- cross-posted to:
- progressivepolitics@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- progressivepolitics@lemmy.world
Summary
Democrats must reclaim their identity as the party of the working class to regain electoral strength.
Despite pro-labor policies under Biden, working-class voters feel disconnected, seeing Democrats as defenders of a failing system.
The party’s decline traces back to NAFTA and neoliberal economic policies that favored corporations over workers.
A generational effort to prioritize labor rights, fair wages, and economic security while addressing working-class frustrations are needed.
Without serious reform, Democrats will continue losing ground to populist alternatives.
You must log in or register to comment.
That would require removing mega-rich conservatives from party leadership. I don’t see that happening.
So long as they have corporate donors and insider trading, they will never be the workers’ party.
Nobody is coming to save us. The working class needs to organize to save itself.
The good news is that if it works, we’ll be in a much better place than where we were a decade ago. It’s going to take a lot of hard work, and we all need to pitch in a little to make it happen. It might not work, but there’s nothing to lose in trying except our chains.
General Strike. Shut the country down, they’ll get violent. They will use the police and the national guard to attempt to break the strike. But hold firm, because then they’ll beg.
They can break up a picket line, but they can’t stop you all going home in response to it. The end result is the strike continues. Or as it’s a general strike just move somewhere else.
Which is why I have always contended the first place to strike is against the police, government, and churches.
Not healthcare CEOs, and business… as long as your local police department, legislature building, and local church are undisturbed nothing will change.
You have to admit that healthcare CEOs make for a great target.
A better target is the Healthcare Group board of directors.
The CEO is just hired management. The directors…
Yup. The Democrats as we’ve known them need to die or completely metamorphose. I don’t want my political party to be friends with CEO’s and billionaires, I want my political party to get the American people’s fair share. I want my party to look upon trillion dollar companies and billion dollar families with the same disgust and ire I have. There’s no such thing as a good billionaire, a good person could never take that much.
Let’s bust some monopolies, let’s tax the fuck outta tycoons. Stop giving billions of government dollars to privately owned and traded companies. Let’s invest in infrastructure projects that make our country better. Who gives a fucking shit about GDP, it doesn’t make my life better.
Best they can do is embrace fascism.
yeah the party of insider trading will definitely be the workers’ party if you wish it hard enough.
Who is it you think is guilty of insider trading?
nancy pelosi
Assuming they spent every dollar her husband made in his life while being an investment banker, and just put her wages in, using 10% average growth (10 year average is over that for the Stock market).
She is below average for the market. She’d be worth about 210 million. But she’s way lower than that in real life.
When you can deposit $174,000 to income annually into the market… You arent playing the same struggles that we are.
Her money would very likely check out, you have to remember she’s been in office for 48 years. That’s a long fucking time. She was at JFK’s inauguration as a 20 year old student studying to become a Congress member.
I don’t think she’s a good person, but when people accuse her I think they overlook how long she’s worked
This is satire right? It’s painfully obvious that she is insider trading and has been doing so along with her husband for years.
She just casually outperforms all the best stock traders in the world every year for the last 40+ years.
As a non American, I’ve been told by an American colleagues that the Republicans are traditionally the worker’s party. Could someone please clarify?
Additionally, my opinion is that the entire system needs to be abolished to allow representation from more than two parties to represent how diverse America is.
Tldr: Democrats were the party of the South until the 90s
Alabama, for example, didn’t elect a Republican governor until 1986. Mississippi didn’t elect one until 1991. Georgia didn’t elect one until 2002.
Claims Nixon was the Republican who came up with the idea of pandering to racists
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_United_States_presidential_election
See Jimmy Carter’s support in the South
So a long time ago, you could argue the Republicans were the worker’s party. Abolionist-focused, was comfortable with immigrants more than other parties at the time, and Lincoln even exchanged letters with Karl Marx, but indrectly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Address_of_the_International_Working_Men’s_Association_to_Abraham_Lincoln
Republicans in the 1800s stood for minimum wage, pushed for suffrage of women, and other generally good ideas like “Maybe we should listen to the unionists who are willing to die for an 8 hour work week.”
But over the centuries since, the lines blurred. In the 1930s a Democrat pushed for expansions of the social net due to the great depression. In the 1950s, a Republican advocated for billions to spent on the interstate highway system, that has never once made a dime back over the last decades.
