Calling Clinton as a centrist is being generous. Didn't the Republican he was running against famously complain that he had nowhere to go on any issue, because Clinton was running to his right on immigration, prisons, welfare reform, just about every significant issue of the time. He passed legislation that led to the mass incarceration of millions of black men as well as allowing states to completely destroy the welfare system that allows their own citizens to survive. He paved the way for conservative Democrats that we all know and love that control the party to this day. In many ways Clinton and the ideas and philosophies Clinton represents are the tragic death, personified. And let's not forget that Mrs. Clinton basically stole the Democratic Primary in 2016 through the use of Superdelegates and other election manipulation. Look into her past on immigration and other civil rights issues--it's not pretty.

lol thinking Hillary stole the primary.

The election issue really is interesting when you look at the Democrats, whether you think Hillary stole the primary or not. They have lost 2 incredibly significant elections in the last 20 years where they won the popular vote, yet they do not have any appetite for truly increasing accessing to the ballot or making big changes to the system. No talk of abolishing the EC, making DC and Puerto Rico states, putting the voting age to 16 or even a new national voting rights act to combat the disgusting voter suppression going on all across the country. There's a reason for that. They don't want to expand the electorate or allow more economically disadvantaged and minority people into the franchise either. They know it would threaten their managerial style grip on power that they have while they are keeping everyone to the left of Joe Kennedy III a complete hostage with nowhere to go under our current system.

As far as I'm concerned, it's time, with a few exceptions, to boycott the Democratic Party. They are a party of business, they are a party of mass incarceration, and they are a party of war. They love to talk the good talk that they are fighting as a resistance, but in truth they are something to be resisted almost as much as the neoconfederates on the other side of the aisle. They are snakes and they know exactly what they're doing.

Edit:
https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...ending/553670/

einbert's back too?

sup eyebooger.

Another good example--Kamala Harris recently defended the existence of ICE:


These Democrats are not on the side of the people. They are making a lot of money to shut us OUT of the political picture. That's why a lot of their stances are growing more and more unpopular but they aren't adjusting.

Also actually watch that clip. It's incredible. She immediately goes to talking about rapes and murders when the question was about ICE, who are now locking up thousands of KIDS for the misdemeanor offence of entering the US illegally in a desperate attempt to survive, or the nonoffense of seeking asylum at the US border. The dogwhistles and racism of the Democratic party are getting more intense, it seems like they feel they have to keep up.

Democrats clearly going with the move right approach to catch #NeverTrump, giving up on progressive voters.

They're assuming votes that they do not necessarily have. There's an opening for a far-left third-party to make sure Trump wins again.

A far-left third party wasn't necessary for Trump to win the first time, so I think it's not the main concern. People not turning out for milquetoast policies they don't actually like and moderate Republicans not actually existing might be more worth your consideration.

If you rig the primary for the less popular candidate, that's a big problem. Especially when the other party literally wants to make it so your party doesn't exist, commit genocide, etc.

Another big problem is you have a system where you got 3 million more votes (that's 3,000,000) and yet you didn't win the election. And yet somehow that is passed off as a "Democracy". What a joke. This is a two-party dictatorship ruled and managed by the two capitalist parties. Both of those parties agree on a few things, and none of them are good.

Edit: Also, you have a system where one party can "steal" a LIFETIME appointment on the Supreme Court seat and the other party doesn't even hardly complain, they just let it happen. People weren't protesting en masse, the media wasn't calling our government illegitimate on TV a hundred times a day like they always do with socialist countries, it just happened and everyone moved on and now rulings are coming down that are just drastically stealing rights from people and we are all just supposed to move on. This is not a democracy. Not even close. This is a tyrant imperial state.

Yo einbart

The Atlantic artlicle from Peter Beinart.... Beinart...einbart....hmm

Kamala. I was beginning to like her despite her history as a prosecutor. (I didn't watch the clip yet actually)

This American Life profiled Jeff Beals yesterday. He's running as a progressive Democrat for Congress in New York. Through a well connected friend he was given the opportunity to address a small group of big donors. He talked about medicare for all, redistributive policies and such. Aftewards he was told how badly he blew it and alienated all these people, left so much money on the table, and should have stuck to something people can rally around like LGBTQ or reproductive rights. The whole thing is definitely worth listening to.

ya that was interesting. tho depressing.

Ohhh....**** Kamala.

Well that's the first bit of good news in several weeks.

Pretty useless without identification trend.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/225074/...le-digits.aspx

Worse than useless. These Democrats are bound and determined to undermine any kind of effective direct action or activism. They know that the neoconfederate/nazi threat doesn't really threaten their massive wealth, but a surge in actual power among the normal people is a huge threat to them.

I like to think these kinds of opinions are getting left in the dust. For instance, the Pod Save America dudes have all been getting much more progressive since 2016 and they are all Obama/Clinton moderates. Axelrod is just too old to change and too much a part of the political machine.

On a related note, it's interesting how classification has changed. I don't think I have substantially altered what I believe since 2016, but it's much more apparent that I identify more with a progressive crowd than a moderate one, despite what my feelings were in 2016.

I think it's fine to simultaneously:

- be disappointed that the left is engaging in uncivil behavior, and to long for a more refined time where politicians debated ideas (regardless of whether that period ever actually existed).

- recognize that engaging in uncivil behavior is the right strategy when the opposing party is already successfully doing the same thing.

Incivility was inevitable. Democrats can only turn the other cheek for so long. Eventually, they have to fight back.

Of course, this will continue to escalate. Question is: How long until Civil War 2.0 begins?

I listened to this. It's mentioned that Beals set himself apart as being a strong progressive. His opponents would try and blur the line, claiming that they supporting universal quality coverage, which isn't Medicare for all, but sounds like it to people not paying attention. Beals then tried to call this opponents out, and, of course, the establishment Dems said that calling them out like that wasn't being civil and by being incivil he was hurting the party. The end result was that civility allowed establishment Dems to claim progressive creds to fool voters.

My policy differences with the Rs are not large enough that Civil War 2 is appropriate and I think we're a dog to get to that point in my lifetime. The reason for the calls for civility is to keep it that way.

We're not only a dog to get to that point, libruls are a dog in the war - a huge dog.

So the only reason you're not trying to finish off Scalise is we still have a functioning criminal justice system?