this post was submitted on 13 May 2025
593 points (97.6% liked)

United States | News & Politics

2867 readers
715 users here now

Welcome to [email protected], where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.

If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.

Rules

Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.

Post anything related to the United States.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The DNC cited a procedural concern, but Hogg said it is “impossible to ignore the broader context” of his criticisms.

(page 6) 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 71 points 5 days ago

Finally! The DNC is finally taking action against the...oh never mind.

[–] [email protected] 51 points 6 days ago (15 children)

Don’t ever ask for progressives’ vote again. We’re done voting blue no matter who.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 days ago (67 children)

Why wouldn't a progressive want to vote blue though? Of the two most likely candidates, they are the least fascist.

Unless you're going the accelerationist route, it makes sense to Vote blue.

load more comments (67 replies)
[–] [email protected] 45 points 6 days ago (15 children)

So where, pray tell, do the progressive votes go?

Primary them sure. Try and snag it back. But you won't turn your next vote red. You know that. And they know that. And I sure as fuck won't do it either. The DNC can rot. But...

You can and should blame the two party system sure. But if you don't primary and win. Well. We've seen that before again and again.

I'm a progressive that will vote blue again. Reluctantly. Emphatically so. But I will.

The posturing of principals means nothing in our political reality. And it pisses me off. But reality doesn't care about your feelings.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 days ago (7 children)

Honestly, maybe it's time for progressives to take over the Republican party primary and start moving them left .

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 days ago (16 children)

I no longer vote for neoliberals or for folks who receive aipac money.

Period.

I won’t vote for a republican either.

If they want my vote they have to support policies that I do.

Period.

Blue no matter who is how we got here.

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Primary them sure.

Democratic primaries are kabuki. Trying to oust Hogg is just the latest demonstration.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 6 days ago (6 children)

If democrats want our votes, it's time for them to start earning them.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 days ago (4 children)

I think we need a different color to vote for. Definitely not green, because that party is for shit. But Democrats are functionally useless at this point.

I think I would rather throw my vote away on somebody who challenges the status quo in a progressive way under the Democratic socialist party (or just the plain socialist party) rather than vote for some goddamn Democrat who's going to uselessly wring their hands and then go home to their million dollar mansion and cry about how unfair people are being to their useless ass.

Voting blue hasn't helped cause they think it's your only option so they don't have to actually do anything to earn your vote other than being "not a Republican".

FUCK THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

I'M NOT VOTING FOR ANOTHER MODERATE ASSHOLE

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago

No where they sit their ass at home so the red hats don’t come for us for voting for dems who won’t even do a fucking thing to combat this. If I’m going to go on record as being against the regime it better be for a good reason, and this ain’t it

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 days ago (3 children)

But reality doesn't care about your feelings.

Yeah so... uh... That kinda goes both ways. I've made this argument before so I'm just gonna copy paste it, but lemme just...

Have you ever heard of gambler's ruin? It's the name of a few different results in statistics, but the one we want is this:

In statistics, gambler's ruin is the fact that a gambler playing a game with negative expected value will eventually go bankrupt, regardless of their betting system.

Now in modern US elections, does your bet have a positive or negative expected value for democracy? Is America becoming more or less of a democracy every election on average? Apply the theorem above to your answer and see what you get.

To change the inevitable result, which is fascism in the United States, you have to change the game in some way, and primarying incumbents and voting blue no matter who is what progressives are already doing.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days ago (4 children)

Your metaphor is flawed. Opting out does not save you anything because voting doesn't cost you anything in the first place. If you got a free bet, why wouldn't you take it?

It's more like we're on a sinking ship and bailing water. The ship is going down if we don't patch the hole, but bailing water still buys us time so that we can make more attempts to patch the hole. Except in this metaphor, bailing is something that takes maybe an hour of your time once every two years.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago (4 children)

Opting out does not save you anything because voting doesn't cost you anything in the first place.