Then the southern strategy happened. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy Republicans marketed themselves towards the white South as a way to say “Hey we back what you stand for, whatever it is” and that’s when South started to vote for Republicans, and Nixon took advantage of this.
But the Republicans today don’t even care about the white workers, they don’t about any workers, they only care about the rich. Have been since at least the 1980s from Ronald Reagan. Democrats lately tend to protect the workers more, but it varies from state to federal, but generally wages are up with Democrats, and we’ve had more expansions of workers rights with them.
Removed by mod
I would really like to know why your American colleagues think that.
Their words were something to the effect of Democrats always campaigning with celebrities and supported by rich people, while Republicans are supported by the poor and don’t campaign with rich people (I did point out Musk to them and they replied that Musk is a hard worker etc.).
Thanks for the follow up. The notion is totally at odds with their actions and efforts, and it’s kind of disheartening to hear their reasoning. I shouldn’t be surprised though.
Probably briefly remembering high school talking about Republicans doing good things, and then thinking Fox News is accurate reporting.
How far back are they talking “traditionally”? You can make an argument that they were a century ago. Not a particularly strong argument, but there’s an argument. Go back even further, and Karl Marx himself was congratulating Abraham Lincoln. After all, slaves are the most exploited workers.
The last 50 years, though? Absolutely not, but their bleating about “coastal elites” hoodwinks a lot of people to think otherwise.
Yes! My colleagues were talking about the elites in California when they mentioned that.
Because they’re jealous of a state that isn’t a shit hole
Source: Californian with family in a red state: if you’re close enough to them they’ll admit it unknowingly
I think that all makes sense. A state government that wants to improve the working class will generally be more rich, and a state that doesn’t will have more poor.
Nice. When another debate comes up in the office, I’ll have some ammo
It’s like pro wrestling. Their gimmick is that they are working class that busts their assess working hard labor jobs to feed their families. The democratic gimmick is that of well meaning and educated individuals seeking a bright future.
But in reality is that they are both moronic abusive assholes and one is a nazi.
deleted by creator
This is absolutely true.
Democrats should be doing a lot of things instead of waiting around for those “good” billionaires to show up. Both parties need to split and take huge chunks of resources with them to form a party that actually does represent the majority. This has happened before in American history but, at this point, it’s just wishful thinking I guess.
No shit. Now convince the democratic party leadership that winning elections is more important that kissing donor ass.
Their goal is never to win elections. Their only goal is to prevent leftist movements and organization from gaining positions of power. To defend these status quo.
Wouldn’t be surprised if you are in a situation where it needs to get worse before it can get better. Vote 3rd party so heavily that it kills one of the major parties. All the people that didn’t turn up vote for someone else?
Yes they will gladly surrender to fascists to prevent socialists from getting a voice. This is the core issue
Why are you using the future tense?
The best way is to bring single payer health care.
Every other G7 nation has it
They tried to do that the moment they had senate supermajority with caucusing ind over a decade ago, but caucusing ind Joe Lieberman voted against it and the GOP filibustered it in 2010.
They haven’t even had more than 50 since like 2013, they only had bare minimum to select majority leader in 2021 because of caucusing independents and VP tiebreaker.
If you want single payer then the only way to get that is not to change the DNC, it’s to convince millions more people to vote for them or to remove Republicans.
ACA was never going to be single payer. Lieberman played the bad guy to kill the public option, but it was pretty obvious it was only there to be bargained out in the first place.
Single payer, on the other hand, was never even considered to be an option.
They voted on singlepayer and it lost by Independent Joe Liebermans vote.
You cannot blame that on the DNC.
They have never once voted on single payer.
Then I guess Barrack Obama and thousands of protestors all halucinated it back in December 2009
Even Nancy Pelosi, who passed the bill in the house with 218 votes, has multiple comments about it being removed in the Senate.
Now convince the democratic party leadership that serving their constituents is more important that kissing donor ass.
Convince them of that, and the winning elections thing will solve itself.
The problem is “kissing donor ass” is a euphemism for serving themselves.
lol no it won’t. If I’m a Republican candidate, I can literally just say some culture war bullshit and still beat you in an election. Especially if you’re a woman or a minority.
Don’t convince national Democratic leadership of anything. They’re too disconnected and don’t care about any state they don’t live in. Run for, and take control of state Democratic parties. Start telling national leadership your terms for your state supporting or working with them.
If enough people do that. They will change or become irrelevant.
The only ones that get any level of power or influence within the party are ones that will defend the status quo. A system that’s operating as designed cannot be reformed from within.
