Democrats should have listened to Bernie Sanders, historians say
newsweek.com
Summary
Historians suggest Democrats might have fared better against Donald Trump by embracing the economic issues championed by Senator Bernie Sanders, who has long pushed for a focus on “bread-and-butter” concerns for working-class voters.
Despite Kamala Harris’s progressive policies, polls showed Trump was favored on economic issues, particularly among working-class and Hispanic voters.
Historian Leah Wright Rigueur argued that Sanders’ messaging on economic struggles could be key for future Democratic strategies.
Sanders himself criticized the party for “abandoning” the working class, which he said has led to a loss of support across racial lines.
More voters should have listened to Bernie.
He told people what to do.
Yes, but people forgot that his real message was to get out there an be the change. Bernie's message was never about relying on or believing in the Democrats, it was that change only happens when we mobilize.
He told us to get out there and run ourselves and get personally involved and invested in our local politics so we can be the revolution.... We just chose not to listen to him.
People talk about "the Dems" like they are a monolith.
AOC unseated a long term Congress member who was tightly connected to the New York power structure. She did it by hitting the streets and talking to the locals. She built up voter support and won her primary.
I know it's an uphill battle, but it is possible to change things.
Yes, this is what I'm saying. I'm not saying take up pitchforks and bring the fight to the democrats like they're the villain, I'm just saying not to blindly trust them either. They are a part of the system; even if not in permanent institution certainly in effect. Bernie didn't say go fight the Dems, in fact he proved that you can strategically use them. But don't think that D = good or D = hero automatically either.
It's not about fighting the dems, it's about trusting in ourselves instead of others. It's about autonomy and the fact that nobody is going to fight the fight for you, you've gotta get your knuckles dirty. Don't trust anyone to do the work for you, red or blue; get out and do the fucking work yourself.
Thank you.
He told everyone to vote for Dems, instead of make a legitimate opposition to the right
God i'll never forget where i was when he dropped out. I had phone banked and donated and I was watching his concession speech just....wrecked maaan, wrecked at how the DNC et al had ratfucked him and how tilted the game was... and while I'm saltin my booze with tears someone in the group asks him "What do we do now?" and he says something like
and my heart fell in that shitty whiskey with the rest. Maaaan, i never knew i still had faith to lose until that moment.
Haha, I feel similar, I was really mad for a while that he just gave in, but at the same time, I think he did what he thought was best for the country at the time, Trump was and will be terrible for the country, and if the DNC was going to fuck over Bernie and he thought he couldn't possibly win third party and if he DID fight that fight, Trump would assuredly have won.
Of course in hindsight, he won anyway so it would have been better to take the fight to the DNC then.
Then did nothing but carry water for them for the last 4 years.
It is not the voters job to embrace a progressive modern platform nor is it their job to get themselves energized over said policies
But both parties have shoved that false belief down voters throats that is the voters' faults when they fail to deliver
Not sure exactly the point you're trying to make, but you're half right. It is a politicians job to convince voters to support their policies, that's true, but it's also equally true that voters should support good policies. While it's not their "job" to do so, they still suffer the consequences for failing to do so all the same. No matter how you slice it, people were stupid to not listen to Bernie all this time.
In a democracy, it sure as Hell is the voters' job to do all that. And more, for that matter.
In fact, the voters should be controlling the parties (if not abolishing them entirely), not the other way around!
No no no, the Democratic Party is some magical uncontrollable entity, we must abandon it, making progressive change infinitely more difficult.
/s if it wasn't obvious. Banana is a bad faith agitator. They desired a GOP victory.
It was the DNC’s job to be clear about Bernie’s message. I voted for him in the 2016 primary even though I was bombarded with “radical socialist regressive left” Bernie articles in my social media feeds at the time.
Unfortunately, most Americans don’t actively seek out information and just accept the picture painted by the news that’s fed to them.
LOL the DNC has actively fought against Bernie's message.
This is a systematic failure. Non-Harris voters are definitely at fault, but so is the DNC for moving further right and abandoning progressives and for sitting on their ass for 4 years.
Democracy is participatory. If it isn't your job, you can't complain when it isn't done to your liking.
Enjoy having Trump. I really don’t have any more words for people like you.
You lot gave everyone Trump by refusing to listen to voters concerns.
You apparently have still not learnt.
Lol I actually voted and voted for Harris. FWIW I’m also a former Republican who voted for Trump in ‘16.
If I’m able to fucking learn then so will all these morons who stayed home and didn’t vote because of either their apathy or “principles”.
Those people gave Trump the path to the White House again.
Oh look, it's the only voter Harris cared about.
Why does it matter if Harris cared about my vote? I did my job. Did you?
Because seeking votes is what campaigning is.
I voted for Harris. Harris didn't do hers. She ran to the right and alienated the left.
Me and others like me warned what would happen as a result, and it was interpreted in all cases as trump support. Got called Russians so often that c/politics eventually made a rule forbidding it. Centrists thought they knew better. Thought that genocide had popular support. Thought that Dick Cheney's endorsement was a win. No one likes Dick Cheney. Even Republicans hated him before the endorsement. The constant abuse aimed at Muslim voters left Trump an in-road that he exploited. Pretending that the economy was fine and that everything was better now, after all the inflation that it sure as fuck looked like the Biden administration just sat back and watched.
Not to mention the very public failures of the Biden administration on labor: Failing to pass BBB, killing the minimum wage increase, and breaking the rail strike. The Biden administration earned the distrust of workers, and it doesn't matter how fair you think that is. Harris didn't do a damned thing to differentiate herself from him on this issue. More of the same was untenable, worse was the only alternative, so people stayed home because they weren't being represented by either party, and one was insulting them and telling them that they weren't struggling because the economy was working fine for billionaires.
Hell, the only daylight between Harris and Biden was when she moved to his right. Promising to appoint a Republican to her Cabinet. Campaigning with Liz Cheney. Even Biden wasn't that tonedeaf.
We warned you. We kept warning you because we knew what was at stake. You were all so fucking pigheaded that you refused to listen.
No one wanted Dick Cheney’s endorsement lol. You are right about most of the points you are making. Unfortunately for the further left, america is about to get a lot more right now. The ideas that progressives are offering are just not resonating with voters while prices are going up up up.
Dems are going to have to start playing nasty if they want to compete now.
Really? Because lemmy's centrists sure seemed really fucking happy to have it.
Congratulations.
No. This is complete self-serving bullshit. The ideas that progressives are offering aren't what Harris ran on. She ran against those ideas. She ran on maintaining an anti-progressive status quo.
Anything to keep from treating the left like humans with agency. And Democrats already play nasty. They just play nasty against the progressive wing of their own party.
Really? I’ve literally never seen anyone on Lemmy excited about Dick Cheney. If you say it’s true it must be true then.
