Every other headline these days is about Joe Biden's disastrous approval rating and the chaotic shape of the Democratic Party. How could Democrats have done this? What's wrong with them?
Let's cut the crap and acknowledge the obvious answer. First off, the progressive wing of the party insisted on pushing voting rights laws that had zero chance of passing. Biden knew this from the start and said so. Then Bernie Sanders insisted on an insane BBB bill that would have been unprecedented in the history of the country—and doubly unprecedented with a 50-50 Senate. But he insisted, and every time it got cut back it gave progressives another chance to moan about how they were being betrayed. Eventually it died.
For some reason, after an election that was razor close, progressives managed to delude themselves into thinking we were on the cusp of a revolution. How they did this is as big a mystery as how millions of people deluded themselves into thinking that Donald Trump really won the election. It's inexplicable.
But that's what happened.
Don't look up.
Terrible movie.
But better than Stepbrothers.
Allegories are always a tough watch, especially when oneself is depicted.
I preferred it when it was called An Inconvenient Truth.
Of course, cringe shitlib algorithm made that, rather than bold truthseeking Berner son of a MAGA Adam Mc Kay.
An Inconvenient Truth was already the dog melting while drinking his coffee.
But but but... if only Biden had put an end to the filibuster, we'd be in paradise...
True.
And tons of articles about Democrats in disarray.
The individual provisions in BBB are popular, and should have been put up for a vote individually so they could be discussed--then rolled up into the reconciliation bill. Talks of it only as a "trillion+ dollar program" means it turns off voters. But when people are afraid they may lose a senator at any time, and thus the balance in the Senate--they make poor choices.
... And the filibuster. No bill can be voted upon unless 60+ Senators vote to let it be voted on.
Sorry, but blaming "progressives" for a series of strategic and tactical errors by the president and Congressional leaders is beyond idiotic.
Series of actions pushed by the Left wing aka progressives. Not idiotic, you push for something then you own that.
Left Wing???? Nope. House Managers. No honorable leftist would ever serve on a government. These people hump the bourgeois and it's debt based con. Matter of fact, they are supply siders in the end. Obsessed with materialism financed by the global rich.
Wrong. Party leaders opted to split the program into two tracks, against the wishes of progressives. They promised the two bills would progress in tandem, then broke their promise. Progressives opposed passing the infrastructure bill because they said it would deprive the party of its only leverage on Manchin and Sinema. They finally agreed to do it after party leaders promised the BBB would pass the Senate later. It didn't. Progressives were right and their leaders lied to them.
Your position assumes Democrats' stupidity.
They were looking to 2022 & 2024 and recognized that average voters wouldn't have a sophisticated understanding of what happened in the first 18 months. They also figured that if they didn't get broadly popular legislation passed when all the news outlets were saying the Dems controlled congress they would get blamed for being incompetent. This is not new. This has been the R strategy whenever they don't have the trifecta: they make sure nothing gets done and then blame the other party. Of course, in reality, the Dems don't control the Senate; it takes 60 to control the Senate unless all you want to do is block all legislation.
So they tried like crazy to pass stuff that voters would like, as their only strategy for preventing R takeovers of House and Senate in 2022 and Exec in 2024. "Obi Wan you're our only hope."
"Crazy" is, indeed, the correct word. The most important thing to do in a legislative body is to count the votes. Progressives either never did this, or they decided to ignore the count. Either is gross malpractice.
Headline claims the progressives blew it, but then explains that they never had a chance to pass progressive legislation? So they didn't actually blow it because they never had a chance? Confusing piece.
Except they are blaming the Biden administration for not passing their priorities when everyone knew that they couldn't hold onto 50 votes for everything.
So what?
The argument that in early 2021, some (many?) felt that progressive legislation would never pass and yet progressives still pressured Biden to support the legislation and some progressives even blamed Biden for their inability to pass sweeping, progressive legislation.....well, so what?
Still missing a link that makes it clear that an opportunity was blown.
The original piece and your response just seems like petty whining to show general displeasure. I dont like the progressives and I need to write that down! Well, ok then!
Come on -- you know that's complete horse shit. The progressive wing was right. Biden lost all leverage once the first bill -- the reconciliation -- was passed. Manchin played along but his excuses shifted and ultimately, shot BBB down.
He didn't say, "Oh, this version is not what I like, let's keep negotiating."
He publicly and loudly shut down negotiations.
People who shut down negotiations are people who aren't dealing. People who aren't dealing are people who have all the leverage to ignore the deals. He got what he wanted and said, "Fuck you very much! Hope you enjoy my Christmas card!"
