The Democrat higher ups by and large threw a temper tantrum when their base protested them allowing their emotional support ethnostate to murder people with impunity.

Rid yourself of the notion that democracy lies in political parties fighting each other where you get to vote on them, and you will realize that all capitalist democracies are just elaborate dictatorships disguising themselves every 4 or so years.

This “democracy” is exactly the kind of system that brought Trump to power with a useless “opposition” party that is comfortably looking away while Trump does all the dirty work that they would also like to have done if it didn’t ruin their facade.

The only real opposition can come from the people themselves.

The official opposition leadership is Jefferies and Schumer. They are both wildly innefective as leaders. Unfortunately. Frankly I’m puzzled as to how no politician has been able to capitalize on this vacuum of oppositional power.

As @[email protected] mentioned, PSL (and a few other socialist parties), are the only real opposition, since they’re a working-class party that’s consistently anti-war and anti-capitalism.

From crash course socialism:

Socialists view democracy under capitalism to be impossible. Most current-day systems are better labeled as Bourgeois Democracy, or democracy for the rich only, which socialists contrast with proletarian democracy. Under capitalism, political parties, representatives, infrastructure, and the media are controlled by capitalists, who place restrictions on the choices given to workers, limit their representative options to vetted capitalist puppets, and limit the scope of public debate to pro-capitalist views.

Bourgeois democracies are in reality Capitalist Dictatorships, resulting in legislation favorable to the wealthy, regardless of the population’s actual preferences. The Princeton Study, conducted in the US in 2014, found that the preferences of the average US citizen exert a near-zero influence on legislation, making the US system of elections and campaigning little more than political theater. Multi-party, Parliamentary / representative democracy has proven to be the safest shell for capitalist rule, regardless of voting methods or differing political structures, for countries as diverse as Australia, Japan, Sweden, the UK, the US, South Korea, or Brazil.

Ancient Greek philosophers like Plato and Aristotle more accurately defined Democracy as rule by the poor, and they considered states based on elections to be anti-democratic Aristocracies, since only the wealthy and ruling families have the resources to finance elections. They contrasted this with random selection / sortition, and citizen’s assemblies, as being the defining features of democracy, both of which are nonexistent in the countries listed above. Today, liberal / parliamentary “democracies” are dominated by wealthy candidates, and entrenched political families, with Capitalists standing above political power.

This system of sham elections acts as a distracting theater piece, giving the illusion of democracy, whilst in reality it serves to platform capitalist views, make them appear more popular than they are, and manufacture consent for the system itself.

Examples of restrictions include a media and news monopoly, 2, gerrymandering, long term limits with no way to recall unpopular representatives, restrictions crafted to disenfranchise poor and minority voters, bills directly crafted by lobbyists and bourgeois lawmakers, voter suppression, electoral fraud, unverifiable closed source electronic voting systems, capitalist campaign financing, low voter to representative ratios, inconvenient voting locations and times, and most importantantly, candidate stacking. Most elections are performed before we ever get to the polling booth. In short, political democracy can’t exist without economic democracy, and true democracy is only possible when workers control production.

The impossibility of Capitalist democracy to make a transition to working-class democracy is best shown by the phrase: Capitalists will not allow you to vote away their wealth. Pacifism, and elections have never been an effective means of disenfranchising the ruling class.

Communists propose building alternatives alongside of bourgeois democracy, with the goal of to replacing it with Proletarian democracy. Measures might include:

• Replacement of bourgeois parliamentary bodies with broadly inclusive workers organizations, such as unions, councils, or syndicates.
• Seizing land, productive facilities, and housing and putting them under democratic control.
• Elimination of all debts, suppression of all private banks and stock markets.
• Direct democracy in as many decisions as possible, often called cyber communism.
• A democratically planned economy for human needs, with open participation.
• Low-level workplace democracy.
• Elimination of the standing army, and the substitution for it of armed workers.
• An emphasis on universal education, health-care, child-care, care for the elderly, and human welfare, paid for socially.
• Increase in productive technology.
• Low levels of wealth and income inequality, often driven by a system of labor vouchers for compensation.
• Experts (if any) elected by the working class through universal suffrage.
• All representatives and officials (including police) are revocable at any time.
• Public officials are paid worker’s wages.

Bernie Sanders and AOC are about the closest you would get to a true opposition. But given that their own party keeps gimping them they can’t do much except stump for their position.

In the US, I’d argue that the democrats are a “controlled opposition” that is also subservient to the same oligarchs that have captured the republicans.

The two opposition leaders in the US are:

Chuck Schumer in the Senate and Hakeem Jefries in the House.

Jefferies and Schumer.

It should be pointed out that it’s not like a parliamentary opposition as seen in many other democracies with political discourse over a dispatch box with the leader of parliament.

PSL is trying to build that opposition party as we speak.

The US doesn’t have a parliamentary system so there really isn’t a singular opposition leader outside of election seasons. The senate minority leader is the closest thing to an opposition figurehead, which would make Chuck Schumer the opposition leader.

Tbh it could just be that the dems are doing a China move: do nothing and win

Right now trump can either reference Biden, knowing people are sick of that, or he simply doesn’t have a definite target, “the radical left”. An emerging leader of the centre would give him a target. So it makes sense they stay quiet.

I’m not a us citizen tho, I know that there is a lot of political activism, especially around the DSA, and the recent big protests are good signs. What I expect is that whoever ends up being the democratic leader will have a very hard time being a centrist. The demo-socialists have a big chance, but corporate media is also going to play its role in supporting a rethoric of “now that we’ve seen crazy let’s go for someone respectable, not another crazy”.

The opposition, in the wide sense, is basically Sanders and the DSA, in my view, because they are popular and they are winning some local elections, including NY. But I still doubt they are going to be the face of the dem strategy for 2028, let alone the midterms.

The leadership in the Democratic Party is absolutely miserable at communicating, especially in this digital era. They seem to still believe in the discredited Biden era philosophy that if you simply do good things people will notice.

That’s compounded by the fact that Trump is particularly good with his lizard brain at dominating the airwaves. That makes it much harder to get your messaging out but honestly they are barely even trying. And I’m not sure they have a compelling message to begin with.

Bill. He’s good people.