Support NeoGAF

[Blader]

You are correct in that nothing has happened yet in regards to displaying a unified front but some Democrats in Congress are starting to show signs of breaking away from that front and that is what a lot of the protesting is about. It makes them think twice about doing that. It's almost like the calm before the storm IF some on the left do start rubber stamping.

Who? On what?

I'm not googling a bunch of stuff for you. If you want to read about which Democrats are already stating they'll allow a vote on Gorsuch after what went down with Garland you can do that yourself.

Huh? Democrats can't not allow a vote on Gorsuch, that's not up to them. They don't have a majority in the Senate, thus don't have a majority on the Judiciary Committee, so they cannot block Gorsuch from getting a hearing or an up-or-down vote the way the Republicans (who were also in the Senate majority last year) blocked Garland from receiving the same.

After what happened to him in the primary, they come crawling back and begging? Ok.

Bernie is a member of Senate Dem leadership, you know.

 

[Xe4]

the democratic party as a whole is solidly right-wing

A. No it's not.
B. Even if it was, the reason they have to move right is the left never votes. Maybe if they showed up for fucking elections, democrats could be more liberal.

He did give us the EPA...The statement is certainly accurate, and on an economic level at, Nixon is probably the most progressive president we have had other than FDR.

Nixon vetoed the Clean Water Act, and all of the progressive legislation was championed by the democratic congress at the time.

Nixon being a liberal is a historic myth.

After what happened to him in the primary, they come crawling back and begging? Ok.

Nothing "happened" to him in the primary. He lost fair and square, and the myth that he was cheated out is a large reason why Trump is now in the White House.

 

[sugarhigh4242]

The bold is why you'll keep failing.

As long as you put the blame on corporations you're buying the shit Republicans and establishment democrats are trying to sell you. Just walking blindly down that "Corporations are people my friend!" logical fallacy.

Corporations are nothing more than tools. Currently they're tools to allow the super rich to hide themselves behind various public entities.

Look at Operation Wall Street. They almost got it, recognizing that the 1% are exploiting the other 99%. But they continued to single out faceless entities like the stock market or major corporations as the problem instead of recognizing that our problems are far more tied to hereditary wealth structure leading to a class of self-appointed American nobility directing everything and rewarding their front men by elevating them into the gentry and maybe even the nobility if they were especially effective.

Corporations stopped Georgia from instituting similar anti-trans legislation as North Carolina. Corporations were and will be again quite soon the real advocates defending net neutrality. Corporations are on the opposite sides from similarly large corporations on various issues.

Corporations aren't the problem. Allowing more and more of the wealth to be consolidated within fewer and fewer people based entirely on the lottery of birth is the problem. Destroy hereditary wealth and corporations become tools for their employees and large scale median income investors, not fronts for massively wealthy individuals to run their agendas through. Get rid of the handful of super rich principles and it quickly becomes beneficial for corporations to unionize as it incentivizes employee engagement and re-investment. Get rid of the super rich and corporate executives will see their direction shift away from quarterly profits and instead towards long term growth an stability as they'll be most accountable to their employees and a far larger net of investors, ideally with all of the former overlapping with the later.

Corporate accountability comes down to who owns the corporation. Simple as that. They're no more good or evil than a car or a hammer, so stop falling for the ruse that they're the problem.

You're right, we have to kill capitalism.

 

[ReAxion]

You're right, we have to kill capitalism.

.

 

[Dude Abides]

actually his revolution was aimed at getting people more involved in the political process and was centered around the people, not bernie himself

Yeah, sure. That's why it's still going strong and playing such an important role.

 

[Inuhanyou]

Kyle went ham on this subject, can't say i disagree with him

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azc6bctJJyw

Yeah, sure. That's why it's still going strong and playing such an important role.

What do you think this thread is about? You think a great portion of those people in the women's march were not Bernie Sanders supporters or people who support the polices progressives in general want?

Its funny to see people who proclaim themselves to be leftists out themselves so brazenly since the election as being pretty hypocritical and basically regurgitate GOP talking points just cause they want to feel like they are on a 'team' with partisan hacks with no interest in saving the country over their own profits.

We have Hillary clinton staffers on televised news recently trying to say that people in the streets marching against trump are not fighting for progressive policies like 15 dollar minimum wage or access to health care.

All the while people like Cory booker who get the most money from insurance industry votes against prescription drug bills for lower cost medications along with the GOP AS THEY ARE TRYING TO DESTROY OBAMA CARE.

