The only time “they” makes sense when referencing the DNC is the ~400 voting members whose sole duty is to elect a chair if there’s no Dem president to nominate one…
And “they” 100% learned their lesson by not picking a neoliberal chair.
Now those ~400 people won’t have anything to do with the DNC till the next one, about 3 years and 3 months from now.
Like, I 100% get the distrust, and if you just a distrustful person ask yourself this:
Why did billionaire owned media stop telling people the DNC is the only shot and everyone has to just accept the lesser evil?
If billionaires aren’t carrying water for the DNC, the DNC likely isn’t carrying water for billionaires.
All I ask is you vote in Dem primaries, especially if you consider yourself left of the party.
There is no obligation after the Dem primary, and the worst that could possibly happen is you make Dems slightly more left, and still vote for Mickey Mouse or Batman in the general.
We just can’t let neoliberals take the party back or this has all been for nothing.
And “they” 100% learned their lesson by not picking a neoliberal chair.
Ken Martin? By what metric!? I’ll give you that he’s not some identity politiking DINO, but he’s still extremely, and fundamentally a capitalist liberal.
Why did billionaire owned media stop telling people the DNC is the only shot and everyone has to just accept the lesser evil?
What are you talking about? Go onto any mainstream social media, news outlet, etc. and this is very much still the line.
All I ask is you vote in Dem primaries
Sure, and all I ask is you vote for whichever candidate best represents you come election time, regardless of “how likely they are to win”.
We just can’t let neoliberals take the party back or this has all been for nothing.
but he’s still extremely, and fundamentally a capitalist liberal.
His personal political beliefs don’t matter, because he believes in a bottom up party structure where: the party’s purpose is getting Dems elected, elected Dems purpose is to represent the will of Dem voters, and Dem voters set the party platform mainly by selecting a candidate in a fair primary…
The shit part is, everyone is so used to a biased DNC that uses corruption and threats of defunding state parties to make politicians represent the DNC chair and not the voters.
You fundamentally don’t know how this works, and you need to at least admit that before you change it. And if you don’t change it, all you’re doing with these comments is convincing people left of neoliberls to give up on the party, which depress Dem primary turnout…
And could lead to the only way neoliberls take the party back and we lose it
the party’s purpose is getting Dems elected, elected Dems purpose is to represent the will of Dem voters
Yeah, you have a fundamental and comically naïve misunderstand of what/how American style democracy works and the function of political parties to where I have a hard time knowing where to start.
neoliberls
You’re using that term a lot. What is the distinction between liberal and neoliberal?
you have a fundamental and comically naïve misunderstand of what/how American style democracy works and the function of political parties to where I have a hard time knowing where to start.
The confusion is I’m talking about how they should work, and how Martin ran Minnesota for a decade…
You’re talking about how it’s corrupted and how the DNC was ran for 50+ years.
But the thing is it doesn’t take a crazy amount of work to fix it, we just needed a single good chair because the chair has 100% power and 0% accountability. It’s a terrible system and we should change it, and the progressive Dem that Martin allows to the general should appoint a chair willing to fundamentally change the structure to distribute power from the chair to some kind of governing body that is obligated to kick big moves to full member votes.
What is the distinction between liberal and neoliberal?
An American neoliberal is someone who is pro-corporate (essentially pro-billionaire because they own the corps) and tries to appease voters by not wanting to exterminate minorities directly.
If you’re trying to start using 27 different labels for various groups, that leads down a dangerous road to tribalism and no one understanding exactly what anyone else means. And you’re falling into the neoliberal’s trap where they just change their self identified label every 5-12 years and pretend they’re not a countable for the last group and totally different.
If you need to break it down more than:
Republican
Neoliberal/ “moderate”
Progressive
Then it’s worth the time to at least break it down along fiscal/so ial policy lines, so:
It does though, and the longer we pretend that garbage stop gaps like this “fix” it, the longer it will take before the actual work needed to fix it can be even started.
how Martin ran Minnesota for a decade
We must live in different universes because other than a color shift I’m not seeing the rosy picture you’re painting. Do you want to enlighten me?
An American neoliberal is someone who is pro-corporate (essentially pro-billionaire because they own the corps) and tries to appease voters by not wanting to exterminate minorities directly.
And how is that distinct from “liberal”?
If you’re trying to start using 27 different labels for various groups, that leads down a dangerous road to tribalism
My friend, you are already so deep in the tribalism you are unable to recognize it. That is part of why I’m focusing on the term “neoliberal”.
Then it’s worth the time to at least break it down along fiscal/so ial policy lines, so:
If your argument is that using terms to describe loose groupings of idealogies is a fundamentally flawed system I am fully on board, see the username.
If your argument is that acknowledging that complexity leads to tribalism and therefore its imperative to do a dimensionality reduction to 1-2d strawmen then we have a pretty fundamental disagreement.
you’re falling into the neoliberal’s trap where they just change their self identified label every 5-12 years and pretend they’re not a countable for the last group and totally different.