It’s actually a pretty low bar to clear. You can even claim a decent annual wage off campaign donations if its your only income source, so a literal unemployed homeless person could run if he got the party endorsement.
The only concern is if the state has active politicians on the ticket that you would be competing against, such as career politicians, long time staffers, and volunteers who would be seen as more preferable. You could still fill one of those staffer, intern, and/or volunteer positions to make your voice heard as well.
Where can I sign up? Fuck it. I’ll run for something.
What state are you in? I will absolutely find you the info.
AZ
The state party has some resources here on volunteering and when the state committee meets for elections and whatnot.
You can go here and look at your county party website as well, they’ll have more info on how to get involved/run there. I looked at a few, most of them had a way of singing up to be a committee person.
Best of luck!
Should spread the word. I’ll help. We should have been doing this 20 years ago.
What state do you live in?
Missouri. Not sure why you’re being downvoted for asking that. We generally even in larger metropolitan areas have a ton of offices that no one other than Republicans run for. Which is part of why this is a red state. National Democrats don’t even try to field candidates for anything but the biggest offices. Which often backfires denying them even those.
All states need to take back their leadership and a lot of the funding from the national party. The National Party should be nothing more than a body that coordinates the state parties. Not the actual leadership itself. That’s part of the reason they seem so disconnected. Because they are
The problem is they see large donors as the only path to victory as campaigns are expensive
The problem is that they see donations as the end goal and no longer give a shit if they lose.
They don’t have to be. Present the people with policies that they want and the public will do all the work themselves.
The problem is getting the word out is expensive. Advertisement buys aren’t cheap.
A motivated voter seriously engaging with their social network is worth a lot more than an ad buy. The whole ad world is trying to smuggle their advertising as the genuine thoughts of a real person and politics is acting like it’s still the age of Must See TV.
True but is there any indication of that currently working on the same level in terms of the return on the ad buy that a TV ad can produce? Ads are passive and they work.
Do they? We’ve outspent Trump in three elections now and still lost two of them. Is there any actual measure of the value of an ad for political purposes? It’s not like business where you could note an increase in sales after you run an ad campaign, there’s one single opportunity to “buy” and it’s a secret. Anything you learn in that one campaign you just have to hope still applies years later in a different environment with a different candidate.
I’m sure they have some benefit, but the only time I’ve ever seen someone talk about political advertising was either when they were sick of seeing them or when an ad was going viral because regular people were using their social networks to share it.
Yes, they do work. Anyone who thinks marketing and advertising are ineffective on them ate just ignorant of how ads work on them.
If you study advertising or marketing you’ll inevitable learn about Charmin toilet paper in the USA. They ran a campaign that was irritating regarding people squeezing toilet paper rolls because they were so soft. “Don’t squeeze the Charmin” was their slogan. People hated the ad. They complained about the ad to stations but Charmin also sold a shitload of toilet paper based on this ad campaign so even irritating ads can work.
They do get the word out. The problem is that we don’t believe them.
And guess what the innovation in advertising this last cycle was? Cheap, to voters, text messages asking for funding. Sounds like a great time to dump the dead-weight corpos and win some elections
And what was the turnover on those buys? The fact that texts aren’t expensive doesn’t mean that is effective.
Convince the voters to stop falling for culture war bullshit then
Losing is more expensive
Here I thought “providing the better option in a binary race” would be enough; but snowflake voters need individual attention?
“Here. We’ll keep a traitorous felon out of office because that’s the choice” and people still preferred the felon.
I think we need to start by apologizing to the Democrats for being stupid. Not just “oops I voted wrong” stupid, but “oops I voted for the Russian agent who’s raped everything he touches and sold every secret he probably touched too, and is now oddly hellbent on destroying a country as a favour to Russia” stupid.
That’s a lotta stupid.
Winning elections by checks notes demanding voters apologize for not voting for you.
Brilliant.
Your hostage situation electioneering is the past, electoral reform is the future.
We will not be abused by people like you any longer. We will be free to vote how we wish. The people will have many options to choose from, and the democrats will have to represent people to earn their votes or be tossed into the garbage can alongside the republicans.
More democracy is the way forward, not this domestic assault you try to pass off as representation.
Videos on Electoral Reform
First Past The Post voting (What most states use now)
Videos on alternative electoral systems we can try out.
You will NEVER get electoral reform from republicans. You will get electoral dismantling.