 

[royalan]

There are several things wrong with this:

1) These aren't all Bernie's people.

2) Even if they were, did anybody see the ruckus at the Democratic Convention? Bernie can't control them.

3) The mere idea that some Democrats think that these protests at their offices are just more upset "Bernie people" and not liberals in general pissed off at Democrats not reacting to the moment just shows how out of touch some of these Democrats are with their own base. It's infuriating.

 

[Gallbaro]

Dems need some balls and secure states like Schumer need to be primary'd.

 

[Boney]

Kyle went ham on this subject, can't say i disagree with him

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azc6bctJJyw



What do you think this thread is about? You think a great portion of those people in the women's march were not Bernie Sanders supporters or people who support the polices progressives in general want?

Its funny to see people who proclaim themselves to be leftists out themselves so brazenly since the election as being pretty hypocritical and basically regurgitate GOP talking points just cause they want to feel like they are on a 'team' with partisan hacks with no interest in saving the country over their own profits.

We have Hillary clinton staffers on televised news recently trying to say that people in the streets marching against trump are not fighting for progressive policies like 15 dollar minimum wage or access to health care.

All the while people like Cory booker who get the most money from insurance industry votes against prescription drug bills for lower cost medications along with the GOP AS THEY ARE TRYING TO DESTROY OBAMA CARE.

I'd argue that Ocuppy was a much larger stepping stone in political activism and Sanders campaign while monumental on its own merits, is galvanizing these same people. Occupy was very effectively shut down and removed from public discourse though, and while they tried the same for Sanders, Trump winning reinvigorated the active resistance.

 

[slit]

Huh? Democrats can't not allow a vote on Gorsuch, that's not up to them. They don't have a majority in the Senate, thus don't have a majority on the Judiciary Committee, so they cannot block Gorsuch from getting a hearing or an up-or-down vote the way the Republicans (who were also in the Senate majority last year) blocked Garland from receiving the same.

That's irrelevant to what went down over Garland. The GOP completely blocked the vote period. Democrats CAN now throw a monkey wrench in the entire procedure and prevent a vote forcing the GOP's hand. It's not tit-for tat anymore when the insane are running the asylum.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Kyle went ham on this subject, can't say i disagree with him

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azc6bctJJyw

It's like watching an inverse mirror of Rush Limbaugh bloviating about Paul Ryan.

That's like half this thread, in a nice tidy summary.

I don't think you understand what purity tests really are. I don't see Joe Manchin demanding some Democrat in Seattle adopt 100% of his views or he'll raise hell. On the other hand, a bunch of people who live in NYC and San Francisco are telling Joe Manchin how he's supposed to represent his own constituents. Which one is the purity test?

 

[Dude Abides]

What do you think this thread is about? You think a great portion of those people in the women's march were not Bernie Sanders supporters or people who support the polices progressives in general want?

This thread is about some Democratic politicians who misguidedly think that Bernie has sway over the anti-Trump movement. I'm sure there were some Bernie fans in the march but there were a lot more people who were not.

Disappointing but not surprising that some Bernie people are trying to take credit for it.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Part of the reason the Republican governor of Massachusetts right now is so popular is that he's not governing like he's from Alabama. You guys expect Dems who win in unfriendly territory to govern like they are from California. So I ask again, which is the purity test?

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Activism on your own behalf is a purity test?

Fuck me

Demanding absolute conformity to your demands and/or beliefs is a purity test. Manchin votes with whatever causes you support more often than he goes against them but every time he disagrees the knives come out. How is that not a purity test?

 

[Glix]

So many of you are missing the point.

Bernie didnt "wake us up"

We were mad as fucking hell for YEARS.

And here was a politician decrying ALL the things we were so mad about. It resonated.

If the other dems want support from people like me (strong Bernie guy during the primary, strong Hil guy after) then they have to address the things we are so fucking mad about. Both sides was real thing before this election made it so i can never say those words again. But clearly MANY pols on both sides were/are in the pocket of special interests and enjoying life in swanky DC. Just because a maniac is now president does not mean those things are invalidated.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Leftists/progressives aren't supposed to advocate for their needs and beliefs, got it. Great stuff. Don't ever wave a sign at a Democrat.

If this is the way in which you engage with your representatives in government then I can't imagine what the problem is.

Dem Senator from ruby red state: "Perhaps filibustering Gorsuch is not strategically wise in the long term"

Activists: "FUCK YOU! RESIST! OBSTRUCT! PRIMARY CHALLENGE NOW!

