PROOF of Democrat collusion to push out Progressive candidates

[DonKnock]

What is your qualm?

Spell it out.

• Are you upset that the DCCC is supporting candidates during the primary?
• That they are supporting a candidate during a contested primary?
• That they are supporting a candidate who isn't the incumbent since the chair is held by a republican?
• That they didn't choose to support your preferred candidate?

Or the false premise that the DCCC is undermining all progressive candidates.

The issue that progressives have is that many of these big budget Dems that get into office are beholden to special interests that afforded them aforementioned big budget and those special interests want them to tank policy disputes in the name of big business.


So for progressives they feel like they are getting screwed twice because:
1) Their candidate is intentionally marginalized early on in the name of fundraising potential
2) Then the party preferred candidate is likely pro-business (because that's how they got their funding) and then those special interests want them to intentionally do nothing on issues on the economic front and effectively let Republicans continually win (As R's took money from similar if not the same corporate interests).

 

[I_Got_Da_Burna]

When's the next indictment?
Rethugs out here attacking Black civil rights, and you somehow find a way to whine about Dems once again.
Disgusting.

stfu black vagina and get the fukk off my nuts you partisan hack

the democrats are trash and are complicit in "attacking black civil rights", so miss me with your party line bullshyt

oh and btw, there's still no proof of collusion between trump and russia.

 

[Black Panther]

stfu black vagina and get the fukk off my nuts you partisan hack

the democrats are trash and are complicit in "attacking black civil rights", so miss me with your party line bullshyt

oh and btw, there's still no proof of collusion between trump and russia.

 

[Dr. Acula]

Left keeps tearing itself apart so the Right can waltz into power.

The reality is that the party is made up of different groups and these groups insist the other is wrong and must conform to what they want.

As much as you have progressive talking about "centrist" democrats, you see "centrist" democrats also saying that the progressives are all alt-right bots. lol. Different sides of the same coin.

The Democrats are going to fukking lose in 2020 at this rate.

 

[Dr. Acula]

he won caucuses which don't favor minority voters

You keep pushing this, when I showed you before in the states that would have been vital in the general were not caucuses. Why do you keep pushing lies?

 

[Piff Huxtable]

let's keep it real democratic primary voters are very obedient

other than Ned Lamont in 2006 (Lieberman still won ) and maybe Obama in 2008 have they ever elected a non-party backed candidate?

 

[Shogun]

The reality is that the party is made up of different groups and these groups insist the other is wrong and must conform to what they want.

As much as you have progressive talking about "centrist" democrats, you see "centrist" democrats also saying that the progressives are all alt-right bots. lol. Different sides of the same coin.

The Democrats are going to fukking lose in 2020 at this rate.

I would add that the right might have internal disagreements but can agree on a core set of principles that allows them to unite at the end of all the infighting, whereas the left is comprised of two groups which fundamentally disagree on core principles that keep them divided.

 

[AnonymityX1000]

I would add that the right might have internal disagreements but can agree on a core set of principles that allows them to unite at the end of all the infighting, whereas the left is comprised of two groups which fundamentally disagree on core principles that keep them divided.

What do establishment types have against running for office on Medicare for all, providing a jobs program, free state college and getting corporate $ out of elections?

 

[I_Got_Da_Burna]

What do establishment types have against running for office on Medicare for all, providing a jobs program, free state college and getting corporate $ out of elections?

they simply don't agree with them. establishment dems are republican-lite; they want republican/conservative policies on anything that isn't related to identity politics or abortion.

 

[AnonymityX1000]

they simply don't agree with them. establishment dems are republican-lite; they want republican/conservative policies on anything that isn't related to identity politics or abortion.

They do pay lipservice to Medicare for all, Hillary mentioned free state college when running.
I mean action wise yeah, it is obvious they aren't down for this stuff. They are on some 'everything is fine' shyt unless we are talking identity politics and abortion? Wow.

 

[Shogun]

What do establishment types have against running for office on Medicare for all, providing a jobs program, free state college and getting corporate $ out of elections?

Progressive Liberalism: Pro Free Market; the government should regulate the economy only when free market forces violate constitutional rights.
Socialism: Anti Free Market.

 

[AnonymityX1000]

Progressive Liberalism: Pro Free Market; the government should regulate the economy only when free market forces violate constitutional rights.
Socialism: Anti Free Market.

Uh I don't think either side is for complete socialism breh and the establishment isn't completely anti-socialism or else they would be down for getting rid of SS, Medicare, Mediacaid.

 

[Shogun]

Uh I don't think either side is for complete socialism breh and the establishment isn't completely anti-socialism or else they would be down for getting rid of SS, Medicare, Mediacaid.

You could make a Progressive argument for SS, Medicare, and Medicaid.
If someone says they're a Socialist you have to assume they espouse Socialism, no?

 

[AnonymityX1000]

You could make a Progressive argument for SS, Medicare, and Medicaid.
If someone says they're a Socialist you have to assume they espouse Socialism, no?

Who is 'someone'? There are people not one person in the progressive wing of the party. As far as I know they are not saying they are socialists generally speaking.

 

[Shogun]

Who is 'someone'? There are people not one person in the progressive wing of the party. As far as I know they are not saying they are socialists generally speaking.

Agreed. I guess my point is that the "left" is comprised of two ideologies which, at their core, are not compatible. Whereas the "right" is more conducive to comparability.

Both Socialism and Progressive Liberalism looks to the state to ensure liberty for all citizens, but disagree on what exactly that means.

I think in the current American left people are unaware of those differences and take Socialism to be simply a "more progressive" version of Progressivism. That debate loses the plot, though, and doesn't address why the left has been hopelessly divided since the beginning of modern mass politics; why "Bernie Bro's" would refuse to vote for Hillary....

Ultimately, I don't believe "Bernie Bro's" are actually Socialists (in the exact meaning the phrase), and I think they're hurting the cause of Progressive Liberalism by taking a moral stance that they don't necessarily understand, let alone believe in.