1086
Dems Reportedly Angry That Progressives Are Pushing Them to Act Like an Opposition Party.
(www.commondreams.org)
this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2025
1086 points (97.9% liked)
politics
20272 readers
3536 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Are you happy with the current administration's Israel policy though?
Are we pretending the dems werent the ones who leveled gaza and committed genocide so far? They did that shit and they promised to do more of it.
And we dont know who to credit with the ceasefire.
Am I wrong? seems like those are just facts.
No, we're not pretending that at all. Is the current administrations policy better?
I dont think thats a forward looking question. Lets try: "Was that a good policy choice and does that represent who Dems say we are going forward?" and "should we trust centrists in leadership any longer because they sure have been out of touch screwing the pooch for a long time" and "do we want more of this right-wing-lite fascist war support BS?"
I'm tired of losing through DNC immorality and incompetence. Arent you? Its way past time to clean house.
I'd prefer you answer my question. Are you happy with the current administration's policy?
Sticking to the canned messaging only eh. I sure do understand why you'd take that approach.
You don't seem to understand anything. It's a yes or no question.
Is the current administration's Israel policy preferable to you?
You're not answering because only a psychopath would say yes. But saying no, if you voted 3rd party, is admitting you fucked up. That's why you avoid it. You can't admit you're wrong.
Just like the vote was a Trump or Harris vote, period? How'd that work out for us champ? Its almost like Harris should have taken a broader view of the concrete issues at hand than just asking the voters to ask themselves "if she was better than trump", and vote accordingly. Do you notice how that strategy is now being panned as out of touch, full of hubris, and pretty stupid?
The world is not limited to carefully scripted yes or no's to the only thing phrased in the only terms you want to talk about. Controlled narrow framings like yours are exactly how we lost, so thank you for your service, finitebanjo.
Still dancing. You're stiiilllll dancing.
The voted third party so I imagine not.
Except unless they had been lobotomized, they knew damn well that their vote was being thrown away and that Trump would be the likely winner.
Which is tact approval of Trump and everything that came with it.
You're rephrasing the post as though you're making a "gotcha!" statement, when it's just the thing they said. Their argument is that the Dems needed to lose for any chance of party reform to occur, and they voted in a way that would encourage that outcome.
It's an argument that I find compelling, especially given the fact that the Democrat leadership seems to be actively trying to learn all the wrong lessons from their humiliation, where they are trying to learn anything at all. This indicates to me that, to some degree, OP is correct and there wasn't even a snowball's chance in hell that party leadership would have done anything significant had they coasted to victory based solely on being not-Nazis.
To seat his logic in another context, where the Trump of it all is not a factor, it's the same argument I've heard lefties trot out in a discussion about legal vs illegal protest tactics. Which is to say, effective protest is protest which forces people to engage with the issue being discussed, and legal protest is ineffective because, by design, it is easily ignored by both the public and the powers that be.
All that being said, the argument is not so compelling as to convince me that any pain caused to the Dems in service of organizing an actual progressive wing is worth the pain Trump's election is causing people, the environment, or the world in general. I don't know anything about OP, so I don't want to state this as fact, but, to me, it smacks of the privilege that comes with figuring they will make it through this period okay (if not particularly great). Therefore, it's worth it to them to endure this inconvenience, in the hopes that it effects change in the Dems. Attack their argument on that front all you like, but you're not contributing anything by saying "you helped elect Trump!" when that's what they said they did and they'd do it again.