storyteller
Veteran
What exactly do you think the progressive movement's mission is? The progressive movement seems just fine to me. The Squad is still doing their thing and added members this cycle.
Nina Turner eyes Marcia Fudge's Ohio U.S. House seat: Turner EATS BOWL OF SH!T to Brown
- Thread starter ☑︎#VoteDemocrat
- Start date
What exactly do you think the progressive movement's mission is? The progressive movement seems just fine to me. The Squad is still doing their thing and added members this cycle.
88m3
Fast Money & Foreign Objects
The Squad are seen as reactionaries and kulaks from what I've read lately according to their base, they've been even compared unfavorably with Warren.
I disagree with this point of view strongly
They aren't winning elections at a high enough clip to inact the changes that make progressive base happy.
My personal opinion is that they have helped move to overton window to a place where positive policy discussion and implementation is happening.
They just aren't going to overthrow the Democratic party.
They've certainly failed at rapping into the apathetic voter base they though would propel them to prominence.
Ethnic Vagina Finder
The Great Paper Chaser
At the end of the day
1. centrist Democrats have had a decades long head start and access to way more capital.
2. Voters have a sheep mentality and don’t want to go against the grain for fear of simply losing. It’s bad enough to always lose to Republicans, but to lose in your own primary is worse.
3. Centrists will always believe they are the party of the majority so long as they keep winning. Period. Progressives simply haven’t won enough. No on the state level and not on the local level.
4. This is why the DNC did everything they could to keep Bernie Sanders out of the White House. Had he won, the flood gates of progressive candidate support would’ve opened. And they would’ve had way more support.
1. centrist Democrats have had a decades long head start and access to way more capital.
2. Voters have a sheep mentality and don’t want to go against the grain for fear of simply losing. It’s bad enough to always lose to Republicans, but to lose in your own primary is worse.
3. Centrists will always believe they are the party of the majority so long as they keep winning. Period. Progressives simply haven’t won enough. No on the state level and not on the local level.
4. This is why the DNC did everything they could to keep Bernie Sanders out of the White House. Had he won, the flood gates of progressive candidate support would’ve opened. And they would’ve had way more support.
storyteller
Veteran
That's pretty fair. I'd say shifting the overton window and creating a better space for more leftist politicians to succeed was more or less the short-term goal for a lot of us. The overthrow people always got magnified because they make for better media and were valuable to attack (ie: Bernie Bros); but they're more representative of a section of the support rather than the broad majority.
The folks who expected this to be a Tea Party level of success do represent a significant chunk, but not a majority. They've also split on Bernie and the Squad. A decent amount of even these heads will go lesser-of-two-evils when it comes down to it. That applied even to Biden.
The attempt to create a new voter base does seem like it's fallen well short of what most of us hoped for. At the same time, I don't think the rest of the voter base is impossible to flip as this messaging and their policy prescriptions become more familiar. Where progressives have succeeded, they're electoral success has grown not shrunken. I think that speaks to their actual constituents' feelings (rather than media personalities and national sentiments toward them) and there's opportunity to improve the appeal of these politicians over a longer span (if I'm not mistaken, Turner did markedly better than Bernie's primary numbers vs Biden for an immediate example. Cori Bush needed a second try. I'm watching Cisneros in '22 to see if she can keep that trend too).
I think the pragmatic view has always been to understand the limitations of electoral politics short term and to understand that activism is still going to play a big role in short-term victories. That's something that I think Bernie was fairly explicit about, but that was misread by some people (some in good faith and some in bad faith).
just stop attacking democrats and they'll do better.
Godless Socialist CEO
Superstar
It's a primary you have to attack your opponents. That shyt doesn't even make sense, also right wing democrats have a fundamentally different way of governing(It doesn't work and they don't actually govern at all) so pointing those differences out is an important thing to do in order help people understand the differences between a progressive politician and right wing corporate democrat.
The very idea that people shouldn't be attacking gutter trash like Nancy Pelosi or Clyburn is wild as fukk to me
Why shouldn't progressives attack shyt like this? What a ridiculous statement. These people are fukking monsters
id rather they stick to winning elections first.
Again, I support the following:
Expanding the size of congress, ranked choice voting, and parliamentary systems.
But we have none of that.
Godless Socialist CEO
Superstar
Spoken like a person with no skin in the game
My dude. I'm one of the most politically engaged people on this fukking forum.
Godless Socialist CEO
Superstar
Ur also obsessed with keeping the status quo and making sure Americans keep getting fukked by the government economically. It's pretty clear you have no skin in this.
I'm obsessed with winning with winning messages