277
Ahead of Chair Vote, Progressives Say DNC 'Failing Disastrously' to Learn From Loss to Trump
(www.commondreams.org)
this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2025
277 points (96.9% liked)
politics
19626 readers
5835 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
How did any progressives get elected if our primaries are unfair?
How do progressives win against the GOP when they don’t play fair?
According to leftists, control of corporate donors and the media makes the DNC extremely strong. But simultaneously, the DNC is extremely weak.
You seem to be a bad listener, because you got it backwards. The DNC doesn't have control over corporate donors and the media, corporate donors and the media have control over the DNC. They're not actually weak, their supposed incompetence is a choice. They're not actually incapable of winning elections and passing good policy that helps the people, they're unwilling. The interests of the Democratic leadership and the interests of the people are misaligned, and they only appear weak because they misrepresent their values and goals.
Ok, so if leftists can't win a primary because they have no support from donors and media, then how are they supposed to win a general election?
The only answer is mass movements. If you can't beat them with money you have to beat them with numbers. We have to continue the slow process of building dual power from the bottom up by engaging in mutual aid and taking into our own hands what the Democrats refuse to.
Money is power in this country, but at its core it's only an abstraction of labor power. Unions can win elections and even run their own social programs if only more people choose to fight. Existing unions need to radicalize and more radical unions need to form.
If mass movements can win a general election then they can win a primary.
Conversely, if leftists aren't yet winning primaries with mass movements, then they can't yet win general elections.
The left is in a slump right now and has been for some time. Decades of repression have been successful in preventing mass movements (ones that challenge the status quo, at least) before they start. We can break through, but it will take a lot more people realizing that they can't achieve their political objectives by working within the system, and then overcoming their apathy and hopelessness enough to take collective action.
A lot of people are stuck in the apathy and hopelessness stage right now, but I see rising revolutionary potential. More people are waking up, and the mass movement that finally breaks the siege may be on the horizon. Don't give up hope.
Well, that much is true.
They got elected despite the party's interference.
The GOP doesn't control national elections like the DNC/DCCC/DSCC controls primaries.
Multiple progressives lost their primaries recently and blame AIPAC funding. Criticizing democrats for catering to donors. While losing to democrats because they catered to donors.
All while claiming they can win elections better than democrats.
The GOP will also be catering to donors.
I was talking about the way the party runs (or eschews) its primaries. You pivoted to international donors.
I’m talking about winning and losing primaries. You’re cherry picking examples.
This is what you initially responded to:
You're putting words in my mouth in order to change the subject to one you're more comfortable with. In this case, the subject you're more comfortable with is gloating that AIPAC bought you some pro-genocide primary challengers.
This is my comment that preceded your quote.
The subject is: “why do progressives think they know how to win elections better than the DNC if they have never done so?”
To which I provided an explanation. They cannot win elections that the party makes certain they can't run in. Now enjoy the results of the party's recalcitrance.
If they don't know how to win elections in the face of opposition, then they shouldn't be giving advice on how to win elections.
Which applies to the party that lost to trump twice as well. In addition, the general election doesn't have the party putting its thumb on the scale like the primaries do. If the party deigns to have primaries at all.
Democrats defeated Trump once, which is still better than the track record of leftists.
The DNC has a primary whenever a challenger gathers enough signatures and submits them on time. I realize that can be a high bar for leftists.
And if you don't think the GOP unfairly influences the general election, then you need to google "voter suppression".
Democrats don't let progressives win primaries if they can help it. Gloat.
Which is a problem for centrists too.
Nobody "lets" someone win an election. Progressives need to earn their votes like everyone else. And if they earn enough votes, then they win regardless of what other Democrats think.
The party prevents progressives from winning if they can. Every progressive who has won a primary in the past decade or so has done so despite the party putting its thumb on the scale for their opponent.
It's weird seeing a centrist say that votes need to be earned after they lost twice by acting entitled to votes.
Everyone who has ever won a contested primary faced opposition from within their own party.
Leftists are ones who feel entitled to win an election without any opposition.
The opposing candidate, yes. The entire party apparatus, no.
"Any opposition" does not mean having to fight the party instead of just your opponent.
Centrists want to ignore the voters' concerns and still expect their votes without question. That's what entitlement looks like.
Party leaders get one vote each, just like everyone else. They can't stop leftists from voting. So if leftist candidates want to win, they simply need to get more votes than their opponents.
And if leftists are discouraged by opposition from "the party apparatus", they are going to be devastated when they find out about the massive electoral advantages of incumbency. Incumbents win >90% of their elections!
With all their whining about "party apparatus", frankly I think most leftists don't have the stomach to take on an incumbent. Which basically means they will never win an election.
Centrists only have to fight one party.
Centrists need to get more votes than their opponent. Just like everyone else.
