Summary
Historians suggest Democrats might have fared better against Donald Trump by embracing the economic issues championed by Senator Bernie Sanders, who has long pushed for a focus on “bread-and-butter” concerns for working-class voters.
Despite Kamala Harris’s progressive policies, polls showed Trump was favored on economic issues, particularly among working-class and Hispanic voters.
Historian Leah Wright Rigueur argued that Sanders’ messaging on economic struggles could be key for future Democratic strategies.
Sanders himself criticized the party for “abandoning” the working class, which he said has led to a loss of support across racial lines.
If we had run Bernie in 2016, Trump would still be nothing but a punchline.
Yes, because Trump’s second term would now be over.
Lol at this delusional lib rewriting history that somehow Clinton won over trump 😂
It’s one think to think that Sanders is correct, but to think that the American people would have voted for him in 2016 is just extremely delusional.
Every trump voter I know would of went for him. Explain how counties that twice went to Obama in a landslide magically flipped to trump in a landslide. You won’t.
Here’s a map of donations for the 2020 primary, you make of that what you will.
In 2016 Sanders was 10 point above trump
Okay, maybe he would have alienated like a small percentage of liberals that thought he was “too radical” and he will bring a holodomor on the US for some reason. Maybe some of those Bernie bros were just troll pretending to like him, so they could play the “why I left the left”. Still, he not only could have won a lot of Republicans, but even more people who normally abstaining from voting.
Clinton lost. Sanders couldn’t possibly do worse than her lmao
It is absolutely clear now. The DNC is a private company whose main function is to fund raise, period. If they also win an election then that’s great, but if it comes to a choice between winning and raising money, they will choose raising money. They will never move to the left to win voters if it will cost them fund raising opportunities from the center and right.
This honestly makes so much more sense than anything else. I think you nailed it. Republicans are motivated by money and exerting social control so they write up manifestos (p2025), take over the courts, work hard to disenfranchise voters, lie, cheat, anything is on the table. The DNC does indeed seem fairly comfortable with losing by comparison, despite the fact that the leftist ideals they supposedly dabble in create a moral imperative to never lose. I wonder if Republicans fucking pay the DNC money to run these candidates we all know aren’t the best. They’re just good enough to get votes against mother fucking Trump. But not always good enough to win, barely good enough when they are, typically.
Republicans don’t need to pay the DNC, both are funded by the same billionaires most of the time.
“Nah guys, we’re good on money, thanks. Got enough.”
The democrats represent the group of americans that think money and “american ingenuity” can solve all problems. No problem is a real problem because we can always solve it if we just try real hard to make the current thing better.
Thats why they are the status quo party, its literally their whole founding belief.
The republicans are a party of changing backwards, which only works sometimes, usually when people are upset: “remember when things weren’t awful…?”
The rest of the parties are thinking long term and are true parties of change but you need money to make it in politics, or else not enough people even know you exist at the higher political levels. There were I think five “third” parties on my ballot but I only ever heard people talk about one or two of them.
I’m not sure if its more likely the democrat party collapses out of disinterest and a third party replaces them, or if the democrat party will become a true party of change for the future.
It could just continue on as the party of “America is amazing and will always be amazing so vote for us for more amazing.”
And the rich.
It’s downright sad that I can’t think of any argument against this.
That never stopped you before. Just scream that they’re a trumper like you did when you were wrong about genocide and didn’t want to admit it.
Imo, you’ve got all the prices. However, I would put them in a different order.
Short answer: Republican or Democrat, the candidate that spends the most wins. Therefore, fund raising is winning.
There’s a small group of king-makers in the US and the candidate who offers them the most becomes president. Recently, the people who decide who gets to be president has started to include social media companies and amazon, who hosts half the Internet. Trump also cozied up to the American owner of the company the owns tiktok. Thats how he won. Trumps also great for social media engagement and news channel views.