The progressive wing was right.... so magically because what you want is so moral and righteous, if you had only engaged in more self-hostage taking, loudly threatening to shoot yourselves more, the opposition would have caved.
Bizarre self-deluding calculus, as of course the opposition was perfectly happy to have you shoot yourselves in the heads with the infra bill and blame you, so really no particular leverage. None.
Pouting about how meany mean the other side is doesn't change the hard and cold vote counts.
But the hard Left in the USA is so delusional that rather than taking the infra win as a big win in the face of years of Republican opposition - who couldn't even get the bloody thing passed when they controlled government - no, rather you got drunk on delusion and decided attacking your own is rather brilliant politics, over touting success and attacking the Trumpist opposition.
Brilliant, really brilliant. But then the delusion that threatening self-harm in killing off your only potential win (with the aforementioned opposition that happily avoided when in control passing any such legislation during all four trump years) is leverage seems to be part of Lefty Left american mythology.
I am sorry to have to agree.
You didn't need to rewrite the same paragraph four times.
The infrastructure bill got Republican votes, did you forget? Because there were several conservatives (most who voted against it very much supported it) who voted for this, it was the only meaningful bargaining leverage the left had.
Manchin's got nothing for Ds. His "bipartisanship" goal is to lead Ds into McConnell's trap on (electoral) voting rights.
Pelosi/Schumer/Biden took the risk of accepting Manchin on his word, only to get stung -- or did you not get that from the acrimonious words Biden had for Manchin?
If you are saying that the Democrats could have rolled up some or all BBB programs into the infrastructure bill, and still gotten Mitch McConnell to let 10+ Republicans to vote for it, I’m going to have to ask you how many years of Senate negotiating you have on your résumé. President Biden spent 36 years at it; I expect he got as much as anyone could have gotten.
I'm saying Progressives wanted to make progress. They had a big plan and kept whittling it down.
Manchin, on the other hand, had no plan. He stuck to it In the end, that's what we got.
End of story. Manchin did not want BBB and he said so.
You guys need 20 Manchin's.
* Abortion would be safe.
* You might get some form of "limited" gun control.
* You wouldn't have Trump's tax cut.
* All the Liberal judge's you want.
* No Gorsuch, Barrett and a drunk guy.
* Obamacare would be safe.
* A voting rights bill.
And plenty more.
Honestly, watching all of this I'm no longer certain R's are the dumber of the two options.
Republicans are still dumber by a factor of 10, more corrupt by a factor of 50, and more mendacious by a factor of 1000.
There aren’t another 19 states that would elect a Senator as ‘left’* as Joe Manchin. *relatively, of course
You'll rue this comment when Kansas elects Aaron Coleman to the Senate at Roger Marshall's next reelect try.
More likely, the House. The Big House.
Those damn commies !!!
I guess Senator Joseph McCarthy still is very much alive and kicking “over there” .. and it’s not just Republicans who are keeping the tradition of the “socialist scare “ alive.
Will the Democratic Party implode?
Your political parties aren’t exactly political parties in the same way as political parties are in more advanced democracies.
Your “parties” are more like “election coalition’s” hopeful contestants with a wide variety of opinions and no mutual agenda. All of them are individually trying to attract as much support as possible from donors in order to survive the next election but they are supposed to cooperate in the Congress in order to get anything done. I
To me it seems as if in these last years has the diversity of opinions widened considerably.
Your Republicans totally lost it and “moderate “ Democrats are all of a sudden taking a sharp right turn and are today comparable to what was considered to be right wing extremists a while ago
They are supposed to work with “progressives” who are having a more European style agenda
A Democratic Party supposed to represent the sane majority of +209 persons of voting age and the variety of opinions they represent presently is just not going to work in the long run.
Just 28% of the ones who are voting for Democrats are actually voting for the politics advocated and implemented by the Democratic Party according to surveys.The others are voting for the Democrats simply because the alternative is the abyss. Americans are more voting against a candidate than in favor of one and since your dysfunctional elections aren’t favoring more “progressive” candidates will it (as usual) be the progressive voters who are supposed to just fall in line and show up at elections whiteout actually having a candidate they endorse.
I wonder if young Americans, in the long run will accept to be deprived of all the social benefits their peers in Europe are benefiting from, benefits the elite of the Democratic Party says you cannot afford (even if nations that sure don’t have your resources can afford it)
It will be “interesting” (or not ) to see how this will end .
