The killing of Renee Good by an ICE agent sparks outrage as Democrats debate funding for the agency. Should they use their power to rein in ICE's violence? Progressive lawmakers demand action, but top Democrats seem hesitant. Is it time for a change in leadership to hold ICE accountable? #ReinInICE #EndViolence
Good idea. Should we vote for another Dem who will do the same shit? Or for a hard R who will do even worse?
How about a Progressive that will actually listen to us?
There was a big progressive victory in NV for the 2020 elections. The progressive Bernie supporter wing successfully took over the party from the establishment dems.
So the dems formed another party and stole half a million from the old party’s coffers on the way out, leaving the new progressive leaders with no means to pay any of the debts the dems had run up. They took the donor lists with them and started getting all their big donors to move their donations over to the new party they controlled.
Which is all to say that even when progressives win the democrats will try to destroy you.
Huh?
Sorry it’s been a while and I was going from memory. It was more an opposing faction that simultaneously resigned than a separate party and I think they may have just told former donors to give directly to individual campaigns rather than the party.
Either way they’ve wrested control back already. If you would like to read more, here’s a couple articles about it
https://www.nevadaappeal.com/news/2021/mar/11/other-six-basin-states-know-colorado-river-droppin/ https://www.socialistalternative.org/2023/06/29/pulling-out-the-rug-what-happened-after-dsa-and-bernie-supporters-took-over-the-nevada-democratic-party/
Oh that–yeah that was dirty politics! But that’s not what I’m talking about. That was about the internal leadership positions of the state’s Dem party apparatus. What I’m talking about is voters voting in elections that send the winners to elected office as state or federal senators and representatives, governors, mayors, school board members, etc.
So, like what we saw with Mamdani. He ran for office, meeting the legal requirements to do so. The Dem Party couldn’t stop him from running for Mayor. But they did whatever they could to make him lose the primary election, mainly by spending tons of money campaigning against him and for Cuomo. But Mamdani won it handily anyway. Even then, the Dem party didn’t even try to help him win the General. They couldn’t stop him.
This could be repeated in other places, other elected offices. Especially the House. And winning seats at the State level is just as important.
I’m not sure how you expected me to glean any of that from “Huh?”.
In any case Mamdani has been in office less than a month and while he’s done some good I think you should wait a bit before you go calling him some kind of herald of democrat reform. They will likely continue to sabotage him while he’s in office because any successful socialist is a threat to their power and donors. It’s not like New York hasn’t had progressive mayors before.
I didn’t expect you to glean that from “Huh?”. That was only my response to your saying that Democrats “formed another party” because that never happened. I apologize about including all the other stuff there. I got confused about who you were originally replying to since your post happened to be right under my post in my view of the thread, and thought it was to me. Sorry for the confusion!
We tried that in 2016 when we elected Bernie Sanders as our Dem candidate. The DNC told us to go fuck ourselves and nominated Hillary Clinton anyway. So, no, apparently that won’t work either.
Times have changed. They can fight all they want. Like they did against Mamdani, and they lost.
Not the same animal though, the DNC manipulated delegate counts at the convention to ensure Hillary won, a tactic they will repeat if a viable threat rises during the general election
Edit sp
But they could only do that for the office of president+VP, a national office. They don’t have conventions for choosing candidates for any of the other offices–those are decided in the primary, period.
Also because of the backlash from thatm after similar issues in previous years, there was some reform to reduce the power of the superdelegates:
See https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7786873/ for more details.
Instead of eliminating super delegates they simply changed their structure. It’s still corrupt
So? You just give up then?
You, voters have demonstrated that they are now ready to run rough-shod over the establishment.
You apparently don’t understand what it means to primary a candidate (from the left, in this case). I’ll explain it for you. The way to get more progressive people in Congress is to primary the existing congresspeople with a more progressive candidate.
Whoever wins the Dem primary in this district will win in the general. It does no good to wait until the general to just vote against the republican and get Jeffries again. You have to find and support a good progressive candidate who is to the left of Jeffries and beat him in the primary. If that doesn’t happen, no one is going to even bother running against Jeffries because they know they won’t beat him in the primary. People have to support support support an opponent.
This is how magats took over Congress. They primaried the hell out of the “traditional” repubs, from the right. They won some of those primaries and lost some. Then sometimes they still lost in the general if their candidate was too far to the right for their district. But they didn’t care because they still won in a lot of others. They kept doing this every election, and the more power the right got in Congress, the more trad repubs just dropped out and didn’t even try to win re-election. Once it gets going it snowballs.
There’s no reason the left can’t do the exact same thing to the Dems as the right did to the repubs. Well, unless it’s already too late now that maga controls the government, that is.
Regardless how progressive they might be if they become a perceived threat to the power structure their ability to change it is neutered by the structure itself and the DNC will primary them at the next election.
We can’t reform a system that’s operating as designed
OMG you mean the power structure will run another primary candate in the next election to try and oust incumbents they don’t like? Whatever shall we do, when the outcome of that primary will be determined by who gets the most votes? I can’t think of anything! I guess we should just stay home and take whoever the elites decide they want.
/s <-- because specifying this is always required
Yes. Because they don’t have the same networks, relationships etc.