Even candidates who happen to be better than the republican candidate, no democratic hopeful worth being of “the left” will ever be given enough money to become the president of America. Even if they started from a position that would appeal to them, they would have to compromise on everything that made them that in order to be allowed anywhere near the Whitehouse by the American ultra wealthy.
What you’re seeing isn’t the failure of the Democrats to correctly triangulate but the strength of the American ultra wealthy consent manufacturing machine.
I don’t disagree those factors are at play, but they’re not as important as you seem to think in this day and age.
Bernie had real grassroots support and the dems stomped it out. The key is populist rhetoric and speaking about change, the DNC has basically been running on “not Trump” and “well things are bad but they would be worse under Trump.” while that is true, that’s not a winning message, give people something real to fight for and you’ll win support.
On the contrary, they’re more important now than they’ve ever been. There also hasn’t been an election where the highest spender didn’t win. Its THE determining factor.
The same people who fund presidential campaigns for Republicans also spend lots of money on influencing democratic nominee choices. The whole things been captured.
Its like you all can’t see the woods for the trees, in the politest way possible. You see the state of trump and all the things that make him an aweful candidate and you say “how could the dems not beat that” instead of “what on earth could exert so much influence that even being that terrible couldn’t stop him?”
There’s no amount of “the dems not having a strong enough message” that overcomes the divide in the candidates, without huge influence. Their campaign wasn’t great but no where close enough to lose to someone like trump, in a fair fight. It would’ve had to have been utterly shocking from start to finish and, as bad as it was, it wasn’t that bad.
You really think Trump outspent Harris? You’d be wrong, go look at the data, trump just went on spaces “normal” people listen, such as podcasts, where Harris didn’t.
He spoke about how America is broken, he gave incorrect reasons why, and is lying about helping people with his policies, but he didn’t lie and tell people everything is fine like the dems
Then this would be the first time in modern American history that this has happened. If so, then thats a huge thing and most likely, it’ll be the social media owners now being more disproportionally ppowerful. That would be more in line with everything that’s happened before.
Youre also relying on accurate self reporting from musk, the republicans and trump there.
I’m basing what I’ve said on whats happened before. Election spending won’t be reliably verifiable this quickly.
Republican or Democrat, the candidate that spends the most wins. Therefore, fund raising is winning.
you do know that in all last 3 elections dnc outspent gop by more than 50% ? last time we raised less than gop was with bush in 2004. harris raised more than 1.6 billion while trump raised about a billion. 600 million extra money they get is for not having a candidate with anti-rich anti-establishment anti-israel policies. hillary was similar story yet we barely saw her campaigning compared to trump. where does all this money go ?
compare that to jill stein who raised 2 million. dnc probably spent 10 times that money on just smearing her.
I’m not thrilled with the DNC either, but I’m not buying this whole idea that they are shooting themselves in the foot on purpose. The DNC does better when they win elections.
In previous elections, the candidate that raised the most money was more likely to win. Also, a moderate Democrat won the last election. They made the decisions they made in this election cycle because they thought it was their best chance of winning.
I don’t have access to the data that they have to determine whether the leftist that Lemmy wants on the ticket could actually win the general.
I’d certainly like to believe that it’s just that simple and all the DNC needs to do is put up a pro-Palestine Democratic Socialist and the election is in the bag… I just don’t know if that’s the reality on the ground. If that is not the reality on the ground, are the leftists that stayed home still committed to their protest? Or is there a point at which they would admit that we haven’t had a true leftist on the ticket because a true leftist is not viable?
I hope someone can put together some clear data to answer that question soon… I’m afraid that a pro-Palestine Socialist will get crushed by AIPAC funded attack ads about Marxism and supporting terrorism that will really stick with moderates, and that no matter how energized the base is it wouldn’t be enough to win the general.
I am not saying that they are losing on purpose. I’m saying that they are making decisions about policies and candidates based on fund raising rather than on attracting voters. On purpose or not, they did shoot themselves in the foot by courting disaffected Republican voters. Everyone knew they were not going to win a lot of those voters, but they sure did rake in a lot of dough. I believe that is their primary motivation.