Greetings from your Swedish friend
Besides be evidently facile in your understanding of political parties with a nice dose of unfounded Nordic-Euro-superiority (tedious Swedish habit really), you evidently have an equally weak understanding of the historical reference. McCarthy was about the accusations of treason and even criminal action. Not mere criticism.
It is no way 'McCarthy' related to make a criticism of the Left for poor political execution or poor political strategy (although very indeed Bolshy to turn a valid area of criticism into an Orwellian accusation). Drum may or may not be correct, but the amateur and poorly informed swipe of McCarthy merely betrays rather typical Swedish faux informed attitudes and insularities.
And yet, some of what Biden has accomplished— remember, after just one year — was accomplished because of the liberals.
This gets in the way of whining about those annoying liberals and their 'we want to pass meaningful legislation' approach.....so let's not mention this again. Capiche?
If a shitlib accomplishes something, dies it make a difference?
It's probably just some human thing to whine about what one doesn't have instead of being joyful about what one has. This possibly seems just particularly pronounced on the left because liberals have a pretty long laundry list of what they want government to do, whereas conservatives tend to be more content to just ram their tax cuts through.
In any case the lessons from the last election clearly haven't been learned. Democrats, whether progressive or centrist, should frankly be overjoyed that they are in a position to do anything at all. We should all be astounded and frankly thankful at what Stacey Abrams and her voter outreach efforts achieved in Georgia, without which Democrats wouldn't be in this position. Instead of passively complaining about how little can be achieved when governing with a 50+1 majority, the main lesson should rather be the importance of expanding that majority so that more can be done. But no, that would mean making phone calls and knocking on doors -- actually doing something to increase Dem winning chances -- rather than just sitting on their collective butts and whining. I suppose that's also all too human.
And what do Americans have compared to comparable countries (or more precisely countries that don’t have your resources) ?
Social progress is of course not possible if one isn’t even allowed to discuss it
… although you are calling discussing it “whining”
A comment by a dumbfounded Swede
I don't think it is necessarily different (or better) in other countries, it being sort of just how humans tick, but I think most other countries with proportional party representation and coalition-oriented governments don't suffer the legislative impasses that the US does with razor-thin majorities. From what I know the filibuster is also unique. People whining about government is pretty universal, I think, but in most places, the democratically run ones anyway, election victories lead to implementation of the agenda for which the majority of people voted. By contrast, in the US it takes overwhelming majorities to get most anything major done, and with the highly polarized electorate, such a majority has become extremely difficult to achieve.
No you are wrong my friend, it doesn’t take an overwhelmingly majority to get anything major done in USA … a minority has time and time again been screwing the majority of reasonable sane citizens .
The possibility for elected representatives in states to set the rules for both their own re-elections and the elections for Congress and President has resulted in gerrymandering and voters suppression .The insane “two senators/state” rule and the EC has made it possible for right wing extremists to grab power and kill all efforts of social progress.
… and let’s not forget that the US of A is the only country where bribing politicians are protected by the Constitution.
The methods for staying in power , that has been very successful for the last decades, might be failing for your right wingers in the future but they are inventive they are starting to implement laws that will allow them to nullify elections that isn’t to their liking and decide the winner themselves
Well, a minority can block things for happening, that's for sure, but that's just the flipside complement of what I said. Senate apportionment is set in stone (The Constitution) so is just the framework in which everything has always worked. The EC has also always been there, is also anchored in the Constitution, and yet plenty of very socially progressive things have been achieved in the past. You're definitely absolutely right about the urgent need for campaign-finance reform, though. That's something that can and should be addressed in the near future if we are to have hope for a government that serves the people.
I am well informed on your archaic nonfunctional Constitution. I guess one can say that the American people are being held hostage until the end of time by a group of slave owning British upper class people who died 200 years ago.
I am still a little dumbfounded over the fact that the sane majority of Americans usually (always?) ends a discussion with
… but … but .. but it’s in the Constitution, meaning okay it’s a mess but one just cannot even discuss it since it’s in the Constitution
“I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and Constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.”
A quote by Thomas Jefferson
You need to modernize your Constitution, one way or the other, or things will continue to slide
You need to start discussing the Constitution if you want to succeed in changing things
Right Wing extremists??? Bhahaha. Keep telling yourself that.
I am speaking out of a more international perspective…
The GOP today is practically indistinguishable from the John Birch Society.
Sorry, but political commentary in America consists mainly of vacuous bloviation about what kind of week the president had, and his chances of re-election. Your suggestion that people should concentrate instead on the broader picture, including actual legislative substance, is radical, un-American and probably communistic.
