this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2024
196 points (91.2% liked)

Political Discussion and Commentary

230 readers
98 users here now

A place to discuss politics and offer political commentary. Self posts are preferred, but links to current events and news are allowed. Opinion pieces are welcome on a case by case basis, and discussion of and disagreement about issues is encouraged!

The intent is for this community to be an area for open & respectful discussion on current political issues, news & events, and that means we all have a responsibility to be open, honest, and sincere. We place as much emphasis on good content as good behavior, but the latter is more important if we want to ensure this community remains healthy and vibrant.

Content Rules:

  1. Self posts preferred.
  2. Opinion pieces and editorials are allowed on a case by case basis.
  3. No spam or self promotion.
  4. Do not post grievances about other communities or their moderators.

Commentary Rules

  1. Don’t be a jerk or do anything to prevent honest discussion.
  2. Stay on topic.
  3. Don’t criticize the person, criticize the argument.
  4. Provide credible sources whenever possible.
  5. Report bad behavior, please don’t retaliate. Reciprocal bad behavior will reflect poorly on both parties.
  6. Seek rule enforcement clarification via private message, not in comment threads.
  7. Abide by Lemmy's terms of service (attacks on other users, privacy, discrimination, etc).

Please try to up/downvote based on contribution to discussion, not on whether you agree or disagree with the commenter.

Partnered Communities:

• Politics

• Science

founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
laverabe
196
It is time that we push the Democratic Party left. (self.politicaldiscussion)
submitted 2 weeks ago by Intergalactic to c/politicaldiscussion
124 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

In light of the recent election, it’s clear that the Democratic Party needs a significant leftward shift to better address the needs and concerns of the American people. The party’s centrist approach is increasingly out of touch, limiting its ability to appeal to a broader base and especially to young voters, who are looking for bold and transformative policies. The fact that young men became a substantial part of the conservative voting bloc should be a wake-up call—it’s essential that the Democratic Party broadens its appeal by offering real solutions that resonate with this demographic.

Furthermore, one major missed opportunity was the decision to forgo primaries, which could have brought new energy and ideas to the ticket. Joe Biden’s choice to run for a second term, despite earlier implications of a one-term presidency, may have ultimately contributed to the loss by undermining trust in his promises. Had the party explored alternative candidates in a primary process, the outcome could have been vastly different. It is now imperative for the Working Families Party and the Progressive Caucus to push for a stronger, unapologetically progressive agenda within the Democratic Party. The time for centrist compromises has passed, as evidenced by setbacks dating back to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 loss, the persistently low approval ratings for Biden since 2022, and Kamala Harris’s recent campaign, which left many progressives feeling alienated. To regain momentum and genuinely connect with the electorate, a clear departure from moderate politics is essential.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] theunknownmuncher 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

The one-time $1400 payments following covid and a child tax credit is UBI? Oh, so you're just being disingenuous...

I think what you need to realize is that the Democrats genuinely need progressive votes in order to win, period. You do not have the numbers, otherwise. The progressives do not need Democrats in order to continue losing, they already are losing either way in a first-past-the-post voting system. That is just reality. You can forsake them and instead try to embrace "centrists", but you'll just lose, like 2016 and 2024.

are fanatically loyal to the GOP. There is no question whether they will vote GOP in 2028 or 2032 or 2036.

You're also describing the "centrists" that Democrats waste their time courting...

[–] FlowVoid -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

"You call that UBI?"

Just as I predicted!

Democrats genuinely need progressive votes in order to win

The point is that they do not need a progressive candidate to win. Bill Clinton and Obama weren't progressive, after all.

[–] theunknownmuncher 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The point is that they do not need a progressive candidate to win.

...well, enjoy losing...😊

[–] FlowVoid 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

It wasn't a losing strategy in the past.

The key for Democrats is to realize that "progressivism" is impossibly broad. So there is no way to deliver on that promise.

However, a candidate who does not identify as "progressive" can still deliver specific promises to progressives. Say, a carbon tax and a trans rights law. And that's it.

For a progressives who care about climate and/or trans rights, that might be enough to vote for the Democrat. Sure, they aren't promising UBI or student debt relief or housing or a minimum wage hike. Maybe the other things in their platform are aimed at Latinos and liberals.

But if you actually care about trans rights, why not vote for the Democrat who will deliver that instead of the Republican who offers nothing or the Green who can't deliver anything?

I think there might be enough progressives who really do care about trans rights and/or climate to make up for losing the ones who only care about UBI. And I think Democrats don't need every last progressive voter to win.

[–] theunknownmuncher 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

in the past.

Yep.

that might be enough to vote for the Democrat

You should ask yourself why you're trying to get away with not delivering things that progressives want, or why you're trying to deliver just enough things to coax their votes, but nothing more. Like, do you hear yourself?

instead of the Republican who offers nothing?

You think this is actually occurring in real life? They're just not voting. And Republicans vote in enough numbers to beat the Democrat base every single time.

"We can win without a progressive candidate, but the only Democrat candidate who has won in recent history is Biden, who was actually pretty progressive" Hmmmmmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

I mean if Biden is pretty progressive then I'd argue Obama's 2008 campaign was too on the same scale, so... seems like the only time Democrats have won since basically the cold war was with progressive candidates... 🤷

[–] FlowVoid -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

why you're trying to get away with not delivering things that progressives want

I'm not doing anything. That's what I think Democrats should do, if they want to win elections. If Democrats promise too much to progressives, they will inevitably disappoint progressives and lose their support.

I'd argue Obama's 2008 campaign was too

Obama did exactly what I'm suggesting.

He campaigned not as a progressive, but as someone who would appeal to centrists and even conservatives in order to bring unity. He made just one major promise to progressives, health care reform. For many of them, that was enough. He delivered, by signing a fairly centrist version without a public option. It was derided at the time by leftists but they got over it.

Then he put most of his energy into futile attempts at bipartisanship, hunting down bin Laden, drone strikes, and trying to ignore another major progressive issue, gay marriage.

He was a huge success! Even today he is widely admired. I think future Democrats will try to emulate him.