cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/22940159

Bernie Sanders caused a stir last week, when the independent senator from Vermont and two-time contender for the Democratic presidential nomination sent a post-election email to his progressive supporters across the country. In it, he argued that the Democrats suffered politically in 2024 at least in part because they ran a campaign that focused on “protecting the status quo and tinkering around the edges.”

In contrast, said Sanders, “Trump and the Republicans campaigned on change and on smashing the existing order.” Yes, he explained, “the ‘change’ that Republicans will bring about will make a bad situation worse, and a society of gross inequality even more unequal, more unjust and more bigoted.”

Despite that the reality of the threat they posed, Trump and the Republicans still won a narrow popular-vote victory for the presidency, along with control of the US House. That result has inspired an intense debate over the future direction not just of the Democratic Party but of the country. And the senator from Vermont is in the thick of it.

In his email, Sanders, a member of the Senate Democratic Caucus who campaigned in states across the country this fall for Vice President Kamala Harris and the Democratic ticket, asked a blunt question: “Will the Democratic leadership learn the lessons of their defeat and create a party that stands with the working class and is prepared to take on the enormously powerful special interests that dominate our economy, our media and our political life?”

His answer: “Highly unlikely. They are much too wedded to the billionaires and corporate interests that fund their campaigns.”

  • Cris
    link
    fedilink
    English
    57 hours ago

    Not every single person who disagrees with you is a paid shill. I voted for kamala and did so happily, and I’m very worried about the democratic party’s ability to change in the way they need to also. At some point, we do need to upend the 2 party system, it has yielded only bad things.

    I don’t know the right way to do that. I don’t know how we can do that with the least possible compromise, giving conservatives an advantage by splitting the progressive vote while using a voting system that favors two entrenched parties over outside candidates. AND ALSO the two party system is a problem this country desperately needs to solve.

    The two parties are absolutely not the same, but that doesn’t mean the democratic party is doing a great job of representing people’s actual interests, it just means they aren’t literal fascists. I dunno about you, but I’d really hope my political representation can be better than “literal fascists, or, people who kinda sorta sometimes care about issues that represent you, except all the times when they don’t”

    • @UsernameHere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      0
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      The only party that has a chance of beating the republicans is the Democratic Party. There is no other party.

      As long as we are sowing apathy towards the Democratic Party we won’t have a chance of beating the fascist republicans that show up to vote no matter what.

      So you can call it disagreeing or call it being worried or call it constructive criticism. It doesn’t matter what you call it as long as it sows apathy it will increase the fascist republicans chances of winning.

      People like OP are reposting the same posts and commenting in each one systematically with comments to sow apathy. It has been obvious to more than just me for a while now.

      • The election is over. Democrats failed spectacularly. Now is the time for criticism and accountability. If not now, when? We’re all just supposed to pretend that Harris ran a great campaign? Are you familiar with the concept of learning from failure? I was beating this drum myself before the election—you know, when it actually made sense. Now it just smacks of sticking your fingers in your ears.

        • @UsernameHere@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          13 hours ago

          Democrats lost because fewer Democratic voters showed up this year. That is a sign of apathy. If we spend the next 4 years sowing more apathy then it won’t matter what we are saying the months leading up to the election because everyone will already be apathetic.

          To pretend democrats failed spectacularly is to ignore the billionaires doing things like buying votes to win or Russian bots sowing apathy to Democratic voters to convince them to not vote or vote 3rd party.

          I see you’re federated with startrek.website. Ever heard the saying “you can do everything right and still lose”.

          Apathy caused Democratic voters to stay home. Continuing to sow more apathy will guarantee we lose the next one, if there is a next one.

          • Sure there were Russian bots. Of course there was billionaire fuckery. That’s been the case every cycle for decades. Do you honestly believe that Democrats lost exclusively because of these things? And furthermore, that nobody should critique their performance or policies, because that constitutes sowing apathy? Weeks after the fucking election? That’s the dumbest fucking thing I ever heard.

            • @UsernameHere@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              12 hours ago

              Harris lost the popular vote by 1.6%. Trump gained more votes than he got in 2020. It was a close race but Trump got all the most important swing states with the most electoral votes. The scales were not tipped very far in Trumps favor.

