“We successfully failed to win. The AIPAC money must keep coming in.”
It rhymes and they’re slime.
…bb-bUt look at everything but Democrats did win. Donor money, trips to Israel, lobbying dinners, suspiciously-accurate stock market moves… You need to re-shape your mindset and focus on the incremental gains!
TLDR: Because they don’t give a fuck about you or me or anyone who isn’t a donor.
Repubs want to hurt you. Dems don’t care that you exist. We need a third party (as if that’s a new idea).
Quick: who’s got Mayor Mamdani on their team? THOSE guys seem to care about people.
the Working Families Party is the best hope USAmericans have. Unlike the Green Party, they’re focused on building up their party from the small positions, and proving themselves that way.
Quick: who’s got Mayor Mamdani on their team? THOSE guys seem to car about people.
The political equivalent of having a black friend just dropped.
So far the only reason that they would want to keep this a secret is AIPAC.
Just reading the headline reminded me of how disgusting the amount of money in US politics is. It’s probably spreading to other places too.
Im beginning to think there is a parallel of hyper concentrated wealth to the physics of a fusion detonation.
If it gets too dense, BOOM.
The Democratic Party isn’t there to “win”, it’s there to act as a honeypot to attract and neutralize progressives, and to make sure that the “Overton Window” of American politics never moves left.
Many Americans are aware of the Ratchet Effect but they’re reluctant to acknowledge that it’s deliberate and coordinated, instead asserting that it’s a function of the “donor class” in the Democratic Party having a different perspective on how political priorities should be assigned.
We all know the reason. It condemns their own shit neoliberal policies and posturing, and they want to continue to pretend that their problem is how they sell the snake oil rather the fact that nobody wants fucking snake oil.
I am at least partially heartened to see the people on here knowing what the fuck is up. I mean six comments deep I agree with everyone, the democratic party is controlled opposition, long since captured by the oligarchy.
Fighting under their Banner, without seizing control of the party, is doomed to fail, and would not produce satisfactory results even if it won.
We could take the party from them. Our policies, our ideas, are actually popular we just lack leadership and organization.
Why? Because their candidates were a couple of corporate stooges who licked Israel’s butthole.
Neither one showed any humanity or concern for the working class.
Meanwhile trump convinced the common man he was on their side and would lower prices. It was all a lie of course. But the democrats couldn’t even be bothered to do that.
The whole campaign was “we aren’t trump”. But offered not solutions at all, just tired platitudes and insincere posturing from a women who had all the empathy of a cold ham.
Pretty sure the Democrats also had a platform of helping small businesses? Like those still exist.
The Democrats have a platform of saying that want to help small business, in fact they steal from small businesses to give to Big Business, same as the republicans, although a little bit less.
Yeah that person is speaking emotionally not truthfully. Kamala ran on a first time homebuyer credit to help out the enormous swath of millennials and Gen z that have been priced out of taking part in the economy in a meaningful way, just as a single example that is top of mind. Im sure a quick Google would reveal a bullet list.
Your rebuttal is nonsensical. She had every opportunity to distinguish herself, and ample resources to get her message across.
SHE FAILED!
We had a vote, and she lost, to a horrific pustule of a human being. There is no greater indictment of her than that. She had a clean shot and she missed completely.
Rebuttal? The actual fuck are you talking about.
I just stated a fact. I said nothing of her winning, I…
You know what, I’d prefer you don’t respond, actually. Go have the life I know you’ll have.
Ooh, a block button! ✌️
Dude, you threw the first turd. Don’t play innocent with me.
“Yeah that person is speaking emotionally not truthfully.”
That is what we call a fact, my guy.
Back to the block list forever. 🥂
Plenty of deep blue state governors who could do this if the Democratic party had any intention of solving the cost of living crisis. It’s empty promises.
Anyway it’s a moot point. Harris was a trash candidate. Registered Democratic voters made it very clear they never wanted her to run in the general election. Not that it was her fault she ended up in that position. Biden was hot garbage and anyone who voted for him in the 2020 primaries is an asshole.
Save it for an audience that doesn’t know any better. We all know Kamala was a neoliberal hack that was annointed and not even nominated by voters with four plus months to go, for the majority of this country’s history the Presidential nominee was not chosen until late August.
But you needed that time to fundraise, how did that workout for you? And you are blaming us? We all knew she couldn’t win and you nominated her anyway.
“Her “signaling” is evidently an effort to disassociate herself from the taint of Martin’s unpopular decision without openly opposing it”
Another principled, very clear, stand from Kamala where she is not trying to please both parties by tying her statements into word salads.
Because they don’t intend to change anything and they don’t want to get called out on repeating the same exact mistakes.
Because it’s owned by Israel
Pretty obvious to anyone who observed it:
-
Biden held on too long making it impossible to run a proper primary.
-
Harris wasn’t allowed to differentiate herself from Biden.
Time of Death: October 8th, 2024:
wasn’t allowed
What would be the consequences if she went off-piste?
Abandonment by the Biden camp, who were really the only people supporting her.
