The Democratic party’s progressive wing, for basically every single election since I’ve been aware of politics, have had to hold their noses and vote for a “least worst candidate” they consider to...
The Democratic party’s progressive wing, for basically every single election since I’ve been aware of politics, have had to hold their noses and vote for a “least worst candidate” they consider to be unsatisfactory (and possibly morally compromised). They do this dutifully even as they are condescended to and lectured by the media and centrist wings about how they need to grow the fuck up and deal with it for the good of the country. If those unsatisfactory candidates end up losing, they are also the ones who get shit on for not having clapped harder for someone who didn’t fire them up.
Now the shoe is on the other foot and it is the centrists who can’t deal with the fact that a Presidential candidate doesn’t fulfill their West Wing vision of what a President should look like, and they will happily torch that candidate’s chances of winning because they can’t get their way.
Basically any time a progressive runs nationally the national press just decides that they’re “unelectable” based on them just declaring that lefty or labor centric policies are unelectable. There’s no real data behind it, and insofar as there is data it’s inevitably tainted by the fact that the only media coverage of left political figures is hyperfixated on them being leftist, or fringe, or unrelatable. The methods used to manufacture narratives to suit the biases and perspectives of media elites and the donor class have never been all that subtle, we’re just so used to it when it’s deployed against the left that it barely registers.
Now we’re seeing a rare occasion when it’s being deployed against an institutionalist, which is novel; but it makes perfect sense that Bernie, who has been subjected to this sort of treatment by the center his whole career, would recognize the dynamic and pierce the veil of the media’s reality distortion field.
I would be very intrigued at what the future might look like if a centrist Democratic Presidential administration owes a huge political favor to the progressive wing of the party for a change. I...
I would be very intrigued at what the future might look like if a centrist Democratic Presidential administration owes a huge political favor to the progressive wing of the party for a change. I don't think French coalition politics are necessarily apt here, but I find the prospects for change exciting.
Biden's been useful in returning focus to some of the traditional New Deal and Great Society priorities - labor rights, environmental policies, civil rights... but not so efficient in selling equitable taxation, housing, efficient transportation policy, a national R&D-based industrial policy, effective cyberdefense, foreign policies that genuinely prioritize human rights and diplomacy/development/aid/trade over military intervention... [Fair argument: I'm not an expert and national media mostly have pitiful reporting quality in these areas.]
I'm of the opinion that the Democratic establishment would much rather be the righteous minority resistance party than owe ANY favors to their progressive wing that they couldn't spin as "well...
I would be very intrigued at what the future might look like if a centrist Democratic Presidential administration owes a huge political favor to the progressive wing of the party for a change.
I'm of the opinion that the Democratic establishment would much rather be the righteous minority resistance party than owe ANY favors to their progressive wing that they couldn't spin as "well done, team effort, big tent." They saw what happened when the populists took control of the opposition and will not let it happen on their watch.
Honestly we’ve never really gotten to test how the progressive left of the party fares when they’re all in on a general election at the national level. As a faction they’ve been in the wilderness...
Honestly we’ve never really gotten to test how the progressive left of the party fares when they’re all in on a general election at the national level. As a faction they’ve been in the wilderness since ‘72. The last time some large part of that faction was truly bought into a presidential candidate was with Obama, but Obama united the whole Dem coalition in a way nobody had before or since so it’s hard to know how much pull any individual group had in there.
This will be an interesting data point to be sure.
This isn’t really an accurate portrayal of the situation. No one is having a temper tantrum over a less than ideal candidate. A lot of people think Biden’s position is unwinnable — their actions...
Now the shoe is on the other foot and it is the centrists who can’t deal with the fact that a Presidential candidate doesn’t fulfill their West Wing vision of what a President should look like, and they will happily torch that candidate’s chances of winning because they can’t get their way.
This isn’t really an accurate portrayal of the situation. No one is having a temper tantrum over a less than ideal candidate. A lot of people think Biden’s position is unwinnable — their actions are correct if those are their prior beliefs.
Anyways, it’s all irrelevant now. The Democrats should turn their attention to fighting for the House and Senate, I don’t think anyone is beating Trump at this point.