The bet here isn't voting; it's elections. An election is an essentially random process where depending on the result things change either for the best or for the worst. If you somehow quantify how far America is from fascism (say, in terms of how many Republican terms it would take to go from the situation at hand to full-blown fascism) then you can model elections as a bet where you're forced to participate and don't get to choose your stake. Again, under this model (which should be accurate since the conditions for its application are all there) you will end up at fascism unless you change the game you're being forced to play so the odds are in your favor rather than the fascists'. I also want to point out that this isn't an analogy; it's a model. I'm simply taking a principle that exists in one field, making some simplifying assumptions and applying it in another. What I outlined here isn't a "what if" analogy; it's one step removed from a mathematical certainty.

It's more like we're on a sinking ship and bailing water. The ship is going down if we don't patch the hole, but bailing water still buys us time so that we can make more attempts to patch the hole. Except in this metaphor, bailing is something that takes maybe an hour of your time once every two years.

I have no problem with the act of voting itself. My problem is with... everything else that happens during election season. The whole idea of unity with liberals (aka Democrats) against the right is evidently a failed preposition, and the reason for that failure is specifically that the Democratic Party is invested in the game's present state and will force you (or, more accurately, already forces you) to cooperate with them to maintain the game before you're allowed to be "united" with them. To borrow your analogy, the Democrats are the ship's captain, who is helping you bail water but only on the condition that you don't patch the holes (and yes, there's more than one). You're not even supposed to point out that neither you nor him are patching the holes. Instead, you and the rest of the crew are supposed to just keep bailing and ignore the rising water level. And to be clear, the bailing isn't just one thing you do every two years; that doesn't begin to capture the opportunity cost involved. Your bailing in this analogy is voting drives, canvassing and other outreach on behalf of the Democrats; it's political donations; it's suppressing criticism of the DNC (attempts to get the captain to patch the damn hole) in the name of unity against the far-right. The actual voting is only the end of this long string of actions that sap energy, money and credibility from the people who would otherwise be out there actually patching the damn holes.

Okay analogy over, back to the real world. The DNC should've been fucking flayed alive when they tried to push a pro-genocide ex-DA on Americans, and instead all they got was progressives hushing down other progressives in the name of "unity". I'm sure you can think of all sorts of examples of this in action, but here's one to drive the point: the progressive reaction to the Uncommitted Movement. This was a large movement that had gained momentum in an attempt to push the DNC from proto-fascism and into the sanity, and what did they get from not even liberals, but progressives who should have been their most ardent supporters? "Hold your nose and vote for her." Not a nationwide solidarity to force the Democrats to back down on their most unpopular policies, not even tepid support or apathy, but active, emphatic opposition. That's not the stuff of democracy; that's a dictatorship where you roll a dice every four years to find out which boot will step on your neck until the next election.

I should note: I'm not advocating for passivity or apathy here. This shouldn't be a reason for you or anyone else to stay home and give up; it should be an impetus to organize, embrace solidarity between workers and take on the capitalists and their supporters. Act, but act according to your own conscience, not according to the DNC's agenda. This is especially important right now because the Democrats won't save you from fascism even if they wanted to, but even if democracy and the DNC both survive Trump, next time you be on the side doing the flaying and not the side practicing cannibalism on behalf of your blue donkey overlords.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (7 children)

This exactly. I have voted for every progressive candidate that has come up on the ballot. And yet every single time the middle of the road Democrat wins. Because that's where the DNC puts the money. And in the general I always vote for whatever Democrat has won the primary. And quite frankly I always feel sick that I voted for somebody that I wouldn't vote for if I had a better choice.

So I think I'm going to choose not to vote in the general if the progressive I vote for doesn't win. I'm tired of a democratic party that is more interested in protecting their position than actually doing their job.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Like another poster said casting a blank ballet sends much more of a message than not voting at all.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I think you should still vote just to show you're an active voter that they failed to court, but vote for independents, 3rd party, write in, whatever.