Most people don’t want your far left politics either. Keep staying home though and not voting like your peers. Seems to be working out well 😂
Well, this conversation has now concluded since you have demonstrated that you don't listen:
I know centrists are completely fucking incapable of listening to anything anyone to their left says, but this was in this same thread.
It is absolutely clear now. The DNC is a private company whose main function is to fund raise, period. If they also win an election then that's great, but if it comes to a choice between winning and raising money, they will choose raising money. They will never move to the left to win voters if it will cost them fund raising opportunities from the center and right.
This honestly makes so much more sense than anything else. I think you nailed it. Republicans are motivated by money and exerting social control so they write up manifestos (p2025), take over the courts, work hard to disenfranchise voters, lie, cheat, anything is on the table. The DNC does indeed seem fairly comfortable with losing by comparison, despite the fact that the leftist ideals they supposedly dabble in create a moral imperative to never lose. I wonder if Republicans fucking pay the DNC money to run these candidates we all know aren't the best. They're just good enough to get votes against mother fucking Trump. But not always good enough to win, barely good enough when they are, typically.
Republicans don’t need to pay the DNC, both are funded by the same billionaires most of the time.
"Nah guys, we're good on money, thanks. Got enough."
The democrats represent the group of americans that think money and "american ingenuity" can solve all problems. No problem is a real problem because we can always solve it if we just try real hard to make the current thing better.
Thats why they are the status quo party, its literally their whole founding belief.
The republicans are a party of changing backwards, which only works sometimes, usually when people are upset: "remember when things weren't awful...?"
The rest of the parties are thinking long term and are true parties of change but you need money to make it in politics, or else not enough people even know you exist at the higher political levels. There were I think five "third" parties on my ballot but I only ever heard people talk about one or two of them.
I'm not sure if its more likely the democrat party collapses out of disinterest and a third party replaces them, or if the democrat party will become a true party of change for the future.
It could just continue on as the party of "America is amazing and will always be amazing so vote for us for more amazing."
It's downright sad that I can't think of any argument against this.
That never stopped you before. Just scream that they're a trumper like you did when you were wrong about genocide and didn't want to admit it.
And the rich.
Imo, you've got all the prices. However, I would put them in a different order.
Short answer: Republican or Democrat, the candidate that spends the most wins. Therefore, fund raising is winning.
There's a small group of king-makers in the US and the candidate who offers them the most becomes president. Recently, the people who decide who gets to be president has started to include social media companies and amazon, who hosts half the Internet. Trump also cozied up to the American owner of the company the owns tiktok. Thats how he won. Trumps also great for social media engagement and news channel views.
Even candidates who happen to be better than the republican candidate, no democratic hopeful worth being of "the left" will ever be given enough money to become the president of America. Even if they started from a position that would appeal to them, they would have to compromise on everything that made them that in order to be allowed anywhere near the Whitehouse by the American ultra wealthy.
What you're seeing isn't the failure of the Democrats to correctly triangulate but the strength of the American ultra wealthy consent manufacturing machine.
I don't disagree those factors are at play, but they're not as important as you seem to think in this day and age.
Bernie had real grassroots support and the dems stomped it out. The key is populist rhetoric and speaking about change, the DNC has basically been running on "not Trump" and "well things are bad but they would be worse under Trump." while that is true, that's not a winning message, give people something real to fight for and you'll win support.
On the contrary, they're more important now than they've ever been. There also hasn't been an election where the highest spender didn't win. Its THE determining factor.
The same people who fund presidential campaigns for Republicans also spend lots of money on influencing democratic nominee choices. The whole things been captured.
Its like you all can't see the woods for the trees, in the politest way possible. You see the state of trump and all the things that make him an aweful candidate and you say "how could the dems not beat that" instead of "what on earth could exert so much influence that even being that terrible couldn't stop him?"
There's no amount of "the dems not having a strong enough message" that overcomes the divide in the candidates, without huge influence. Their campaign wasn't great but no where close enough to lose to someone like trump, in a fair fight. It would've had to have been utterly shocking from start to finish and, as bad as it was, it wasn't that bad.
You really think Trump outspent Harris? You'd be wrong, go look at the data, trump just went on spaces "normal" people listen, such as podcasts, where Harris didn't.
He spoke about how America is broken, he gave incorrect reasons why, and is lying about helping people with his policies, but he didn't lie and tell people everything is fine like the dems
Then this would be the first time in modern American history that this has happened. If so, then thats a huge thing and most likely, it'll be the social media owners now being more disproportionally ppowerful. That would be more in line with everything that's happened before.
Youre also relying on accurate self reporting from musk, the republicans and trump there.
I'm basing what I've said on whats happened before. Election spending won't be reliably verifiable this quickly.
you do know that in all last 3 elections dnc outspent gop by more than 50% ? last time we raised less than gop was with bush in 2004. harris raised more than 1.6 billion while trump raised about a billion. 600 million extra money they get is for not having a candidate with anti-rich anti-establishment anti-israel policies. hillary was similar story yet we barely saw her campaigning compared to trump. where does all this money go ?
compare that to jill stein who raised 2 million. dnc probably spent 10 times that money on just smearing her.
I'm not thrilled with the DNC either, but I'm not buying this whole idea that they are shooting themselves in the foot on purpose. The DNC does better when they win elections.
In previous elections, the candidate that raised the most money was more likely to win. Also, a moderate Democrat won the last election. They made the decisions they made in this election cycle because they thought it was their best chance of winning.
I don't have access to the data that they have to determine whether the leftist that Lemmy wants on the ticket could actually win the general.
I'd certainly like to believe that it's just that simple and all the DNC needs to do is put up a pro-Palestine Democratic Socialist and the election is in the bag... I just don't know if that's the reality on the ground. If that is not the reality on the ground, are the leftists that stayed home still committed to their protest? Or is there a point at which they would admit that we haven't had a true leftist on the ticket because a true leftist is not viable?
I hope someone can put together some clear data to answer that question soon... I'm afraid that a pro-Palestine Socialist will get crushed by AIPAC funded attack ads about Marxism and supporting terrorism that will really stick with moderates, and that no matter how energized the base is it wouldn't be enough to win the general.
I am not saying that they are losing on purpose. I'm saying that they are making decisions about policies and candidates based on fund raising rather than on attracting voters. On purpose or not, they did shoot themselves in the foot by courting disaffected Republican voters. Everyone knew they were not going to win a lot of those voters, but they sure did rake in a lot of dough. I believe that is their primary motivation.
I mean the Republicans are doing the same. Lining their pockets as they make decisions. Why is it so foreign to do with one costume rather than the other?
Grey's Law applies here.
I've been saying that since the DNC fucked him over in the 2016 election. I voted for Biden, then Harris, but I never fucking forgot who's to blame for the state of things now.
