You don't understand how this works. If enough people vote for the candidates you support in Democratic primaries, they win. The establishment can't stop them. If you're still hung up on the superdelegate system that burned Bernie in '16, well that system is gone now, and it only existed for the presidential candidate anyway
There are a lot of people who don't want to admit that when a progressive loses it's not always "the DNC"'s fault. Politics and life are just a bit more complicated than that.
Well clearly the problem is 1/3rd of the party, and the solution is to conceed nothing to them and run to the center hoping desperately to peal off a few Romney-style Republicans.
The crazy thing is just how popular socialism is across America. Deep rural red America can be quite supportive of socialist policies in practice.
They just don't like the words. The language is poisoned. So they keep listening to the chorus that condemns the words they don't like. Their perception is flat wrong and based on specific lies, but that's a hurdle that has to be contended with, and why it's so complex to discuss.
Yeah I've been wondering if a socialist party calling themselves "the freedom party" would be able to fool all the idiots who vote against themselves. And when the foxmaxx talking head chuds start calling them commies they can just keep repeating "why do you hate freedom?"
According to the same poll, 25% of the respondents had never heard of the Democratic Socialists of America, and 21% had no opinion of them.
Also, 10% of respondents who leaned democratic that the Democratic Party needed to be completely reformed, 47% said it needed major changes, and 39% said it needed minor changes.
Also, this is a major "throw the bums out" moment:
One question was:
"Imagine that after the November 2026 elections, most of the current members of Congress are replaced with new members. Do you think that would:"
51% said it would change congress for the better, only 9% said it would change congress for the worse.
Also, even if only 1/3 consider themselves democratic socialists, 73% would be either enthusiastic or OK with nominating someone who described themselves as a democratic socialist, and only 27% would be uneasy or upset by that.
I actually can't find in that poll where people identify as democratic socialists. But, everything else suggests now is an ideal time to run a DSA candidate.
Also, even if only 1/3 consider themselves democratic socialists, 73% would be either enthusiastic or OK with nominating someone who described themselves as a democratic socialist, and only 27% would be uneasy or upset by that.
That 27% are the Democratic establishment. Those somehow still committed to neoliberalism, that sad, failed ideology.
That 73% number I think shows the demsoc policies are popular. Which is the real number to watch. The self-identification with a word subject to a century of negative propaganda is more an indication of how strong the propaganda is these days.
Tend to be younger (59% are younger than 45, compared to 46% of non-democratic socialists aligned with the Democratic Party) and are more likely to be White (57% to 49%)
I really can't parse what they mean by "non-democratic socialists aligned with the Democratic Party." Juche supporters? Those younger than 45 who aren't democratic socialists? What does the percentage have to do with age? Compared to what percentage for those older? Based on how I'm reading it, it's saying that they skew younger but it's hard to tell how much without knowing what percentage of total members are under 45. But it's still quite broad based and not a youth or white movement based on those numbers.
Wisconsin doesn't have party registration at all and hasn't for a while (though it did when I first registered, and it cant be undone or changed now, leading to the appearance that we just have a huge population of independent voters (about 1/3 at this point), and no other changes in the last 20-ish years.. so if it only includes people who are registered, it misses a lot of important data. Idk about other states, I think there’s at least one other that doesn’t do party registration, but a lot of people opt to be independent if given the opportunity because they lean left and dems kinda don’t.
So I think that interpretation is probably accurate.
They have been actively guiding public sentiment away from populist socialism for 50 years, and they will choose to throw every election before they acknowledge that people want socialist policy
I'm not in love with the ICE collaboration, and using private contractors for "city-run" grocery stores by Mamdani, but the DSA seems faaaaaaaaaaaar better than practically any other organisation with any momentum in the USA.
Perhaps quit your whining and actually do something to push the USA and the DSA organisation, further left. I have no idea what the internal organisation governance is like, but I'd imagine it'd be at least somewhat meaningfully democratically elected.
You and your comrades ought to consider joining to make interventions, which can be even more effective if you do so together.
We leftists should always intervene in the places we can be most effective. (Not an argument for lesser-evilism, an argument for bringing those somewhat further right, further left).