Harris ‘wasn’t allowed’? Fuck that, you’re the candidate now. What would they have done, unannounced you? She doesn’t have the ovaries to take a strong stand.
She would have lost the financial backing of the Biden camp:
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5191087-harris-trump-biden-harris/
All that financial backing didn’t help her win. She would rather lose the election than lose a source of money.
She would have lost harder without it.
Would she? What part of the money she received made her pivot to the right more palatable to the average voter?
It was never about the average voter, it was all about appealing to the people with the money.
Then she never had a chance. And the DNC fucked up hard by putting her forward.
Correct!
She wasn’t a good candidate in 2020 and wasn’t better in 2024.
She COULD have won if Biden had stepped down in 2022 and let her run as the incumbent president, or if Biden had decided not to run early enough to run a proper primary and she survived the primary process.
Giving her only 100 days and blocking her from running down Biden doomed her candidacy.
I felt like she had so much traction in the beginning, and with Walz coming in on board and really hitting the MAGA in the stomach with their comebacks.
But then suddenly they just stopped, and MAGA was able to reposition and gain the upper hand for the remainder of the season.
So yeah, shit themselves in the foot a few months before the end. Such a shame, I think they would’ve ok.
But then suddenly they just stopped, and MAGA was able to reposition and gain the upper hand for the remainder of the season.
Don’t forget cozying up to Republicans. I think they took the campaign to the right because of some crazy idea that they needed to try for getting Republican votes. They stopped punching maga in the nose out of a misguided idea that they might steal some R votes from Trump.
I distinctly remember when they told Walz to stop calling out how weird the Elon/Vance/Trump crew all were. It was working and I couldn’t understand why stop. Some wormtongue consultant or PAC? It was baffling
Many people point to the influence that Uber exec and Kamala-brother-in-law Tony West had on the campaign.
His pro-corporate policies helped Kamala raise a billion dollars, but accepting that corporate money is a deal with the devil: it shifted her policy proposals and rhetoric significantly to the right.
Yeah, I don’t know if it’s just the same Democrat consultants every presidential election, but the last three elections they’ve always, always reverted to, “The election is three months away but you’ve already won, so for the love of god don’t do anything inspiring to our base because that might upset Republicans and make them attack us more. In fact, just put all your energy into getting Republican votes.”
- people dont like unwaivering support for genocidal Israel
people dont like unwaivering support for genocidal Israel
Some of us draw a harder line: as long as Israel is genocidal, no support. Sanctions instead. So where’s a party that actually runs on that?
It’s gotta be either this or evidence that the base is further left than they thought and moderating to the right was a dogshit strategy. Nothing else seems like it’s threatening enough to the establishment to warrant burying the report. Though if I was gonna bet, I’d be putting it on support for Israel.
3rd option would be evidence of election fraud by GOP but they are afraid DOJ will go after them.
LMAO if that’s it, we’re even more fucked than I thought.
We are actually very fucked unless Americans woke up.
This is take from an American historian and she also mentions that US has this happen 2 times already and people woke up and stopped it. Let’s hope this time it won’t be different.
You don’t need to bet, you can just look up surveys on whether or not US voters say the Israel-Palestine conflict is important to them, and you’ll find that an extremely small minority of voters say it is.
Trump won mainly because, among swing voters, he was ranked more favourably than Harris when it came to the economy and immigration.
More than half of Americans (53%) say the conflict between Israel and Hamas is either very or somewhat important to them personally.
Pew Research - Apr 7, 2026 survey
“Somewhat” is doing some heavy lifting there. Of course I mean: important enough to alter their vote. So 22% per the article say the Israel-Hamas conflict is “very” important (which was less in 2024). Those who would base their vote on it is a smaller subset. Those who would base their vote on it and not think Trump was significantly worse a yet smaller subset of this subset. Some of the 22% might favour a tougher approach against Hamas, and/or support the Gaza genocide.
All this is even still ignoring the fact that Jewish Americans heavily favour the Democrats, and while many certainly aren’t Bibi fanboys, the Democrats cannot afford to alienate this part of their voter base (and in the oligarchic system of the US, that they have above-average incomes also makes them more valuable voters), making it less than obvious that a more hardline approach towards Israel would bear electoral fruit.
I think you’re just moving the goalposts now.
Of course I mean: important enough to alter their vote.
Can you point me to a survey that tracks this? You suggested there was survey data to support your claim, but I am unaware of any survey that asks if Israel/Palestine is important enough to change votes.
