this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2024
512 points (97.4% liked)

politics

19088 readers
3407 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] IzzyScissor@lemmy.world 33 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Or maybe they should just leave the Democratic party and start a new progressive party? We have less than 4 years, but that's also the most time we'll ever have.

[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 12 hours ago (4 children)

The problem with that strategy is that our democracy uses a first-past-the-post voting system which trends towards a two-party system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo&t=31s

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 11 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Then become one of the two parties.

[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

There already are two. We must co-opt one with a populist candidate. The Republican Party was already hijacked by Trump. That leaves the Democratic Party.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 11 points 8 hours ago (4 children)

Bernie tried twice, Democrats demonstrated their ability to stop that shit in its tracks. It will not work.

The only solution is for progressives to abandon the Party and start their own to replace it. The US has replaced parties before, it can be done again.

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

It didn't work with Bernie for more reasons than the parties resistance. A lot of people on the left that dislike the party don't seem to understand that you still have to join the party and get involved with it if you want the party to move left. Party members and active involved people shape where the party goes. We absolutely can shift the Dems left, but it means holding our noses and becoming the party. The Dems have always been an open door, big tent, party. Walk into the tent and change minds...

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 1 points 15 minutes ago

The Dems didn't let a single Palestinian-American speak at the DNC this year. The tent is big enough for Cheney, not us.

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

The Democrat establishment wants power and for that they have to win elections. So having an anti establishment candidate is preferable to them over a Republicans victory. If anything good came out of the last election, it is that Trump as horrible as he is can still win elections against an establishment Democrat, so the Democrats have to change.

Also changing the parties does not work. The problem is systematic and the US really needs to change its election system, to get better politics.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 1 points 14 minutes ago

They sure didn't look like they wanted to win this election.

[–] zephorah@lemm.ee 2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Third party doesn’t work. You have to do what trump did, 1 man coup from the inside.

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 2 points 4 hours ago

Apparently Republican voters are gonna set the mark at R regardless of who it is, so how about having someone like Bernie run in the Republican primary.

[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Trump tried once and it worked. Neoliberal ideas are entrenched in the minds of Americans. Neoliberalism only allows change to the people in charge of systems as it asserts, incorrectly, that our institutions are flawless. Since neoliberals only consider changing people, it is much easier for a fascist to convince a neoliberal to change the people in society. Where as it is much harder for a progressive or a socialist to convince a neoliberal to enact systemic change or redistribute wealth respectively.

In short, people with neoliberal ideas in their head need to fully internalize neoliberalism as a scam.

Abandoning the Democrats will not result in them being replaced. They will continue to exist by moving further to the right, as Democrats like Chris Murphy have already proposed.

Starting a successful third party is mathematically impossible under a FPTP system. Third party candidates can only be spoiler candidates.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 1 points 13 minutes ago

Where's the Whig Party?

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

I think you mean popular, not populist, but yes.

[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

No, I mean populist. Populism is what is popular right now.

https://www.wordnik.com/words/populism

A political philosophy supporting the rights and power of the people in their struggle against the privileged elite.

[–] BadmanDan@lemmy.world 1 points 56 minutes ago

Trump didn’t run on any economic populism this year and won. Kamala did, and lost. It’s the electorate stupid!

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 4 points 10 hours ago

We have already seen a third party take over a major party. The current problem with the GOP is because it absorbed the Tea Party.

With the right symbol to rally behind, we can do the same thing to the Democratic party. We need to build the Guillotine Party.

[–] IzzyScissor@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Oh, I'm all for ranked choice voting, but in order for it to have any meaning we also need a plurality of parties. They also need time to build and I'm sure these two would start a good one if allowed.

Although the likelihood of political parties having any weight at all past January is anyone's guess..

[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 12 hours ago (3 children)

Without rank choice voting any progressive party would act as a spoiler for the Democratic Party. Debilitating ourselves in this way isn't particularly useful for leveraging power to create better outcomes for the environment and minorities.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Then the Democratic Party had best make sure that progressives have no reason to split off and form their own party, huh?

Why does it always fall to progressives to get behind Democrats and never the other way around?

Debilitating ourselves in this way isn’t particularly useful for leveraging power to create better outcomes for the environment and minorities.

Oh thank god Democrats don't throw vulnerable populations under the bus every chance they get.

[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Then the Democratic Party had best make sure that progressives have no reason to split off and form their own party, huh?

The FPTP voting system ensures that they do not have a reason.

Why does it always fall to progressives to get behind Democrats and never the other way around?

