this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024
293 points (97.1% liked)

politics

19089 readers
3790 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
 

Summary

Following Kamala Harris’s unexpected defeat, Democratic leaders are scrutinizing their party’s failures, particularly with working-class voters.

Figures like Bernie Sanders, Chris Murphy, and Ro Khanna argue the party lacks a strong economic message, especially for those frustrated with stagnant mobility and neoliberal policies.

Sanders emphasized Democrats’ disconnect from working-class concerns, while Murphy criticized the party’s unwillingness to challenge wealthy interests.

DNC Chair Jaime Harrison announced he won’t seek re-election, leaving the party’s leadership in flux as Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries prepare to assume top roles amid a Republican resurgence.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Allero@lemmy.today 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The question is: how are they gonna get back on track?

One thing to remember is that Democrats, just like Republicans, are sponsored by the rich, and have their hands tied against taking drastic measures that would actually improve lives of common people against the interest of businesses. This is primarily why key economic points they rallied with never came to fruition.

[–] Maiq@lemy.lol 5 points 1 day ago

They even go as far as to have poisoned pill dems that are there to tank any change and take the blame. Joe Libreman, Olympia Snowe were likely not the first. Just the first time I saw that trick. I was dumbfounded when everyone let Manchin and Sinema rob that football like Lucy, again!

I remember when Biden was caught hot mic'ed saying "Nothing would fundamentally change" to a room full of rich donors during his first run. He already knew that he wasn't gonna do a fucking thing to help anyone but his donors.

Surprise pekachu all those who forgotten the first three card montie "find the single payer" trick during the Obama years.

The system is working exactly as designed. Repetitively even.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 day ago
[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

At what point do we learn that voting for progress is an illusion, a fable, taught and told to us to prevent us from organizing socially to effect real change?

[–] x0x7@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah. Voting is retarded. Yet if anyone on the right tells you that republican democracy is a failed concept that creates a false sense of control and corruption you call them un-democratic and a nazi. But if you come to that conclusion yourself its ok.

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago
[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 92 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Democrats are basically a conservative party, a depressing wet blanket to the people's spirits, and Republicans are illegitimate, unhinged extremists.

Democrats are objectively superior in every way and they still suck ass.

Sure would be nice if there was a party that actually represented Americans instead of company profits.

[–] lagomorphlecture@lemm.ee 27 points 2 days ago (8 children)

They have got to stop talking down to voters, gaslighting voters, and they need to give people something to vote FOR instead of against. I find Kamala to be a good speaker and easy to understand but people saying she's using word salad...at first I didn't get what that was all about, especially when Trump makes absolutely no sense whatsoever but I think I might get it now. She's talking to well educated people but a huge swath of this country is not well educated, uses social media extensively, and maybe it actually does sound like word salad to them when democrats start using words that normal people never use and probably don't understand. If you never went to college and only graduated high school because standards have been reduced, maybe she kind of sounds like an alien sometimes. They need an economic message that speaks to people who have been getting crushed more and more since the 80s and they need to say it in terms we can all understand. And when voters tell them "this is how I feel" for the love of God they need to stop saying "no you don't".

[–] Preflight_Tomato@lemm.ee 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Register_(sociolinguistics)#Register_as_formality_scale

I'm not sure about the specifics, but the core I can agree with, that is: 'people speaking the same language, but with vastly different backgrounds, will have difficulty communicating effectively.'

[–] lagomorphlecture@lemm.ee 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes perfect, thank you for this. I literally majored in Linguistics but didn't even think of this because school was so long ago. The ability to code switch where someone could use the professional language while governing but colloquialisms and everyday language while giving public statements would be nice, to be better understood. We all understand basic informal American English but not everyone has a great education.

[–] Preflight_Tomato@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago

Nice, glad to help! And cool that you did Linguistics in school!

[–] knobbysideup@sh.itjust.works 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

TIL speaking plain English is word salad.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

How can you NOT appear to talk down to someone who is Trump vocabulary / concept or less about issues that are actually complex and nuanced? Trump can talk out of both sides of his mouth to different groups with radically conflicting messages tuned to the audience. If anyone did that while trying to cater to the left, you would be immediately strung up for being duplicitous while at the same time being excoriated for being vague and nonspecific with your plans. No "concepts of a plan" are going to fly for someone running outside the Republican party.

Trump is basically bowling with the gutter guards up and it's because the Republican electorate is angry and not exactly... uh... discerning when it comes to complex or academic issues.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] foggy@lemmy.world 168 points 3 days ago (2 children)

We need an actual left party.

