Will Rogers said it about a century ago.
“The census taker asked if I was a member of any organized political party? No, sir, I am a Democrat.”
They have the same bosses as the republicans, so they can’t criticize what republicans are doing. So there’s no surface area for a potential (liberal) democrat to latch onto.
The good news is that progressives will gladly fill that void.
Nope.
‘Progressives’ were getting on Mamdani for not disbanding the NYPD on Day 1.
Sure they do, it’s called money. Like all US politicians (and many in other countries as well) they vote as they’re paid to vote.
Priority one in any attempt to fix the US needs to be overturning citizens united. There’s an admittedly long list of other things that need to be done as well, but getting corporate money out of the equation is a significant force multiplier.
The only long term way to permenantly prevent corporate money from corrupting a political system is to prevent that kind of individual wealth from existing in the first place and to transfer ownership of corporations to a larger group of people, such as the employees, which will then spread out the wealth of those corporations such that no individual will have the kind of money needed to buy politicians and judges/justices.
What will happen if corruption is simply regulated without preventing mass wealth accumilation is the regulations will just slowly be eroded over time again as greed will ultimately prevail since it is ultimately allowed to prevail. We’ve seen this happen throughout history, where powerful people will do anything possible to gain more power. Therefore, we need to eliminate that kind of power from existing in the first place, which in our current society is wealth.
We could also just kill the rich. It may not be the ideal solution but it is definitely a potential solution. I think we negotiate from a weaker position when we act like that isn’t an option. Taxation, wealth redistribution, and caps on political donations should be seen as the preferable option to public beheadings, which is how the masses used to settle these kinds of grievances when pushed far enough. I say we frame it that way instead of “please don’t do mean stuff anymore Mr. CEO”, which is what they hear when we talk about more civilized solutions.
To be fair, that is the left. A myriad of ideas thrown in a sack, and, like a bag of wet cats, there’s going to be little agreement.
Everyone has a different definition of what Liberal is. Like cats, frenemies at best, just for elections.
Ideally, aside from the money, no more lawyers. Lawyers live in a place where it’s not about right and wrong, legal or illegal, but how you can pick things apart and compromise, on everything, while making a pretty argument.
Yes they do, it is called the electorate
Anyone that thinks the DNC should be involved in a Governor’s race shouldn’t be listened to about anything political.
They’re either woefully uninformed, or want the neoliberal top down structure that fucked us for generations.
Yeah I feel like people are just upvoting the headline here. If they read what it actually meant they might not like it so much.
The DNC hasn’t had a real leader since Obama. Explains why Trump is so obsessed with him.
“Don’t pick our candidates, DNC!”
“DNC, come pick our candidates!”
This would be the ideal leader for Democrats, articulate, a veteran, a family man, and attractive. John F. Kennedy is a good example. Prince Harry is a good example but he’s not a US citizen. Of course, this is ideal. The candidate might only have some of the qualities. Democrats should try recruiting Jonny Kim to run for office. Andy Beshear might be a possible leader.
