I assume you are joking. Otherwise I can’t agree with any of that.
That’s not what I’d prefer to say, but in the spirit of, comment on the comment, not the commentOR I’ll roll with peace.
1 Like
No one here should be surprised by this data AOC points out. My prediction of the response from dem party elites…Fake News!
3 Likes
Unfortunately these are actual things I’ve heard in this county where I live in the last 2 weeks. All Drumpf supports.
I’m still trying to figure out where it comes from. Social media?
5 Likes
I haven’t heard of or seen any push back by right-wing, gun toting nut jobs, and that is a very good thing.
1 Like
I’m surprised by this data. Kara Eastman is a big M4All proponent and she lost her race.
1 Like
… And just in case anyone still harbors doubts about the center-right nature of PBS… On the News Hour last night -while talking to Judy Woodruff about certain legislative loses- Lisa Desjardins felt the need to single out two specific democratic loses, all as a result that evil ‘socialist’ meme…
… To quote an old Bob Dylan song; “they smile at your face… but behind your back they hiss…”
3 Likes
The NNU is having an online virtual organizing/strategy meeting onNov. 17.
Contact NNU:
NNU Affiliate & Direct Member Organizations
~https://www.nationalnursesunited.org/contact-us
Contact Physicians For A National Health Program:
~https://pnhp.org
Annual Meeting and Leadership Training
November 13-14, 2020
Organizations Supporting Single-Payer Healthcare:
~https://www.ilsinglepayer.org/new-page-71
4 Likes
Bet this made 3rd Way Nancy and Chuckles “download” in their pants!
1 Like
“… I’m surprised by this data. Kara Eastman is a big M4All proponent and she lost her race…”
… It’s disappointing, but I’m not surprised. When I saw that chart highlighting those that were for M4A, and those that were against -and their respective reelection results- I was more than a little skeptical that these figures actually represented the totality. They are ‘fun facts,’ and can be very helpful when going toe-to-toe with your centrist-democratic friends -but they can also be easily thrown back in your face by your more conservative peeps, when done with just a bit too much ‘selectivity…’
… I work with more than a few of these centrist/dem types myself, and having been trying for years to chip away at that convoluted facade. Just yesterday morning I went into the office of one of these folks and mentioned how the democratic leadership was -quite predictably- trying to blame these huge democratic missteps and loses on us ‘lefties.’ I then mentioned the so-called ‘Squad;’
“You know who the Squad is right? Well, they all won their elections -quite handily, I might add…”
… That’s all I needed to say. I did not need to cheery-pick numbers that will only come back to bite me in the *ss, later in the day. Just that simple, generalized observation was enough to make my point. And for the first time in years, I believe I finally saw a crack in that silly, centrst facade…
… By all means, use the numbers to make your case -but be very mindful about how to go about it- least you end up like the pollsters who toyed with the dream of a blue wave -only to be confronted with the reality of mere trickle…
Chomsky: Voting Is Not the End of Our Work. It’s Only the Beginning.
Only the beginning. Then we organize like never before.
~https://truthout.org/articles/chomsky-voting-is-not-the-end-of-our-work-its-only-the-beginning/
Joe Biden is the winner of the 2020 election. Yet while Trump has lost, the Democrats failed to materialize the blue wave some expected — and Trump fared extremely well despite the pandemic. In this exclusive interview, Noam Chomsky shares some of his insights about Trump’s continuing popularity and what the left needs to do in the years ahead, emphasizing that voting is never an end — only a beginning.
3 Likes
Recall that after FDR Democrats passed the New Deal, they controlled the House of Representatives for DECADES afterward, because these are popular policies.
The only reason they do not now, is their donors oppose it. Not their voters. Not the US electorate. Their donors.
That is the very definition of “selling out.”
8 Likes
The list is an example of picking and choosing data for convenience without adequate context. AOC sits in a very Democratic seat, but a lot of the other Democrats on that list do not. Most of them are in swing seats to majority Republican. Let’s just look at a few:
Iowa 1, Abby Finkenauer, D +1 (District has swing back-and-forth several times the last decade)
Minnesota 7, Collin Peterson, R +12
South Carolina 01, Joe Cunningham, R+10
It’s a massive stretch in a presidential election year where turnout is high, to pretend that Medicare for All had anything to do with the three losses above. It’s way more likely Republicans just came out to vote for the President and kicked these folks out irrespective of their policy positioning. Sometimes the other side just has more votes.
“When given the choice between a real Republican and a fake one, the voters will choose the real one every time”
The more we see of supposedly pro life, pro gun, pro military democrats, the more we see them lose. And even if they do win, they govern like the Nixon republicans they are.
That’s the problem
4 Likes
I think you are missing a big piece: redistricting. The Democrats won seven governorships in 1930 and flipped several legislatures, giving them control of a majority of states. That, along with the solid Democratic south, allowed them to control the redistricting process and the allocation of House seats for the next decade. Exercising raw political power played a role in their gains too.
If being a leftist or progressive won those seats, leftists or progressives would be sitting in them now. I live in a heavy Republican district, it’s just hard to win here. It’s delusional to pretend some particular policy is going to be the thing that would turn my R+10 district around. We can’t even get my Board of Supervisors to support mask wearing.
1 Like
If you don’t draw a contrast between yourself and your opponent you will always lose.
How many more years are we democrats going to play this game? A game I might add, that we have lost since the 1980’s.
3 Likes
1930 redistricting does not explain holding the House for 58 out of the next 62 years. The Democrats also controlled the Senate for 52 of those 62 years. That is because they were immensely popular for having put through policies that worked for common people.
The New Deal is the primary explanation.
It is largely since the neoliberal Clintonite takeover of the Party, working in tandem with Republicans who have now spent decades disparaging and undermining governance itself, that the entire US electorate has grown so disgusted with the Congress, making it year after year among the most detested institutions in the USA, because neither party represents the people.
3 Likes
Are you assuming the Democrats who ran for re-election in R+10 and 12 seats didn’t contrast with their opponents? Do you think their opponents didn’t create contrasts with them, say via television ads etc.?
AOC is in a very liberal seat, D+29. Her biggest threat is a primary, not a general. What works in her seat may not work in others, and it’s just wish casting to pretend otherwise.
time too move the establishment Dems to the sidelines–they are simply put corporate toadies working hard for their bribes by denying us the health care we need–in a pandemic yet–HOW PATHETIC IS THAT??
3 Likes
what “works” to keep a politician in office and what “works” to build a more just society are two different concepts
2 Likes