I mean the Republicans are doing the same. Lining their pockets as they make decisions. Why is it so foreign to do with one costume rather than the other?
I’m not thrilled with the DNC either, but I’m not buying this whole idea that they are shooting themselves in the foot on purpose. The DNC does better when they win elections.
Grey’s Law applies here.
If democrats were capable of listening we wouldnt have two terms of donald trump.
Not even a single term
Hell, if the US could finally get rid of this first past the pole, winner takes all system, the democratic and Republican parties wouldn’t even exist anymore, they’d both be replaced by better parties
You guys need to think of the DNC as more of a for profit business.
From that perspective, they were super successful in making so much money.
Remember, there can be more money made when you intentionally lose, similar to butch in pulp fiction.
Every single text i got had donate in the first sentence. The DNC had a very singular message this cycle and it was donate. It shows the flaws in the system and it shows the flaws in the party. Until i start seeing serious conversations about serious fuckin issues like repealing Citizens United, universal healthcare and proper privacy laws I can no longer consider the DNC a serious organization.
And just to clarify, gender identity, abortion rights, reproductive rights all fall into privacy for me. It’s only my business.
And it should be, those harm no one but yourself, and it shouldn’t even be harmful then. What someone identifies, had an abortion, who they love, shouldn’t impact me or anyone else.
Republicans demand that since they find it immoral, we should have it impact to the general public. The right to privacy being implied but never codified in America is such a massive blow to the rights of citizens.
https://www.cnn.com/politics/elections/presidential-candidates-money-raised-dg
Harris had the most money for her run and still begged for money from the people who were being hurt by no minimum wage, affordable healthcare, living paycheck to paycheck.
The RNC had more funding than the DNC, not sure if that’s common or unique this one. While I didn’t get any texts for “send money to Trump” texts, that might be because I’ve used my phone for aiding Democrats in office so they probably saw it as a waste of money.
Remember, the DNC admitted in court that they are an unaccountable private corporation
I usually vote along with the democrats, but neoliberals are so freaking elitist and clueless. As much as it pisses me off that I’m going to have to deal with whatever fascist bs Trump has in store, it’s really quite nice seeing them get their asses handed to them by a populist… It’s just too bad it wasn’t a left-wing populist.
I vote for Democrats because I kinda half to, not because I want to.
I wanted to vote for Sanders. I voted for Biden and Harris.
deleted by creator
Ive always liked Bernie. Bernie demonstrates the Democratic party would much rather lose with Kamala than win with Bernie. Never thought I would see them campaigning with Dik Cheney, the mask fell away for a few moments on that one.
I legit could not believe they accepted that endorsement at all, much less ran with it as hard as they did.
I don’t really know how the Democratic Party is expected to steer out of the center-right ditch, though. With all the dark money calling the shots, I mean. Bernie is the exception that proves the rule.
The electorate is actually far more progressive on the issues than the corporate media lets on. But the minute the Democratic Party were to embrace Bernie-style positions? You can bet that not only the “liberal media” would declare this sO vErY eXtReMe, but all the big money would be spending against them, and spending against them hard. Think it’s bad now where crypto, Elon, and the Washington Post are tilting against the Democrats? Imagine they actually embraced progressives…
Not saying I love it, I just don’t know what the answer is.
At this point maybe the democrats just need to embrace these hard positions and normalize them. The gop doesn’t appear to care how radical their stances are and they get votes regardless of the racism. Trump’s whole shtick has been normalizing bad behavior and gaslighting the other party into thinking any wrong they do is a gotcha- they’re operating on two very different rulesets.
Democrats (DNC and donors) don’t want to win with a progressive. They’d rather have Trump. They’ll never embrace anyone like Bernie.
You missed the point about the money… They’re hooked
Hooked on election funding despite it not really doing anything for her despite the huge advantage? Yeah that’s a good strategy.