This is a bad analogy. People* who are saying Biden can’t win largely agree with his agenda and politics. This isn’t sour grapes or political angle shooting. This is people who are concerned at...
This is a bad analogy.
People* who are saying Biden can’t win largely agree with his agenda and politics. This isn’t sour grapes or political angle shooting. This is people who are concerned at the prospect of an election loss in this environment.
*At least the people you’re talking about. Plenty of progressives also taking the opportunity to take shots at Biden as well right now.
I think quite a few of the calls are coming from people who just don’t like him, either for aesthetic reasons (too old), or political ones over Gaza or tax and labor policy. They were less vocal...
I think quite a few of the calls are coming from people who just don’t like him, either for aesthetic reasons (too old), or political ones over Gaza or tax and labor policy. They were less vocal when there wasn’t blood in the water but now that they think there’s an opening it’s a feeding frenzy.
Most of these pundits were absolutely sure Trump was never gonna win in 2016 either. They’re just habituated to confidently asserting shit.
I acknowledge that there are many who have concerns about his ability to execute a campaign, but intensifying that liability by talking about it non-stop and leaking anonymous doomer whining to the press is not the way to address that productively. It may be that there is no way to address it publicly, but that’s just a mark in favor of the “switching horses now has more downside risk than staying the course” camp. If the structure doesn’t exist to productively engage in dialogue this late then it certainly doesn’t exist to productively settle on a path forward that keeps the party united.
There’s someone on a Mastodon instance who has been insisting for the past six or eight months that Biden can’t win and that the Democrats have to nominate someone more progressive. I’ll give him...
There’s someone on a Mastodon instance who has been insisting for the past six or eight months that Biden can’t win and that the Democrats have to nominate someone more progressive.
I’ll give him credit for being ahead of the curve, but when I finally got fed up and asked who, specifically, he had in mind, he didn’t respond. I have yet to see any of these people actually propose a candidate. It’s genuinely bizarre.
You owe it to yourself to not give in to this defeatist attitude
Anyways, it’s all irrelevant now. The Democrats should turn their attention to fighting for the House and Senate, I don’t think anyone is beating Trump at this point.
You owe it to yourself to not give in to this defeatist attitude
Obama was not so long ago and he was an exceptionally good quality candidate. Clinton on paper was also a very solid candidate in 2016. She didn’t follow through on likeability and fucked up in...
Obama was not so long ago and he was an exceptionally good quality candidate.
Clinton on paper was also a very solid candidate in 2016. She didn’t follow through on likeability and fucked up in the debates because of zero strategic guidance.
In 2020 I blame Sanders for getting Biden into the mix. Had he withdrawn in time when he saw presidency wasn’t happening, Warren would have handily been nominated, won the election, and all this nonsense would not be happening now; we would be in until 2028 and Trump would likely be unable to run by then.
The Democratic Party is definitely fucking up but they don’t stand alone in those fuckups.
I was a Warren booster and campaign volunteer in 2020, but after seeing the exit poll crosstabs from that election I sadly had to admit that she probably would not have won the general.
I was a Warren booster and campaign volunteer in 2020, but after seeing the exit poll crosstabs from that election I sadly had to admit that she probably would not have won the general.
Warren basically made a lot of the key personnel decisions on labor and consumer protection issues anyway so that’s like 40% of the value of being President already.
Warren basically made a lot of the key personnel decisions on labor and consumer protection issues anyway so that’s like 40% of the value of being President already.
Warren got 1/10 the delegates that Sanders got. She was a way weaker candidate than Sanders or Biden. There's no reason to believe that voters would have preferred Warren over Trump significantly...
Warren got 1/10 the delegates that Sanders got. She was a way weaker candidate than Sanders or Biden. There's no reason to believe that voters would have preferred Warren over Trump significantly more than Biden over Trump when they didn't even like her more than Biden or Sanders!
People not voting for a candidate in a clown car primary with 5 or 6 serious contenders does not mean voters “didn’t like” them. People need to stop over interpreting based on scant data like this.
People not voting for a candidate in a clown car primary with 5 or 6 serious contenders does not mean voters “didn’t like” them. People need to stop over interpreting based on scant data like this.
