this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2024
1252 points (98.2% liked)

News

23013 readers
4221 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

In an interview with the Guardian from his home base in Burlington, Vermont, Sanders urged the Democratic president to inject more urgency into his bid for re-election. He said that unless the president was more direct in recognising the many crises faced by working-class families his Republican rival would win.

“We’ve got to see the White House move more aggressively on healthcare, on housing, on tax reform, on the high cost of prescription drugs,” Sanders said. “If we can get the president to move in that direction, he will win; if not, he’s going to lose.”

The US senator from Vermont added that he was in contact with the White House pressing that point. “We hope to make clear to the president and his team that they are not going to win this election unless they come up with a progressive agenda that speaks to the needs of the working class of this country.”

Sanders’ warning comes at a critical time in American politics. On Monday, Republicans in Iowa will gather for caucuses that mark the official start of the 2024 presidential election.

Biden faces no serious challenger in the Democratic primaries. But concern is mounting over how he would fare against Trump given a likely rematch between them in November.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Rusticus -2 points 8 months ago (5 children)

If Americans can’t realize for themselves that Biden is the most progressive president we’ve had since Jimmy Carter then we deserve Trumps dictatorship. I’m not saying Biden is adequately progressive (he’s not), but can anyone name a more progressive president in the last 50 years?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Fuck this "people deserve the asshole their neighbors voted for" bullshit.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (5 children)

bringing up the idea of voting third party is not a good choice here, huh? If i did that, i would get a lot of copypasta 'but trump' if i did so I'll just say this instead:

Since we all know we need a third party eventually, what do we think we could do to make that happen in the future? (After this election i mean, and trump disappears forever, melted by our vote power.)

How long would we need to wait? (Don't want to steal votes from Democrats mind you) would they're ever be a time where that wouldn't happen? If we asked the DNC about timing, do you think they would help us get one started? If we tried and somehow succeeded in getting something off the ground, how might both parties feel about that attempt? Would they be for or against? If they were against, would they try to crush it? If they tried to crush it, what would they do to crush it? They probably wouldn't use force first, so maybe they'd use words. What might they say about it?

[–] Drivebyhaiku 10 points 8 months ago

Sadly for more than a two party race you really need a hardier representative voting system like ranked choice voting so that as parties are knocked out of the running people's actual choices are not entirely relegated to the garbage pile.

We're still trying to get that off the ground here in Canada where we have established parties outside of two but everyone keeps voting back and forth between liberal and conservative because of the spoiler effect.

Trudeau originally ran on a promise to bring in ranked choice voting but that was an outright lie I have been salty about for years. Not that I particularly believed him because really why would he? His party benefits from a lack of representive representation by historic bias. Still its very frustrating to actually have good parties that have been well established for decades and know that if I vote for them I might increase the risk of LGBTQIAphobia and Neoliberal economic policy running the gorram country.

[–] Adubya 5 points 8 months ago

I'm the Democrat you probably are referring to. Quite frankly nothing is wrong with your interest in a third party or even having an interest in alternative voting method (Ranked Choice or Star voting) to get a more preferable candidate.

My only thing to bring up is to understand the objective as well as its difficulties. On a federal aspect 'but Trump' is a very real issue. Nobody should be ignorant to harm that having Republicans in the White house & 1 and/or 2 branches of congress is very dangerous & detrimental.

The enthusiasm that people have for wanting to have something better is commendable & shouldn't be discounted. The task to win an executive office is based on electoral college not a popular vote. President Obama & Biden has soon how even that large of an office can be well checked & handcuff to a unaccommodating congress so you need to have more one office to present an alternative. That is fifty sates & with several states having various methods of how they allocate those votes. A third party & Independent candidate run that hasn't spent at least multiple years & decades should really owe potential voters a serious analysis than supposed moral platitudes(There are real harms for Republicans winning). They need concrete real & achievable measurable goals & strategies so their voters can gauge their success a long the way so voters could make rational choices come time for the general election. Democrats & Republicans benefit from a long history of being established players(or the only ones), it can seem unfair but don't be discouraged.

First, read up on your state statues & laws on what it takes to form or be a recognized political party. Then check out some of those recognized especially ones you believe align closest to you. Make sure you aren't reinventing the wheel. You might find out the those parties have platforms you for the most part agree with. Check out those parties state rules & bylaws on how they are governed or operate. If their is possibility to get involved that might be an easier option. There is something meritorious in a state having their own voice or say in a different candidate even if they aren't the presidential pick. Just see how Bernie Sanders's status is viewed as a Independent who caucuses with Democrats. Even as Democrats we got to keep an almost free pickup with Joe Manchin in MAGA country West Virginia & also John Tester in Montana. Distinctions can be made while existing under the umbrella.

