Very true, i kind of wish something like the Pirate party would get established in the US but for the time being hijacking the Democratic party is the path of least resistance.
7 Likes
I think the focus on Clinton is a blinder. It’s much easier to boil everything down to ONE thing and believe that if/when the ONE thing is remedied, the things Trump has brought to the surface will no longer have control of our government.
ETA: Aaaannnnd Kennedy is retiring. That’s pretty fucking bad.
1 Like
Oh shit, hadn’t heard that.
There goes the nice day I was having.
12 Likes
Happy cake day, none the less.
7 Likes
Yeah. Thanks. It could’ve been so nice.
11 Likes
No - you are the one boiling it down to just Clinton. I’m not saying those other things are not important. I’m just saying that Clinton was the straw that broke the camels back and allowed trump to win. ITs not the only thing - just thing that if changed and all else remained the same would have made the difference.
I’m afraid you may not have been following what I was attempting to say if that’s your takeaway.
1 Like
The DSA is technically not a political party.
From the DSA site:
We are a political and activist organization, not a party; through campus and community-based chapters DSA members use a variety of tactics, from legislative to direct action, to fight for reforms that empower working people.
11 Likes
No - I follow what you are saying. You are simplifying the notion of what replacing Clinton on the ticket would have entailed. Replacing Clinton was never “one thing”. It required a deep and wholesale revision of thinking in the DNC leadership, much of which reflected the movement and energy in the party. It would have required a “different” DNC. Trump did not win because “one thing” - Clinton - he won because Clinton was the result of a myriad of things within the DNC, as well as the far right support for Trump. People who are waving a finger at the far right and saying thats where the problem was are ignoring the deep disfunction of the DNC that lost the race. People pointing at the far right support for trump are saying “see, there is not anything we could have done about that, its not Clinton’s fault” where the problem is deep in the DNC, where we could have done a lot about that, and likely won this race if Sanders had been run, and then we would be living in a different America right now.
And don’t come back with “well Clinton won the primary” - Bullshit. What happened was Clinton and the DNC were caught red handed colluding and breaking their own party rules. The result was they treated it like nothing had happened, when what should have happened was Clinton should have been OUT at that moment and Sanders should have clinched the nomination right then. Instead the DNC proved to the American people that Clinton was a cheater, and how many on the fence republicans do you think that drove to vote for trump?
4 Likes
Sounds good!
This is how it should go – challenge the establishment people with highly leftist / progressive / whatever the current term is candidates in the places where the Democrats are guaranteed, or nearly guaranteed, a win. Thus moving the caucus as a whole to the left, and getting new voices in the Congress. Don’t waste everyone’s time running leftist candidates against Blue Dog Democrats, where even if you win the primary, you’re far less likely to get elected.
I didn’t specify the dress code 
2 Likes
It’s certainly possible that Sanders could have gained more votes than Clinton, but I’m highly dubious of the idea that Sanders would have gained more electoral votes than Clinton. There’s little utility in getting more votes in states where the electoral votes were already sewn up in our (mostly) winner take all electoral system. With that in mind, I don’t think that there is any way that a presidential election can be won by the Dems without crossover voting.
1 Like
That’s most definitely not what I’m doing.
This hyper-focus on Clinton and the DNC is a blinder. I mean, look at your own comment–you want to re-litigate the primary? As I agreed earlier, Clinton’s people and the DNC should not be judged well by history (nor, frankly should any Sanders voter who didn’t vote in the general or went 3rd party or voted for Trump under some bizarre justification), and their actions were a part of why she lost.
What I’m saying, and I’m not sure you’re hearing, is that there are reasons Trump won that we need to pay attention to that go well beyond Clinton and the DNC. He tapped into something with his brand of white nationalism, and like any good demagogue he both reflects and amplifies what his base wants. I think that it’s entirely possible that it carries him to another term, in which case god help us all.
6 Likes
13 Likes
No, you are amplifying an aspect of trump’s win that is and was not strong enough to carry him to victory and ignoring the parts that you actually have some control over.
I’ll say this as simply as possible. The DNC you can reform. White supremacist America you can not reform. Saying that the DNC is a blinder is de-emphaizinng and directing focus away from the place where you can make a difference.
3 Likes
Unless one is hung over. Past me can be very inconsiderate.
4 Likes
Don’t you dare accuse me or “re-litigating” the primary. What I stated is what went down. And everybody in America saw it. My point is the DNC’s handling of this pushed a lot of votes to trump, many more than there are far right wing-nuts. The DNC established that Clinton was a cheater in these people’s eyes.
4 Likes
Well look who seems to think Crowley lost because he was too critical of Trump.
Someone is in for a surprise when Cortez takes Crowley’s seat.
8 Likes
Hopefully, AOC is just the beginning.
Next up; MJ Hegar in TX.
6 Likes