The hostage situation is ongoing and you’re asking for every hostage to die.
Ok, keep voting for stupid things, win stupid prizes.
“We’re second worst and you will be voting for us no matter what we do” was going to fail eventually, and you were fools to keep doing it.
I feel like I have to cook so many times on this app.
They’re downvoting you, but you’re right. One day they’ll grow out of this communist shit
The same neoliberal policies republicans supported yet aren’t held accountable for because 🤷♂️
Because Democrats are holding the bag
They kinda were. People hate “RINOs,” ofc Trump is in reality just more of the same, but like the author said he represents a “wrecking ball,” and only thing resembling a deviation from the mainstream Washington consensus.
Because no one expects anything but terrible policy, like those neoliberal ones, from the GOP. People think the dems will be for the people and workers not just the wealthy
So why do people vote for republicans? Come on, just admit it.
The hate, years of am radio/fox News and anti abortion
Biden’s pro-union moves are historic, but voters need more than symbolism. Effectively outlines the problem and proposes actionable solutions.
🐱🐱🐱🐱
I keep hearing this, but Biden shut down the rail workers strike and then slowly got them a small portion of that they were striking for. They would have gotten a better deal if Biden had just stayed out of it.
Teamsters wouldnt endorse him in 2024. Whens the last time you saw unions not line up behind a Dem?
When I look up what else he did, people like to say he appointed some people to some positions, and upped funding for NRLB. NLRB arbitrates labor disputes, but doesnt advocate for unions specifically. And Biden walked 1 picket line, while ignoring some others, like during the amazon strike. He did nothing in many cases where the cops were called in to brutalize picketers and demonstrators in both the amazon teamsters strike and the rail union workers strike.
So all this adoration for him showing up for one picket line for a few minutes, and one needless derailing of a rail strike. And no blame for his ignoring some other labor stuff he could have helped with if he actually cared about labor even just a little bit. Seems like a C- grade to me.
Following the new DNC flowchart: Is that better than an trump? OK, sure. If thats our only yardstick for everything.
Following the DNC critics: is that enough to get elected? Eff No. Biden and Harris both hemorhaged votes amongst union members too, along with every other working demographic. Working people do not see pro business centrists as serious partners. Dress Biden up in the clothes of being pro union all you like, I think everyone see thats thats just performative BS for the chumps. Just like his phony ‘red lines’ in pretending to push against war crimes while enabling them in both constant weapons shipments on the US taxpayer dime, and running interference for Israel in the UN. Should we give Mr best labor president ever a nobel peace prize for his strong stances against war crimes? Or can we stop this charade of his being the best president ever in every possible category?
Biden actually kept working to get the union their demands after the fact, when he clearly had the power to ignore them if he wanted to.
EDIT: GOVERNMENT WEBSITE LINK HERE "On Biden-Harris Administration’s watch, the percentage of rail workers who are guaranteed paid sick leave has gone from 5% to 90% "
Biden’s rail decision wasn’t perfect, but it prevented economic collapse while securing paid sick leave—a historic first. Teamsters’ hesitation reflects union independence, not failure. NLRB funding and pro-union appointments are structural wins ignored here.
Biden’s labor record isn’t flawless, but it’s leagues ahead of anti-union predecessors. Your ‘C-’ grade ignores these achievements and oversimplifies complex realities. Pragmatism beats ideological purity in advancing labor rights.
😺😺
Other countries manage to allow for rail workers to strike though. Why should the US government and not a court of law be able to evaluate whether limiting strikes is an appropriate measure for protecting the economy?
Take German as example. There’s this union:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gewerkschaft_Deutscher_Lokomotivführer
They are one of the only unions that is willing to actually fight in Germany and have achieved results exceeding those of significantly larger unions. Why shouldn’t they be permitted to strike? Strikes in Germany can be blocked by labor courts if they cause too much economic damage by the way.
Also, as a sidenote:
Aren’t you doing something right when you get an actually decent song praising you shown on - and created by - a publicly founded TV channel?
The song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2fVMSKfI7E English translation by me: https://pastebin.com/c3YXtpGN
Further context: The song was uploaded shortly before the 2023/2024 strikes were announced by the union. Claus Weselsky, the union leader since 2008, retired after the union got its demands fulfilled.
Other countries’ systems aren’t directly comparable to the U.S., where federalism complicates labor law uniformity. Germany’s co-determination model works within its unique legal and economic framework, but applying it to the U.S. ignores vast structural differences. Rail strikes in the U.S. directly impact interstate commerce, which federal law prioritizes above all else.