Berine had the biggest grassroots campaign I've seen in my time alive, bigger than Obama, more individual donations than any candidate ever.
But the DNC knew if they ran a real progressive it would threaten their corrupt racket
I never gave to a politician before Bernie Sanders. I wanted to see him win so bad.
I will never forget or forgive the DNC for 2016. I worked on his campaign. I went to the primary, in my state at the time a caucus, and felt the energy and excitement of everyone. He was the real deal. Unfortunately, he's a little too old now.
Other Dem campaigns often don't invite their voters to help out like Bernie or Stacey Abrams - instead they ask for money repeatedly. I got a million texts for money this year. It's giving "Election Christmas" in a capitalist way.
If we had run Bernie in 2016, Trump would still be nothing but a punchline.
Yes, because Trump's second term would now be over.
Lol at this delusional lib rewriting history that somehow Clinton won over trump 😂
It's one think to think that Sanders is correct, but to think that the American people would have voted for him in 2016 is just extremely delusional.
Every trump voter I know would of went for him. Explain how counties that twice went to Obama in a landslide magically flipped to trump in a landslide. You won’t.
Here's a map of donations for the 2020 primary, you make of that what you will.
In 2016 Sanders was 10 point above trump
Okay, maybe he would have alienated like a small percentage of liberals that thought he was "too radical" and he will bring a holodomor on the US for some reason. Maybe some of those Bernie bros were just troll pretending to like him, so they could play the "why I left the left". Still, he not only could have won a lot of Republicans, but even more people who normally abstaining from voting.
Clinton lost. Sanders couldn't possibly do worse than her lmao
In hindsight it seems obvious, but to be honest I really thought Kamala would have fared better.
We all did, you're not wrong.
It's a sad reality we all woke up to on Wednesday. Learning that the majority of Americans are ignorant, racist, misogynistic, selfish assholes.
No, we did not "all" think so, a lot of us have been saying this for quite a while. In fact since at least the 2016 election cycle started in 2015.
Pretty much lmao
When you mean "all", I wonder who you group in that conception.
Not all of us believed Kamala would win. A good group of people were calling out Kamala's shit since the DNC, and everything since. With the direction of the campaign, you had a good chance to predict Kamala's underperformance.
Let's not kid ourselves here.
This is what many said in 2016 after Clinton lost but we still did it again in 2020 and yet again in 2024. If I were a betting man I'd say that if there's sill an election worth having in 2028 we'll see another, even further right leaning, centrist Democrat win the nomination.
Yoyo look, this guy's fucking nostradamus up in here, right? It's gonna happen just like this.
I'm thinking newsome is the "perfect" candidate for 28.
Whoever it is, I bet you, just like me can't wait to be told how stupid i am and actually great they are by credulous online political minds who call parroting the pundits talking points word-for-word fucking theory
Progressives need to start picking a single nominee to get behind right now. Or we're getting whichever candidate the establishment wing of the party has already selected. Maybe they'll run Liz Cheney.
Lol i bet in 4 years we'll be beggin' for a moderate Dem like Cheney
And Democrats will run her if they think they can get away with it.
To me the main takeaway is that I live in a completely separate reality from most voters. I would have voted on a dead dog over Trump. He is mean, narcissistic and never shows any empathy. On top of that he is clearly losing his wits. If a majority of voters prefers a candidate like this, is even enthusiastic to vote for him, what can you do?
I also know that Lemmy skews left, but I think we have to face the fact that most voters have no ability to empathise with those worse off. There is no left wing politics without empathy and solidarity. What most of us here want is dead.
I think social media has put everyone in their own eco chamber.
This is true to an extent. Social media made it much easier to spread misinformation that allowed for the total shattering of consensus reality. Which had been under intense duress for the better part of a century anyways
Is the majority enthusiastic to vote for him? His own campaigning rallies were a snorefest, as far as we saw.
For me the main "a-ha" here is that so many people apparently still believe his stupid story that he is a guy who makes deals to fix the economy. Instead of a con-man. I have no idea why democrats were not able to destroy this "economic leader" image that he has built. Or why Harris and Walz did not focus on the issue every poll in the last month did say was the most important one: the economic situation.
It was also copium. After the infamous debate we all knew Biden wouldn’t win and had made a mistake.
The fact that he actually backed down just gave a lot of enthusiasm to what could come next. It was historic and made us all stop focusing on the fact that he should have never ran for 2024 in the first place.
The fact that the party listened just fucking once was what generated the enthusiasm. That died when it became crystal clear that no further listening would happen.
The screams of "Dems need to move right" (not from Bernie, obv) are fucking clown shoes and hilarious. She was running around with Liz and Dick Motherfucking Cheney. There's no more right to move to without literally just embracing Trump.
But here's the thing: libs keep cutting their noses off. Why would the actual left give the DNC the fucking time of day? They raise a billion fucking dollars, light it all on fire and go out to brunch. They co-opt movements like the Floyd uprising and metoo but leave everyone else to do the actual work. When we need bodies in the streets, when we need material support, when we fucking TELL THEM WHAT POLICIES WILL WORK FOR US, they spout some 1950s realpolitik bullshit and have some more wine.
Biden: you're immune. Have some fun with it. Show us you have skin I the game. $100 says he keeps up this "when they go low we go high" bullshit and does somewhere between nothing and the bare minimum.
You may not remember, but it's only been a few months since Biden said he "wouldn't really care if trump won as long as he tried his best".
He literally doesn't have any skin in the game, the party leaders don't really give a fuck.
Not only did he say that, he thought it helped show he could continue running after shitting the debate.
This is the most infuriating part, and it made me happy I kept replying STOP to all their fucking "ZOMG 10X MATCHING" texts. They blew all that money and their political consultant cronies made out like bandits. They outraised and outspent Trump and have fuck all to show for it.
Not only that,they're still sending them to help with recounting.
were on our knees to stop trump, by only fund raising not doing anything to actually deal with the issues
The most Democratic Party thing ever was the "Send us $15" text they sent within minutes after Roe was overturned.
I mean, why would the DNC give he left the time of day?
Passed biggest climate bill, forgave most student loans in history, rescheduled weed, etc. And yet? It's never good enough nor enough to give them a chance to do more.
All with a threadbare Senate majority with two "independent" dems and only two years of a house majority.
They did not reschedule weed. It's still Schedule I. Crime Bill Biden ran out the clock like he always intended to.
EDIT: Downvoting it doesn't magically pull cannabis out of Schedule I.
They literally didn't, I don't know why you're being downvoted.
...I mean I know why, but its wild.
Centrists see that Trump has a cult of morons who will believe any lie they're told, and get mad at anyone who demonstrates that they don't have that too.
It's why they courted Republicans, they wanted that same "they'll do anything we say" energy.
And worse, they assumed they already had it and were fiercely hostile to anyone who pointed out that they didn't.
