2 points

At least the Palestinian genocide is over now because those Dems didn’t learn the lesson or whatevs.

🤡

permalink
report
reply
12 points
*

AOC Snub Shows How Democrats Refuse to Learn Lessons of 2024

2020

2016

2004

2000

1996

1992

1988

1984

1980

FTFY

permalink
report
reply
2 points

@auk@slrpnk.net do you not run into the paywall? I’m curious if it’s region-specific or something.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

No idea. Maybe it’s region-specific, or maybe it allows a certain number free before it kicks in.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points
*

When the right wing voters didn’t like what their elected leader were doing, they primaried them with more ideologically pure leaders.

Left wing voters just bitch and moan but take no action proving that some of the qualities the right claims of the left, like being lazy and entitled are true.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

The magas have no problem voting for good enough… Dem base consistently let perfect get in the way of good… And various factions have a different definition of perfect.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Did you read the article? They’re saying that’s possibly what lost AOC some favor with the dem leadership, that she was supporting progressive primary challengers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

What fucking primary?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Primaries are internal party elections that determine what candidate a party will support for presidency. In US generally speaking the Democratic Party primaries are open or semi-open, so every voter can participate.
For example, in lasr Dem primaries approximately 10 million people vited for Bernie Sanders, 2 for Elisabeth Warren, and 20 for Biden, which amounts to less than 20% of registered voters.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The primary every congressional district has. The right ran some crazy fucks against some well established right wing politicians so where is the left’s version of this.

Everyone hung up on the presidential primary is failing to heed our own advice to the people who vote for a third party as a protest against the Democratic Party.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

They are doing that. At least they did in my state.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The one that exists in the argument but not in reality. Keep up. It’s straw man season

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

I’m sure it has nothing to do with multiple billionaire backers like Trump and Thiel pushing their candidates.

Must just be that the left doesn’t care in comparison.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The billionaire backers came after the crazies won against right wing encumbrants.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

thiel has been doing thiel things for decades. others too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

LOL

Okay buddy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

When the right wing voters didn’t like what their elected leader were doing, they primaried them with more ideologically pure leaders.

I’ve been thinking the same thing. The current form of the Republican party that is MAGA is clearly influenced by the Tea Party movement. The Wikipedia entry say the movement dissolved and doesn’t say what legacy it left. But in hindsight, it is clear that it made the Republican party evolve into MAGA that it is today.

The Democratic Party should have its own MAGA movement but from the left. The American left only seem to be animated if the candidate or leader is deemed progressive enough. They don’t seem to actively try to influence the Democratic Party themselves unlike what the right did to the Republican Party.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

What I find hilarious is that every “progressive” leader that does make their way in ends up being a Republican/Russian puppet. (See Sinema/Fetterman).

Proves horseshoe theory is real. The DNC doesn’t care about you guys because you’ve shown you don’t care about the DNC. Bitch all you want but why should they try to pursue lazy kids who bitch and moan but don’t vote when it counts or protest vote.

That’s why the DNC drives further right because at least that voting base actually consistently votes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

The tea party was astroturfed. There’s no wealthy PACs propping up a movement of soc dems like AOC

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I don’t know. It’s not directed at you but I think anyone who disagrees with a movement would always find ways and angles to smear it.

Nonetheless, many of what had been advocated by the Tea Party movement-- both social and economic policies-- are still visibly present and implemented by MAGA. So I think even with astroturfing, the goals of those involved in Tea Party had their way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Growing up with these movements, it felt like the Occupy Movement could have been that, but it was smeared by The Powers That Be alongside infighting or a focus on strange parliamentary procedure. It helps with cops also are on your side (Tea Party).

I don’t think the left makes enough persistent noise at their leadership compared to the right. I’m really proud of the recent strike announcements from Unions & hope they stick through the tough shit.

I volunteer in municipal work on a town board local to me. It’s not much, but there’s a few chuckleheads “from the private sector” that think they know everything in five minutes. If you put hard facts and actually argue them in proper settings with conviction, you can at least have a voice in the bullshit around you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Have Republicans ever had any primary corruption controversies, like that whole superdelegates thing?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Ron paul 08

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

The corruption is their goal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I’m not sure where you’re going with a thus since I’m referring to primary if congressional leaders and you’re hung up on the presidency, another weird thing we only do on that left.

The right did have a candidate that refused to participate in their party’s debates and threatened the party’s leaders so there is something there but it’s not a fair comparison since the left isn’t good at authoritarian demagoguery.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Paywall. Can we get the cliff notes?

permalink
report
reply
10 points
*

https://archive.is/P62kC

Archive version paywall freestill paywalled never mind.

Screw their paywall, have my complimentary visit:

AOC Snub Shows How Democrats Refuse to Learn Lessons of 2024 Seventy-four-year-old Gerry Connolly was picked to lead the House Oversight Committee over Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who embodies the kind of generational change that the party is sorely in need of.

By Eric Lutz December 18, 2024

Given the frequency with which Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been described as a Democratic “rising star” since her 2018 election to the House, it’s worth asking: When, exactly, will Democrats actually let her star rise? The 35-year-old New York progressive Tuesday lost her bid to head up the Oversight Committee, a panel that will play a key watchdog role over Donald Trump and his incoming administration. Winning out for the post was Gerry Connolly, the 74-year-old Virginia congressman who just last month announced that he was being treated for esophageal cancer. Ocasio-Cortez ran on a message of generational change, the appetite for which has greatly increased since the party’s crushing losses in last month’s election. But Connolly had some powerful old-guard allies in his corner—including former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, 84, who made calls on his behalf. Connolly reportedly carried the vote 131-84.