The thing is, we’ve seen what the working class wants: Not concrete policy that will help them, but to have their feelings of struggle, outrage, and anger acknowledged and reflected back to them.
The Democrats could have radical pro-worker, pro-working-class reforms in their policy platform, but if what they’re broadcasting is “things are great” energy, or “there are bigger fish to fry” energy, then they’re going to get ignored.
The Democrat’s talking points have focused on the health of American institutions. That’s the thing they’ve repeatedly signalled is most important to them.
It’s not what’s most important to most households. It’s actually pretty far removed from the top of their lists of concerns.
The electorate is actually far more progressive on the issues than the corporate media lets on. But the minute the Democratic Party were to embrace Bernie-style positions? You can bet that not only the “liberal media” would declare this sO vErY eXtReMe, but all the big money would be spending against them, and spending against them hard. Think it’s bad now where crypto, Elon, and the Washington Post are tilting against the Democrats? Imagine they actually embraced progressives…
It would be worse than you imagine. Wouldn’t need the liberal media or the big money to move against it. People don’t translate policy positions into support for candidates. They vote on vibes, and any candidate espousing consistently left-wing positions sounds like a dangerous socialist to a good 2/3s of the country.
Not saying I love it, I just don’t know what the answer is.
Education. We just signed over the official apparatus to the fascists, though. So, uh, it’s gonna be much harder than it should have been.
The “vibes” campaign by the Dems just failed hard.
And why is it that only the right should get to move “vibes” by sticking with extreme positions? Especially as things like universal health care, public housing, strong unions or debt free education are just normal in other western countries.
Because selfish vibes driven by greed and fear come easy when education is lacking.
The “vibes” campaign by the Dems just failed hard.
Turns out the “Please don’t vote for fascism” vibe isn’t very appealing to the country.
And why is it that only the right should get to move “vibes” by sticking with extreme positions? Especially as things like universal health care, public housing, strong unions or debt free education are just normal in other western countries.
I didn’t say we should give up any of those positions. I was saying policy positions do not consistently translate into votes, and the US electorate is easily spooked by anything they’re told resembles ‘socialism’.
Turns out the “Please don’t vote for fascism” vibe isn’t very appealing to the country.
That was one vibe. Unfortunately, the rest of the vibe from the Democrats have been, “Well, things are actually pretty good, just look at our charts. Economy is doing great!”. I think that’s where they really failed the vibe check, telling people not that they will improve things in a major way, but that the status quo is mostly acceptable and they’ll keep things from getting worse.
Change was the order of the day, and they ran a campaign on stability instead.
That too.
and any candidate espousing consistently left-wing positions sounds like a dangerous socialist to a good 2/3s of the country.
Harris just demonstrated that running to the right is no longer a winning proposition.
Yeah I was surprised to see Trump is just going to disband the department of education, but what can you do 🤷♂️
Even education doesn’t work friend. We’ve seen people reject logic time and time again. They even did a study on numeracy and political affiliations and the responses were not surprising…. https://youtu.be/zB_OApdxcno?si=G51bPMcxs9R5iY0o
Not education in the sense of teaching basic literacy and such, political education. Class consciousness, if one prefers such terms.
The essential outcome of the study. The better you are at understanding numbers and math. The worse you are at interpreting data that counters your beliefs. Like laughably bad. 40%+ish bad.
Ah not sure if you watched the video. But agreed. I’m not sure it will work but we better damn try our best in our personal lives. Can’t trust society to help guide anymore :/
Ah, no, I didn’t. I generally don’t watch videos. I just read what you said about numeracy and moved on to the point about other forms of education being my concern.
Haha that’s totally fair. I generally don’t either. But that one surprised me a bit. Friend at work shared it to show the context of how confused we all are due to what we are objectively told to feel. Rather than HOW we feel.
I watched this video when it came out and I disagree with the findings in it, because to me it seems less to indicate that people reject logic because of political affiliations, and more people are critical of studies that contradict prior knowledge.