GDL’s success stems from Germany’s specific labor environment, where unions negotiate under different constraints. In the U.S., rail unions face systemic hurdles like the Railway Labor Act, designed to limit disruptions. Comparing outcomes without acknowledging these disparities oversimplifies the issue.
Finally, your sidetrack about a song and TV production is irrelevant to the discussion of labor rights. Focus on substance instead of tangential anecdotes.
A mix of effort and relevance but flawed arguments and diversions.
🐱🐱
Other countries’ systems aren’t directly comparable to the U.S., where federalism complicates labor law uniformity
Federalism is enshrined in the German constitution and does complicate a shitton of things too though. Labor and contract rights just happen to be there too but isn’t the latter in the US constitution as well?
Rail strikes in the U.S. directly impact interstate commerce, which federal law prioritizes above all else.
But so would truck driver union strikes or port worker strikes. As far as my limited knowledge and quick research goes, the latter does strike somewhat frequently and the former doesn’t exist as each company has their own small union, if any.
Federal law also prioritizes the economy in Germany. It’s just that courts must rule whether the violation of labor rights can be justified with this argument - the government cannot unilaterally disband a strike. That’s the point of separation of powers.
In the U.S., rail unions face systemic hurdles like the Railway Labor Act, designed to limit disruptions. Comparing outcomes without acknowledging these disparities oversimplifies the issue.
To some extent, yes. Biden and congress however were not forced by this act to act the way they did if I can read this law correctly. They could’ve easily permitted warning strikes or put significant pressure on the involved companies.
Even then, indefinite strikes rarely happen in Germany either. There are always several warning strikes beforehand which cause limited damage.
Finally, your sidetrack about a song and TV production is irrelevant to the discussion of labor rights.
I thought it was fun to bring up in this topic. The song is quite apt w.r.t. the impact and perception of rail strikes. The GDL is despised by rail companies, politicians, tabloids et al and usually portrayed as unreasonable monsters targeting poor commuters.
But that’s the entire point of strikes. They must hurt, otherwise they are meaningless. Don’t you think that had Biden not intervened, the workers would’ve gotten all their demands fulfilled - including paid sick leave (mandatory in countries with labor rights btw)?
The only thing I’m certain about is that if the German government had the same capability to end strikes willy-nilly, rail unions would be neutered until they exist on paper alone. Like they seem to in the US.
Federalism may complicate matters in Germany, but comparing it to the U.S. misses the point. American federalism prioritizes commerce over labor rights, creating systemic barriers unique to its legal framework. Tossing in contract rights feels like a red herring—stick to the rails, friend.
Your take on German courts balancing labor rights better is valid but irrelevant here. The U.S. government’s intervention wasn’t about legal obligation; it was political calculus. That nuance undermines your argument while proving mine.
As for strikes “needing to hurt,” congratulations on stating the obvious. The real issue is how systemic suppression in the U.S. neuters unions, leaving workers with little leverage. Your tangents about songs and tabloids? Entertaining but hollow.
Focus your argument, or you’ll derail yourself again.
🐱🐱
contract rights
Isn’t that why unions are allowed to exist? Freedom of association and negotiation is the necessary foundation which I believe is inclided somewhere in the US constitution. And strikes - at least from what I’ve read - are part of what’s granted through this freedom. After all, labor disputes are between two private parties (company + union) and limiting one of the parties violates their freedom of forming contracts. I might be wrong though, its been some time since I researched the legal foundations of strikes, at least in Germany.
t’was political calculus
Was it though? I don’t see who benefitted but the rail companies. The workers only got some of what they would’ve striked for but not everything. Any political benefit usually vanishes a month after the headlines have moved on, so I don’t think breaking up the strike has helped them win any “moderates” who would’ve voted Republican. And it might have alienated some workers from the Democrats, seeing them side with the companies instead of them.
systemic suppression
That’s what this is about though. Biden is part of the system and has used it to systemically suppress unions by literally preventing one from striking. Why should he be praised for limiting his suppression slightly when he could have just… not suppressed unions? He certainly had the required votes in Congress to block any legislation preventing the railway strike.
Also, is your comment written with the help of AI? I can’t quite put my finger on it but some your writing sounds like it could come straight from an LLM. You also used this symbol: — earlier which isn’t on any standard keyboard layout I know - unless you have some autocorrect feature replacing short dashes with long one’s.