There is no point appealing to the Democratic party establishment in my view, but building a movement via the DSA to essentially take over the Democratic party seems like a decent strategy (the USA having the terrible voting system that is has)
The DSA (to me, from the outside) seems like a good opportunity to make socialist arguments to those who are primed to listen.
Or you know, you can just poo pop them from the outside (and perhaps you're right to do that, if their aims are completely unacceptable).
They may be a reformist organisation, and not a revolutionary one, but present a very good opportunity to build a working class movement, that eventually becomes revolutionary.
There is no point appealing to the Democratic party establishment in my view, but building a movement via the DSA to essentially take over the Democratic party seems like a decent strategy (the USA having the terrible voting system that is has)
That's basically how MAGA took over the Republican Party, first building momentum from Gingrich's Contract with America through the Tea Party, and finally to MAGA.
I have no doubt that if the Progressives were able to grab the kind of power in the Democratic Party that MAGA has in the Republican Party, there might be motion toward the same sort of crazy extremism, but at this point, I'll cross that bridge when we come to it.
Right now, there is literally the future if humanity at stake. These Sociopathic Oligarchs WILL enslave all of humankind, if they possibly can, and they are actively pursuing that agenda, as we all see every day.
So I'll worry about leftist over-regulation when it becomes a problem, if it means avoiding Stephen 'PeeWee Himmler" Miller's Leftist Prisoner Chain Gang of online loudmouths, replacing deported minority farm workers.
So I'll worry about leftist over-regulation when it becomes a problem
Not sure if the DSA is your vibe then, since it's openly anti-capitalist, but again, I'm not from the US and known little about the organisation.
Perhaps some leftists will bring ya along and change your views, or vice versa.
I'm part of Victorian/Australian Socialists, and on the topic of "over-regulation", I'd much rather see a world where the workers have meaningful control over their workplaces (currently, companies are dictatorships, coerced with the threat of poverty)
I'd much rather have industries regulated by bodies comprised of the willing (which would primarily be the workers in those industries, and whoever else cares) who will discuss and vote on regulation, with an overarching national body keeping them in check. (So, similar to regulators of today that work within legislation, but with the difference that people who are making/voting on the regulations actually know what the fuck they're talking about)
"Over-regulation" becomes much less necessary when organisations aren't run purely for profit since the incentives are different. I also think over regulation happens when requirements are made way too inflexible - which isn't a a feature of socialism nor capitalism. That already happens all over the world under capitalism as well.
Just saying, being very left wing (like me) doesn't equal over regulation.
Nothing works until it does. And revolution has yet to produce a stable communist society on the scale of a major nation, so maybe don't talk too much shit at the people trying to make the world a better place to live in.
Anyone thats read an ounce of history knows this method has been tried before countless times. Theres a reason we say get a basic understanding of historical materialism.
37 Comments
nkat2112@sh.itjust.works · 48 pts · 2d
It's true. Let's keep it up!
Thank you for posting this, OP!
knobbysideup@sh.itjust.works · 30 pts · 1d
Doesn't matter so long as the establishment is still in control of who gets pushed forward.
We need ranked choice everywhere. They aren't going to get there willingly.
protist@retrofed.com · 7 pts · 1d
You don't understand how this works. If enough people vote for the candidates you support in Democratic primaries, they win. The establishment can't stop them. If you're still hung up on the superdelegate system that burned Bernie in '16, well that system is gone now, and it only existed for the presidential candidate anyway
chiliedogg@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 1d
The superdelegate system didn't burn Bernie. He was behind Clinton in the primaries well before the superdelegates got their vote in the Convention.
Would they have killed his nomination in 2016 if it were close? Probably. But they didn't have to because people weren't voting for him.
TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 1d
People are down voting you even though you are objectively correct. That's sad. I feel bad for those people.
timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 1d
There are a lot of people who don't want to admit that when a progressive loses it's not always "the DNC"'s fault. Politics and life are just a bit more complicated than that.
deathbird@mander.xyz · 22 pts · 1d
Well clearly the problem is 1/3rd of the party, and the solution is to conceed nothing to them and run to the center hoping desperately to peal off a few Romney-style Republicans.
ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works · 9 pts · 1d
The crazy thing is just how popular socialism is across America. Deep rural red America can be quite supportive of socialist policies in practice.