Where's the give and take? Where's the willingness to pick your battles and concede that they have conservative voters to represent too?

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

Part of the reason the Republican governor of Massachusetts right now is so popular is that he's not governing like he's from Alabama. You guys expect Dems who win in unfriendly territory to govern like they are from California. So I ask again, which is the purity test?

For those of us in hard red states, progressive reforms will only come nationally.

I can vote for comprise candidates because they'd be better than nothing but they'll still lose by 30 points and our Republican state government will still slash school budgets and worker rights if the federal government does nothing.

 

[Mutant]

They don't need Bernie to fight for the people, to be the opposition party, to grow a spine.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

For those of us in hard red states, progressive reforms will only come nationally.

I can vote for comprise candidates brcause they'd be better than nothing but they'll still lose by 30 points and our Republican state government will still slash school budgets and worker rights if the federal government does nothing.

John Bel Edwards seems to show otherwise. The first thread about him on here was just bitching about how he's pro-life in Louisiana, not that he will expand medicare.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

Jon Bel Edwards seems to show otherwise.

Okay, that's one guy who fluked into office in a state with a large black population. I'm sure this is a reliable position.

 

[JABEE]

People have been mad for a long time. You had the ability to stop the Trump's of the world a long time ago before you ceded so much power to executive branch and allowed people to suffer for political convenience. When going along with the status quo was more practical than the struggles and hard decisions of true reform. This is when politicians in Washington allowed Trump to do what he has done in the first weeks of the Presidency. This is far bigger than one election. Trump utilizing his powers for heinous things is just the product of our broken democracy and the lack of checks and balances in place to stop monsters from perverting the office of Presidency in the name of power, ideology, and personal enrichment.

 

[Cybit]

The bold is why you'll keep failing.

As long as you put the blame on corporations you're buying the shit Republicans and establishment democrats are trying to sell you. Just walking blindly down that "Corporations are people my friend!" logical fallacy.

Corporations are nothing more than tools. Currently they're tools to allow the super rich to hide themselves behind various public entities.

Look at Operation Wall Street. They almost got it, recognizing that the 1% are exploiting the other 99%. But they continued to single out faceless entities like the stock market or major corporations as the problem instead of recognizing that our problems are far more tied to hereditary wealth structure leading to a class of self-appointed American nobility directing everything and rewarding their front men by elevating them into the gentry and maybe even the nobility if they were especially effective.

Corporations stopped Georgia from instituting similar anti-trans legislation as North Carolina. Corporations were and will be again quite soon the real advocates defending net neutrality. Corporations are on the opposite sides from similarly large corporations on various issues.

Corporations aren't the problem. Allowing more and more of the wealth to be consolidated within fewer and fewer people based entirely on the lottery of birth is the problem. Destroy hereditary wealth and corporations become tools for their employees and large scale median income investors, not fronts for massively wealthy individuals to run their agendas through. Get rid of the handful of super rich principles and it quickly becomes beneficial for corporations to unionize as it incentivizes employee engagement and re-investment. Get rid of the super rich and corporate executives will see their direction shift away from quarterly profits and instead towards long term growth an stability as they'll be most accountable to their employees and a far larger net of investors, ideally with all of the former overlapping with the later.

Corporate accountability comes down to who owns the corporation. Simple as that. They're no more good or evil than a car or a hammer, so stop falling for the ruse that they're the problem.

Bingo. We have gone down a path of "win at all costs" in all facets of American society, and what corporations are doing is just an application of that philosophy (which is being rewarded by voters and consumers). Everyone loves how corporations are being socially liberal right now, but will they love them once they start fighting against the minimum wage increase or destroying unions?

That's irrelevant to what went down over Garland. The GOP completely blocked the vote period. Democrats CAN now throw a monkey wrench in the entire procedure and prevent a vote forcing the GOP's hand. It's not tit-for tat anymore when the insane are running the asylum.

I don't think the Dems can do that without control of the Senate. The GOP can merely remove the filibuster for judicial nominees and proceed if they want.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

Bingo. We have gone down a path of "win at all costs" in all facets of American society, and what corporations are doing is just an application of that philosophy (which is being rewarded by voters and consumers). Everyone loves how corporations are being socially liberal right now, but will they love them once they start fighting against the minimum wage increase or destroying unions?

Sounds like Booker's wet dream.

 

[slit]

If this is the way in which you engage with your representatives in government then I can't imagine what the problem is.