The real proof in the pudding is the way the greens took such a large percentage of the elecetoral college vote so obviously to recapture all that the dems need to move left. The people have shown their power.
That’s great analysis except for one detail… what progressive policies?! Like ceding the “border issue” to the republicans? Like backpedaling on fracking when they needed votes from PA? I voted for her because she was the only option but in no universe was her campaign progressive.
I think they mean that her running mate did some progressive stuff as governor. Or maybe we're just so far right now that referring to LGBT as if they're human beings counts as being progressive
The build back better bill had Republicans calling fixing roads instead of letting them collapse progressive. The 'middle' point on infrastructure seems to be 'let some roads and buildings collapse' like that apartment building in Florida. Roads are something even libertarians want the government to do. It literally doesn't matter what dems say, Republicans will have the media calling it progressive to demonize it.
Thats what they get for squeezing Bernie out and giving the people garbage candidates. Eat it, you fools.
I don't really know how the Democratic Party is expected to steer out of the center-right ditch, though. With all the dark money calling the shots, I mean. Bernie is the exception that proves the rule.
The electorate is actually far more progressive on the issues than the corporate media lets on. But the minute the Democratic Party were to embrace Bernie-style positions? You can bet that not only the "liberal media" would declare this sO vErY eXtReMe, but all the big money would be spending against them, and spending against them hard. Think it's bad now where crypto, Elon, and the Washington Post are tilting against the Democrats? Imagine they actually embraced progressives....
Not saying I love it, I just don't know what the answer is.
At this point maybe the democrats just need to embrace these hard positions and normalize them. The gop doesn't appear to care how radical their stances are and they get votes regardless of the racism. Trump's whole shtick has been normalizing bad behavior and gaslighting the other party into thinking any wrong they do is a gotcha- they're operating on two very different rulesets.
Democrats (DNC and donors) don't want to win with a progressive. They'd rather have Trump. They'll never embrace anyone like Bernie.
You missed the point about the money... They're hooked
Hooked on election funding despite it not really doing anything for her despite the huge advantage? Yeah that's a good strategy.
The thing is, we've seen what the working class wants: Not concrete policy that will help them, but to have their feelings of struggle, outrage, and anger acknowledged and reflected back to them.
The Democrats could have radical pro-worker, pro-working-class reforms in their policy platform, but if what they're broadcasting is "things are great" energy, or "there are bigger fish to fry" energy, then they're going to get ignored.
The Democrat's talking points have focused on the health of American institutions. That's the thing they've repeatedly signalled is most important to them.
It's not what's most important to most households. It's actually pretty far removed from the top of their lists of concerns.
It would be worse than you imagine. Wouldn't need the liberal media or the big money to move against it. People don't translate policy positions into support for candidates. They vote on vibes, and any candidate espousing consistently left-wing positions sounds like a dangerous socialist to a good 2/3s of the country.
Education. We just signed over the official apparatus to the fascists, though. So, uh, it's gonna be much harder than it should have been.
The "vibes" campaign by the Dems just failed hard.
And why is it that only the right should get to move "vibes" by sticking with extreme positions? Especially as things like universal health care, public housing, strong unions or debt free education are just normal in other western countries.
Because selfish vibes driven by greed and fear come easy when education is lacking.
Turns out the "Please don't vote for fascism" vibe isn't very appealing to the country.
I didn't say we should give up any of those positions. I was saying policy positions do not consistently translate into votes, and the US electorate is easily spooked by anything they're told resembles 'socialism'.
That was one vibe. Unfortunately, the rest of the vibe from the Democrats have been, "Well, things are actually pretty good, just look at our charts. Economy is doing great!". I think that's where they really failed the vibe check, telling people not that they will improve things in a major way, but that the status quo is mostly acceptable and they'll keep things from getting worse.
Change was the order of the day, and they ran a campaign on stability instead.
That too.
Harris just demonstrated that running to the right is no longer a winning proposition.
Yeah I was surprised to see Trump is just going to disband the department of education, but what can you do 🤷♂️
Even education doesn’t work friend. We’ve seen people reject logic time and time again. They even did a study on numeracy and political affiliations and the responses were not surprising…. https://youtu.be/zB_OApdxcno?si=G51bPMcxs9R5iY0o
Not education in the sense of teaching basic literacy and such, political education. Class consciousness, if one prefers such terms.
The essential outcome of the study. The better you are at understanding numbers and math. The worse you are at interpreting data that counters your beliefs. Like laughably bad. 40%+ish bad.
Ah not sure if you watched the video. But agreed. I’m not sure it will work but we better damn try our best in our personal lives. Can’t trust society to help guide anymore :/
Ah, no, I didn't. I generally don't watch videos. I just read what you said about numeracy and moved on to the point about other forms of education being my concern.
Haha that’s totally fair. I generally don’t either. But that one surprised me a bit. Friend at work shared it to show the context of how confused we all are due to what we are objectively told to feel. Rather than HOW we feel.
I watched this video when it came out and I disagree with the findings in it, because to me it seems less to indicate that people reject logic because of political affiliations, and more people are critical of studies that contradict prior knowledge.
People interpreting results on the skin cream have absolutely no frame of reference. There isn't a brand name associated with the skin cream that might have some kind of recognition for people to have prior knowledge. The study that they are presented with is the first time they are seeing anything about this skin cream.
People weighing in on gun control, have a lot of prior knowledge on the topic. Now whether all this knowledge is based on facts or data is obviously questionable. But regardless they have prior experience with the topic. So naturally you are going to be critical of a study showing you results that directly contradict your prior knowledge. Also from the video it doesn't seem clear that they are asking them to specifically treat it like math problem and make judgements based on the study alone. They are asked whether they think gun control is effective. And while obviously they have the infographic right in front of them, most people are not going to base their judgements solely on that data alone.
To put it another way, what if the study was based on something non-political, like say whether smoking 2 packs of cigarettes a day improves or worsened lung capacity over the course of a decade? I think most people would be heavily critical of the study that shows smoking improved lung capacity even if the data they are presented reflects that. And I don't think it would be because they are simply rejecting logic and numeracy based on affiliations. It's because they have prior information and knowledge that directly contradicts the singular study that is presented to them.
And this is ignoring the fact that while the statistic they use to measure the effectiveness for the cream is very tangible and direct. Either the rash improves or it worsens. And you can make direct comparisons with the control groups. In the gun control study you are comparing different sets of cities, ones that have gun control laws and ones that don't. You aren't comparing the same set of cities before and after gun control. So already this is a poor study. Then to make matters worse the statistic they use to measure the effectiveness is "crime worsened" and "crime improved". Not crime committed with firearms. Or even just violent crimes. Just crimes. And in cities where gun control laws have been implemented, crime is naturally going to go up because there is a new law for people to break. Anybody who isn't following the gun control laws in that city are committing a crime whereas people in the cities without those laws are doing the exact same thing, but it's just not counted towards "crime" because it hasn't been outlawed.
