The DNC is the problem. Or is it?

[Jolly_Penguin]

But until that happens, the whole... trust us the votes are there, they just haven't voted before doesn't line up with the history of voting or even recent elections. Generally the prog primary candidate either doesn't win the primary or loses the general election.

The votes are there IF the "vote blue no matter who" anti-Trump brigade is true. If they are then it doesn't matter if a more progressive candidate is made the nominee. They will vote for them so long as they at not Trump. Or are you arguing that they are NOT going to vote blue if the candidate is too progressive?

Kind of reverses that whole thing where people whine about the progressives not also voting blue no matter who eh?

If the progressive support is conditional and the non-progressive support is unconditional... Then your best shot is with a progressive candidate, no?

 

[Rhea]

You’re never going to answer the question about why the ones who say the DNC is the problem can’t manage tk get a candidate elected in an election that has no dnc influence, are you?

Because the US is a two party system.

Only at the state and federal level. Not at the local level, not at the county level, not at the school district level. This is what I have been saying.

If a progressive runs as an independent or third party all that would do is split the Dem vote,

Not, as I said, in elections where no Dem is running, it would certainly not split. And in races where no republican is running, it would merely prove the point.

and guarantee a Rep victory in the majority of races.

Not the majority. But in the federal one, yeah. But then again, that’s what the Bernsters want, right? As they claim “vote Blue not matter who” is against their principals. So suddenly it’s not rue for them at a local level?

Also the way the system is set up now running for congress is expensive

I didn’t say congress, did I? I said local elections. If the progressives are so all-fired popular and right, and the DNC is so bad, why aren’t they all over local politics?
That’s the question. Are they a movement? Or are they just a small group trying to hijack a party that has actual grass roots?

. Without an organization like the dnc to back you up it is very difficult to set up and fund an organization that can compete with the two parties.

Absolutely not true. I ran for my office on $250 and won.
And that’s the question. Why aren’t the people, who excoriate the DNC, running for office in the easy place in droves?
When they build that bench, they’ll have an easier time getting into congress. But they don’t. WHYNOT?
Is it because they aren’t as numerous as they claim and they are just trying to hijack someone else’s efforts?

Why are the school, town and county positions NOT filled with progressives? Why? They are as numerous as the grains of sand in the Mohave.

How do you know they arn't?

Bcause I am very very engaged in local politics. I teach workshops on how to win in red districts. I pay attention to what seats are open, which ones are uncontested and who is running and how to get on the ballot.

In polling on individual policy positions the liberal/progressive policies tend to poll very well.

Why don’t any of these pikers run for office? Because they are not engaged? They are not reliable voters, perhaps?

But since most people have to run as a member of a party,

They don’t.

and parties tend to support candidates that toe the party line

Parties don’t give a shit about town clerks and council members.

(and reasoning to dismiss the more progressive positions). There is also the possibility of since the major parties do not promote some of the more liberal/progressive policies, a lot of people might not be familiar with them as an option, and so haven't sought to push them.

Wait, I thought everybody liked those policies in polls?


So my point remains. If all these people wo blame the DNC for deliberately rigging against progressives actually ran for office as Sanders Party candidates, they be able to get thousands in office, make a name for their party and crreate an actual movement.

I wonder, I really actually am curious, why they don’t.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

The Sanders party is now the Democrat party.

Why should these people running for local office identify themselves as Sanders oriented? Why can't they just run no-name or Democrat?

What exactly is your concern here?

The DNC remains a problem regardless of any of this.

 

[Elixir]

The Sanders party is now the Democrat party.

Why should these people running for local office identify themselves as Sanders oriented? Why can't they just run no-name or Democrat?

They do. Local officials around here are elected (or not) because of their voiced opinions on allowing camping in public areas for special events, whether parking on 3rd street should be parallel or head-in diagonal, who is responsible for cleaning the bird shit off shared fences and how many times cows have to get loose on the highway before getting after the owner.

Whether they're Bernie Bros or Trumpanzees doesn't really enter into it.

The DNC remains a problem regardless of any of this.

Maybe they'll unite the party in hatred ... of the DNC.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

It really shouldn't be controversial that the DNC should be more transparent and less corrupt. That isn't a left or right issue. That's something everyone in the party should be able to get behind.

 

[marc]

Only at the state and federal level. Not at the local level, not at the county level, not at the school district level. This is what I have been saying.

Ah ok, but then on a local level, where party affiliation is not as much of a factor, then someone might not run on being a 'progressive' while supporting progressive policies. Its is like you want there to be an official Progressive policy and people have to identify as such, and if they don't they are not a True Progressive.