People interpreting results on the skin cream have absolutely no frame of reference. There isn’t a brand name associated with the skin cream that might have some kind of recognition for people to have prior knowledge. The study that they are presented with is the first time they are seeing anything about this skin cream.
People weighing in on gun control, have a lot of prior knowledge on the topic. Now whether all this knowledge is based on facts or data is obviously questionable. But regardless they have prior experience with the topic. So naturally you are going to be critical of a study showing you results that directly contradict your prior knowledge. Also from the video it doesn’t seem clear that they are asking them to specifically treat it like math problem and make judgements based on the study alone. They are asked whether they think gun control is effective. And while obviously they have the infographic right in front of them, most people are not going to base their judgements solely on that data alone.
To put it another way, what if the study was based on something non-political, like say whether smoking 2 packs of cigarettes a day improves or worsened lung capacity over the course of a decade? I think most people would be heavily critical of the study that shows smoking improved lung capacity even if the data they are presented reflects that. And I don’t think it would be because they are simply rejecting logic and numeracy based on affiliations. It’s because they have prior information and knowledge that directly contradicts the singular study that is presented to them.
And this is ignoring the fact that while the statistic they use to measure the effectiveness for the cream is very tangible and direct. Either the rash improves or it worsens. And you can make direct comparisons with the control groups. In the gun control study you are comparing different sets of cities, ones that have gun control laws and ones that don’t. You aren’t comparing the same set of cities before and after gun control. So already this is a poor study. Then to make matters worse the statistic they use to measure the effectiveness is “crime worsened” and “crime improved”. Not crime committed with firearms. Or even just violent crimes. Just crimes. And in cities where gun control laws have been implemented, crime is naturally going to go up because there is a new law for people to break. Anybody who isn’t following the gun control laws in that city are committing a crime whereas people in the cities without those laws are doing the exact same thing, but it’s just not counted towards “crime” because it hasn’t been outlawed.
Bernie isn’t the exception that proves the rule:
He’s not a fucking Democrat.
That’s what happened in 2015/2016. BeRnIe Is So ExTrEmE!
Yes you do. We all do.
I do?
No shit.
Democrats should have listened to Bernie Sanders, Captain Obvious says.
Despite Kamala Harris’s progressive policies…
Wait, I am not trying to be (overly) mean here but what where they? I just remember her running on a status quo platform.
If she was running on a progressive platform I never heard about it
She was progressive by saying she would saying she would have a Republican in her cabinet. So…”progress…?”
because it’s not what she campaigned on. She very easily could have run a policy focused campaign and shown the American public how much they would benefit from a Dem president.
Instead, she campaigned on maintaining the status quo, working alongside Republicans, being pro-Israel and being anti-immigration. If the DNC weren’t trying to lose, then I think they’re incompetent.
I think I saw one headline about potentially trying to talk about eventually raising the minimum wage, once
You didn’t look. It was out there. See above.
She was so progressive she got the endorsement of noted socialist Dick Cheney.
You know, here’s a bit of sophisticated political theory- people vote for a candidate for different reasons. I voted for Harris because of her campaign policies. Cheney endorsed her for different reasons. It didn’t change Harris’s policies.
People stay home when they aren’t represented.
Both you and Cheney were. I voted for Harris because she stood the best chance of preventing Trump.
“Not trump” wasn’t enough for a lot of voters. Her policies that you and Cheney both found so appealing kept enough people on the couch.
Funny that it’s the first time I see it listed out like that. All while I have seen hundreds of memes and many videos of rallies where the soundbite was content free.
It’s probably me though.
Just you…
…and millions others.
A bad campaign is a bad campaign.
Disclaimer: I voted for her
that doesn’t save you lol. you’re being critical of the chosen DNC candidate. sit down shes talking, blue no matter who, etc.
The chosen ruler, it has to be. The alternative would be a monster, a criminal, a dictator from day one.
It can be no other way then the chosen candidate, voting is just a formality of your “democracy”.