That’s my point, that’s what you’re falling for. To be more clear, “progressive” is just the latest mask that liberals are wearing.
take this opportunity to organize primary votes for someone who you think will pick a chair you want.
There is no candidate that represents me, or you. Nobody will pick a chair either of us want. That is not how that power structure works.
I am taking this opportunity to organize around rejecting the authority of the chair and encouraging others to put in effort themselves instead of relying on their local monarchs.
I hope your dissilussionement is painless, and not too late.
The only time “they” makes sense when referencing the DNC is the ~400 voting members whose sole duty is to elect a chair if there’s no Dem president to nominate one…
And “they” 100% learned their lesson by not picking a neoliberal chair.
Now those ~400 people won’t have anything to do with the DNC till the next one, about 3 years and 3 months from now.
Like, I 100% get the distrust, and if you just a distrustful person ask yourself this:
If billionaires aren’t carrying water for the DNC, the DNC likely isn’t carrying water for billionaires.
All I ask is you vote in Dem primaries, especially if you consider yourself left of the party.
There is no obligation after the Dem primary, and the worst that could possibly happen is you make Dems slightly more left, and still vote for Mickey Mouse or Batman in the general.
We just can’t let neoliberals take the party back or this has all been for nothing.
Ken Martin? By what metric!? I’ll give you that he’s not some identity politiking DINO, but he’s still extremely, and fundamentally a capitalist liberal.
What are you talking about? Go onto any mainstream social media, news outlet, etc. and this is very much still the line.
Sure, and all I ask is you vote for whichever candidate best represents you come election time, regardless of “how likely they are to win”.
They never left! All what has been for nothing?
His personal political beliefs don’t matter, because he believes in a bottom up party structure where: the party’s purpose is getting Dems elected, elected Dems purpose is to represent the will of Dem voters, and Dem voters set the party platform mainly by selecting a candidate in a fair primary…
The shit part is, everyone is so used to a biased DNC that uses corruption and threats of defunding state parties to make politicians represent the DNC chair and not the voters.
You fundamentally don’t know how this works, and you need to at least admit that before you change it. And if you don’t change it, all you’re doing with these comments is convincing people left of neoliberls to give up on the party, which depress Dem primary turnout…
And could lead to the only way neoliberls take the party back and we lose it
Yeah, you have a fundamental and comically naïve misunderstand of what/how American style democracy works and the function of political parties to where I have a hard time knowing where to start.
You’re using that term a lot. What is the distinction between liberal and neoliberal?
The confusion is I’m talking about how they should work, and how Martin ran Minnesota for a decade…
You’re talking about how it’s corrupted and how the DNC was ran for 50+ years.
But the thing is it doesn’t take a crazy amount of work to fix it, we just needed a single good chair because the chair has 100% power and 0% accountability. It’s a terrible system and we should change it, and the progressive Dem that Martin allows to the general should appoint a chair willing to fundamentally change the structure to distribute power from the chair to some kind of governing body that is obligated to kick big moves to full member votes.
An American neoliberal is someone who is pro-corporate (essentially pro-billionaire because they own the corps) and tries to appease voters by not wanting to exterminate minorities directly.
If you’re trying to start using 27 different labels for various groups, that leads down a dangerous road to tribalism and no one understanding exactly what anyone else means. And you’re falling into the neoliberal’s trap where they just change their self identified label every 5-12 years and pretend they’re not a countable for the last group and totally different.
If you need to break it down more than:
Then it’s worth the time to at least break it down along fiscal/so ial policy lines, so:
It does though, and the longer we pretend that garbage stop gaps like this “fix” it, the longer it will take before the actual work needed to fix it can be even started.
We must live in different universes because other than a color shift I’m not seeing the rosy picture you’re painting. Do you want to enlighten me?
And how is that distinct from “liberal”?
My friend, you are already so deep in the tribalism you are unable to recognize it. That is part of why I’m focusing on the term “neoliberal”.
If your argument is that using terms to describe loose groupings of idealogies is a fundamentally flawed system I am fully on board, see the username.
If your argument is that acknowledging that complexity leads to tribalism and therefore its imperative to do a dimensionality reduction to 1-2d strawmen then we have a pretty fundamental disagreement.
That’s my point, that’s what you’re falling for. To be more clear, “progressive” is just the latest mask that liberals are wearing.
Then take this opportunity to organize primary votes for someone who you think will pick a chair you want.
But this has been going on for two days, if I haven’t helped by now, my time is best spent elsewhere.
I hope you vote in every primary tho
There is no candidate that represents me, or you. Nobody will pick a chair either of us want. That is not how that power structure works.
I am taking this opportunity to organize around rejecting the authority of the chair and encouraging others to put in effort themselves instead of relying on their local monarchs.
I hope your dissilussionement is painless, and not too late.