Not, as I said, in elections where no Dem is running, it would certainly not split. And in races where no republican is running, it would merely prove the point.

Well in places where no Dem is running, is it because there is no chance to win so why bother? Then why run as a progressive and face the same result?

Not the majority. But in the federal one, yeah. But then again, that’s what the Bernsters want, right? As they claim “vote Blue not matter who” is against their principals. So suddenly it’s not rue for them at a local level?

uh no, most definitely not. I do know some Bernie or Bust people, just as there were Hillary or Bust people, but there is a lot of attempts to paint all of his supporters like that with very little to back it up. As I have said repeatedly, I am a Bernie supporter, and I will vote for whoever the candidate is, just like last time.

(and reasoning to dismiss the more progressive positions). There is also the possibility of since the major parties do not promote some of the more liberal/progressive policies, a lot of people might not be familiar with them as an option, and so haven't sought to push them.

Wait, I thought everybody liked those policies in polls?

When polled, yes. They might not have heard of the specifics outside of a poll question, just the talking points that the parties put forth.

So my point remains. If all these people wo blame the DNC for deliberately rigging against progressives actually ran for office as Sanders Party candidates, they be able to get thousands in office, make a name for their party and crreate an actual movement.

I wonder, I really actually am curious, why they don’t.

So if someone wants M4A they should run for county clerk as a progressive, which would have the same effect as spitting in the ocean? And again, you seem to want people to identify as a totally new party, even though progressives are liberals, so would tend to run as part of the more liberal democratic party. You seem to want people to identify as a national party campaigning on national issues for small local offices where the party affiliation doesn't play as significant a roll, and would not affect the national issue.

and btw, refer back to Don2's post listing progressives in Congress. There is a movement, it would appear to be a lot bigger than you think.

 

[Jarhyn]

Ah ok, but then on a local level, where party affiliation is not as much of a factor, then someone might not run on being a 'progressive' while supporting progressive policies. Its is like you want there to be an official Progressive policy and people have to identify as such, and if they don't they are not a True Progressive.




Well in places where no Dem is running, is it because there is no chance to win so why bother? Then why run as a progressive and face the same result?

Not the majority. But in the federal one, yeah. But then again, that’s what the Bernsters want, right? As they claim “vote Blue not matter who” is against their principals. So suddenly it’s not rue for them at a local level?

uh no, most definitely not. I do know some Bernie or Bust people, just as there were Hillary or Bust people, but there is a lot of attempts to paint all of his supporters like that with very little to back it up. As I have said repeatedly, I am a Bernie supporter, and I will vote for whoever the candidate is, just like last time.

(and reasoning to dismiss the more progressive positions). There is also the possibility of since the major parties do not promote some of the more liberal/progressive policies, a lot of people might not be familiar with them as an option, and so haven't sought to push them.

Wait, I thought everybody liked those policies in polls?

When polled, yes. They might not have heard of the specifics outside of a poll question, just the talking points that the parties put forth.

So my point remains. If all these people wo blame the DNC for deliberately rigging against progressives actually ran for office as Sanders Party candidates, they be able to get thousands in office, make a name for their party and crreate an actual movement.

I wonder, I really actually am curious, why they don’t.

So if someone wants M4A they should run for county clerk as a progressive, which would have the same effect as spitting in the ocean? And again, you seem to want people to identify as a totally new party, even though progressives are liberals, so would tend to run as part of the more liberal democratic party. You seem to want people to identify as a national party campaigning on national issues for small local offices where the party affiliation doesn't play as significant a roll, and would not affect the national issue.

and btw, refer back to Don2's post listing progressives in Congress. There is a movement, it would appear to be a lot bigger than you think.

Yeah... At one point the democrats were a progressive party, advocating big changes on behalf of labor and the common citizen. There are a lot of people seeking to push them in that direction again, and why shouldn't they already want to be there?

There are two parties. Until FPTP ends, there will only be two. As you have mentioned, there is no reason to attach to the party at all for small races; on our ballot, there are frequently no parties listed for a number of local offices.

When it comes to state positions, you need a party backing you, and it's going to have to be a party with money. And there are only two of those. Of course, ever since I first heard of the Green party, they looked and sounded ridiculous: like a single-issue party trying to piss into a whirlwind. All they do is lose and spoil elections. Why would I ever support that behavior or give it more money to make more negative externalities?

Demanding progressives set up their own camp is just petulant gaslighting. No, progressives belong in the big tent. It's where they have always belonged. And there is broad popular support for those policies, particularly among democrats: when democrats see those policies described, they like and support them. Why don't their politicians?