Dem Senator from ruby red state: "Perhaps filibustering Gorsuch is not strategically wise in the long term"

Activists: "FUCK YOU! RESIST! OBSTRUCT! PRIMARY CHALLENGE NOW!

Where's the give and take? Where's the willingness to pick your battles and concede that they have conservative voters to represent too?

You have two choices here, continue the give and take bullshit that has gotten us nowhere and has done nothing but emboldened the GOP or you can fight back in those "ruby red" states when you get right down to it are not necessarily as red as you might think. Those ruby red states have elected progressive Democrats before. It's not as hopeless as you're making it sound. The ruby red states are not the problem anyway, it's the rust belt states that the Democrats have taken for granted for far too long.

I don't think the Dems can do that without control of the Senate. The GOP can merely remove the filibuster for judicial nominees and proceed if they want.

Then let them push that button because then it's gone for good. There are those in the GOP scared to death of that. At some point you have to call a bluff.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Okay, that's one guy who fluked into office in a state with a large black population. I'm sure this is a reliable position.

The out party has done well since 1992. In 2006, this is what the governor map looked like (the colors are flipped).

You have two choices here, continue the give and take bullshit that has gotten us nowhere and has done nothing but emboldened the GOP or you can fight back in those "ruby red" states when you get right down to it are not necessarily as red as you might think. Those ruby red states have elected progressive Democrats before. It's not as hopeless as you're making it sound. The ruby red states are not the problem anyway, it's the rust belt states that the Democrats have taken for granted for far too long.



Then let them push that button because then it's gone for good. There are those in the GOP scared to death of that. At some point you have to call a bluff.

Five minutes ago you didn't even know the process of bringing a vote to the floor in the Senate, now you're lecturing on getting rid of the filibuster. Is it possible that maybe you should defer to more experienced/calmer heads?

 

[royalan]

If this is the way in which you engage with your representatives in government then I can't imagine what the problem is.

Dem Senator from ruby red state: "Perhaps filibustering Gorsuch is not strategically wise in the long term"

Activists: "FUCK YOU! RESIST! OBSTRUCT! PRIMARY CHALLENGE NOW!

Where's the give and take? Where's the willingness to pick your battles and concede that they have conservative voters to represent too?

The Democrats' current strategy is not strategically wise in the long term.

 

[slit]

Five minutes ago you didn't even know the process of bringing a vote to the floor in the Senate, now you're lecturing on getting rid of the filibuster. Is it possible that maybe you should defer to more experienced/calmer heads?

What are you talking about? The filibuster stops it in it's tracks. Your way has proved disastrous to everybody and now your just shoveling more of the same redundant shit.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

The Democrats' current strategy is not strategically wise in the long term.

On what basis? The government hasn't shut down yet over an education secretary?

 

[royalan]

On what basis? The government hasn't shut down yet over an education secretary?

....this thread?

We literally have Democrats going to Bernie Fucking Sanders to beg him to save them from their own base.

Here's a novel idea: stop pissing off your base. Especially when you get nothing for the trouble from Republicans.

In a two party system this is quite literally the only way to represent left of center policies. I really don't get how stuff like the women's March is applauded while anybody pointing that same style towards a Democrat is not.

Activists aren't pundits. They aren't there to be concerned about the optics of pressuring a Dem in a red state. Expecting them to treat politics with the eye of a pundit is worrying.

Exactly.

 

[Cybit]

Then let them push that button because then it's gone for good. There are those in the GOP scared to death of that. At some point you have to call a bluff.

I personally think they should push the GOP to nuke the filibuster now if they believe the GOP is all in on Gorsuch. Might as well make them use their last card now. But we better fucking pray that no one else leaves SCOTUS while we don't have control of the Senate.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

The out party has done well since 1992. In 2006, this is what the governor map looked like (the colors are flipped).




Five minutes ago you didn't even know the process of bringing a vote to the floor in the Senate, now you're lecturing on getting rid of the filibuster. Is it possible that maybe you should defer to more experienced/calmer heads?

There's been a Democratic governor in my state for the first six months of my life and since then it's been an ever increasing Republican supermajority. 83% of my state legislature is red. I'll take JBE if I can get it, but I won't and the only progressive reforms that happen here will come nationally.

I'm getting out of here as soon as I graduate, but not everyone can do that or should have to do that.

 

[Inuhanyou]

.

 

[Henchmen21]

Kyle went ham on this subject, can't say i disagree with him

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azc6bctJJyw



What do you think this thread is about? You think a great portion of those people in the women's march were not Bernie Sanders supporters or people who support the polices progressives in general want?