The 1% will apparently continue to rob you blind.
The biggest win of your Republicans (and “moderate”-right wing Democrats) was when they fooled Americans into believing all tax is theft never to be of any use for ordinary citizens.
When I am giving information on my Sweden is the usual answer:
Americans would never pay xx% in tax ( usually a vastly exaggerated figure)… and by doing so are they confirming my statement above.
The interesting question isn’t the % , it’s what you get for the money.
A family of average income in (tiny) Sweden is much better of than their peers in USA and a low income family isn’t comparable whatsoever.
This is a list of some things you are lacking and most cannot afford
It may sound jingoistic but that wasn’t really my purpose and this list could have been from a number of other European countries.
... and I must have forgotten a lot of benefits you also are lacking
Paid parental leave 480 days ,
If a child younger than 12 is sick a parent stays home, 100% of salary
Subsidized childcare
Cash money disbursed if you are having kids
If you are sick 80% of salary (it’s an upper limit)
Unlimited healthcare, fees totally negligible.
Prescription drugs maximum $270/year
Free dental care until 24 years of age then subsidized
At least five weeks paid vacation/year
Livable pensions guaranteed (total sum dependent on income)
Guaranteed nursing home with your own room en suit and kitchenette (charge dependent on income)
All education free of charge and a small salary if you are over 16
Student loans provided by the government on reasonable terms
Isn’t this going to end up in national bankruptcy ?
Before the pandemic was our net national debt less than 30% of GDP
.... but Sweden is still having more billionaires per capita than USA and if you want to live the American dream you better move to one of those pesky Nordic countries because that dream is dead in America, statistically, but your chances are good over here
Your suggestion that people should concentrate instead on the broader picture, including actual legislative substance, is radical, un-American and probably communistic.
Point taken. 😉
Stacey Abrams is an excellent tactician. Her work in Georgia allowed the Democrats to pull two rabbits out of a hat.
Over the last 10 years, progressive Democrats have thrown their brains out of the window. It was obvious that 81 year-old, cancer-stricken Ruth Bader Ginsburg should have resigned from the Supreme Court in 2014. She didn't because she was selfish. Yet for years she was celebrated as "Notorious RBG". Enjoy your t-shirts RBG stans, but don't complain about conservative 5-4 decisions like the recent one that declined to block the Texas abortion law.
It's clear that for lifetime appointments to the Supreme Court, longevity should be the first priority. Republicans' last 6 nominations for the court were 50 years old on average. Democrats' last 5 nominations were 57 years old on average. (including a diabetic). The resulting make-up of the court - and the limited opportunities to replace a liberal justice with another one - was entirely predictable.
Where's the intense back-room pressure to get 83 year-old Stephen Gerald Breyer to quit? Or will he, instead, be celebrated as "Notorious SGB"
Yes, you point out another very important lesson Democrats need to learn:
presidential elections for 4-year terms = federal judiciary appointments for lifeFortunately, it seems like the Biden administration has learned this one well. As far as RBG goes, I strongly suspect she delayed retirement not so much out of selfishness but rather for the symbolism of giving the first female president a powerful way to make an early mark. It obviously didn't work out that way.
I would assert that is simply a group selfishness rather than individual.
In addition to the usual GOTV stuff, of course, there's also this:
https://runforsomething.net/run/
Won’t be thanking Stacey Abrams anytime soon
Her failure to concede gave cover to Trumpist election denial. Plus she basically just stamped her name and face on locally-organized “get out the vote” efforts that happens anyways, a branding campaign which worked nicely on you I see
If you look at the numbers also, Trump lost because White suburbanites don’t like him. Stacey doesn’t exactly control their vote
Your name as Pooh-Willkers tells me you are a workerbee on Savushkina Street.
And here I thought I was clever for coming up with the name 🙁 plus the lack of reference to “the Great Middle Kingdom” should betray me as a red blooded American I would think. Or is Savushkina a Russian thing? I was a little rude about buying into branding I’ll admit but my point is valid
But honestly, most the time when National or state politicians take credit for low level, locally organized efforts, they are performing a branding operation
As for where Biden won (or alternatively, where Trump lost) in 2020, posts on this website were pretty convincing in showing that most the change was in white suburbs that couldn’t stomach MAGA-isms. There’s a convenient narrative that inner city Georgians made the difference and so get-out-the-vote was important, but they voted how they always do
It's the same morons -- well, probably their kids and grandkids -- who took the righteous questions about why we were occupying a foreign country in Viet Nam and turned it into a full scale rebellion. It's the same morons who trashed Portland and Seattle time after time.