Bernie isn't the exception that proves the rule:
He's not a fucking Democrat.
That’s what happened in 2015/2016. BeRnIe Is So ExTrEmE!
Yes you do. We all do.
I do?
You guys need to think of the DNC as more of a for profit business.
From that perspective, they were super successful in making so much money.
Remember, there can be more money made when you intentionally lose, similar to butch in pulp fiction.
Every single text i got had donate in the first sentence. The DNC had a very singular message this cycle and it was donate. It shows the flaws in the system and it shows the flaws in the party. Until i start seeing serious conversations about serious fuckin issues like repealing Citizens United, universal healthcare and proper privacy laws I can no longer consider the DNC a serious organization.
And just to clarify, gender identity, abortion rights, reproductive rights all fall into privacy for me. It's only my business.
And it should be, those harm no one but yourself, and it shouldn't even be harmful then. What someone identifies, had an abortion, who they love, shouldn't impact me or anyone else.
Republicans demand that since they find it immoral, we should have it impact to the general public. The right to privacy being implied but never codified in America is such a massive blow to the rights of citizens.
https://www.cnn.com/politics/elections/presidential-candidates-money-raised-dg
Harris had the most money for her run and still begged for money from the people who were being hurt by no minimum wage, affordable healthcare, living paycheck to paycheck.
The RNC had more funding than the DNC, not sure if that's common or unique this one. While I didn't get any texts for "send money to Trump" texts, that might be because I've used my phone for aiding Democrats in office so they probably saw it as a waste of money.
Remember, the DNC admitted in court that they are an unaccountable private corporation
Bernie is a leftist politician. The Democrat party is not a liberal leftist party, they're a conservative corporatist party.
Further, Bernie is a progressive whereas Dems are status quo
His message hasn't changed. They don't only not listen, but actively oppose his message.
If democrats were capable of listening we wouldnt have two terms of donald trump.
also see:
How the Hillary Clinton campaign deliberately "elevated" Donald Trump with its "pied piper" strategy
Not even a single term
Hell, if the US could finally get rid of this first past the pole, winner takes all system, the democratic and Republican parties wouldn't even exist anymore, they'd both be replaced by better parties
Wait, I am not trying to be (overly) mean here but what where they? I just remember her running on a status quo platform.
If she was running on a progressive platform I never heard about it
She was progressive by saying she would saying she would have a Republican in her cabinet. So…”progress…?”
because it's not what she campaigned on. She very easily could have run a policy focused campaign and shown the American public how much they would benefit from a Dem president.
Instead, she campaigned on maintaining the status quo, working alongside Republicans, being pro-Israel and being anti-immigration. If the DNC weren't trying to lose, then I think they're incompetent.
I think I saw one headline about potentially trying to talk about eventually raising the minimum wage, once
You didn't look. It was out there. See above.
She was so progressive she got the endorsement of noted socialist Dick Cheney.
You know, here’s a bit of sophisticated political theory- people vote for a candidate for different reasons. I voted for Harris because of her campaign policies. Cheney endorsed her for different reasons. It didn’t change Harris’s policies.
People stay home when they aren't represented.
Both you and Cheney were. I voted for Harris because she stood the best chance of preventing Trump.
"Not trump" wasn't enough for a lot of voters. Her policies that you and Cheney both found so appealing kept enough people on the couch.
Funny that it's the first time I see it listed out like that. All while I have seen hundreds of memes and many videos of rallies where the soundbite was content free.
It's probably me though.
Just you…
…and millions others.
A bad campaign is a bad campaign.
Disclaimer: I voted for her
that doesn't save you lol. you're being critical of the chosen DNC candidate. sit down shes talking, blue no matter who, etc.
The chosen ruler, it has to be. The alternative would be a monster, a criminal, a dictator from day one.
It can be no other way then the chosen candidate, voting is just a formality of your "democracy".
Save me from what lol
The disclaimer from people screaming lesser evil. ;)
Here were some progressive policies promoted by Harris, which we aren't going to get because people thought Trump would get them cheaper eggs:
Launch a National Health Equity Initiative to address health challenges that disproportionately impact Black men. Take on pharmacy benefit managers Have Medicare cover in-home health care Extend the $35 cap on insulin and $2,000 cap on out-of-pocket spending to all Americans Eliminate the filibuster to restore the Roe v. Wade precedent on abortion Ban corporate price gouging on food and groceries Will not raise taxes for those earning less than $400,000 a year Roll back Trump’s tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans Enact a minimum tax for billionaires Increase the tax rate on long-term capital gains to 28% for those earning at least $1 million a year Expand the child tax credit to $6,000 for families with newborns Quadruple the tax on stock buybacks Provide first-time homebuyers with up to $25,000 for down payments, plus more generous support for first-generation homeowners Build 3 million more rental units and affordable homes Outlaw new forms of price fixing by corporate landlords Pass the Equality Act to protect LGBTQ+ Americans from discrimination Ensure that no former president has immunity for crimes committed while in office Require Supreme Court justices to comply with ethics rules Impose term limits on Supreme Court justices Raise the minimum wage Eliminate taxes on tips Establish paid family and medical leave End sub-minimum wages for tipped workers and people with disabilities Double the number of apprenticeships End four-year college degree requirements for federal jobs where appropriate Limit businesses from "unnecessarily" using criminal arrest histories, convictions, and credit scores in employment decisions Sign the pro-labor PRO Act and the Public Service Freedom to Negotiate Act Generate 25 million new business applications Expand the startup expense tax deduction for new businesses from $5,000 to $50,000 Increase the share of federal contract dollars going to small businesses Provide 1 million loans to Black entrepreneurs, fully forgivable up to $20,000 Legalize recreational marijuana Enact a regulatory framework for cryptocurrency Extend the expired Affordable Connectivity Program to support internet access
Glancing over that word salad, it looks like a pile of bandaids on capitalism.
Here's a list of actually progressive things that would do what her list would be pretending to do and more:
Universal Healthcare. Wealth cap. Breaking up any corporation that is in more than one industry. Universal education. Complete medical and student debt forgiveness. Complete cessation of aid to governments engaged in war crimes. Complete eradication of for-profit weapon manufacturing. Universal Basic Income.
Still not great from a messaging perspective. Better ways to reach people who aren't politics nerds or policy wonks:
Medical care will be affordable, so you can go see your doctor any time you or your family need to. If your kid gets sick, you can be there for them and help them get better without worrying about how to pay for care. You'll get paid better, no more of the "boss gets a dollar, I get a dime" crap. No more stress about setting aside a college fund for your kids. They'll be able to go to school, guaranteed. Strong American morals mean we're not going to send our tax money to fund war and atrocities on the other side of the planet. If you lose your job, the government will have your back with enough money to survive on until you get back on your feet, no questions asked.