Some of the opposition to Ocasio-Cortez seems to have stemmed from concern about her more progressive politics, as well as her previous support for primary challenges to incumbent Democrats. But “there was also a sense,” Politico reported, citing eight Democratic lawmakers, “that it was Connolly’s turn, after he had previously run for the Oversight spot twice and served on the panel for 15 years.” Democrats appear to have picked Connolly—at least in part—because they felt he was entitled to the influential post, as a reward for his loyalty and longevity. “He’s been the ranking member-in-waiting,” Democratic Representative Emanuel Cleaver, 80, told Axios.

That sentiment is as telling as it is infuriating. It’s emblematic not only of the party’s gerontocracy but of its tendency to treat powerful positions as a kind of remuneration for loyalty, longevity, and legacy—often at the expense of the party’s best interests. During Barack Obama’s second term, amid suggestions liberal justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg should retire with a Democrat in office, the late California Senator Dianne Feinstein defended her: “She is certainly entitled to serve,” Feinstein told Politico in 2014. Ginsburg would die in office six years later, at 87, allowing Trump to install a third conservative on the Supreme Court—establishing a six-member majority that would fell Roe and erode the liberal principles she championed.

By then, Feinstein herself was the subject of concerning reports about her cognitive and physical decline, which were underscored by her performance in the confirmation hearings of Amy Coney Barrett, Ginsburg’s successor. While she relinquished her leading post on the Senate Judiciary Committee, she remained in office—even as it became clear she was no longer capable of executing her duties. But Pelosi pushed back on calls for Feinstein to resign during an extended medical absence last year: “I’ve seen up close and firsthand her great leadership for our country, but especially for our state of California,” Pelosi told reporters in April 2023, suggesting Feinstein’s critics were sexist. “She deserves the respect to get well and be back on duty.” Feinstein died five months later, at age 90. That wouldn’t carry the same political consequences as Ginsburg’s death; California Governor Gavin Newsom appointed fellow Democrat Laphonza Butler to the vacant seat, allowing the party to keep its majority in the upper chamber. But there would be major fallout the next time Democrats put deference to one of their elder dignitaries over the party’s future.

Joe Biden—who ran and won in 2020 as a transitional figure—was 80 when he announced he was seeking reelection. There were already significant concerns about his age and unpopularity when he kicked off his campaign in 2023. But they were nothing compared with the groundswell he faced after his faltering debate performance this summer. As calls for him to step aside mounted, he insisted, “No one’s pushing me out. I’m not leaving.” Some Democrats rallied around him, framing their support for his flagging candidacy in personal terms: “Joe Biden’s had our back,” Newsom told CNN. “Now it’s time to have his.” Biden would give up his bid, in no small part because of pressure from Pelosi and other leading Democrats. But by the time he passed the torch to then-59-year-old vice president, it may have been too late: Kamala Harris had just 107 days to campaign against Trump, and her run was haunted by her association with Biden and the perception that the administration had sought to hide Biden’s senescence. Harris’s loss—and the governing trifecta Republicans will enjoy in January—carries a lesson for Democrats about the need for a new generation of leadership, about the inadequacy of the party’s status quo. The ground has begun to shift: Jamie Raskin, currently the top Oversight Democrat, will take over as the ranking member of the powerful Judiciary Committee from Jerrold Nadler; Raskin, at 62, isn’t exactly a “new generation,” except when compared with the 77-year-old Nadler. Meanwhile, Jared Huffman, 60, will succeed 76-year-old Raúl Grijalva as the top Democrat on the Natural Resources Committee. But AOC’s loss seems to point to a lingering resistance to the new generation among some party elites, who have downplayed concerns about Connolly’s age and health. “Gerry’s a young 74, cancer notwithstanding,” remarked fellow 74-year-old Representative Don Beyer. Ocasio-Cortez is not entitled to the post by sole virtue of her youth, of course. But the New York representative has distinguished herself on the Oversight Committee, and even some who supported Connolly acknowledged her qualifications after her defeat Tuesday: She is “equipped with all the tools necessary for leadership,” Cleaver told Axios. “Sometimes, it’s a little more time to get there.” But for a party scrambling to curb Trump’s extremist plutocracy, and its own struggles with younger voters ahead of the 2026 midterms, isn’t now as good a time as any?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

lost her bid to head up the Oversight Committee, a panel that will play a key watchdog role over Donald Trump and his incoming administration.

Ah so there it is. Cant have real opposition to Trump. Lets get the guy whose literally dead in his chair to head that committee up. Heck of a job, Pelosi.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Pleasant Politics

!pleasantpolitics@slrpnk.net

Create post

Politics without the jerks.

This community is watched over by a ruthless robot moderator to keep out bad actors. I don’t know if it will work. Read !santabot@slrpnk.net for a full explanation. The short version is don’t be a net negative to the community and you can post here.

Rules

Post political news, your own opinions, or discussion. Anything goes.

All posts must follow the slrpnk sitewide rules.

No personal attacks, no bigotry, no spam. Those will get a manual temporary ban.

Community stats

  • 1.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 259

    Posts

  • 1.4K

    Comments