422
Nancy Pelosi ‘Actively Working to Tank’ AOC’s Committee Bid
(www.thedailybeast.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2024
422 points (97.7% liked)
politics
19248 readers
2130 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
No, a third party is non viable. But the right move would have been exactly what the crazy right wingers have done with the Republicans. Get organized and primary the fuck out of the people blocking things.
The "tea party" gave us the blueprint, but we've been too dumb and lazy to follow it. When they didn't give us the public option with Obamacare, every primary since then should have been about cleaning house of the corporatist, establishment Democrats and replacing them with real progressives. But since we're too lazy and dumb to vote in primaries in mass numbers, their establishment people keep sailing to victory.
You're ignoring primaries are rigged, the party can just ignore the results, and pro-corpo candidates take in an insane amount of bribes.
That system is only for Presidential Primaries. There's a primary for most positions all the way down to dog catcher. Getting a partisan seat gives you a voice in the state party and possibly the national if your seat is high enough. Get enough Congressional seats and you control the special delegate swing in Presidential Primaries. Might they change that system as a progressive movement gets more seats? Sure, and they can have another riot outside their national convention too.
The very thing you call rigging is vulnerable to a tea party style primary challenge.
Primaries are only rigged in that yes, the rules and the entire framework is built to benefit those currently in power, but that is less rigged than the general is against a third party, which is to say, totally, absolutely, and unassailably rigged. Proclaiming it impossible because it's rigged is silly when you're advocating for instead competing in one that is far, far more rigged and has far more structure to prevent any upsets.
We have never actually won a primary and had them ignore it. They use their structural advantages as much as they can, but if we push hard enough to overcome those advantages, they don't just nullify the election and go with their candidate. We do get people like Ocasio-Cortez in there from time to time, when people actually show up to the primaries enough to flip it to the more progressive candidate. If we got enough candidates like her in, not just in congress but state houses and such too, we'd actually start getting places.
Now the bribes and money on the corporate side, nothing we can do about that - we have to overcome it so that we can get officials in place that will do something about it.
Now lemme put it this way. I live in bumfuck Ohio where there's no chance of a progressive candidate being elected. But I still vote in every primary. People who live in places where there is more of a chance of doing something need to be as diligent as I am, if not more, damnit.
Correct. This is why there is essentially zero chance at political reform in this country without large scale violence. Granted, that violence will almost certainly be misdirected, but I think given the actual state of the system it truly is a forgone conclusion that we will see mass civil unrest within the next (~20) years.
Decades ago, a group calling itself The New Party tried to eliminate the spoiler effect of third parties through the practice of electoral fusion, that is, allowing the same candidate to run and appear on the ballot under more than one political party. That way, they'd know where their support came from. But the Democratic Farm Labor Party (Minnesota's Democratic Party organization) went to court to shut it down, offering the specious argument that it would confuse voters.
Would the corporatist, establishment Democrats allow an upstart progressive movement into its primaries?
The closer they hold primaries, the worse their voter turn out gets. It's a double edged sword.