Goddamn, why can't Democrats say this stuff, instead of word salad like, "Launch a National Health Equity Initiative to address health challenges that disproportionately impact Black men." WTF does any of that even mean?
JFC, I’m not messaging, it’s not my job to “message”. Someone said somethings that are not true and I’m listing policies that refute that claim in the very limited format allowed here.
Right, and this isn't rhetorical combat. You are correct, and I was continuing the train of thought.
So enable fascism then eh? Because you can’t have socialism?
A regulatory framework for the scam known as crpyto is “progressive”?
Yeha America really needs to embrace leftism and not this “progressive” neolib branding.
See this is the difference between the left and the right. You see a huge list of policies and focus on the one that you have some nebulous objection to, ignore everything else and don't even have a substantive criticism of what you apparently don't like. The right will see a big list of policies, focus on the one they agree with, and claim that everything else is just nonsense and won't really be enacted. Ideological purity, smh. The perfect is the enemy of the good.
indeed. genocide was the big bad one this year. too bad.
And all she needed was one lousy photon of daylight between herself and Bidenyahu.
Well yeah I think even the first month was abhorrent and once the Palestinian health ministry started to lose track of the actual dead, which was basically about a month or two in, it was obviously an atrocity that was, if not already genocide (yeah it was), at least sparkling ethnic cleansing with a familiar bouquet. There is no excuse for that, and weapon provisions to Israel should've been immediately withheld indefinitely in the aftermath. No question. But permitting the guy who not only wants to speed up that process, but is also awful on a thousand other metrics, to take the reins is probably a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face...
Oh it definitely is, for many a genocide is a genocide. You dont get to play the moral shades continuum once you reach that level of atrocity. So here we are.
You also need to realize that many states will be insulated from the worst of trump via our local government. So in reality life will go on for us, foreign policy will go to shit but shrug. Not much we can do there.
So, you think it SHOULDn’t be regulated? Capitalism is a fucking scam. It’s legal though and isn’t going to be replaced any time soon. In the meantime regulate the hell out of it to reduce its negative effects
Wait.... I have seen these before. Like 10 plus years ago it feels like.
If Biden is offering down payment assistance for first time home buyers, could you please direct me to the applications please? Thanks!
Well he talked about maybe looking into what it would mean to offer it. Just like I guess she did?
When did she say the supreme court stuff or the anti-corporate stuff?
Google it.
Good one.
And yet the only campaign ads I ever saw from her were clips of Donald Trump saying stupid shit.
I voted harris, but I don't blame anyone for thinking that a Harris win would be a repeat of the last four years
You know, the one where she said we need to accept Palestinian deaths so we can get cheaper bread.
Dems imbraced the race to the bottom instead of being a true opposition party. I voted for them this time around but never again unless they make a platform surrounding core left prencipals and left leadership. Many within my communities gave up on political means to help their communities and threw themselves into volunteering, activism, and self sustainability. You can't demand bottomless support and obedience from your base while ignoring their cries for help.
Dems said they are the party of science and facts but wouldn't support universal health care or simply stop sending weapons to Isreal. If they were just as ravenous as republican are, can you honestly say we couldn't achieve those good things?
Dems said the Supreme court and justice system was courupt, but never even investigated the court or made cuts to the militarization of the police forces. Police are still killing people at the same rates with no real accountability. If the Supreme Court was left leaning Republicans would have expanded the court to make it right leaning.
Just do what Republicans do to get there way but for good. I honestly can't think of one dem policy that has been as impactful as some of the top Republican changes in the past 50 years.
Ultimately we need to come together and demand better because if the dems don't change it'll be 50 more years of being steamrolled.
Honestly, your democratic party is very right wing to most of European. And you saying people give up on politics and turn to sctivism is so sad.
If the government doesn't take care of his poor, minorities, what are they doing.
Facilitating the transfer of wealth to the richest fraction of the population.
Grifting and insider trading.
The government and the companies in the US work together as legal shields protecting the wealthy and money siphoning systems from the public to the wealthy.
For example: Johnson&Johnson poison babies with asbestos in their talc baby powder. Instead of the Johnson family losing money or facing any consequences, the company and its employees bear the repercussions. The government investigates at its own pace and might be defunded in the areas relating to investigations. The government doesn't guarantee health care so people don't even know they have issues from asbestos because they can't even go in to be diagnosed without significant cost. Accessing legal help for a class action can also be difficult. These large companies also have huge legal teams to defend them including lobbyists who represent companies and as their sole job lobby the government. And then the government also gives tax breaks to Johnson and Johnson, and nearly free publicly funded research from university research and students who not only paid to go to school, but don't receive money for these student publications. And then J&J can take that research and profit off it.
America is a giant work camp.
its not a bug but feature. They exist to sabotage people interest and giving them false hope of an alternative. we have become one party two candidates system, where one markets racism other wokeness, both of which cost their mega-donors nothing.
I wish the democrats represented wokness.
they don’t, they just market it same as oil companies running pro-climate ads
No shit.
TIL I'm a fucking historian, apparantly
It's amazing how much shit is obvious if one pays attention to the big picture and follow the current trends towards their natural conclusions
This shit really was obvious all along, and I don't even live in the US
We tried. Biden's Build Back Better bill had a lot of pro-working class stuff in it. We just couldn't pass it with Manchin and Sinema resisting.
Details are important.
This is about messaging, not policy. Most people don't really pay attention to actual policy, so it's more about convincing your average Joe you're working for them. Bernie had that, Biden and Harris didn't.
Well put.
I believe they don't talk about that because they fear it will cause rich people to remove their funding. That's just my thought.
I think the inherent problem with the build back better deal is it's still framed within the neoliberal trickle down economics of post Regan America.
Would it have increased some workers protections and child care, sure. But it would ultimately be a gift to the shareholders and owners of corporations able to tap into the 3 trillion dollars of funding.
Americans are tired of progressive bills that vicariously improve their lives by further bribing the economic class that actually have their boots on our necks.
People are tired of seeing headlines that the American economy is doing fine while they struggle to put food on the table. Nobody cares if your bosses retirement portfolio is breaking records when they have to pull overtime to maintain the same quality of life they had 20 years ago.
Funny when it was the more neoliberal, pro-business dems that shot it down, shortly before leaving the democratic party. There's really not a whole lot of corporate profits to be found in here, though, despite the rampant misinformation floating around online. It actually raised corporate taxes, which is not a neoliberal policy position:
https://schakowsky.house.gov/build-back-better-act#:~:text=The%20Build%20Back%20Better%20Act%20invests%20in%20securing%20universal%20preschool,and%20the%20universal%20preschool%20initiative.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/build-back-better/
Yeah, they split it into two bills, one with all the stuff that was intended to pass, and the one with all the stuff they ran on that they never intended to pass.