They just don't like the words. The language is poisoned. So they keep listening to the chorus that condemns the words they don't like. Their perception is flat wrong and based on specific lies, but that's a hurdle that has to be contended with, and why it's so complex to discuss.
tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip · 9 pts · 1d
Yeah I've been wondering if a socialist party calling themselves "the freedom party" would be able to fool all the idiots who vote against themselves. And when the foxmaxx talking head chuds start calling them commies they can just keep repeating "why do you hate freedom?"
Bloomcole@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 16h
It worked with the Patriot Act.
Obama made it even worse but called it the Freedom Act.
Americans are stupid
Dozzi92@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1d
Peal is a loud ringing sound.
Otherwise, I agree.
k0e3@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 1d
Also, concede.
Dozzi92@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 10h
Peal means concede? I think peal only refers to a sound, I've never heard it used to mean concede. I may have misinterpreted what you meant though.
k0e3@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 10h
No I mean, they misspelled concede.
merc@sh.itjust.works · 18 pts · 1d
According to the same poll, 25% of the respondents had never heard of the Democratic Socialists of America, and 21% had no opinion of them.
Also, 10% of respondents who leaned democratic that the Democratic Party needed to be completely reformed, 47% said it needed major changes, and 39% said it needed minor changes.
Also, this is a major "throw the bums out" moment:
One question was: "Imagine that after the November 2026 elections, most of the current members of Congress are replaced with new members. Do you think that would:"
51% said it would change congress for the better, only 9% said it would change congress for the worse.
Also, even if only 1/3 consider themselves democratic socialists, 73% would be either enthusiastic or OK with nominating someone who described themselves as a democratic socialist, and only 27% would be uneasy or upset by that.
I actually can't find in that poll where people identify as democratic socialists. But, everything else suggests now is an ideal time to run a DSA candidate.
TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 1d
That 27% are the Democratic establishment. Those somehow still committed to neoliberalism, that sad, failed ideology.
sdfer@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 15h
avidamoeba@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 1d
That 73% number I think shows the demsoc policies are popular. Which is the real number to watch. The self-identification with a word subject to a century of negative propaganda is more an indication of how strong the propaganda is these days.
OS2Warp@lemmy.zip · 16 pts · 2d
https://www.cnn.com/2026/07/30/politics/cnn-poll-a-third-of-democrats-now-identify-as-democratic-socialists
roguetrick@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 1d
I really can't parse what they mean by "non-democratic socialists aligned with the Democratic Party." Juche supporters? Those younger than 45 who aren't democratic socialists? What does the percentage have to do with age? Compared to what percentage for those older? Based on how I'm reading it, it's saying that they skew younger but it's hard to tell how much without knowing what percentage of total members are under 45. But it's still quite broad based and not a youth or white movement based on those numbers.
NABDad@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 1d
I take it to mean Democrats who are not Democratic Socialists, but it's an odd way of saying it.
Maybe they are including people who aren't registered as Democrats but tend to vote for them?
CentipedeFarrier@piefed.social · 2 pts · 1d
Wisconsin doesn't have party registration at all and hasn't for a while (though it did when I first registered, and it cant be undone or changed now, leading to the appearance that we just have a huge population of independent voters (about 1/3 at this point), and no other changes in the last 20-ish years.. so if it only includes people who are registered, it misses a lot of important data. Idk about other states, I think there’s at least one other that doesn’t do party registration, but a lot of people opt to be independent if given the opportunity because they lean left and dems kinda don’t.
So I think that interpretation is probably accurate.
roguetrick@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Oh yeah, the juche thing is just a joke, but it feels like someone lazily added crosstabs without thinking about what they meant.
uberdroog@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 2d
Or...or....people are realizing the democratic party wasn't what was advertised
saltesc@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 1d
Are they all trying to learn what socialism is now to ensure they stay on with voters?
protist@retrofed.com · 14 pts · 1d
Voters pushing candidates to the left is a good thing. You should not be cynical about this
decolo@piefed.social · 4 pts · 1d
They have been actively guiding public sentiment away from populist socialism for 50 years, and they will choose to throw every election before they acknowledge that people want socialist policy
MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Fight
K1nsey6@lemmy.world · -12 pts · 1d
These are Democrats that think the Nordic model is socialism, and the oligarchy thanks them for their ignorance
MisterFrog@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 1d
I'm not in the US and not super knowledgeable about the DSA, but this isn't my vibe at all as a blanket statement.