Its funny to see people who proclaim themselves to be leftists out themselves so brazenly since the election as being pretty hypocritical and basically regurgitate GOP talking points just cause they want to feel like they are on a 'team' with partisan hacks with no interest in saving the country over their own profits.

We have Hillary clinton staffers on televised news recently trying to say that people in the streets marching against trump are not fighting for progressive policies like 15 dollar minimum wage or access to health care.

All the while people like Cory booker who get the most money from insurance industry votes against prescription drug bills for lower cost medications along with the GOP AS THEY ARE TRYING TO DESTROY OBAMA CARE.

The Clinton wing of the party were never liberals/progressives. They were just republicans who stopped calling themselves republican.

 

[royalan]

The Clinton wing of the party were never liberals/progressives. They were just republicans who stopped calling themselves republican.

Please stop with this shit.

 

[Ogodei]

In states where Democrats don't have to pretend to be moderate to not get destroyed by the GOP, they pass stuff like a 15 dollar minimum wage.

They actually do want those things. But the American people do not.

The American people want higher wages too. As you said, it's down to demographics. Likely voters in state and local elections skew much more conservative than the average American.

 

[thepotatoman]

The Clinton wing of the party were never liberals/progressives. They were just republicans who stopped calling themselves republican.

You could maybe make the case for that in the 90's. It'd be wrong, but not insultingly so.

Saying that's the case in 2017 shows such a complete lack of understanding of US politics. There are so many extremely meaningful issues that the Clinton wing disagree with republicans with that I don't even know where to begin.

 

[rashbeep]

The Clinton wing of the party were never liberals/progressives. They were just republicans who stopped calling themselves republican.

That's a bit of an exaggeration

 

[GAF A60-Rim A]

The absurdity of all of this is that Bernie has been repeatedly praised by Trump, during his campaign and since election.

I don't see why the Dems aren't using that as leverage (e.g. 2018 campaign ads, etc.) to reel back in some of the voters who had fled to Trump.

Bernie is the answer, but you can't expect him to tow the line. He is the progressive version of Trump who believes in a slightly more socialist (i.e. typical Western) democracy, but also sharing the views of the majority of Americans on almost all major issues (according to polling).

But it's a stalemate: The Democrats want Bernie to tow the line. And he won't, and nor will Keith Ellison.

 

[excelsiorlef]

If the filibuster got nuked could Trump withdraw Gorsuch and replace him with someone crazier knowing the Dems couldn't stop it?

 

[royalan]

The absurdity of all of this is that Bernie has been repeatedly praised by Trump, during his campaign and since election.

I don't see why the Dems aren't using that as leverage (e.g. 2018 campaign ads, etc.) to reel back in some of the voters who had fled to Trump.

Bernie is the answer, but you can't expect him to tow the line. He is the progressive version of Trump who believes in a slightly more socialist (i.e. typical Western) democracy, but also sharing the views of the majority of Americans on almost all major issues (according to polling).

But it's a stalemate: The Democrats want Bernie to tow the line. And he won't, and nor will Keith Ellison.

What is this line, and why does it need to be towed?

And Bernie is literally not the answer here. There is nothing he can do about these crowds marching in the street.

 

[hodayathink]

If the filibuster got nuked could Trump withdraw Gorsuch and replace him with someone crazier knowing the Dems couldn't stop it?

He could, but it's unheard of, and since mainstream Republicans actually like this guy, I'd like to think that even they would be opposed to that. Not to mention that there's a good chance that they'll get to replace someone else in the next few years, so why burn bridges now when you can just wait.

 

[tbm24]

It's not really surprising that someone like Manchin would think Bernie could help stop protestors from coming his way. I honestly don't know what anyone realistically expects out of Manchin given the state he represents. If not Manchin then it'll be a republican, but either way he can handle some heat, his voting base won't suddenly turn against him for it.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

If the filibuster got nuked could Trump withdraw Gorsuch and replace him with someone crazier knowing the Dems couldn't stop it?

Sure, but there's no reason he couldn't do that anyways.

 

[studyguy]

It's not really surprising that someone like Manchin would think Bernie could help stop protestors from coming his way. I honestly don't know what anyone realistically expects out of Manchin given the state he represents. If not Manchin then it'll be a republican, but either way he can handle some heat, his voting base won't suddenly turn against him for it.

There really isn't a better alternative with Manchin.
It's either a bluedog-types like Manchin or some angry constituents primary him and put a republican in power instead. There's no middle ground there.