Save me from what lol
The disclaimer from people screaming lesser evil. ;)
Here were some progressive policies promoted by Harris, which we aren’t going to get because people thought Trump would get them cheaper eggs:
Launch a National Health Equity Initiative to address health challenges that disproportionately impact Black men. Take on pharmacy benefit managers Have Medicare cover in-home health care Extend the $35 cap on insulin and $2,000 cap on out-of-pocket spending to all Americans Eliminate the filibuster to restore the Roe v. Wade precedent on abortion Ban corporate price gouging on food and groceries Will not raise taxes for those earning less than $400,000 a year Roll back Trump’s tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans Enact a minimum tax for billionaires Increase the tax rate on long-term capital gains to 28% for those earning at least $1 million a year Expand the child tax credit to $6,000 for families with newborns Quadruple the tax on stock buybacks Provide first-time homebuyers with up to $25,000 for down payments, plus more generous support for first-generation homeowners Build 3 million more rental units and affordable homes Outlaw new forms of price fixing by corporate landlords Pass the Equality Act to protect LGBTQ+ Americans from discrimination Ensure that no former president has immunity for crimes committed while in office Require Supreme Court justices to comply with ethics rules Impose term limits on Supreme Court justices Raise the minimum wage Eliminate taxes on tips Establish paid family and medical leave End sub-minimum wages for tipped workers and people with disabilities Double the number of apprenticeships End four-year college degree requirements for federal jobs where appropriate Limit businesses from “unnecessarily” using criminal arrest histories, convictions, and credit scores in employment decisions Sign the pro-labor PRO Act and the Public Service Freedom to Negotiate Act Generate 25 million new business applications Expand the startup expense tax deduction for new businesses from $5,000 to $50,000 Increase the share of federal contract dollars going to small businesses Provide 1 million loans to Black entrepreneurs, fully forgivable up to $20,000 Legalize recreational marijuana Enact a regulatory framework for cryptocurrency Extend the expired Affordable Connectivity Program to support internet access
Glancing over that word salad, it looks like a pile of bandaids on capitalism.
Here’s a list of actually progressive things that would do what her list would be pretending to do and more:
Universal Healthcare. Wealth cap. Breaking up any corporation that is in more than one industry. Universal education. Complete medical and student debt forgiveness. Complete cessation of aid to governments engaged in war crimes. Complete eradication of for-profit weapon manufacturing. Universal Basic Income.
So enable fascism then eh? Because you can’t have socialism?
Still not great from a messaging perspective. Better ways to reach people who aren’t politics nerds or policy wonks:
Medical care will be affordable, so you can go see your doctor any time you or your family need to. If your kid gets sick, you can be there for them and help them get better without worrying about how to pay for care. You’ll get paid better, no more of the “boss gets a dollar, I get a dime” crap. No more stress about setting aside a college fund for your kids. They’ll be able to go to school, guaranteed. Strong American morals mean we’re not going to send our tax money to fund war and atrocities on the other side of the planet. If you lose your job, the government will have your back with enough money to survive on until you get back on your feet, no questions asked.
Goddamn, why can’t Democrats say this stuff, instead of word salad like, “Launch a National Health Equity Initiative to address health challenges that disproportionately impact Black men.” WTF does any of that even mean?
JFC, I’m not messaging, it’s not my job to “message”. Someone said somethings that are not true and I’m listing policies that refute that claim in the very limited format allowed here.
Right, and this isn’t rhetorical combat. You are correct, and I was continuing the train of thought.
A regulatory framework for the scam known as crpyto is “progressive”?
Yeha America really needs to embrace leftism and not this “progressive” neolib branding.