Those rail workers were trying to tank the economy. Fuck them. And fuck these unions too. We don’t need unions, we need regulations directly.
the rail companies were trying to tank the economy by not giving them the bare minimum of benefits any reasonable employer should give. They easily could have afforded some tiny amount of benefits, they just didnt feel like it.
The problem is that the voters do need symbolism. Voters are too stupid and propagandized to know what actions a party actually takes. Symbolism is all that matters. You can even just straight up lie and these dumbasses will believe it.
Observe the contempt for workers.
That’ll be the day.
The Democrat party is not a democratic party, they are a neoliberal, technocratic party. They don’t want the people to rule, they want neoliberal technocrats to rule. I don’t see that changing, anytime soon.
A workers’ party would have to be a majoritarian, democratic party, because the workers are the vast majority of the population.
MAGA took over the GOP in just a few years. I think the same thing can happen to the DNC. Just need a little propaganda, some charismatic leadership, and people willing to slander the establishment.
MAGA had a lot of money pushed at it. The Koch Bros independently funded the Tea Party movement until Trump was created, then Russian money began to flow.
There is no such money faucet for leftist groups. In fact, a massive lack of funding has been one of the chief struggles these groups have had for decades.
This took decades. They started in the 1970s. If you think this happened over a few years you are either young or paying attention to the wrong things
Eh, this particular movement started in the 1990s. Then they got focused in the 2010s.
There’s a lot of stuff that also started in the 70s, but the MAGA stuff is way more recent and beyond what they had dreamed would be possible in the 70s. They really, really didnt count on their voters largely giving up on any semblence - claimed or real - of principles. Which was a huge win for them.
The current maga we see today was started by the John Birch Society.
The Christian nationalism starts with Roe debatably even with the Civil Rights movement. The Christian nationalists are the driving force behind this movement. Remember when Iran revolted the religious elements didn’t take over immediately.
MAGA voted for Republicans.
If you’re suggesting the left change the DNC by starting to vote for them, then I’m in.
It won’t happen because Anyone left of center is too fucking worried about supporting a candidate that isn’t completely perfect in their eyes than they are about making actual progress.
Edit- and just like that, like moths to a flame, people come by to prove me right.
I dont think asking for “not in support of wildly illegal war crimes” was a big ask. But evidently the centrists were willing to throw the entire country to permanent fascism to stand on their principle that AIPAC money needed to continue to flow to DNC bank accounts. But yes, the voters are to blame here, clearly.
Leftists would never support a centrist candidate because we are not centrists.
Yes, AND it’s worth bearing in mind that some democratic strategists apparently think the path to being the “worker’s party” is to embrace social conservatism. Trans people aren’t the reason I will never retire, they aren’t the reason I’ll never be able to take my kids on a real vacation, or why we’re one “get fucked lmao” from being bankrupted by health insurance. The assholes in this party who have a vision of trying to capture moderate Republicans need to show themselves the door. Bernie and Trump both show that you’ll get the votes when you promise big changes to this busted ass system AND people believe that you’ll actually do it. Stop trying to be yesteryear republicans; start promising shit that hurts the big donors’ feelings and meaning it.
Bernie is a loser. So is Trump. Both have lost national elections.
Obama can’t relate 😎
Hillary and Kamala are bigger losers than Trump, apparently, having the same national track record as Gary Johnson.
And Bernie is bigger loser than all of them. Never seen the White House.
All of them are beneath Obama 😎
I guess? Bernie never lost to Trump.
deleted by creator
There needs to be a worker’s party. It doesn’t have to be the Democrats.
That there are only going to be two viable parties in this country is a mathematical inevitability of how our voting system works, but there’s no reason why the Democrats have to remain one of those parties. If what they’re doing right now is the best they’ve got then they shouldn’t be difficult to replace. A damp sandwich could do a better job.
DAMP SANDWICH 2028
Its a first past the post 2 party system. It’s gonna have to be the Democrats.
Check out the Working Families Party. It’s not in every state, but they aren’t delusional about running their own candidates as third parties. The strategy is generally to find candidates that align to their values and get them into Democratic primaries.
Now, at the end of the day, I don’t think any political party can save us. The best case scenario is to make sure the state isn’t too repressive, but that’s useful in itself.
Democrats have no intention of being pro-labor. They need to go away and be replaced by a better party.
No. The Dems must implode and let something actually decent come in