Funny how it still almost passed, then. Unless you're proposing a grand conspiracy where they all actually secretly were lying about their intentions. Such a conspiracy theory would be a strong claim, and those require evidence. Perhaps in the thousands of individual staffers and advisors to each member of congress you could find a whistleblower indicating such a conspiracy? Otherwise it'd have to be as airtight as Jewish Space Lasers.
It was never in any danger of passing. Centrists had Manchin.
This sounds like conspiracy again, where this was all orchestrated. You can believe whatever you want, that's part of living in the free world. But to actually be something worth considering, there should be evidence of this orchestration that can be found among the thousands of people that would've had to have been involved. Has AOC or Bernie or any of their staffers spoken of any orchestration?
There doesn't need to be orchestration.
If that's true, then the bill failed by a slim margin. It almost passed, and had the support of the majority of the democratic party, including passing the House of Representatives. This is an important detail.
It didn't "almost" do anything. Manchin blocked it for you. If by some miracle a progressive had won Manchin's seat, some other centrist in another state would rotate in to vote no.
There are always enough Manchins.
Ah, that's orchestration, which you just said was not happening. You are insinuating that most of them are neoliberals who simply put forward a chosen sacrificial scapegoat in some sort of planned scheme to deceive the American public. Strong claims require evidence, otherwise they are simply convenient ideas we can adopt to oversimplify a messy world and make ourselves feel better.
Nope. All it takes is for some moneyed interest to buy just enough Manchins. They buy whoever's cheapest.
And you make excuses for them.
Shot it down? The bill passed in 2022 after being modified to hell by special interest.
If it's not going to be implemented directly by the state it means that it's going to be implemented by private businesses. Those private business owners are going to walk away with the lion's share of any money they accept from the government.
It's almost like corporations aren't a monolith of mutual aid and support. You don't think Raytheon wouldn't support raising some taxes if it meant they could funnel a ton of government funding towards the privatized military industrial sector?
No, that is a false claim. It was not passed by the Senate and never became law. We can certainly criticize our neoliberal factions, but we should do it factually instead of weaving whatever narratives we find most convenient. Unless you're confusing it with the Infrastructure bill, which did pass. They were linked at one time, but were separated after both failing became likely.
https://ballotpedia.org/Build_Back_Better_Act
My dude..... The inflation reduction act is an amended version of the build back better deal. What are you talking about?
On July 27, Manchin and Schumer announced the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, the final result of these negotiations, surprising other congressional Democrats.[192] The bill, which includes provisions on tax, health care, and climate and energy spending, was introduced in the Senate as an amendment to the Build Back Better Act. On August 7, the Senate passed the bill on a 50–50 vote with Vice President Harris breaking the tie.[193] On August 12, 2022, the House passed the bill on a 220–207 vote.[194] President Biden signed it into law on August 16.[195]
Fine, technically true I suppose. But when you gut something that comprehensively and change its thrust, I think it's a little disingenuous to call it the same thing. It had all the workers rights stuff stripped out of it.
edit: Disingenuous on the bill author's part, not yours. Though tbf, they did rename it.
Tbf I did say it was passed after being modified to hell by special interest.
There are always enough Manchins.
Yep. That excuse does not fly.
Yeah, and maybe if progressive voters showed up en Masse we wouldn't have had to rely on those two. Imagine that progressives. Imagine that...
Ive always liked Bernie. Bernie demonstrates the Democratic party would much rather lose with Kamala than win with Bernie. Never thought I would see them campaigning with Dik Cheney, the mask fell away for a few moments on that one.
I legit could not believe they accepted that endorsement at all, much less ran with it as hard as they did.
I usually vote along with the democrats, but neoliberals are so freaking elitist and clueless. As much as it pisses me off that I'm going to have to deal with whatever fascist bs Trump has in store, it's really quite nice seeing them get their asses handed to them by a populist... It's just too bad it wasn't a left-wing populist.
I vote for Democrats because I kinda half to, not because I want to.
I wanted to vote for Sanders. I voted for Biden and Harris.
It seems to me that a lot of people are confused about what "supporting the working class" would actually mean.
It wouldn't mean that the working class would start thinking like Democrats. It will mean that Democrats will start thinking like the working class. Think about the implications, they're not all what you want them to be.
Probably worth it, though.
The implications, like supporting a higher minimum wage, universal healthcare, labor protections, unionization, and ending the forever wars?
Not sure about how they think about universal healthcare and unionization. It's hard to believe those are core issue for them if they're willing to vote republican like this.
And I can add to that list not caring about immigrants or minorities more than the bare minimum. Or about helping students financially.
Why should I give a fuck about immigrants who directly drive down my wages? I’m talking legal immigrants. I work for a ski area - they can’t function without J1s and H2Bs or they’d have to pay double the wages for it to make sense for American citizens. I’m in a well tipped position so it doesn’t matter for me but my non tipped coworkers can barely make rent, meanwhile as a condition of employment J1s and H2Bs have to be provided housing (that they pay $500 a month for deducted in their paychecks) by the resort.
Please note how minorities abandoned the democrats because democrats abandoned them.
I'm not saying I disagree with that position. I'm saying that Democrats mostly disagree with that position.
Except they don’t or trump wouldn’t of won.
Like the other out-of-touch libs, when you say 'working class' what you mean is 'racist white rural people'.
Half my coworkers were either born outside the US or are second-gen. My national just voted to affirm and support trans rights. Turns out, people who work for money are working class. That includes, well, everybody.
This misunderstanding is why the Dems 'moved to the right' this election. They still think it's 1950. Moving to the right doesn't make you appealing to the working class, it makes you appealing to bigots.
Literally just make life easier for the working poor. That is all you need to do.
What are the implications?
Shame the Democrats just told Bernie he is wrong. Again.
Democrats should have listened to Bernie Sanders, Captain Obvious says.
This assumes Democratic leadership thinks winning is more important than bringing the left to heel. Given their behavior that's not a great assumption to make.
The workers of America need to abandon the Democrat party and establish a unified left wing party (a good name would be "American workers party", yes I know that existed before). A few basic details of this party should include:
I wish you the very best of luck. The main issues you'll have will be, in order: funding, funding and funding.
Anyone being serious about this will have to spend most of their time thinking about that. Its why they always, eventually, end up being g captured by the powers that be. But they can do a lot of good before then, in the right circumstances.
One solution is through part of the party being a sort of union of trade unions. Unions have money, similar values and members who would potentially join. Membership subs would be another. They can do an awful lot of good but unions can also come with their own long list of problems you'll have to keep your eye on.
Whatever name you choose, check out the formation of political labour movements, as a kind of road map to building what you want. An example would be the labour party in the UK or NZ. It'll have to be done your way and for an American electorate of course but im sure you won't need any inspiration from me or any other country for that part.