So yes. We are invading the party itself and pushing it towards the will of the constituency. If they don't bend, we will oust those who resist most heavily, and we will affect change from within.

Did she not notice that the Dem frontrunner is such a person? That if we win the presidency party leadership itself, and the resulting platform, will become progressive? Boo hoo. Cry more. We are coming to change the party, because that's the only way to get a party these days.

 

[Politesse]

The DNC, summarized:

 

[Rhea]

No, marc. I am saying, as I have been saying all along - THOSE PEOPLE who decry the DNC as the problem, as something that is broken, as something that is holding their progressive candidate back and rigging the system against him,

THOSE PEOPLE

Are sure acting like they really really love what the DNC has built and they want to hijack it and take it.
They usually say how incredibly numerous they are.
They say how despicable and “corrupt” the DNC is,
But they want it very badly.
They say they have never been strong members, that the DNC “takes them for granted,” that they are progressive first and Democratic Party not at all.
They do not build anything for themselves, though.
They could have been running in these small offices (like the Democrats do) without party support (like the democratic locals do) and build a huge base of visible, countable support (like the Democrats do - and like the Republicans do)

But they don’t. They could build a huge base of people that establish a strong mandate.

But they don’t.
They. Those people who whinge about the DNC and call themselves progressive.

And I wonder, as a person who is an ACTIVE political progressive, (who appreciates what the DNC builds and does for progressives,) why the establishment-haters have no portfolio.

You all keep wondering why I appear to expect people who say they hate the DNC, who say they are idealists who answer to no corporatists, why they don’t do the easy free work of establishing a mandate through grass-roots building.

They don’t have to build the juggernaut in a day. BUt they say they have zillions of supporters. So it should make way a lot faster because of that.

It’s curious.
(When you remember we are talking about those who specifically call the DNC corrupt and say they will only vote dem if the dem is Bernie Sanders (who is not a dem)).
It’s like even they know that they do not have a reliable base.

 

[PyramidHead]

You all keep wondering why I appear to expect people who say they hate the DNC, who say they are idealists who answer to no corporatists, why they don’t do the easy free work of establishing a mandate through grass-roots building.

Welcome to the 2020 Bernie Sanders campaign! Do you want to phonebank, text, or knock on doors?

 

[Rhea]

The DNC, summarized:

It’s interesting that you should post this so soon after I explained that I have done a lot more than sign petitions.
I’m a progressive who cares about building progress that lasts beyond a cult of personality.
I ran for office and served for 8 years. Had screws put in my tires 5 times. Had to have a sheriff attend town meetings because of death threats. Had signs put on the road that my socialist ways were stealing from my neighbors.

You?

 

[Rhea]

You all keep wondering why I appear to expect people who say they hate the DNC, who say they are idealists who answer to no corporatists, why they don’t do the easy free work of establishing a mandate through grass-roots building.

Welcome to the 2020 Bernie Sanders campaign! Do you want to phonebank, text, or knock on doors?

That’s not a lasting mandate. That’s a cult of personality trying to parachute into the CEO position without building a back bench. And I find their aggressive harassment of other progressives very distasteful. I supported him at first for his ideas. I left him because he is not a builder.

 

[Jarhyn]

No, marc. I am saying, as I have been saying all along - THOSE PEOPLE who decry the DNC as the problem, as something that is broken, as something that is holding their progressive candidate back and rigging the system against him,

THOSE PEOPLE

Are sure acting like they really really love what the DNC has built and they want to hijack it and take it.
They usually say how incredibly numerous they are.
They say how despicable and “corrupt” the DNC is,
But they want it very badly.
They say they have never been strong members, that the DNC “takes them for granted,” that they are progressive first and Democratic Party not at all.
They do not build anything for themselves, though.
They could have been running in these small offices (like the Democrats do) without party support (like the democratic locals do) and build a huge base of visible, countable support (like the Democrats do - and like the Republicans do)

But they don’t. They could build a huge base of people that establish a strong mandate.

But they don’t.
They. Those people who whinge about the DNC and call themselves progressive.

And I wonder, as a person who is an ACTIVE political progressive, (who appreciates what the DNC builds and does for progressives,) why the establishment-haters have no portfolio.

You all keep wondering why I appear to expect people who say they hate the DNC, who say they are idealists who answer to no corporatists, why they don’t do the easy free work of establishing a mandate through grass-roots building.

They don’t have to build the juggernaut in a day. BUt they say they have zillions of supporters. So it should make way a lot faster because of that.

It’s curious.
(When you remember we are talking about those who specifically call the DNC corrupt and say they will only vote dem if the dem is Bernie Sanders (who is not a dem)).
It’s like even they know that they do not have a reliable base.