They are just as bad -- perhaps worse -- than the thumbsuckers of the right.
A pox -- maybe a new variant ???? -- on them.
Kevin: "For some reason, after an election that was razor close, progressives managed to delude themselves into thinking we were on the cusp of a revolution. ... It's inexplicable."
It's explicable. Throughout 2020 the polls had Biden well ahead of Trump and, in addition, most of the Democrats running for other offices with leads ranging from 2% to 8%. There was even talk, not of a Blue Wave, but of a Blue Tsunami. Remember that?
The polls were very wrong. Biden's margin was not impressive in battleground states. Republicans gained at the state level and reduced the Democratic margin in the House. Here's a headline from November 2, 2020:
Poll shows Biden up 11 nationally, 5 points in Fla., 4 in Ohio.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign-polls/524037-poll-shows-biden-up-11-nationally-five-points-in-fla-four-in-ohio
Biden won nationally by 4.4%. He lost Florida and Ohio.
*There was no national mandate.* But progressives internalized the Blue Wave and thought they could get massive legislative packages into law, even though the reality was they had the thinnest margin possible in the Senate. People are bitching about Manchin, and I don't like his stance, but he's a Democratic senator from a state that Trump won 69% to 29%. We're lucky to have him.
We're also lucky to have Maggie Hassan as senator from New Hampshire - who won her 2016 contest 48% to 47.8% - a margin of 0.2%. She's up for reelection this year. Where is the clarion call to help her out?
Democrats are inept at politics. They don't do math. They raised $90 million for Amy McGrath's hopeless challenge against Mitch McConnell. She lost 38% to 58%. That money could have made big differences elsewhere. An additional $10 million might have gotten Cal Cunningham elected to the senate (he lost to Tillis by 1.8%).
It's been said elsewhere, but deserves repeating: If you want progressive legislation enacted, win more elections.
McGrath was affirmative action choice. That is why she go 90 million. That however is dead. It's why the midterms will be interesting in 2022.
There is evidence that the elections were hacked in Trump’s favor:
“Experts have traced Russian efforts to find vulnerabilities in election computer systems in dozens of states before the presidential election, and some now assume that every state was targeted at one time or another.
“Mr. Mueller’s report said that officers of the Russian military intelligence agency, commonly known as the G.R.U., targeted computers at state election boards, secretaries of state and county governments, as well as computers used by employees at those agencies.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/18/us/florida-russia-2016-election-hacking.html
Using Trump logic:
Why were the polls so wrong? This is evidence the election was hacked.
Florida Republicans admit the Russians got in to their election computers but claim they were unable to affect the vote. Why should we believe the crooked Republicans?
“ In the third instance at the manufacturer of election equipment, the Mueller report states that G.R.U. agents planted malware in a company computer.”
Doesn’t anyone else find it suspicious that Trump’s conspiracy theory involves someone using election equipment to change the vote? Trump ALWAYS accuses his opposition of doing crooked things he does. Why was Trump so shocked that he lost? Was it because he thought the fix in his favor was in again?
Do I believe the Russians hacked the election(s)? Not really, but I do have my suspicions and I do think it’s possible Trump thinks so.
Don’t talk crazy, buddy
The realistic scenario is that pollsters just suck ass
In the 2016 election the buzz was that Trump’s people knew they had Florida and were thus able to concentrate the the Northern races that were close such as Wisconsin and Michigan. Based on the polls, Clinton thought Florida was winnable and stayed there. Yet the end result wasn’t even close. So, supposedly Trump’s people were smart. Have Trump’s people ever appeared smart to you? Or perhaps they knew the fix was in in Florida and thus they were free to go elsewhere.
Note I’m not saying it is true. Just asking questions.
+1
But in 2021 specials & regular elections, including the 40 office Meatmen stomp in Georgia, the Democrat Party is killing it.
Really, the GQP has Yungkins on which to hang their hat... & we are getting a good idea from day one of his Commonwealth regime how that will end up.
Wait. A couple of days ago I read a post here comparing Biden’s popularity to Obama’s and even Trump’s over time and the downward trends were remarkably similar. The obvious conclusion was that Americans are fundamentally complainers who are dissatisfied with anyone eventually and policies hardly matter. Certainly Biden’s popularity is not the fault of progressives, nor of Joe Manchin for that matter.
Meanwhile he did the correct — and also “progressive” — thing for the country at this moment by reversing years of neolib Dem policy and shoveling money out to regular people, not just the rich, during a huge crisis.