              And furthermore, that nobody should critique their performance or policies, because that constitutes sowing apathy?

              Saying we should waste our votes on 3rd parties or claiming democrats are the same as the republican fascists is not “critiquing performance or policies”. To even claim that is a bad faith argument.

      • Cris
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        Yes. There isn’t another party. Democratic voters didnt turn out, and lots of people feel that is a reflection of the Democratic party’s strategy, and it’s ability to connect with people and motivate them.

        For those who see it that way, there are two options, the reform and improvement of the democratic party, or a replacement that can better motivate people by offering more significant change. And many folks in the camp that are frustrated, and feel the democratic party isn’t reflecting their interests, or doing enough to connect with amercians, also don’t feel like the democractic party can change.

        People want to act on what they think will solve the problem. I understand you think their idea of a solution is counter-productive, the case I’m trying to make is that going around assuming everyone you don’t agree with is acting in bad faith in service of a secret agenda is AT LEAST as counter productive, if not substantially more so.

        Theres an entirely legitimate good faith reason for someone to post this kind of thing- they think it will build momentum towards what they see as the solution to the problems they care about.

        If we can’t even have productive conversations about what the problem is and why we think it should be solved a certain way, we’re fucking doomed. Democracy is fundamentally about collaborative governance, even in an unhealthy democracy like ours. These problems are fundamentally bigger than any of us can solve alone, and the solutions we pick, and how many people will throw themselves behind them, are BOTH materially improved by seeking to understand those you disagree with, rather than insinuating that they’re up to some plot to get a fascist elected, here on one of the most progressive platforms on the entire internet.

        Your frustration is understandable. We’re all fucking angry and trying to find the best way to resolve what we see as the source of our anger.

        • @UsernameHere@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          11 hour ago

          It’s getting to the point where a third party push seems logical.

          OP is suggesting we throw away our votes on a 3rd party. That has always been a bad faith argument in a first past the polls system. It is statistically impossible to win that way which is why it is a bad faith argument.

          I’m not claiming it’s bad faith as an emotional response. I’m pointing out that when someone suggests the option that guarantees failure, they are not acting in good faith.

          • Cris
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 hour ago

            Firstly saying it’s logical to push for a third party doesn’t actually mean “let’s just piss away our votes”

            It can mean pushing for voting reform along with a new party. And the change has gotta start somewhere if you want it to happen, and if you think it has to happen then picking a place, even one that you feel is impossible, doesn’t make it a bad faith argument. Its not like there’s any easy route to overturning the two party system, so if that’s what you think has to happen, you don’t exactly have any options that will be a cakewalk.

            And furthermore, I’m not aware of statistics that say that (though I wouldn’t be surprised) but you’re essentially saying that because your (I assume) informed opinion is that it can’t be done, anyone who suggests it must be suggesting it with an ulterior motive. You reached for malice as an explanation where, if you’re right, ignorance would be a much more suitable explanation. Its an issue I care about, and if we actually have data to suggest its impossible then I would be ignorant too

            It’d be far more productive to say “I really don’t think that’s possible, here’s why: xyz. I think if you want to make that kind of change happen I think you’ll have to find a different approach”

            Do you have research or data on the topic? Or are you being hyperbolic in order to make your point that you think it’s unrealistic? (Honest question, I think both would be fair, though if it’s just a personal perspective that its unrealistic I do think that even further weakens the argument that its bad faith on OP’s part)

            • @UsernameHere@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              237 minutes ago

              [The most successful third-party candidacy came in 1912, when Theodore Roosevelt finished second and got around 27 percent of the popular vote. Of course, he was a former president of the United States who hadn’t been renominated by his party and formed his own party. In recent times, H. Ross Perot’s third-party candidacy in 1992 got 19 percent of the popular vote, the second most in US history—but he got zero electoral votes. With the electoral college system, it’s highly, highly unlikely a third-party candidate could win an election.

              Polls put the two biggest parties, the Green Party and the Libertarian Party, at around one percent of the popular vote, whereas in 2016, they got around four to five percent of the vote.](https://www.bu.edu/articles/2024/is-voting-third-party-a-wasted-vote/)

              [Third parties that have been established were either short lived or, like the Libertarian and Green Parties, have had little impact on federal and state elections other than bringing more attention to issues for voters or siphoning votes from major-party candidates, sometimes serving a spoiler role in elections.