If a candidate can't do that, they are not a good candidate. Their excuses are irrelevant.
You're deliberately ignoring that the party does not run fair primaries, if it runs them at all. Repeat your talking point some more.
Politics isn't fair.
But nevertheless, if you can submit your signatures on time, then you can be in the primary. And if you get the most votes, then you will win the primary.
If you can't accomplish those two basic tasks, then you are not a good candidate. Even if you think it's "unfair". Step aside so someone better than you can do the job.
That's not an excuse for running corrupted primaries. Unless you like the results, which you do. Up to and including losing to trump.
It's clear that you're happy with a party that doesn't respect the votes of its members enough to run honest primaries. You're just gloating about corruption, which is what I've come to expect from centrists.
If everyone obeys the law, then a primary is not "corrupt". It is a test of how many votes you can get when your opponent is using every possible legal mechanism to obtain an "unfair" advantage.
And that's exactly the same thing that will happen in the general. So if a candidate doesn't know how to win an "unfair" primary then they are destined to lose in the general. They are not a good candidate, and they should be eliminated as soon as possible.
Enjoy your smoke filled room then.
The good news is that laws have changed. Candidates today can win primaries simply by getting the most votes, without need of smoke filled rooms.
The bad news is that leftists are still incapable of winning primaries.
Yes, money is power and power is politics. What is your point exactly?
Progressives will continue to lose for this reason.
Progressives will continue to lose until they give up their morals and descend into the muck of incompetence and greed like us fine fellows, and take the big money dick that is being offered. You'd be stupid to try any other way of winning.
I am very smart.
Progressives will continue to lose because they think they don’t need to work with ideologies other than their own in a country where progressives are a small fraction of the population.
‘Don’t try to appeal to moderate voters! Why can’t we win elections?!’
‘Don’t compromise with republicans to get the votes needed to pass legislation! Why can’t we get legislation passed?!’
‘Is is us progressives that are to blame for our lack of progress? No it is the voters that are wrong!’
‘We are very smart’
It is unironically the voters' faults if things go to shit in a democracy yes. It sucks that we have bad education but nobody is stopping people from paying attention.
The point of progressives is they don't support regressive policies
Appealing to oligarchs and embracing the Feudal system kind of goes against their core tenants
This is a fancy way of saying they let Trump win instead of voting in their own best interests.
Are they achieving those tenants by letting Trump win?
If the strategy of compromising with the right, appealing to moderate voters, and sucking up to corporate donors is so effective, why did it fail miserably at stopping the fall to fascism? Are you of the same mind as the Democratic leadership, that Kamala Harris ran a perfect campaign?
You're making the same mistake that right-wingers make, blaming the powerless for the actions of the powerful.
Because China/Russia/Iran/North Korea and the billionaire class wanted Trump to win and used their propaganda machines to influence the elections. Not to mention billionaires doing underhanded stuff like buying votes. All while progressives fed the propaganda machine with their constant criticism.
Failing miserably would describe progressives’ refusal to work with other ideologies and thus losing elections consistently.
There is no such thing as a perfect campaign.
I’m blaming the people that tipped the scales and got Trump elected.
You acknowledge the influence of billionaires and foreign governments on our political process, yet you still place the blame on progressives for criticizing Democrats for refusing to challenge those billionaires. Why?
The progressives are the Democrats' true base, so if Democrats are unpopular with their base and are receiving criticism from them, it's on the Democrats to respond to that criticism and appeal to their base. If you absolutely must play the blame game, place the blame on those who had the power to do better and didn't. You can be frustrated about the way people vote all you want, but it isn't going to change their minds. Only the Democrats had that power, and they refused to do what needed to be done.
Clearly the solution is just to sell out as hard as possible since there's no other way to win.
I’m not saying what is good/bad. I’m saying what wins/loses. You can be good and lose in the case of progressives. But then you can’t claim you know how to win better than the DNC.
Well, it's a good thing we ran so fucking far to the right, then. Can you imagine if Harris had listened to progressives? She might have lost the primary we didn't fucking have.
She lost to Trump because she did what you wanted. Don't worry. The party will never fucking change.
Democrats have won the majority of the elections since the 90s using this strategy.
How many elections have progressives won?
There were a lot of black/female/indian democrat voters offended that anyone would even consider a primary instead of going with Vice President Harris. All those votes would’ve been lost.
She lost to Trump because that’s what China/Russia/Iran/North Korea and the billionaire class wanted. Whether intentional or not you’re just helping them out by scapegoating the DNC.
It's still the 90s, huh?
Nope, a long time has past since the 90s. That’s the point. The DNC has won the majority of elections for a long time. Proving they know how to win, unlike progressives.
Then keep it up. Keep pretending that it'll work forever. You deserve trump and only trump. After all, you want two identical fascist parties.
“bOtH sIdEs R sAmE”
You certainly want them to be.