1d ago

Mark my words: they will put Kamala 2.0. or Gavin in the race for president instead of AOC or any other progressive.

276 comments

Did you listen to the latest tiff between David Hogg and James Carville?
Carville really wants to push progressives out of the Democratic party while keeping their heads in the sand. I think his last rant was because Hogg wants to replace existing Dems (Carville says he should be replacing Republicans). However, I think Hogg wants to do this because these Dems aren't really doing anything and waiting to pick up the pieces from this Trump administration. I think agree more with Hogg that it's more important to show the people that you represent them rather than be like: "we're not the Republicans".
I'm not an entire fan of Hogg though, he seems a bit inconsistent but I agree with him here.
To be clear, people should have voted for the Democrats. We're all in the position we're in because not enough people did. Would you get what you want? No. But we still wouldn't be in the mess otherwise. I mean, assuming the election wasn't stolen.
That being said, all these older people that don't seem interested in fighting for their people need to be purged from the Democrats. I don't know if it's because they're really old or out of touch or what. There's a thirst for people to want representation for them to fight (as seen by the AOC and Bernie rallies). I think their inactivity isn't helping for the most part. Also, they need to get some more names out there.
- Hogg wants to replace old, "do nothing" incumbents with younger versions of Pelosi, Clinton, Jeffries.
  Hogg wants young, centrist, corporatist Democrats, not progressives.
- Yeah, I've been low-key following this drama and Hogg is out there spearheading the "tea party style takeover" that people have been saying the DNC needs. Carville, Schumer, and Co. seem to think that letting the republicans off the leash to blow up everything and hurt everyone is the best path forward. Put another way, the plan is to continue offering shitty corpocentrism and hope that voters prefer corpocentrism (clothed fascism) over naked fascism again in two and four years. Fuck that and fuck them, Hogg can take my energy and blast those fossilized assholes with a spirit bomb.
- It's because the democrats simply cannot fund-raise on the kind of populist progressive policy Americans actually want.
  Democrats are up schitt's creek without a paddle - they can't fund-raise without the support of the large donor-class, and their increasingly populist progressive base are simply not satisfied by the kind of economic policies those donors are desperate to preserve.
  If democrats stay this course they will never hold more than 45% of congress again and only win the white house maybe once every 3 or 4 terms.
  
  I've brought it up on other Lemmy comments, but one thing I really want to work on with messaging is "Eat the rich".
  Case in point: Elon Musk is evil. He's a toe-sucking narcissist who can't stand that South Africa ended apartheid. He's a loser that can't beat the first Path of Exile boss. He's...make up your own insult, and I'll likely echo it. But what I can't stand is commenters saying that anyone and everyone possessing as much money as him is equally evil. Basically the equivalent of so many school "Zero tolerance" policies.
  Musk is evil for his actions, not just for personality. Yes, a large number of rich people are also evil - there's logic behind that venn intersection. But capitalism is our system, even if we decide we want to start changing it. Past the big names of horrible people that have lobbied the system for their own interests, many rich people are just...quiet outside of their main successful ventures. One very ready playbook of the far right is to point out how many Democrats - even honest ones that have made excellent changes - are evil simply for having net worth in the millions. As long as "Eat the rich" is a popular slogan, it tends to work, and convince donors that progressives are out to hunt them down with axes.
  My take on a better message would be: We all want a better world. Have you ever wandered the streets of venice, wishing you could have that nice communal feel back in America - unburdened by homeless people, dirty streets, or traffic? This is our goal. House the homeless. Clean the streets, and encourage recycling. Put people on public transit. Progressives will tax you more to make that work, but will make a better world for it; one where people don't need to hire private security to protect from betrayed employees, or shelter in an SUV to go two blocks. If you're a businessman, vote Republican. If you're an honest businessman, vote Democrat.
  The message could use some work, but perhaps you get the idea.
  
  All the career federal employees that have lost their jobs because of Musk numbers in the thousands. Their knowledge, skills and experience with federal programs just wiped out because of that freak. The true cost of this is just beginning. Nothing is going to work soon.
  
  If democrats stay this course they will never hold more than 45% of congress again and only win the white house maybe once every 3 or 4 terms.
  Yeah I'm feeling that.
  You bring up really good points. How do you go to the large donors and say, "give us more money to help take more money from you".
  
  I'm greedy. I want the live in a clean and safe society. Empirical data exists that shows one way to achieve this is the Scandinavian model; high tax funding social services.
  At least, that's how I dress it up.

276 comments