I saw your other post about accepting Warren probably wouldn't have won, so this isn't directed at you, but "People need to stop over interpreting based on scant data like this." is something I...
I saw your other post about accepting Warren probably wouldn't have won, so this isn't directed at you, but "People need to stop over interpreting based on scant data like this." is something I agree with. People asserting that Warren would have won is based on even more scant data.
Yes, Sanders is the one who devised the voting system that enables such outcomes. Totally right to blame him for it.
In 2020 I blame Sanders for getting Biden into the mix. Had he withdrawn in time when he saw presidency wasn’t happening, Warren would have handily been nominated, won the election, and all this nonsense would not be happening now; we would be in until 2028 and Trump would likely be unable to run by then.
Yes, Sanders is the one who devised the voting system that enables such outcomes. Totally right to blame him for it.
Sanders chose to stay in the race when it was clear he was dividing the Warren voters and would not win. Yes it is fair to blame him for it; he and his team are politicians and know exactly how...
Sanders chose to stay in the race when it was clear he was dividing the Warren voters and would not win. Yes it is fair to blame him for it; he and his team are politicians and know exactly how the system works.
Yes he did, and blaming Sanders doesn't fix the underlying problem. If Sanders had dropped out at the exact time you say he should have, it wouldn't do a thing for all subsequent elections where...
Yes he did, and blaming Sanders doesn't fix the underlying problem. If Sanders had dropped out at the exact time you say he should have, it wouldn't do a thing for all subsequent elections where similar issues arise.
“Enough! Mr. Biden may not be the ideal candidate, but he will be the candidate and should be the candidate. And with an effective campaign that speaks to the needs of working families, he will not only defeat Mr. Trump but beat him badly. It’s time for Democrats to stop the bickering and nit-picking.”
Campaigns exist because of bickering and nit-picking. If everyone just "shut up" then there'd be no point in this period of time. Feedback is critical for democracy to be successful, and...
Campaigns exist because of bickering and nit-picking. If everyone just "shut up" then there'd be no point in this period of time. Feedback is critical for democracy to be successful, and candidates should adjust over time. Saying this also comes off a little desperate or weak.
The bickering and nit-picking he's talking about is within the Democratic party, though, and since primaries are long over, it is past the time to do that. This is not "campaigning", it's a party...
The bickering and nit-picking he's talking about is within the Democratic party, though, and since primaries are long over, it is past the time to do that. This is not "campaigning", it's a party not actively undermining their own candidate.
It is far too late to switch candidates at this juncture without even further hampering our already-tenuous chances of winning. Biden shouldn't have run for a second term to begin with and we...
It is far too late to switch candidates at this juncture without even further hampering our already-tenuous chances of winning. Biden shouldn't have run for a second term to begin with and we should have had real contests in the Democratic primaries. We have long passed the window where it wouldn't massively hurt the Democratic party's chances to switch candidates.
Presumptive and with no announced competitors. Do you think a competitor is going to burst out of a side door during the convention like it's a twist in a professional wrestling event? (ok, I kind...
Presumptive and with no announced competitors. Do you think a competitor is going to burst out of a side door during the convention like it's a twist in a professional wrestling event?
(ok, I kind of love that imagery)
So yes, we're assuming he's going to be the candidate, because the chances of it being anyone else are zilch.
I'm not sure what you mean, there are definitely other candidates. Dean Phillips and Jason Palmer are both on the ballot at the convention, and Kamala Harris could take over their campaign's cash...
I'm not sure what you mean, there are definitely other candidates. Dean Phillips and Jason Palmer are both on the ballot at the convention, and Kamala Harris could take over their campaign's cash if Joe Biden decided to stop running.
And I truly don't know who those first two are. I'm not the most informed but I'm not the least by any means. Nominating an unknown at this stage, even if everything else were even, is...
And I truly don't know who those first two are. I'm not the most informed but I'm not the least by any means. Nominating an unknown at this stage, even if everything else were even, is incomprehensible to me.