So, you think it SHOULDn’t be regulated? Capitalism is a fucking scam. It’s legal though and isn’t going to be replaced any time soon. In the meantime regulate the hell out of it to reduce its negative effects
See this is the difference between the left and the right. You see a huge list of policies and focus on the one that you have some nebulous objection to, ignore everything else and don’t even have a substantive criticism of what you apparently don’t like. The right will see a big list of policies, focus on the one they agree with, and claim that everything else is just nonsense and won’t really be enacted. Ideological purity, smh. The perfect is the enemy of the good.
indeed. genocide was the big bad one this year. too bad.
And all she needed was one lousy photon of daylight between herself and Bidenyahu.
Well yeah I think even the first month was abhorrent and once the Palestinian health ministry started to lose track of the actual dead, which was basically about a month or two in, it was obviously an atrocity that was, if not already genocide (yeah it was), at least sparkling ethnic cleansing with a familiar bouquet. There is no excuse for that, and weapon provisions to Israel should’ve been immediately withheld indefinitely in the aftermath. No question. But permitting the guy who not only wants to speed up that process, but is also awful on a thousand other metrics, to take the reins is probably a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face…
Oh it definitely is, for many a genocide is a genocide. You dont get to play the moral shades continuum once you reach that level of atrocity. So here we are.
You also need to realize that many states will be insulated from the worst of trump via our local government. So in reality life will go on for us, foreign policy will go to shit but shrug. Not much we can do there.
Wait… I have seen these before. Like 10 plus years ago it feels like.
If Biden is offering down payment assistance for first time home buyers, could you please direct me to the applications please? Thanks!
Well he talked about maybe looking into what it would mean to offer it. Just like I guess she did?
When did she say the supreme court stuff or the anti-corporate stuff?
Google it.
Good one.
And yet the only campaign ads I ever saw from her were clips of Donald Trump saying stupid shit.
I voted harris, but I don’t blame anyone for thinking that a Harris win would be a repeat of the last four years
You know, the one where she said we need to accept Palestinian deaths so we can get cheaper bread.
His message hasn’t changed. They don’t only not listen, but actively oppose his message.
It seems to me that a lot of people are confused about what “supporting the working class” would actually mean.
It wouldn’t mean that the working class would start thinking like Democrats. It will mean that Democrats will start thinking like the working class. Think about the implications, they’re not all what you want them to be.
Probably worth it, though.
The implications, like supporting a higher minimum wage, universal healthcare, labor protections, unionization, and ending the forever wars?
Not sure about how they think about universal healthcare and unionization. It’s hard to believe those are core issue for them if they’re willing to vote republican like this.
And I can add to that list not caring about immigrants or minorities more than the bare minimum. Or about helping students financially.
Why should I give a fuck about immigrants who directly drive down my wages? I’m talking legal immigrants. I work for a ski area - they can’t function without J1s and H2Bs or they’d have to pay double the wages for it to make sense for American citizens. I’m in a well tipped position so it doesn’t matter for me but my non tipped coworkers can barely make rent, meanwhile as a condition of employment J1s and H2Bs have to be provided housing (that they pay $500 a month for deducted in their paychecks) by the resort.
Please note how minorities abandoned the democrats because democrats abandoned them.
I’m not saying I disagree with that position. I’m saying that Democrats mostly disagree with that position.
Except they don’t or trump wouldn’t of won.
Like the other out-of-touch libs, when you say ‘working class’ what you mean is ‘racist white rural people’.
Half my coworkers were either born outside the US or are second-gen. My national just voted to affirm and support trans rights. Turns out, people who work for money are working class. That includes, well, everybody.
This misunderstanding is why the Dems ‘moved to the right’ this election. They still think it’s 1950. Moving to the right doesn’t make you appealing to the working class, it makes you appealing to bigots.
Literally just make life easier for the working poor. That is all you need to do.
What are the implications?
Bernie is a leftist politician. The Democrat party is not a liberal leftist party, they’re a conservative corporatist party.
Further, Bernie is a progressive whereas Dems are status quo
Lmao. Historians.
I should have gone to bed at a reasonable time last night instead of doom scrolling, historians say.
The more Dems and Progressives think and sound like Bernie, the better.
