People talked about socialism in NYC, but back in the day people did something about it in places like Oklahoma and Kansas. The chances of say a Socialist Party Senator are low anywhere, but it's more viable in WV than NY imo.

I don't know if you'd call it a socialist party, but New York is one of the few states with a politically relevant party to the left of the Democratic Party. Current Public Advocate (and possible future mayor) Tish James was originally elected on the Working Families Party line. Last gubernatorial primary, Zephyr Teachout, a candidate recruited by the WFP, got 36% of the vote.

That name sounds too absurd to be real

So you've basically been concern trolling this entire time, huh?

Zephyr Teachout has filed a lawsuit over Trump's emoluments. Her Twitter is worth following.

Zephyr is cool. Cali and NY have a large group that is def left of the Democratic Party, but a lot of them have money and there are limits to how far they will go. WV is, imo again, a more likely place for something really radical to happen.

For the people that want to "preserve" "culture" you guys sure do know how to paint a soulless dystopian ideal.

I'll agree that a communist revolution is probably more likely in West Virginia than New York, but I don't agree about socialism more broadly.

I always forget how awesomely cheaply affordable college tuition was before student loans came along

This economically illiterate bumble**** is so bad at this **** he just phrased his critique here as straightforward advocacy of denying people care.

It's a historical fact that turn of the century radical leftism was in many ways an agrarian socialist movement and found mostly in the same places that are now deep red (the Ozarks, Appalachia, Great Plains states, the Upper Midwest). Remember many of the restless unemployed and underemployed dudes of the era were still itinerant farm labor. The legacy of Democratic Party names today (e.g., Democrat Farm Labor in Minnesota) reflect that. But that's largely not where restless unemployed dudes are; they're in cities and suburbs.

And while it is initially surprising a West Virginia audience might respond favorably to Bernie type messages, it is probably predictable in that people without much in genuinely dire straits will respond far more radically and in a reactionary manner to the same stimulus than people who have more. The far right operates in much the same way; it thrives especially among lower class whites.

So while someone maybe predisposed to leftist thinking in places we think of as full of liberals, like NYC -- leftists in NYC may still have some wealth, may still want to preserve much of the status quo but recognize some of the inherent unfairness of capitalism, some of its predatory nature, whatever.

But I would not predict a future socialist movement to find its popular power from these places like Oklahoma, Kansas and West Virginia the way past leftist radicals could draw popular support from these places one hundred years ago. Three factors:

1. America is genuinely far more racially diverse than it was in ~1880-1920 so non-whites now make up a very large and growing percentage of the population, and
2. America is far more urbanized than it was at the turn of the 20th century, and
3. the truly poor and dispowered and dispossessed remain disproportionately urban minorities, recently arrived immigrants, etc.

Therefore if I had to place my bets on where a genuine far left movement in the US might emerge from, I'd still bet on cities, and I'd bet the critical mass will come from people who are victims of systemic racism and bias, even recognizing the truth about history and the way a radical left message can still resonate in WV among whites more than say establishment Democratic messages of the Hillary/Obama vein, and even if we recognize the history of leftism in America. Things have evolved.

I was going to add that there are plenty of poor and disaffected in Cali/NY, but the overlap definitely isn't complete. And, the more radical elements have to fight on two fronts: one against actual conservatives and the other against wealthy liberals.

WV, being more monolithic, is more likely to end up responding to one particular firebrand.

And urbanization didn't erase the state of West Virginia. They have shrunk in population since 1950, but they're still there and they still get a state government, two senators and, for now, three representatives.

And while the socialist/communist message is absolutely about race and gender equality it's not the same as the liberal message. This is not meant as a positive, but rural whites who talk about the impending race war aren't as threatened by a workers' movement as they are by a civil rights/multi-culturalism movement.

And regarding Bernie, yeah it's a red state, but Bernie won the primary by 16 points while he lost NY and CA. (and in the primary he got 127k to Trump's 157k which isn't bad considering no other Republican got more than 18.3k in the WV primary)

WV has been a union-friendly Democraric state until fairly recently. Like, they voted for Dukakis. Not at all surprised some guy with working-class cred would do well there.

Unions are dead, and so now are the Dems in places like WVa, I'm afraid. It was union membership that kept that vote in line for so long. We may also be writing Pennsylvania's, Michigan's, and Wisconsin's obits over this issue.

Bermie Sanders is mad at the Democratic party. And he wants you to know about it.

Bernie calling it like he sees it.

The following is a commentary from a reddit thread on the article

All Congressional offices or higher have a staffer(s) who handle constituent service issues like "Sgt. Martinez at the VA." They don't work in Washington because that isn't where their constituents live. They also have legislative staff based in Washington, who yes go to lots of (boring) seminars and conferences because that is their job. They also talk to other staffers and lobbyists because, again that is their job. Legislation requires coordination. For instance, the Trump/Ryan people seem to have done a poor job of talking to these organization before their rollout of AHCA, which led to a bunch of conservative and business organizations opposing the bill, making it less likely to pass. These organization really do have power and influence, and pretending they don't just makes achieving your own goals less likely.

Okay. But nearly all modern democracies are run by political parties. Bernie Sanders' refusal to join or participate in the Democratic Party made him weaker as a politician and is one of the biggest reasons he lost to Hillary in the primary.

Managed 43.5% (9% loss) in NY-19 House of Reps election last cycle, too.

Tish James is fantastic. I almost pray that she eventually runs and one of Trump's kids is stupid enough to attempt to be the R nominee against her so Lord Voldemort can blow his top on Twitter when a black woman buries them by 50+pts.

I fully agree with your conclusion about why he lost in the primary. I'm hesitant to cede that not joining a party has weakened him as a politician throughout his career. It has allowed him to work with both parties when necessary without being faced with ideological purity tests from his own party. He caucuses with democrats and votes with them 96% of the time. As an outsider, he won't be able to pass a bill he puts forth as the main sponsor as often as people in either of the political parties, but from an ideological perspective most of the major bills he would want to pass would fail in congress. However, he will quite often be able to pass pieces of his agenda to bill amendments when his support is being courted, and can work with either side to do this without losing political capital, in fact gaining it in all likelihood. Bernie Sanders was the amendment king from 1995-2007.

That Bernie guy.

It's a pretty well thought out explanation, why is this in it?

Pretty much. All the hardcore union guys I know would absolutely be Trump fans w/o the union.

WAAF

Unless he keels over dead or starts spontaneously undressing in public - it has to be Bernie 2020. No one except the people who would never vote for him give a **** how old he is. Hell my Mom even liked Bernie.

I love the guy but he's going to be 80 ****ing years old on inauguration day 2021. It's inconceivable.

Maybe Bernie could be the trojan horse for a veep that would otherwise never get a look in.

I think what the Dems need is some fairly young blood to try to mobilize the 18-35s. Youths are progressive for a reason, and are the most important demo in the next election (aside from olds who are going to lose their insurance and hit the revenge votes against the Rs hard.)