The FPTP voting system and entrenchment of neoliberalism in the minds of the American public for over 40 years from both mainstream political parties starting with Regan. This is may be the case for western countries and democracies more broadly as well. Currently, neoliberal ideas cause a contradiction when a person encounters progressive or socialist ideas. Along the lines of:

Why would we fix our institutions if they are flawless? What's the hurry to solve our problems if we are at the end of history?

Some useful and correct resolutions of these contradictions are:

Our institutions are flawed because they were made by us, flawed humans. The time to advert climate change, fix systemic inequalities, the reduce the wealth gap is now. Incremental changes will run out the clock, as they don't address the root causes. There will be hundreds of millions if not billions of causalities unless these issues are addressed sooner rather than later.

Neoliberal ideas must be pulled from the minds of Americans like a weed. Or like one of those radishes in Super Mario Bros 2. Then people will be able to embrace ideas like systemic change to institutions and wealth redistribution from the rich to everyone else.

When asked about socialism, if a person responds with 'socialism doesn't work' or 'the Soviet Union collapsed' those are the tells that a person needs to full internalize neoliberalism as a scam.

And maybe a history lesson about how the Soviet Union was actually an authoritarian communist dictatorship and not a socialist country. The government owned the means of the production, not the people, and the government wasn't representative of the people.

Oh thank god Democrats don’t throw vulnerable populations under the bus every chance they get.

It's better than the Democrats intentionally murdering people in camps. Neoliberals in office aren't going to solve our problems, but it gives us time to do the work to solve them. Like educating people and co-opting the Democratic Party in one of their primaries. Like Trump did to the Republicans and Bernie tried to do to the Democrats.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

It’s better than the Democrats intentionally murdering people in camps.

The would in a heartbeat if they thought they could get one Republican vote for doing so.

Neoliberals in office aren’t going to solve our problems, but it gives us time to do the work to solve them.

Neoliberals ARE our problem. We've had half a century of incrementalists demanding that we just wait a little more for them to get around to moving the needle to the left, and instead they move so far to the right that they're buddy-buddy with Netanyahu and the Cheneys. Incrementalism says "too soon" until it's too late.

[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

The would in a heartbeat if they thought they could get one Republican vote for doing so.

Again, don't lie. The Democratic Party can of course move that far, but they have yet to do so.

Neoliberals ARE our problem.

Neoliberalism is the problem. Neoliberals can be tomorrow's socialists. But we have to put in the work and educate people. My argument already refuted this point, I recommend reading it.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Again, don’t lie. The Democratic Party can of course move that far, but they have yet to do so.

Just wait. Incrementalism will get you there.

Neoliberalism is the problem. Neoliberals can be tomorrow’s socialists

You have unfounded faith in neolliberals' willingness to move any direction other than right.

[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

If your arguments actually referenced mine in any meaningful way you would know I have addressed these points in this comment section multiple times. As it stands, a casual refutation of your arguments is now sufficient. edit: typo

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I have addressed these points in this comment section multiple times.

Yes, with "leverage power we don't have against people who would rather lose than stop throwing people under the bus."

[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

We do have this power. We elected Joe Biden in 2020. Your argument pretends we don't at the expense of minorities and our ability to prevent the worst outcomes of climate change.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

We do have this power. We elected Joe Biden in 2020.

And oh shucky dern, his hands were always conveniently tied. Except when it came time to sell weapons for genocide.

Your argument pretends we don’t at the expense of minorities and our ability to prevent the worst outcomes of climate change.

Democrats consider minorities expendable in their unending quest for Republican votes.

[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

And oh shucky dern, his hands were always conveniently tied. Except when it came time to sell weapons for genocide.

You don't actually care about minorities. Even more people would dead by now under four years of Trump. That's immaterial to you.

Democrats consider minorities expendable in their unending quest for Republican votes.

So do you. Except you want moral victory over the Democrats.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

So do you. Except you want moral victory over the Democrats.

I've spent the past few decades wanting that party to move to the left and voting for them. They did what you wanted instead and moved to the right.

[–] IzzyScissor@lemmy.world 3 points 10 hours ago (14 children)

A few weeks ago, I'd have agreed with you, but now? The Democratic party that just lost 10 million votes.. We'll spoil that party? The one that just lost a fair election to a convicted felon? You want to protect them from being spoiled?

We have 4 years, which is, again, the most time we'll ever get to try something like this because that's how 4 year election cycles work. What is it exactly that they're doing successfully you don't want to spoil?

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 2 points 10 hours ago

The Tea Party did not spoil a GOP election. The GOP caved and adopted their platform.

The Democratic Party will do the same thing with the Guillotine Party.