Check out the working class party that started in michigan in 2016.
I guess we'll just have to put up with a couple of months of this fantasizing bullshit, before people realize just how much the paradigm is going to shift... We aren't going to be talking about organizing parties, because it will be moot.
Any real opposition will be removed (imprisoned and/or executed), and anything that remains will be purely for show.
Well, that would be a good way to guarantee republican dominance, yes.
The workers of America will listen to reason if the left has someone strong enough to rally the workers behind them
You underestimate how sensitive the working class is to anything involving removal of capitalism. The red scare never really ended.
Workers are scared of the terminology but not the ideology, if someone who's powerful and charismatic enough is able to clearly explain left wing values the workers will follow along. Workers may be scared but they're also easily convinced.
Wow, there are people who actually believe that in real life? Huh. Good luck with your glorious revolution
Yes leftists exist, not everyone is a liberal
I consider myself a leftist (though I'm sure I don't pass the purity tests of many on here), but I'm not deluded enough to believe what you said.
I'm literally in a union position, and I work with college educated people who support Trump.
The purity test here is simple, do you belive in private property (capitalism)?
Conventional Democratic Party "wisdom" just accomplished that.
Lmao. Historians.
I should have gone to bed at a reasonable time last night instead of doom scrolling, historians say.
Could have had a bad bitch.
Huh, they spelled elected wrong.
Fucking Hillary Clinton, are you kidding me.
If Democrats could hear criticism, they'd be very upset.
Criticism is just a 9 letter word for "Russian asset" to Democrats in 2024.
Sorry for the dumb question but I really don't follow politics. What did he mean when he says the dems ditched the working class.
Things like more paternity leave for workers, universal Healthcare that isn't tied to your job, increased minimum wage. Things like that to help strengthen everyday working people and give them more power and just generally improve their lives.
He means they chose identity politics of worker protections and unions. You buy votes and pandering to business was the wrong purchase. Trump may be a liar but he chose the right lie and sold his base a fallacy but one they can get behind and are unfortunately not educated well enough to know it's a improbablity to the point of near impossibility.
Though in this case he might actually be able to do it, though it will mean causing a world war to destroy every other major countries industrial base and choosing the right time to sue for terms.
Thank you that clears things up. One more question though, how was trump able to flip almost the blue wall States. I live in WI as an example and we totally flipped from blue to red. I couldn't imagine Kamala lost that many blue votes, unless there is something else I don't understand. Even educated people seemed to flip from what I have read.
All this talk we're hearing about all of these states shifting right is a little bit misleading. It's not that anyone who voted Biden in 2020 switched their vote to Trump in '24, it's that a lot of Biden's voters in 2020 didn't vote at all this year, while most of Trump's did
Al Gore too.
They should have listened to anyone that wasn't part of core in-group of the party.
I recently tried to explain to Lemmy that non-white working class voters see their social program as weird and off putting. I was downvoted to oblivion just for honestly relating an opinion from people these chronically online "allies" would never hear from, because they simply don't associate with seamstresses/fruit packers/construction site crossing guards etc. Not to mention the majority of these folks can't speak any language but English.
Tell my Chilean wife how she is going to make more money tomorrow than she did today and she will listen. Tell her she is a bigot because she believes that it takes more than "feeling like" a women to actually "be" a woman and she will stop listening. That is what just happened here.
I am from a different cultural context than her and I tend to believe what the people who study these issues have to say ie: gender affirming care saves lives. But to say that this one issue determines a persons entry or exclusion from our ever shrinking tent is political suicide, no matter how much we might wish that wasn't the case.
WHAT SOCIAL PROGRAM?? The Democrats didn't run on any of this woke mind virus bullshit you're complaining about. Trans people were the target of choice for the conservatives despite being basically a miniscule sliver of the population and Democrats just mumbled some generic pablum about privacy and compassion before changing the topic as quickly as possible. In no remote sense was "trans rights" a purity test for the Democrats, as clearly evidenced by all the fucking Republicans involved in the campaign.
This is just divorced from reality, and maybe that's the real sentiment you two have landed on, but it's not because the Democrats did anything to foster it.
Yeah.
That's the real problem with historians. They always talk about the past and not the future.
The more Dems and Progressives think and sound like Bernie, the better.
I did vote for Bernie. I know. But this isn’t helping. Regret about stuff you didn’t do changes nothing. We can’t be Uncle Rico about this. What can we do now? Anything?
Get to know your neighbors. Organizing doesn't have to mean politically, and community is the only strength we have.
I'm dead serious. Get to know your neighbors. At home. At work? (lolsafely) Do less work, more talking to your co-workers about work. About whatever. But yaknow, get to know them. And probably find out you agree about a lot of the stuff that's not on tv.
Organizing isn't some nebulous concept, politics isn't for lawyers. Organizing (and politicking) 's just... talking to people. People who like you n me who can't "influence politics" and don't know how to start. But we do know what we need.
People power is right there with us every day, politics is everyday life. So get to know your neighbors
They did listen to him, he endorsed Kamala.
Progressive policies were on the ballot, they just werent endorsed by Bernie.
Too bad that version of Bernie went into hiding for the last four years.
Don't you think it's more that the media has been corrupted? Since Khashoggi was dismembered?
Media has always been partisan and corrupted.
Media is different than journalism. There's a woman, formerly called "The Most Hated Woman In American," named Madelyn McMurray O'Hair, and she's the reason we don't pray in schools or have Bibles. I'm going to link an interview of her, and I want you to imagine this conversation happening today.
https://youtu.be/sJIWgevK4zw?si=RjXZLANFXqbDVUpP
People weren't kinder then. But it does appear that they had better journalism in some ways back then. How do you think "Your body, my choice," men would respond to this women?
I completely separate media from journalism. What we have today is not journalism, Journalism has been dead since Clintons telecom Reform Act.
I had watched numerous interviews with Madelyn McMurray O’Hair In the 70s I'm well aware of who she is. She was probably my first catalyst into becoming atheist.
Are there any other interviews or people from that time you'd like to share?
If Bernie had been president back in 2016, his terms would be over by now. But he wasn’t president. And he isn’t. now. Why the fuck are you people still rubbing one out over him? Trump won for a long list of reasons. The biggest: millions of Trump haters didn’t bother to vote, or they got duped into voting third party even in light of what a Trump win would bring to this nation.
Move on, move forward.
There were more Harris voters in Vermont than Sanders voters. So maybe Bernie should be listening to Kamala.
The difference is that Bernie won lmao.
If Kamala were only running in Vermont, she would have won too.
But she wasn't only running in Vermont, and she lost.
Same thing that happened every time Bernie tried to run nationwide. Did he take his own advice?
Steve Berry, a Democrat, was also running as independent in that election. He peeled off about 8k voters.