              However, as has been the case for prior third-party candidates, Kennedy’s initially higher levels of support eventually faded. Kennedy also struggled to gain ballot access in many states, with his efforts landing him on the ballot in 21 states, and 13 additional states pending before he suspended his campaign and endorsed Trump.](https://news.gallup.com/poll/651278/support-third-political-party-dips.aspx)

      • @Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -14 hours ago

        The only party that has a chance of beating the republicans is the Democratic Party. There is no other party.

        And they just shat the bed because they can’t resist moving to the right and ordering people to love it.

        Democrats aren’t interested in beating Republicans. They’re only interested in beating progressives.

        • @UsernameHere@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          24 hours ago

          They didn’t lose because they weren’t progressive enough. They lost because Biden inherited a pandemic that caused inflation and weak economy that required increasing interest rates.

          • @Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -1
            edit-2
            4 hours ago

            Oh, now the economy at the time of the election was weak. Last month it was roaring and everyone who noticed that they couldn’t afford groceries was a Russian shill.

            Democrats supported genocide, ran anti-trans bigotry in their own ads, and reveled in getting the endorsement of Dick Cheney. They moved to the right and lost. Quit defending their shitty behavior.

            • @UsernameHere@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              13 hours ago

              Oh, now the economy at the time of the election was weak. Last month it was roaring and everyone who noticed that they couldn’t afford groceries was a Russian shill.

              Not sure what you are babbling about here. Republican ads during the election were all focused on the high inflation.

              Democrats supported genocide, ran anti-trans bigotry in their own ads, and reveled in getting the endorsement of Dick Cheney. They moved to the right and lost. Quit defending their shitty behavior.

              The US military supports Israel to prevent Iran from getting stronger in the region because Iran has teamed up with China, Russia and North Korea and are actively supply drones and other weapons to Russia for use in Ukraine.

              Netanyahu is responsible for the genocide. He is the only one who can stop it.

              Cheney had absolutely nothing to do with Harris losing. Absolutely nothing in the polls or anecdotal evidence supports that claim but it is heavily pushed as a taking point here on lemmy from lemmy.ml so that fact should speak to how disingenuous it is.

              • @Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -1
                edit-2
                2 hours ago

                Not sure what you are babbling about here.

                Don’t fucking gaslight me. Democrats ran on “the economy is great actually”.

                The US military supports Israel

                Biden and the entire centrist wing of the party supported GENOCIDE for the sheer joy of it and no other reason.

                Cheney had absolutely nothing to do with Harris losing.

                He sure as fuck didn’t help. But since you and your entire wing of the party has always loved everything he ever stood for, you were happy for his endorsement. Senpai noticed you.

                • @UsernameHere@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  22 hours ago

                  Don’t fucking gaslight me. Democrats ran on “the economy is great actually”.

                  Democrats didn’t run on this. Biden simply pointed out that inflation was going down but there was more to do.

                  Bad faith actors tried to spin that into “bIdEn SaId GrOcErIeS aRe ChEaP oMgWtF”.

                  supported GENOCIDE for the sheer joy of it and no other reason

                  Such a blatant bad faith argument. If he really just wants to commit genocide then why specifically arm Israel. Aren’t there easier ways to commit genocide. You’re pretending that he is some Bond villain to ignore nuance and geopolitics.

                  But since you and your entire wing of the party has always loved everything he ever stood for, you were happy for his endorsement. Senpai noticed you.

                  What is my wing of the party? Anything you pretend to know about me is based on assumptions just like everything else you’ve said. Finding common ground and reaching across the aisle is how you get things done in a democracy with many different ideologies.

                  • @Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    046 minutes ago

                    Democrats didn’t run on this. Biden simply pointed out that inflation was going down but there was more to do.

                    Democrats tried to pretend that nothing was wrong while people couldn’t afford to eat.

                    If he really just wants to commit genocide then why specifically arm Israel. Aren’t there easier ways to commit genocide.

                    I see you’ve fantasized this out.

                    Finding common ground and reaching across the aisle is how you get things done in a democracy with many different ideologies.

                    Democrats don’t reach left.