The Democratic party’s progressive wing, for basically every single election since I’ve been aware of politics, have had to hold their noses and vote for a “least worst candidate” they consider to be unsatisfactory (and possibly morally compromised). They do this dutifully even as they are condescended to and lectured by the media and centrist wings about how they need to grow the fuck up and deal with it for the good of the country. If those unsatisfactory candidates end up losing, they are also the ones who get shit on for not having clapped harder for someone who didn’t fire them up.
Now the shoe is on the other foot and it is the centrists who can’t deal with the fact that a Presidential candidate doesn’t fulfill their West Wing vision of what a President should look like, and they will happily torch that candidate’s chances of winning because they can’t get their way.
Basically any time a progressive runs nationally the national press just decides that they’re “unelectable” based on them just declaring that lefty or labor centric policies are unelectable. There’s no real data behind it, and insofar as there is data it’s inevitably tainted by the fact that the only media coverage of left political figures is hyperfixated on them being leftist, or fringe, or unrelatable. The methods used to manufacture narratives to suit the biases and perspectives of media elites and the donor class have never been all that subtle, we’re just so used to it when it’s deployed against the left that it barely registers.
Now we’re seeing a rare occasion when it’s being deployed against an institutionalist, which is novel; but it makes perfect sense that Bernie, who has been subjected to this sort of treatment by the center his whole career, would recognize the dynamic and pierce the veil of the media’s reality distortion field.
I would be very intrigued at what the future might look like if a centrist Democratic Presidential administration owes a huge political favor to the progressive wing of the party for a change. I don't think French coalition politics are necessarily apt here, but I find the prospects for change exciting.
Biden's been useful in returning focus to some of the traditional New Deal and Great Society priorities - labor rights, environmental policies, civil rights... but not so efficient in selling equitable taxation, housing, efficient transportation policy, a national R&D-based industrial policy, effective cyberdefense, foreign policies that genuinely prioritize human rights and diplomacy/development/aid/trade over military intervention... [Fair argument: I'm not an expert and national media mostly have pitiful reporting quality in these areas.]
I'm of the opinion that the Democratic establishment would much rather be the righteous minority resistance party than owe ANY favors to their progressive wing that they couldn't spin as "well done, team effort, big tent." They saw what happened when the populists took control of the opposition and will not let it happen on their watch.
Honestly we’ve never really gotten to test how the progressive left of the party fares when they’re all in on a general election at the national level. As a faction they’ve been in the wilderness since ‘72. The last time some large part of that faction was truly bought into a presidential candidate was with Obama, but Obama united the whole Dem coalition in a way nobody had before or since so it’s hard to know how much pull any individual group had in there.
This will be an interesting data point to be sure.
This isn’t really an accurate portrayal of the situation. No one is having a temper tantrum over a less than ideal candidate. A lot of people think Biden’s position is unwinnable — their actions are correct if those are their prior beliefs.
Anyways, it’s all irrelevant now. The Democrats should turn their attention to fighting for the House and Senate, I don’t think anyone is beating Trump at this point.
“They can’t win” is exactly what is said about every progressive who has vied for a seat at any level.
This is a bad analogy.
People* who are saying Biden can’t win largely agree with his agenda and politics. This isn’t sour grapes or political angle shooting. This is people who are concerned at the prospect of an election loss in this environment.
*At least the people you’re talking about. Plenty of progressives also taking the opportunity to take shots at Biden as well right now.
I think quite a few of the calls are coming from people who just don’t like him, either for aesthetic reasons (too old), or political ones over Gaza or tax and labor policy. They were less vocal when there wasn’t blood in the water but now that they think there’s an opening it’s a feeding frenzy.
Most of these pundits were absolutely sure Trump was never gonna win in 2016 either. They’re just habituated to confidently asserting shit.
I acknowledge that there are many who have concerns about his ability to execute a campaign, but intensifying that liability by talking about it non-stop and leaking anonymous doomer whining to the press is not the way to address that productively. It may be that there is no way to address it publicly, but that’s just a mark in favor of the “switching horses now has more downside risk than staying the course” camp. If the structure doesn’t exist to productively engage in dialogue this late then it certainly doesn’t exist to productively settle on a path forward that keeps the party united.
There’s someone on a Mastodon instance who has been insisting for the past six or eight months that Biden can’t win and that the Democrats have to nominate someone more progressive.