There are lots of other avenues to explore that doesn't have to be a national campaign or even a state-wide one. Apathetic voters that don't or rarely do as well as plenty of disgruntled two party members exist to provide a strong base for third parties. Nobody would be upset with third parties increasing the voter pool & providing them with a voice better aligned to their views or interest.

Don't discount the importance of city, county, and state legislators importance in everyone's life. Some states don't prevent minimum wage increases passed at the city level & one insane aspect of RW SCOTUS is municipalities can enact environmental laws they are trying to strip from the federal government. Cities give "incentive" deals to businesses and I've seen them get involved in housing schemes. There are possibilities for improvement. Just Imagine taking that kind of victory separate from Dems or Repubs to the national stage. Also, how much better an individual would feel being involved in that kind of improvement.

(The only challenge would be that both parties at state & federal election filing may challenge petitions to be recognized and later to field candidates with challenges. Easily addressed by CHECKING your state laws. Some states like Florida & Tennessee the party can field their own candidates so check the laws. Be prepared and really try to work on a process to get candidates to support the issues & actions condoned by the group recruiting them. After building a good strong base its really just working on the party's appeal & protect their image from attacks by the Big Two. Establish an ethics committee or other aspect to help guard against accusations. Be accountability & trust in the party but not naive. Not being so paralyzed you have to be afraid but vigilant enough to challenge entryist that are only there to sabotage.)

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

It would require massive reform to our current laws in order for there to be a viable 3rd party option. That's what you should be working for, not throwing away your vote.

[–] Rusticus 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Good questions. As with most things in society, true change has to start small. So you have to start by changing the messaging. With greater organization and messaging you start local and build a foundation. It drives me nuts that we have these conversations every 4 years about the presidency and then everybody goes back to their lives for another 4 years. Meanwhile the corporate machine is continuing their messaging that "government bad, worker's rights/unions bad, minimum wage bad, welfare bad, education bad, stock market good". What do you expect?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah. If i use myself as a barometer of what regular people are capable of, i simply don't have the time n money n energy to start my own campaign or put time and money into a smaller political entity, to try and build them up for the next, out even the next next presidency.

I mean, were talking realism it would be a small party that won at the local level first yeah? Or so I've been told.

So we're talking decades. I have thought idly about how something like that could even happen over that time, and the only realistic starting point i can't think of is a pipe dream on its own, UBI.

I cannot think of another way the common man could compete with all that corpo monkey

[–] Rusticus 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I get it. Maybe we can all just start by changing the conversation and focus on the positive things Biden has done and encourage more of the same. The narrative is only focusing on the negatives and that will affect polling and voting.

[–] go_go_gadget -1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

The narrative is only focusing on the negatives and that will affect polling and voting.

Good. Biden losing the general election is the only way the fucking pieces of shit who voted for him in the primaries will get the fucking message. Stop voting for procorporate trash in the primaries. We won't show up for them in the general.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Oh God the "vote blue no matter who" crowd is coming back soon this year aren't they?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago

Oh they have been around the whole time for slobs like me who never touch grass but you're absolutely right they are gonna get real real loud, huh? And they're gonna sound just like this article too! Hear that?

That's the sound of them sharpenin their waggin fingers

[–] iquanyin 2 points 8 months ago
[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Feelings about Trump aside: Biden? Progressive? What are you smoking?

Having zero policy changes during your time in the office is progressive now, huh? I'm pretty sure many would consider Obama more progressive due to the fact that he campaigned for like universal healthcare at some point when president. Hell even trump gave us multiple stimulus checks lol /s

[–] Rusticus 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

lol. Did I say Biden was a progressive OR did I say he was MORE progressive than any president in the last 50 years?

I’m smoking rational thought, shared by others. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/07/13/why-progressives-winning-inside-democratic-party/

[–] willis936 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Biden's party is more progressive, but Biden is not. Note how he is on par with popularity polls with the guy who attempted to lynch our political representation. Obama was easily more progressive.

Edit: migrating my response to a deleted comment so others can read it. The deleted comment below accused me of not reading the article. This was my response.

Sure did. It’s an embarrassing op-ed. Short and flimsy arguments. Every link is either something that someone else did (mostly state legislators) or about lip service rather than action. About the only thing Biden can claim credit for is related to the economy, where his policy has helped transfer wealth upward. If “progressive” means “keeping things perfectly as they are” then you can go ahead and be a progressive.