this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2024
115 points (94.6% liked)

politics

19243 readers
2379 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Rottcodd@lemmy.world 57 points 6 days ago (6 children)

The DNC and the rest of the Dem establishment would rather lose than adopt any meaningful progressivism or allow for a progressive candidate.

Their primary motivation, and quite possibly their only motivation, is collecting as much soft money as possible.

And that interest is actually well served by losing, and in fact, that appears to be their preference. If they lose, then they don't need to run in the next election on any platform other than stopping the Republicans from causing even more harm, which saves them having to promise their supporters things that they'll then have to arrange to somehow fail to deliver even if they have a majority. It's easier just to lose, then to run merely on being "not Republicans."

And the one thing that would upset that gravy train is ending up with an actual progressive in a powerful position. A progressive would not only promise things the establishment democrats would prefer to not even mention, but would mean it. And even worse yet, they'd then try to actually deliver on their promises. And that would alienate the big money, which pays for policies that favor themselves, and most assuredly NOT policies that favor the common people.

So yes - if the Democrats want to win, they self-evidently need to appeal to progressives. But that's been the case since 2016, and it's made zero difference and it's going to continue to make zero difference, because they'd rather lose than adopt any meaningful progressivism.

[–] buttfarts@lemy.lol 3 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Need a third party so so badly. Even if not to win just to make the point that neoliberalism isn't a progressive cause.

[–] WeirdyTrip@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

It's fledgling, but check out https://www.votelabor.org/ It's a small but growing group of Americans who want to start a party that advocates for the working class. I jumped in yesterday and am gonna try to do my part. There's channels for every state to organize amongst their state peers, national channels for overall organization, policy discussions currently under debate, and desire to start getting people on ballots and in seats as soon as possible

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 1 points 3 days ago

There's nothing on that website about who runs that party.

It had better not be the unions. Most US labor unions are just as compromised as the Democrats. That's a lasting legacy from the Red Scare and also working-class white racism.

load more comments (3 replies)