So hooray for “progressive” policies I’d say.
+1
Yep, it's all Bernie's fault. /s
Correct.
Is Biden’s approval rating low because he tried to pass the progressive wish list? If lots of these people don’t like that agenda and it failed as a result, then I guess they should be happy. If his rating is low because the coverage and drama are irritating (and it is) then that makes more sense. The media sucks.
Everyone has a right and to advocate for their beliefs in this political system. If people vote for republicans because I say that the US military is full of despicable creeps and US foreign policy is a clusterfuck, then so be it. I’m not going to stop saying it. Go to hell. Vote for trump.
If you want this argument to be convincing, Kevin, I think you need to better justify its premises. For example, what was too 'progressive' about the legislation? Bernie Sanders is supposed to be our scape-goat in the Senate for this? The assertion strikes me as justified. This is our process. Why are we the party that declares our own failed Presidencies?
To tell you the truth, I thought Manchin and Simena would come around to prevent that, a failed Presidency AT THIS HISTORICAL MOMENT. I would have thought they would realized their existential responsibility in the era Trumpism. Honestly, I believe this was how Pelosi, Schumer and Biden saw it. What hapened is disappointing, not surprising, and not Bernie's fault.
Simena signed off on final bbb bill. Nobody cares about black driven "voting rights" bore. It's irrelevant.
The biggest gift to Republicans is fighting hard on voter ID. It’s just not worth it, and it sounds stupid to normal people when you squirm and moan over it
Not to mention it’s a great segue to election denial and conspiracy thinking
re: "voter ID"
We prefer to call it Photo ID. Seriously -- every time some person shows up to vote, they "identify" themselves. Here in New Mexico, you state your name. The clerk may ask for a few confirming details, like the year you were born and your home address. That's it. Voter identified!
This is BS. Activists can't negotiate a compromise. There are parts of the progressive agenda that could pass, and the reason they have not passed is the Biden Administration, Manchin, and Sinema. They need to work out a compromise that can pass. They can use a majoritarian exception to pass BBB if they can work something out among Democrats.
Except Sinema famously had no agenda to do any compromising with.
Yeah, this is the biggest problem. Manchin and Sinema have no agenda other than getting headlines. They could have put together their version of the BBB and negotiated from there, but it never happened.
I always check up on Mr Drum but I usually don’t care to comment that much on this site , and rarely (never) cares to involve in a discussion… but still.
Let’s give you the opinion of someone who is looking at it from elsewhere.
Mr Drum claims it’s the “progressives” who blew it… in my opinion is it the other way around, it’s the elite of the party who blew it .
Winning elections in a democracy is about promising to decisively handle the issues the citizens are concerned over. Two such issues in USA are healthcare and guns.
A polling by Pew found that 63% of Americans are of the opinion that the government should guarantee healthcare for all citizens (that’s a convincing majority) and I found an article in the Hill saying that 2/3 of Americans wants stricter laws on guns.
This is a God-given opportunity for a party in a democracy to win an elections, just hammer it into the heads of voters that you are going to fix it .
… but it’s toxic to address these two it in the party of Democrats. Someone who is a hopeful candidate is basically told to shut up if she/he is trying to run on these issues.(this is just two examples of issues where the opinions of the majority and the politics of the Democrats aren’t matched)
The Republicans are owning the room and Democrats are playing defense, trying to have it both ways and aren’t challenging.
The same goes for social benefits. The Republicans has turned it into a truth that livable wages and some modest social benefits will end in bankruptcy for the US of A and everyone will lose their jobs.
The Democrats aren’t taking a fight on it , they are accepting that the Republicans are on top of the issue and can’t be challenged on it .
… and “progressives” are told to shut up and sit down by the elite of the party and worried bloggers like Mr Drum are blaming progressives for the present situation
Knowing that they can’t pass anything in this system, democrats keep pretending they can. I think they ought to just admit it. Instead they engage in this political drama with republicans which does nothing but annoy everyone.
The system cannot be changed. Democrats are too timid, and republicans won’t allow it anyway. All we can do it try to manage the status quo. Progressives, bless their hearts, keep thinking they can achieve something useful. They can’t. I wish they could, but they can’t. I don’t know what the right answer is, but perhaps it’s time to lower expectations and admit it.
If that sucks the energy out of the Democratic voting base, so be it. Life will go on. They can Work at the local level to achieve their some of their goals.