There’s dozens of polls that show how the Dems position on Israel/Palestine cost them votes
The data on why the Democrats failed to win is clear
Here Are 34 Polls That Show A Ceasefire & Weapons Embargo Help Kamala Win
Kamala Would Have Won With A Weapons Embargo
Democrats’ Working-Class Failures, Analysis Finds, Are ‘Why Trump Beat Harris’
2024 Post-Election Report: A retrospective and longitudinal data analysis on why Trump beat Harris
How Trump and Harris Voters See America’s Role in the World
Majority of Americans support progressive policies such as higher minimum wage, free college
Democrats should run on the popular progressive ideas, but not the unpopular ones
Here Are 7 ‘Left Wing’ Ideas (Almost) All Americans Can Get Behind
Finding common ground: 109 national policy proposals with bipartisan support
Progressive Policies Are Popular Policies
Tim Walz’s Progressive Policies Popular With Republicans in Swing States
https://blueprint2024.com/polling/harris-poll-positive-message-8-8/
https://blueprint-research.com/polling/distance-biden-ads-message-test-10-15/
“This was a preventable disaster,” Cook said, “but Harris and the Democratic Party leadership prioritized the agendas of corporate donors and gambled on a centrist path, while largely abandoning working-class, young, and progressive voters.”
We know what the autopsy is about, and why they won’t release it.
Why are you linking to a study that took place more than a year after the election?
In the context of this thread it’s more important to know how people felt during the election
Because I’m not a Pew Research historian, and I’m not writing a research paper here.
You’re correct that data from 2024 would be more relevant, but 2026 data is still revealing. The commenter said that an “extremely small minority” cared about the conflict [in 2024].
Are you suggesting that they are correct, an extremely small minority cared during 2024, but now in 2026 that has ballooned to >50%? That is an extraordinary claim; if you are making such a claim then please provide evidence.
You don’t need to be a pew research historian to think critically and evaluate a source. You even posted the date. You were most of the way there.
Are you suggesting that they are correct, an extremely small minority cared during 2024, but now in 2026 that has ballooned to >50%? That is an extraordinary claim; if you are making such a claim then please provide evidence.
No I am not. I’m pointing out the issue of your data set.
I doubt it was a small minority, but 53% (or whatever it actually was during the election) of people can somewhat care about an issue without it being their primary voting issue. The people that made it their primary issue was likely a small minority of voters. That’s my take anyhow.
I think it’s much simpler - they are concerned that the report contains research on effective Republican tactics, as well as ways they can be countered in the future, which would give Republicans a lot of useful information for future elections.
This seems very obvious, but we are in a political era where everyone just defaults to cynicism I guess
So the hypothesis is that somehow the DNC ($6m in debt, raising ~$10m/month) somehow came up with valuable information that the RNC ($110m cash in hand, raising ~$20m/month) doesn’t know and doesn’t have access to?
Seems very unlikely, not obvious at all.
- People are beginning to wake up that good/bad cop is still slave patrol for the empire.
You are giving people way too much credit here. Your average voter for either side isn’t thinking this hard.
Hence “beginning.”
I don’t understand this one. Both sides seem to support this?
Trump ran explicitly on ending the “war”. A lot of people knew it was bullshit but some people held out hope and voted for him.
Except he was always vaguely hinting that by end the war he meant give Isreal everything they wanted therefore “ending” the war. Same with Russia and Ukraine.
I still say if Biden has stepped down at year 2 and let Harris be president for 2 years she would have won very effectively. I’ll never understand why that didn’t happen. Hell he could have just said he was sick with cancer and stepped down for to health problems
I was so mad when he ran again. I had a distinct memory of him running as a “transition” president in 2019 - which my fool ass took to mean one term
She also refused any broadcast interviews of substance to make her case.
-
Because political parties have their own agenda that isn’t simply what voters want.
This one’s analysis shows them in a poor light for picking a candidate that they knew would probably cut it close or lose, rather than a candidate that would be elected with populist / democratic socialist leanings. Probably anyway. How would we ever know, even if they released a report? They never tell the public how the sausage is really made.
As anyone knows…trump stole the election and there was proof, but following that lead would surely change into a civil war and the democrats wanted to avoid that for the good of the country. Or maybe there is just one party that has a red team and a blue team playing against each other, and they call the real shots. /s
There already is a civil war, but only one side is fighting. I would say they aren’t yet violent, but ICE exists and Trump already said he would send some kind of “army” to the polling booths.
Fully agreed with everything besides that MAGA’s forces “aren’t yet violent” — ICE and vigilantes both are terrorizing and killing people in the street and in camps.
Unfortunately as you noted the left and liberals are not fighting back. Everyone besides MAGA seems to be more focused on defending the notion that this is “politics” than defending their neighbors. I don’t see hope for that changing.
Since before most all of us were born the police have been exercising what’s the phrase, unaccountable power against working people. What we are experiencing now is nothing new, just a progression of the game plan of the oligarchy that put this in place in the 1971 business Round Table where they made the long game to overthrow the Republic.
We could stop them, all we have to do is organize and find some real leaders. Alas.
The whole purpose behind the police is to be a violent state power that protects capitol. Just look at the Haymarket Massacre.
I just looked that up on Wikipedia and holy shit, cops fucking with people, somebody throws a stick of dynamite at the police and kills seven of them, they fire back kill three.
The labor movement was fucking hardcore before we became fucking bitches in the modern area here.
And that specific movement is what got us the 8 hour workday.
Also, curious that Labor Day is celebrated on May 1st essentially everywhere except for America, where the event originally happened.