Honestly, I think the only solution for progressives is to elect enough independents that mathematically, while a minority, MUST be courted by the establishment parties in order to secure their legislation. Though that won't do anything for legislation that both establishment parties fully agree on, that'll still get rammed through.

But what are we even talking about? These are all legal constructs. We're living post rule of law now. Dictator just flat ignoring courts.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago

Yeah, that's basically the situation in Australia. The crossbench is needed to pass anything in the Senate, but Liberals and Labour routinely join forces to pass some truly disgusting shit (most recently an election reform that would reduce funding to the smaller parties, and a takeover of one of the biggest unions in the country).

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Exactly this. Stop giving the DNC money. Whenever you can send the message to the officials. No progressive platform and change? No removal of incumbents? No money. No vote.

It isn’t _just _ on us to do something. If they too don’t wanna see the fascists win, then it’s time for them to eat humble pie and realize their policies and their positions for the past 30-40 years brought this pig to prom. They have to pass the torch.

Fascism might be defeated again but it will come at the cost of neoliberalism finally dying as well. There’s very little options of anything else working.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 60 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I would not consider myself a far leftie, more of a left of center kind of guy, but I have found Hogg’s vivacity refreshing. The old guard should squirm, considering they shat the bed last go-round, and may even have lost us the country.

There are plenty of Bernie Trumpers out there, that feel this country has ignored them. And they’re right in the kinds of nooks and crannies where we need to win.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 6 days ago

Hogg is more of a centrist as well, his only sin was threatening the power of party leadership. As far as I know he's pretty much in the middle of the party when it comes to policy issues.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 6 days ago

Their trying to Bernie the guy. It's the same players again

[–] [email protected] 25 points 6 days ago

If they KEEP Hogg then they MIGHT have to Try a New Plan BESIDES Letting Americans Suffer Under Trump with LITERALLY NO PUSHBACK WHATSOEVER!

[–] [email protected] 20 points 6 days ago (1 children)

They're not "ousting" anyone, and the process was put into motion months ago before he made any comments about primary challenges.

You can literally just ask the other guy effected by this.

What had happened was the prior DNC didn't follow its own election rules for the vice chair races. Imone of the candidates who lost challenged it, and a committee ruled that the fair way to handle it was redo the election, but this time follow the rules.

The DNC chair is encouraging both the winners, and anyone else who wants to run, to run.

Like, if you know what's happening, there's not a better way to clean up the mistakes of the last DNC chair.

But the reason the media wants people to hate the DNC, is the people who own the media don't own the DNC anymore

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago

*affected

Sorry. Minor pet peeve.

[–] [email protected] 162 points 6 days ago (6 children)

These shit bags will never learn

[–] [email protected] 31 points 6 days ago (2 children)

People will never learn if they can't make it to the second paragraph:

As a result of a challenge from Kalyn Free, a losing candidate in the election, the committee decided that the election was not conducted properly and that it violated the DNC’s gender parity rules. If the full body of the DNC rules the same way, it will force Hogg and fellow Vice Chair Malcolm Kenyatta to run for election again later this year.

The old DNC ran a ahitty vice election that broke its own rules.

The current DNC decided via comitte the best way to handle it was to redo the vote. Which is not a big deal for the DNC.

Like, what would you prefer the current DNC do in this scenario?

[–] [email protected] 48 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

It might be technically valid, but it's literally being used as an excuse to get rid of him.


Ken Martin(DNC chair) has been whining about Hogg for a while. Being real upset that he's trying to oust incumbents who refuse to do anything.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-election/david-hogg-disrupts-democratic-party-rcna202202

And he doubled down a few days ago: Giving Hogg an ultimatum to take a "neutrality pledge" or step down.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/05/10/hogg-dnc-chair-ultimatum-00340272

Hogg refused, so now they're pulling this one out.


Like, what would you prefer the current DNC do in this scenario?

They knew about it last week, before they gave him an ultimatum. Meaning they were holding it back and waiting for his response. They're not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts and wanting to follow the rules. If that was the case, they would have gone ahead right away.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›