I’ll give him credit for being ahead of the curve, but when I finally got fed up and asked who, specifically, he had in mind, he didn’t respond. I have yet to see any of these people actually propose a candidate. It’s genuinely bizarre.
Yeah I take Kamala supporters more seriously since it’s a real proposal with real upsides and downsides that can be discussed.
You owe it to yourself to not give in to this defeatist attitude
Ride now!
Ride for ruin!
And the world ending!
Obama was not so long ago and he was an exceptionally good quality candidate.
Clinton on paper was also a very solid candidate in 2016. She didn’t follow through on likeability and fucked up in the debates because of zero strategic guidance.
In 2020 I blame Sanders for getting Biden into the mix. Had he withdrawn in time when he saw presidency wasn’t happening, Warren would have handily been nominated, won the election, and all this nonsense would not be happening now; we would be in until 2028 and Trump would likely be unable to run by then.
The Democratic Party is definitely fucking up but they don’t stand alone in those fuckups.
I was a Warren booster and campaign volunteer in 2020, but after seeing the exit poll crosstabs from that election I sadly had to admit that she probably would not have won the general.
Agreed, and Warren's no younger than Biden. I love her on policy and think she's exactly where she needs to be for the remainder of her days.
Warren basically made a lot of the key personnel decisions on labor and consumer protection issues anyway so that’s like 40% of the value of being President already.
Warren got 1/10 the delegates that Sanders got. She was a way weaker candidate than Sanders or Biden. There's no reason to believe that voters would have preferred Warren over Trump significantly more than Biden over Trump when they didn't even like her more than Biden or Sanders!
People not voting for a candidate in a clown car primary with 5 or 6 serious contenders does not mean voters “didn’t like” them. People need to stop over interpreting based on scant data like this.
I saw your other post about accepting Warren probably wouldn't have won, so this isn't directed at you, but "People need to stop over interpreting based on scant data like this." is something I agree with. People asserting that Warren would have won is based on even more scant data.
Yes, Sanders is the one who devised the voting system that enables such outcomes. Totally right to blame him for it.
Sanders chose to stay in the race when it was clear he was dividing the Warren voters and would not win. Yes it is fair to blame him for it; he and his team are politicians and know exactly how the system works.
PS watch the sarcasm / attitude here please.
Yes he did, and blaming Sanders doesn't fix the underlying problem. If Sanders had dropped out at the exact time you say he should have, it wouldn't do a thing for all subsequent elections where similar issues arise.
Campaigns exist because of bickering and nit-picking. If everyone just "shut up" then there'd be no point in this period of time. Feedback is critical for democracy to be successful, and candidates should adjust over time. Saying this also comes off a little desperate or weak.
The bickering and nit-picking he's talking about is within the Democratic party, though, and since primaries are long over, it is past the time to do that. This is not "campaigning", it's a party not actively undermining their own candidate.
Primaries are over but those are just the primaries. He hasn't been chosen by the DNC yet and there's still time to replace him... and they should.
It is far too late to switch candidates at this juncture without even further hampering our already-tenuous chances of winning. Biden shouldn't have run for a second term to begin with and we should have had real contests in the Democratic primaries. We have long passed the window where it wouldn't massively hurt the Democratic party's chances to switch candidates.
Per their own process with the national convention, yes he is still campaigning within the party as he's still presumptive.
Presumptive and with no announced competitors. Do you think a competitor is going to burst out of a side door during the convention like it's a twist in a professional wrestling event?
(ok, I kind of love that imagery)
So yes, we're assuming he's going to be the candidate, because the chances of it being anyone else are zilch.
I'm not sure what you mean, there are definitely other candidates. Dean Phillips and Jason Palmer are both on the ballot at the convention, and Kamala Harris could take over their campaign's cash if Joe Biden decided to stop running.
Dean Phillips dropped out in March. Jason Palmer dropped out in May. Kamala Harris has not announced her desire to be at the top of the ticket.
And I truly don't know who those first two are. I'm not the most informed but I'm not the least by any means. Nominating an unknown at this stage, even if everything else were even, is incomprehensible to me.