The Republicans stole the narrative… the majority needs to steal it back
I don’t think there is a winning narrative for democrats. I really think people just want them to sit down and be quiet. Rather than debate the finer points of tax policy and child care problems, they really need to prepare to defend themselves. Investigations, character assassination, impeachment, and perhaps even violence… this is what the American people are voting for if they vote for republicans.
I believe that narrative and vote based that reality. Nothing else really matters to me.
sture
No one takes people like AOC seriously because she hasn't written a single piece of legislation herself. Now, she's still "new" but if you want to get legislation going you need to write it not just sit on the sidelines and let others do it for you.
Did I mention any specific person?
So what legislation, specifically, has Mitch McConnell authored?
Since you asked, GovTrack lists 28 bills for which McConnell was the primary sponsor:
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/browse?sponsor=300072#enacted_ex=on
Many (most?) of them appear to be trivial or repeats, with some appearing more substantive--how that compares to the Senate as a whole, I don't know.
Not sure why you'd compare AOC and McConnell, though--one is the second most powerful person in the entire Senate with decades of experience and demonstrated canny/ruthless political instincts, while the other is a bit of a flashy backbencher/newcomer. I'd wait a decade or so before evaluating AOC, to be honest.
You're not sure why I'd compare AOC to McConnell? Really? Perhaps it was because it was in response to this:
Okay, let's stop playing silly buggers here. There's no 'perhaps' about it: Vog46 said something rather stupid and extremely silly, and my rather pointed question shows why.
Again, do you really want to give people the impression you're just that slow and just that thickwitted? You're privilege, Tuds.
Lol.
Is that why I see your postings on Kelvin’s Blog more than anyone else? You’ve consumed more pixels on this one thread alone than everybody else combined.
Just trollin’ for the kicks I guess. Funny how a “Swede” spends so much time interested in the affairs of others.
That’s Kevin’s blog.
Auto correct also tried changing “R’s” to “D Souza” this morning.
As I said in one of the comments, I am making an exception today.
Why do I care ?
This planet really needed the US of A to start handling climate breakdown but nothing happened since a minority of right wing extremists are able to sabotage it all due to your nonfunctional political system.
… and we will most probably once again have to fight a two front war against Putin&Co and a US government that is acting as Putin’s useful idiots as it was just a year ago
The Democratic Party lacks the strategic thinking of the Trumpublicans.
This is somewhat expected, because Democrats believe that what they are doing will benefit most Americans while Trumpublicans know that what they are doing is against the interests of most Americans, so we Democrats think we just have to show up and explain ourselves and people will fall in line behind us; the Trumpublicans know they're pulling a con, so they know they have to have a good plan to pull it off and to stick with the plan.
The Trumpublicans also have the advantage that their schemes benefit the wealthy, so it's easy to finance all sorts of things to advance their agenda.
Anyway, the failure to pass BBB or Voting Rights is water under the bridge; at this point the Party should be highlighting and exaggerating what was lost because these were not passed: every bad thing that happens, from tooth decay to earthquakes, should be laid at the feet of failure to pass one or the other of these bills.
Well, they certainly lack the sustained vision and top-down hierarchical organization that a relativity few uber-wealthy megadonors supply ... and demand.
Yes. And funding not just campaigns, but also media/propaganda outlets, ‘think tanks’ that supply op-eds for mainstream media, and academic institutions and programs that groom successive generations of conservative activists.
Kevin letting his right-wing freak flag fly. Now we know why he left MJ. There really isn't a single post he's written since he went solo that MJ would have allowed to be published.
Lol, you are "right wing" as well. Bourgeois leg humper. Which most of that transfer stuff is. The modern world is a failure. Let's get rid of the last 2000 years of history.
Thanks, Steven B.
What? By advocating for their preferred policies progressives somehow make Biden announce a bunch of things he knows he can’t pass and/or make Manchin and Synema walk away from bills they had previously indicated they would support? That’s some serious mind control, man. The fact that Biden announces these big bills and then nothing gets passed is on Biden and the Dem leadership in the Senate.
Biden's approval ratings with Independents is historically at the median. What's so awful about it???? Betcha Obama had a worse approval rating with independents in October 2010.
And yet, the fact that ZERO REPUBLICANS will vote for any Democratic bill just ... what? Goes without saying? How is this normal? How is this right, or expected?
Don't blame "progressive Dems". Put the blame where it belongs: on Moscow Mitch McConnell's GQP.
+1
Go back a step further: progressives' emphasis on Defund the Police cost Democrats seats in both the House and Senate. It gave Republicans leverage to convince a lot of people who were going to vote against Trump Republicans that voting for Dems was just too big of a risk.
