Democratic political strategy

  • immutable@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 days ago

    We have data so that we don’t have to go with our guts

    You can check out the vote totals

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries

    I would argue the 2016 is a better reflection, in 2020 there was a sort of coordinated drop out of centrist candidates on Super Tuesday as the establishment wing of the party threw their weight behind Biden.

    But in either case the answer is that the Democratic Party is basically a coalition party of centrist Dems that seem to be fine with shifting further and further to the right and more progressive voters. In 2016 it was pretty evenly split so there is appetite just not enough for a viable party.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Ok, where’s the Progressive party then? If the existing parties are leaving such a huge part of the population without a party (based on what people are saying) then it should be a guaranteed win, right? Why don’t the progressives Democrats (and left wing independents) get together and tell the rest of the Democrats to fuck off? Sanders has a ton of support, you just proved it!

      • immutable@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        I’d refer you back to my first comment that explains the structural incentives and disincentives that prevent an alternative to the Democratic Party from emerging

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Nope, it doesn’t explain why you’ve got progressives that would rather live with the status quo instead of saying “You know what, fuck you guys, we’re done.” when the party clearly works against them. Hell, there isn’t even a movement comparable to the tea party! I’m more and more convinced that it’s all just a show and they’re just happy the way things are and would rather keep things as is than potentially lose their seat by actually fighting against the status quo.

          • immutable@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            If there’s something in particular in that original analysis you disagree with feel free to point it out.

            Progressive voters can’t vote for progressive candidates that don’t exist. My analysis explains why progressive candidates / parties don’t emerge in this system.

            When there are progressive candidates progressive voters vote for them, while centrist Dems say they won’t (that’s exactly what Clinton supporters said they would do if sanders won the nomination)

            What exactly do you think “you know what, fuck you guys, we’re done” looks like in the absence of progressive candidates? Maybe the presidential candidate getting 20M fewer votes? That literally just happened.

            • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m saying it doesn’t explain why progressive Democrats that are popular and get elected don’t get together and form their own party or even movement inside the party. Blame money all you want, they would find donors and would probably be a strong grassroots movement.