Many members might think what you're asserting, perhaps, but doesn't seem to be the organisation's stated platform at all:
https://www.dsausa.org/
I'm not in love with the ICE collaboration, and using private contractors for "city-run" grocery stores by Mamdani, but the DSA seems faaaaaaaaaaaar better than practically any other organisation with any momentum in the USA.
Perhaps quit your whining and actually do something to push the USA and the DSA organisation, further left. I have no idea what the internal organisation governance is like, but I'd imagine it'd be at least somewhat meaningfully democratically elected.
You and your comrades ought to consider joining to make interventions, which can be even more effective if you do so together.
We leftists should always intervene in the places we can be most effective. (Not an argument for lesser-evilism, an argument for bringing those somewhat further right, further left).
There is no point appealing to the Democratic party establishment in my view, but building a movement via the DSA to essentially take over the Democratic party seems like a decent strategy (the USA having the terrible voting system that is has)
The DSA (to me, from the outside) seems like a good opportunity to make socialist arguments to those who are primed to listen.
Or you know, you can just poo pop them from the outside (and perhaps you're right to do that, if their aims are completely unacceptable).
They may be a reformist organisation, and not a revolutionary one, but present a very good opportunity to build a working class movement, that eventually becomes revolutionary.
Just some thoughts, you do whatever.
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 21h
That's basically how MAGA took over the Republican Party, first building momentum from Gingrich's Contract with America through the Tea Party, and finally to MAGA.
I have no doubt that if the Progressives were able to grab the kind of power in the Democratic Party that MAGA has in the Republican Party, there might be motion toward the same sort of crazy extremism, but at this point, I'll cross that bridge when we come to it.
Right now, there is literally the future if humanity at stake. These Sociopathic Oligarchs WILL enslave all of humankind, if they possibly can, and they are actively pursuing that agenda, as we all see every day.
So I'll worry about leftist over-regulation when it becomes a problem, if it means avoiding Stephen 'PeeWee Himmler" Miller's Leftist Prisoner Chain Gang of online loudmouths, replacing deported minority farm workers.
MisterFrog@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 16h
Not sure if the DSA is your vibe then, since it's openly anti-capitalist, but again, I'm not from the US and known little about the organisation.
Perhaps some leftists will bring ya along and change your views, or vice versa.
I'm part of Victorian/Australian Socialists, and on the topic of "over-regulation", I'd much rather see a world where the workers have meaningful control over their workplaces (currently, companies are dictatorships, coerced with the threat of poverty)
I'd much rather have industries regulated by bodies comprised of the willing (which would primarily be the workers in those industries, and whoever else cares) who will discuss and vote on regulation, with an overarching national body keeping them in check. (So, similar to regulators of today that work within legislation, but with the difference that people who are making/voting on the regulations actually know what the fuck they're talking about)
"Over-regulation" becomes much less necessary when organisations aren't run purely for profit since the incentives are different. I also think over regulation happens when requirements are made way too inflexible - which isn't a a feature of socialism nor capitalism. That already happens all over the world under capitalism as well.
Just saying, being very left wing (like me) doesn't equal over regulation.
K1nsey6@lemmy.world · -5 pts · 1d
Reform never works, any leftists that ever read any amount of theory knows this
Soggy@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 22h
Nothing works until it does. And revolution has yet to produce a stable communist society on the scale of a major nation, so maybe don't talk too much shit at the people trying to make the world a better place to live in.
K1nsey6@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 19h
Anyone thats read an ounce of history knows this method has been tried before countless times. Theres a reason we say get a basic understanding of historical materialism.
MisterFrog@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 22h
So did ya read my comment? I'm not suggesting reformism works, just that you should intervene to move the DSA in a more radical direction.
But it just seems like you want to complain from the sidelines 👍👍👍
JamesBoeing737MAX@sopuli.xyz · 3 pts · 15h
It's still an improvement. A right step towards class-conciousness, but don't get your hopes up.
K1nsey6@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 9h
It's not a step in the right direction, this has happened several times in the past with the same results