Had Progressives not gone nuts on that, the Dem majorities would be larger and Joe Manchin would be less of a factor.
They're doing the same things right now, with New York allowing non-citizens to vote and ANY racial consideration for COVID treatment. They're handing Republicans convincing, impactful issues. Progressives hurt their own cause by overreaching during the election, and they're hurting it now.
Then the national Democratic party needs to criticize and penalize the Democratic party of New York. It's not hard.
Not New York, only New York City will allow all legal residents to vote.
The extremes of both parties are just a little "out there"
New Gov Northram(sp?) in Virginia pleased all his conservative parents who supported him by banning something that is NOT taught in schools to begin with - critical race theory.
He his looked upon by some as a governor who follows through on his promises.
After just a couple of days!!!
"We" are convinced we are right about everything and everyone who opposes those beliefs are wrong
The problem is with the voters
Yungkins is the governor now.
Gov. Jolson was his predecessor.
The name is AweShuckskin.
As in, “I might be worth a 1/2 billion, but awe shucks if this sweater vest doesn’t make me look like a wholesome white Christian and common man from Virginia.”
Day 1- cancel all zero of the current critical race classes being taught.
Day 2- tax breaks and deregulation for AweShuckskin and his peeps.
Day 3- complain how Mexicans are holding white folk back.
Manchinema are not progressives & they blew it. Meanwhile, Georgia progressives boycotted Biden because he is tardy on Voting Rights. Can't please everyone, shit happens so stop the whining.
I dissent. But I have something else to say.
You gotta stop using the word progressive to mean that part of the party that you hate. Progressive is being stigmatized by middle-of-the-roaders and that's doing no favors for the Democratic Party.
Progressive is a good word for Democrats. What does it mean? Someone who stands for progress. Who wouldn't want to be part of the group? I'm a progressive. Aren't you? If your answer's not yes, then what's your problem?
Progressive,, for a long time, has been a positive, affirmative word used to describe most people in the Democratic caucus. Some people prefer the term to liberal. Some use them interchangeably. (I answer to either.)
If you use the word to refer only to Bernie Sanders and his bloc, you're destroying the value of a valuable word. Maybe, you say, the Sanders people like to use the word to refer to themselves. That's because they understand the value of the word. Which makes them smarter than you.
But don't let Sanders et al. own the word progressive. And don't begin using the word to mean fringe, radical, far from most voters on the political spectrum.
On policy, Sanders pushes the envelope for "progress" on certain economic issues and healthcare. But not at all on issues like minority and women's rights, immigration, guns. Painting him as the ultimate "progressive" is wrong.
Find another word.
1970's Sanders was anti-gun control and anti-immigration. Your problem is not understanding history.
Sure, and half a century ago, your grandmother was in diapers. Point??
21st century digital scam is still anti-immigrant -- just watch him yukking it up with Lou Dobbs, then of CNN, in 2006 -- & pro-gun.
Thank you. Dems have got to stop letting the right-wrenched mainstream media and the Republican Party debase the language. We on the left need to start learning how to "use our words", too. No more idiocy like "Defund the Police" or "Occupy Wall Street". Start calling the Repubs "reactionaries". "Revanchists." (and then explain what that means - it's a good, appropriate word!) Start harping on how NOT ONE REPUBLICAN will vote for any Democratic bill - it's THEM who refuse to "compromise." Or "negotiate."
Shame the Rs. I know, I know -- they have no shame. But there are still many Americans who recognize the concept. Demonize the Jan 6 Deniers. Demonize the Senate R caucus.
Cut off the oxygen from Manchinema by denying them any attention, and suggest to your reporter "friends" that Manchin & Sinema Verite aren't the problem -- it's all the cowardly, sheep-like Republican Senators.
And even start using Republican words against them. I thought one of the biggest misses of the Jan 6 commemoration was in NOT replaying Republican comments on that day, of not excerpting their Impeachment Trial 2 statements about how wrong, wrong, wrong the former guy was. Put the hypocrisy on full public display.
It has the added advantage of being true.
This guy gets it.
Do you know what that word is, the one that's been true for years? 'Mainstream Majoritarian Moderates' (I'm waiting to see what you'll do with that one.) Why did you think the usual suspects are working so hard to avoid giving Democrats that frame?
No, sitting and doing nothing out of fear would have been the disaster. Trying and failing to pass the agenda they were elected for is not disastrous. It's time for voters to understand what happens when they fail to vote for Democrats in numbers sufficient to get it done.
This is a good and useful message to take into the fall General Election.
+1