Amy McGraths campaign was so fucking bad she almost certainly caused the Overton Window to go further right in Kentucky. Charles Booker almost certainly would have lost, but at least he would have tried to push left.
2 Likes
Sounds like Nancy pretty good at politics actually, just her goals are different from yours (and what she generally says her goals are).
I’d definitely donate to this guy.
This is a good question but my gut says it has a lot to do with one party being for straight up evil shit for basically the entire history of the country. Hard to build a third party when 40%+ is continuously for the worst stuff imaginable.
I can! Language changes. Meanings change. What was considered progressive in 1992 and progressive now are very different things.
Here’s an example: In 2020, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is considered heinous and regressive and terrible policy, because we’ve evolved.
In 1993, when Clinton signed it into law, DADT was considered a step forward for LGBT rights, and was widely lauded as being what we would now call “progressive.” I lived it. I had just joined the Air Force then, and it was hugely controversial, with the “old guard” conservatives fighting against it tooth and nail.
3 Likes
I don’t really have a problem with an Amy McGrath-type in Kentucky if the person has a record of actually winning.
Instead, McGrath lost the 2nd most blue district (of 6) in the state in 2018 and then two years later can win a statewide election because???
2 Likes
Most states don’t allow fusion tickets where a candidate is on the ballot for more than one party. Most states have sore loser laws so a candidate can’t run for another party if the lose a primary, or else they have calendars which don’t give a candidate time to switch upon losing a primary.
This is basically nihilism and a point that makes the burn it all down argument stronger.
I wanted to add a couple of things as well. The top-two type of primary is conducive to this strategy, and so we already have it going on in California. Ranked choice voting also helps, but is so confusing to people. “One person one vote!”
One final thing would be for progressive incumbent Democrats to change parties to the Progressive/Squad party. I think in MA, we would end up with the two parties being Democrats and Progressives, with a Dem governor.
It can be a problem in a top two format if you can’t clear the progressive lane for a single candidate.
I think there’s a greater chance of success trying to build up the party and capture it from within. You wand to cultivate non-progressive yellow dog Democratic voters who will vote for progressives who win contested primaries.
The left side of the dems saying they wont vote for eDems is a good thing because it puts pressure on dems to move left or lose.
Hillary and the gang already blame the left for costing her the election. Use that paranoia as leverage even if its not entirely true.
3 Likes
Like everything else, this of course depends on the circumstances. Have a gander at the CA-53 race this time.
More progressive, LGBT candidate, lost by 20 points to the more centrist candidate (both Dems). Twist: CADEM and the DCCC threw heavy support behind the former, and actually tried to actively sabotage the latter. I think this race proves that money talks more than anything else, sadly. The winner is an heiress (Qualcomm) and had tons of private money backing her. She’s not entirely terrible…just not as progressive as Gomez.
I suck at making threads or I’d do it but someone should make a thread about helping progressives and how to fight back against the establishment. A list of all the small local races that would be good to donate too would be awesome, though we can probably just donate to justice Democrats. I know election season just ended but I’m sure we can help some people get started.
If no one else makes it in a day or two I’ll go ahead and do it.
I’ve repeatedly posted tis link, but it can never be posted enough:
2 Likes
Now do economic policy
eDems have a wildly irrational compulsion for ex military that are willing to run as Dems. They think its This One Neat Trick that will magically win over Persuadable Republicans.
3 Likes
Chuck and the DNC nuked the progressive challenger to Fighter Pilot Lady.
People say they’re bad at politics but they’re not, they’re quite good at defeating progressives.
1 Like
I guess I’m confused with how signing a prejudicial and regressive executive order is progressive in any way even if it shifted things marginally to the left. DADT was a horrible policy that literally barred openly gay people from military service and if that is your cite for DemE politicians accomplishing progressive things then I am going to guess they don’t exist. The actual text of the order is deplorable af:
Progress on gay marriage and LGBTQ rights has largely been won by activists not the Democratic party. Hell Obama was openly against gay marriage in 2008. The DemE crowd only got on board once it was overwhelmingly popular and not a day before.
5 Likes
The don’t ask part was a meaningful upgrade… They used to root anything not cisgendered out.
1 Like
I am not trying to make the point the policy wasn’t somewhat of an improvement. I don’t see how explicitly banning openly gay people from service is progressive though. Skydiver’s point (i think) is that society as a whole has moved left on some social issues. That has been done with the DemE crowd kicking and screaming not with their help though. If we didn’t have the SC case would gay marriage be legal in all 50 states? Probably not.
And lets look at how that movement took place. It happened with local activists getting petitions signed and then voters voting on it as ballot initiatives. The DemE party including Obama and Hill were largely against gay marriage until very recently.
2 Likes