United States | News & Politics

You’re all over the map. Like I said, Dems tried to reform campaign finance, but got filibustered. Filibuster bad, *but also filibuster good somehow*? Filibuster is a tool of the minority - ie a directly undemocratic tool. It was undemocratic when Thurmond tried to hold back the hands of the clock and slow the Civil Rights act, it was undemocratic when Republicans blocked campaign finance reform, as it was undemocratic when Mitch blocked Garland.

Filibustering is a double edge sword. It is bad when you are trying to pass legislation but good when you are trying to block legislation. Even Bernie uses filibustering. So of course there will be flip flopping depending on the situation. Ending filibustering would allow Trump to pass a lot more legislation. That’s not a conspiracy it’s called foresight. 

Filibustering can be ended using cloture with 60 votes. So apparently you consider voting “anti-democratic”. 

You read it, but didn’t comprehend it. The party conflated alternative voting with anti-democratic principles. Open primaries are not a rare thing, but DNC opposition to alternative voting isn’t even though it would peel off more center/moderates who trend republican and isolate extremist voices. Crying about “$hill Stein” whilst demanding fealty and refusing to build broad coalitions (coalitions which delivered strong Democratic electoral results and unified government in the Obama years) is inherently anti-democratic.

I read it, comprehended it, explained it to you, then you posted a link supporting my argument. You should read your own sources sometime: 

 Manipulation and dilution

Opponents of the open primary believe that the open primary leaves the party nominations vulnerable to manipulation and dilution. First, one party could organize its voters to vote in the other party's primary and choose the candidate that they most agree with or that they think their party could most easily defeat. Secondly, in the open primary, independent voters can vote in either party. This occurrence may dilute the vote of a particular party and lead to a nominee who does not represent the party's views.

Because they effectively didn’t. You can’t in one sentence recognize the role of inflation, then link to a graph championing a single dollar/hr increase while inflation was [2-9% year on year](https://www.statista.com/statistics/244983/projected-inflation-rate-in-the-united-states/). Wages grew in raw dollars, [but were outpaced by inflation](https://www.statista.com/chart/27610/inflation-and-wage-growth-in-the-united-states/). Yet here you are harping about how line went up and therefore economy strong.

Another bad faith argument. I pointed out that democrats raised wages and called out price gouging. Which is literally everything they can do. You show that you understand wages went up and that you understand corporate price gouging was responsible for canceling out those wage increases, then in the same breath you scape goat democrats for the actions of corporate price gougers. Bad. Faith.

I’m not even going to bother with a retort to the rest of your comment, because that’s hat genuinely bad faith argument looks like. I listed some political and extra-political activities that the Dems failed to do or take and you reduce that to “it’s not a wrestling match”.

You have nothing to say because your comments can’t get any more ridiculous than they have already been.

From your comments, you’re clearly one of the moderates/liberals who are far more comfortable working with the Republican Party than daring to glance left,

Sorry to break your stereotype of me but I would love for our government to move further left. But I live in reality so I know that for that to happen, voters need to move further left first and as we’ve seen with the 2024 election, voters moved to the right. 

Comfort has nothing to do with it. In order to win elections we have to appeal to more than the left. In order to pass legislation and fix things we have to work with more than just the left. That’s reality. 

Turning our backs on democrats and scapegoating them for the actions of Trump, the GOP and corporations, weakens their chances of winning elections and passing legislation that is in our best interest.

even as it costs the Dems traditionally [reliable voting blocs](https://www.vox.com/politics/381857/2024-election-black-voters-harris-trump) who for generations came out faithfully for the Democrat party. 

I like how you claim dems are losing traditionally reliable voting blocs by using an article that says the opposite.

Trump swung the Republicans to populism, the Democrats reacted by pulling toward liberal and moderate elites and middle class. Show the people (not the donor class) what a democracy that works for them could look like, and they might come back.

Trump swung the republicans to conspiracies and hate that ostracized a lot of republicans. Democrats reacted by trying to earn those votes to prevent fascism from winning another term. The donor class already own our government. The 2024 election may have been our last chance at changing that. But too many people like yourself spread misinformation about the Democratic Party and convinced voters to fuck around. Now we have to find out.