You mean the people that recognize collusion with the Biden campaign, allowing them to appoint staffers to the finance board? Or how about allowing Bloomberg to buy his way into the party? Those things happened, as did the buried debates of 2016, and the DNC voter roll hijinks.

Bernie Sanders is a democrat, the kind that recognizes the principles of democracy in action. He's on the Dem ticket, and has been two elections running. Because what makes him a democrat is that the people, the voters, actually vote for and accept his platform. 43% of democrats in 2016 disagree with you, and while that is a slight minority, it is colored by the fact that this was fairly well depressed by the long running Bernie blindness within the media, the thumb on the scales that was the superdelegate counts, and all the other fuckery.

This time he's the fucking frontrunner, still despite a widescale media blackout of his campaign. What's a democrat if not a politician that democrats have placed a clear consensus behind being one?

Sure, some asshole like Bloomberg can buy an ad campaign full of lies, but we have Bernie here who has a history of standing straight and saying what he means and doing as his principles demand.

 

[Politesse]

The DNC, summarized:

It’s interesting that you should post this so soon after I explained that I have done a lot more than sign petitions.
I’m a progressive who cares about building progress that lasts beyond a cult of personality.
I ran for office and served for 8 years. Had screws put in my tires 5 times. Had to have a sheriff attend town meetings because of death threats. Had signs put on the road that my socialist ways were stealing from my neighbors.

You?

It's almost as though you personally were not the intended target of the comic. Weird.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

It’s interesting that you should post this so soon after I explained that I have done a lot more than sign petitions.
I’m a progressive who cares about building progress that lasts beyond a cult of personality.

It is hard to believe that when you are here complaining about people who want better transparency and less corruption in the DNC, and standing in the way of the progressives now in the race for the nomination.

 

[Rhea]

This time he's the fucking frontrunner, still despite a widescale media blackout of his campaign. What's a democrat if not a politician that democrats have placed a clear consensus behind being one?

See? He’s the frontrunner and still they complain about “rigged” systems. Like the DNC pays the media or something.
It feels so whiney.

And yet, despite the whining about what they deserve and how bof their following is - the unanswered, dodged, question remains.
Sanders is only a Dem when he’s running for president. He can’t create a raft of “I”-for-independent office holders. At all.
So bizarre.

It conflicts with the whining. It leaves me puzzled.

 

[Rhea]

It’s interesting that you should post this so soon after I explained that I have done a lot more than sign petitions.
I’m a progressive who cares about building progress that lasts beyond a cult of personality.

It is hard to believe that when you are here complaining about people who want better transparency and less corruption in the DNC, and standing in the way of the progressives now in the race for the nomination.

Is it?
Is it really hard to believe when I’ve walked the walk?


More whingeing about “corruption” from someone who doesn’t run for office himself, about a faction that does not run for office or do any of the hard work. “But you signed all those petitions!” And you complained so loudly on the internet!
Gadflies.

 

[Rhea]

What’s interesting, Jolly, is that you sound no different than the “Radical Constitutionalists” who posted billboards about town saying how “corrupt” I was to have enacted a public children’s program and supported the public library. You sound exactly the same as them. And your words are cheered by them. You know that, right?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

It’s interesting that you should post this so soon after I explained that I have done a lot more than sign petitions.
I’m a progressive who cares about building progress that lasts beyond a cult of personality.

It is hard to believe that when you are here complaining about people who want better transparency and less corruption in the DNC, and standing in the way of the progressives now in the race for the nomination.

Is it?
Is it really hard to believe when I’ve walked the walk?

Yes. It is. You say you have walked the walk and want progressive policy and yet here you are whining about people who want more transparency and less corruption in the electoral process and in your party and DNC, and as you stand against progressive candidates.

And no, I am not a "constitutionalist" or whatever. I am a liberal. One who doesn't live in your country and who has much of what your liberals are striving to get, as you stand against them because you want them to build a third party in a first past the post system first.

I encourage the liberals and progressives in your country becauase I want them to enjoy the freedom I do, and if things keep moving in Bernie's direction you may even surpass my country and I will be envious..

 

[Rhea]

But I don’t stand against progressive candidates. I AM a progressive candidate.
This post, as I clearly said in the OP, is about those who think the only way to get progress is to hate the DNC and the grassroots it has built.

I do note that you keep erasing the actual efforts and work of any progressive who doesn’t also hate the DNC.
You want to call it “corrupt” and claim that if I am against people trashing it that I’m somehow against transparency.

This American, active, progressive sees you.