so much joy in this?!" Well, we don't. We're sad. But we've been sad and disappointed for years and years now, so maybe it's just something we're used to at this point. Nobody here is actively trying to *sabotage* the Dems any less than Republicans. The user base here is simply more liberal, so liberal talking points get combated more often. But speaking for myself, I voted Clinton, Biden, and then Harris. I even canvassed for 5 weekends for Harris. All 3 were very disappointing in their own ways. I think it's pretty clear after this election, everyone is tired of the same old Democratic Party for the elites and they can't be told "you're gonna lose your rights!" anymore. It's not enough to vote out of fear. People can't feed their families or get healthcare or jobs. Will Republicans make this better? Obviously not. But the Democrats won't do anything to capitalize on the MASSIVE failures of the Republican Party, because they are somehow more inept. That's just not a party anyone wants to vote for, even outside of progressives. So if the Democrats want to win, they need to properly restrategize. And lashing progressives is possibly the worst thing they can do to change up the strategy, especially cause they've been doing it for about a decade now. Bernie would have been a great president, much better than Biden and I think Bernie is one of the greatest politicians the Dems have ever had. But he can't win elections. He had a fanatical fan base Ala Trumpers, and extremely popular with independents, but the core base of the Dems said no. Twice. The greatest president that can't win an election is a fish on a bicycle. Establishment Dems and core Dem voters are free to rally against any candidate they want, it's the Dems candidates responsibility to win enough of them over, which Bernie couldn't do. Of course Dems are going to push back and pulls strings to hamper Progressive candidates whose platform is replacing and gutting out the old guard. That just seems like human nature. Thats why I've been saying progressives needed to gain more footing in a non aggressive way (their fan base, not the candidates) and I know that brings a round of 'Why the **** should they have to?' But is the goal a moral victory or actual political power? It just seems contradictory. The push against the Democratic Party is due to their tepid embrace of progressive ideals so instead we will hope to kneecap them for the small chance it will force them to evolve while letting a party that is the antithesis of your entire platform run shot over all the rights and progress and support programs that are in place. And I feel there are posters in here that do just want the "I told you so, see? I am so smart'' hubris that would come with progressives taking power. I understand this thinking, but I just don't think it's the way it is gonna go. Republicans are gonna cause so much damage that the electorate will look for the most generic, non controversial candidate to assure them of a sense of normalcy after Trump fucks everything up. Yes Dems need to figure out their ****, I just find the concept 'the Dems are suffering' when they're not, it's you guys, the voters. Politicians are insulated from the repercussions, it's you all that suffer the consequences. IfI gotta fall from a large height, I'd be taking the softest pillow, even if it'll hurt either way. Edited January 9 by superglowy
ClashAndBurn Posted January 9 Posted January 9 (edited) 55 minutes ago, Vermillion said: They want Greenland for lithium mining. I figured it was something along those lines. Shipping lanes too. It'll be very important as the Arctic ice continues to melt. As for the Canada acquisition, the northern tundras of today will be tomorrow's farm land, due to those of the present day becoming unusable. Edited January 9 by ClashAndBurn 1
lyk251 Posted January 9 Posted January 9 2 minutes ago, Relampago. said: Oh, you're hitting the nail on the head with progressives needing to be better at PR. Kinda need the Justice Dems (especially AOC) to stop cozying up to the party. I get she thinks she can make inroads with them, and I defended her trying to win the Oversight Committee seat, but atp it's a useless cause. Bernie has been getting more harsh on the Democratic Party's strategy post-election, but that should have been happening for the duration of Biden's presidency. No more of this "my friend Joe" or "my friend Nancy". **** them. Progressives need to grow a pair and lash the s*** out of these establishment politicians on both sides. They play way too nice. As far as the infighting on ATRL, it's a forum of gays talking about politics. Gays will argue about the best Rihanna hair color for hours and politics will cause hours long arguments, it's a recipe for arguments. Even with progressives outside of this website though, I think it's in the nature of politics to be heated and passionate. Too many people take disagreements as attacks. I've learned so much after canvassing and post-election, being able to talk to people who don't see eye to eye with me at all. I wish more people could do that. And yeah, the GOP won't support any progressive legislation for sure. But unfortunately Democrats won't either as they've openly said they would not pass M4A, they will always be a close ally to Israel, they pushed for the awful bipartisan immigration bill. And even when they do something right, like withdraw from Afghanistan, they run away from it. So as bad as the GOP is for progressive policy, Democrats.. really just don't support it either honestly. It makes me very sad. I DO think Democrats will inch their way to being progressive, as we see it now, in maybe 2-3 decades. But I don't feel personally invested in getting them there anymore after being rejected by them 3 times in my adult life. I agree with you about progressives in US need grow a pair but i feel like they are too weak to get out of DEM , they lack of roots/base in local/states gov and i think their chance to gain power will drop everytime GOP in power. I don't think you will see US give up Israel in your life tbh . 1
Recommended Posts