Tired of this fascism vs conservatives masquerading as "left vs right" bullshit.

Pelosi sucks, Bernie should be in charge of the party with AOC under his wing until he dies, it's their only chance.

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 91 points 3 days ago (16 children)

As a Swede, calling the Democrats a party on the left is insane, it is center/right and the Republicans are far right.

load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 62 points 2 days ago (5 children)

They didn't show the entire tweet chain. Murphy starts off saying we should abandon neoliberalism which is good. But then finished by uncritically supporting men's rights, abandoning social issues, and abandoning action on climate change.

He's calling for Democrats to move to the right. The big tent he's pitching is fascism. A true populist movement that champions socialism and progressive causes can bring people together while also championing these issues.

[–] x0x7@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago

Do you think men shouldn't have rights?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Deconceptualist@lemm.ee 81 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

The Dems kept making big proclamations about how the economy has rebounded under the Biden administration. But no one except the wealthy has benefited from that. It felt genuinely insulting every single time. Average folks in the US keep seeing bills, grocery prices, subscription services, and especially housing costs rise steadily. People are so worried about paying for these core things.

But the party never listened to Bernie and just kept saying "look, we fixed it" when they clearly didn't, and I believe that drove away voters.

[–] seaQueue@lemmy.world 49 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (14 children)

The Dems kept making big proclamations about how the economy has rebounded under the Biden administration. But no one except the wealthy has benefited from that.

And that's just a microcosm of Dem policy for the last ~35y. We get it, Democrats are better at government, we all fucking know it. What everyone has been waiting for is a Democrat who'll come along and say "the top 15% of the country has taken 90% of the wealth over the last 35y, it's time for everyone to share in the prosperity."

People are sick of neoliberal business as usual, this is why Hillary lost, this is why Kamala lost. This is why every single Dem candidate from here on out is going to be viewed with skepticism and voters will continue to stay home. People would rather hand the country to a narcissistic kleptocrat and hope for the best than accept four more years of neoliberal business as usual while they try to eke out a meagre existence with ever increasing costs of rent, food, healthcare, energy, insurance and corporate profits.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 61 points 3 days ago (7 children)

If we get a consensus on the Left it will be the first time ever.

"I can't support Bernie! He's not a real Socialist, he's a Social Democrat!!"

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Hey, I’m pretty sure we had a consensus from March to November of 1917. And why there was a solid half of the Spanish civil war we were in agreement

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago

The good old days, right?

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 52 points 3 days ago (3 children)

If you ask 10 Democrats what they want for lunch, they'll give you 12 different answers

[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 62 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (7 children)

If you ask 10 Republicans what they want for lunch, they'll give you 1 answer. And it's racist.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] bacon_saber@fedia.io 47 points 3 days ago

“The left has never fully grappled with the wreckage of fifty years of neoliberalism, which has left legions of Americans adrift as local places are hollowed out, rapacious profit seeking cannibalizes the common good, and unchecked new technology separates and isolates us,” wrote Murphy, who represents the northeastern blue bastion of Connecticut.

The problems, he continued, were obvious: stagnant economic mobility for many Americans and an erosion of social life.

But he went on to argue that the only way to shake up that dynamic was with real solutions that challenged the rich donors who support Democrats — wealthy interests who he said Democrats lacked the stomach to really challenge.

“[W]hen progressives like Bernie aggressively go after the elites that hold people down, they are shunned as dangerous populists,” wrote Murphy. “We cannot be afraid of fights - especially with the economic elites who have profited off neoliberalism...Those are hard things for the left. A firm break with neoliberalism. Listen to poor and rural people, men in crisis. Don't decide for them. Pick fights. Embrace populism. Build a big tent. Be less judgmental. But we are beyond small fixes.”

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 45 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

I hope Schumer steps back. He’s part of the old guard that got us here, and I don’t think he should be involved in party leadership anymore. Less sure about Jeffries - but frankly, despite his obvious skills, I’m deeply sketched by his refusal to play hardball with Johnson specifically, when he threw him a lifeline to get some stuff done instead of stepping back and letting his party and the situation they and Johnson created eat themselves alive. I think that alone indicates an excellent argument for Jeffries NOT being in leadership. This is not an era for compromise and half measures that perpetuate the status quo, which he inarguably has done.

TL;DR: at this point, it’s my firm opinion that NOBODY who was involved in party leadership up to this point should be let within a country mile of leadership going forward - up to and including “fuck you, the DNC is dead, we’re making a new party”.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›