Membership of actual bluedog coalition has fallen pretty dramatically. Mostly losing their seats to... Republicans.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Sure, but there's no reason he couldn't do that anyways.

This doesn't make sense. Why pull the trigger and shoot yourself in the head because you assume someone else is going to do it?

 

[KingV]

If this is the way in which you engage with your representatives in government then I can't imagine what the problem is.

Dem Senator from ruby red state: "Perhaps filibustering Gorsuch is not strategically wise in the long term"

Activists: "FUCK YOU! RESIST! OBSTRUCT! PRIMARY CHALLENGE NOW!

Where's the give and take? Where's the willingness to pick your battles and concede that they have conservative voters to represent too?

Seems to have worked out pretty swimmingly.for the Republicans actually.

 

[AlphaDump]

The Clinton wing of the party were never liberals/progressives. They were just republicans who stopped calling themselves republican.

This is so fucking wrong that it is actually insulting. Shameful.

 

[tbm24]

There really isn't a better alternative with Manchin.
It's either a bluedog-types like Manchin or some angry constituents primary him and put a republican in power instead. There's no middle ground there.

Membership of actual bluedog coalition has fallen pretty dramatically. Mostly losing their seats to... Republicans.

National fueled protests aside, what's going to matter is how the DNC itself positions defending democrats and challenging democrats come 2018. Here's hoping they go through with the 50 state strategy as I'll take a manchin in every red state over a republican any day of the week. I do maintain there's nothing particularly wrong with democrats letting them know where they stand nationally, Manchin didn't break for every trump/republican vote. That's crucial for democrats as a whole.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

This doesn't make sense. Why pull the trigger and shoot yourself in the head because you assume someone else is going to do it?

The only thing stopping Trump from getting anyone appointed on the bench is that Trump doesn't want them on the bench. If the Republicans are willing to nuke the filibuster for Gorsuch, they'll be willing to nuke it for someone even crazier. The filibuster's existence only matters if it won't be nuked as soon as it's used, so there's no reason it shouldn't be employed here to keep a far-right crazy man off the bench. At the very least, it gums up the rest of Trump's agenda and guarantees our ability to confirm justices in the future with 50 senate seats.

Gorsuch is a Scalia-type who is young and is giving conservatives who voted for Trump that were afraid he wouldn't hate gay people enough exactly what they want, it's not like he's a compromise pick or anything.

 

[Foffy]

There are several things wrong with this:

1) These aren't all Bernie's people.

2) Even if they were, did anybody see the ruckus at the Democratic Convention? Bernie can't control them.

3) The mere idea that some Democrats think that these protests at their offices are just more upset "Bernie people" and not liberals in general pissed off at Democrats not reacting to the moment just shows how out of touch some of these Democrats are with their own base. It's infuriating.

This is the jewel of the problem, I think.

People in this country are struggling, and they want actual solutions. For the left, it is increasingly being aimed to arm a message and a direction, to support actual policies, movements, and ideas, that it seems the Democrats, at least higher up, do not understand.

I would imagine most of the Democratic party is like Nancy Pelosi. When even questioned about the failure of social policy of the last 35+ years -- particularly neoliberal Capitalism -- she doubles down on Capitalism and makes excuses, saying it's "shareholder Capitalism" as if that's some fluke. She wouldn't even concede with a Millennial who even asked her to open her horizons regarding a new approach. You know, the same generation hating Capitalism almost in full because it's become a machine to exploit, abuse, and they have nothing to show for even trying to "follow the American Dream" within it. They don't hate it because they're lazy; they hate it because it's not fucking working for most people in this society. People like Sanders and Warren have been political beacons for this for many years, but I would imagine people have become far more active as they see neoliberal Capitalism be replaced with neonational Capitalism, which is several degrees worse, offers no solutions, and makes several bullshit narratives of scapegoating that only promise things get worse.

This "old guard" really doesn't have a clue a precariat class has formed in this country, and they're not only befuddled at the "protests" aimed at them, they haven't a clue on how to handle it. They've normalized decades of increased precarity and a game that's worked for a few that most of them that they really haven't a single idea on how to reverse course, for they're only really focused on making sure the GOP doesn't pivot the ship into icebergs. But what if the ship is already insolvent and filled with water?

I mean, you can even say their inaction and passivity to even nominations the GOP is getting away with as a normalization of this problem, for they're not even preventing them from getting through the front door, in a sense.