r/politics • u/Hootinger • 16d ago

No Paywall Hakeem Jeffries says Medicare for all is not legislation he currently supports

https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/hakeem-jeffries-says-medicare-for-all-is-not-legislation-he-currently-supports-268371525570
14.9k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

3.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

6.3k

u/Wet_Side_Down 16d ago

Democratic leadership needs a kick in ballot box

3.0k

u/Simmery 16d ago

They've already been kicked when they lost twice to the worst president in history. They should have stepped down in disgrace the second time.

1.0k

u/VintageBilliard 16d ago

The man is room illiterate.

1.0k

u/ChadEmpoleon 16d ago

They aren’t actually this obtuse.

Their donors would never permit it. And hiding behind him are 12+ others who would eagerly turn on the people should the moment call for it.

463

u/DickSlammington 16d ago

Seriously there's tons of money to be made...

They ain't ever going to resign because they're not taking the job to better the country...

They're taking it for the money and power it creates for them individually

171

u/Daddyball78 16d ago

Yep. All about the money. Which, of course, attracts the wrong people to be put in those positions of “representation.” We’re effed from the get-go.

232

u/DickSlammington 16d ago

Until we repeal citizens united...

Politics in this country is a popularity game for the rich and shameless.

31

u/HalJordan2525 16d ago

Would it not take a Constitutional Amendment to repeal Citizens United?

76

u/too1onjj 16d ago

No, that was just a Supreme Court decision just like Roe v Wade and can be overturned by the Supreme Court if they determine that it was decided in error or is no longer relevant. Unfortunately, that is definitely not something that's going to happen under this Supreme Court.

5

u/Some_Rate3642 16d ago

If you remember, I'm 2009, Associate Judge David Souter wrote a brief that allegedly destroyed the case for Citizens United. But then he "retired" before it was presented, and as is custom with the Supreme Court, anything written by a judge who has retired/died/resigned that hasn't been presented is subject to being withheld for 50 years after he leaves the court. So, basically, the winning argument is our there, but it's been effectively suppressed by the Roberts-led court. Nobody but them knows what's in the brief. And Souter is dead.

5

u/rowrbazzle75 16d ago

So many reasons to expand the court. Term limits and lifetime appointments are in the constitution, so harder to fix. But the size of the court is doable.

44

u/asomebodyelse 16d ago

Or packing the court.

5

u/codered39 16d ago

I’ll never forgive JB for not packing the court.

19

u/Land-Southern 16d ago edited 16d ago

It would take one of any of several possible legislation, not an ammendment. State business is not a person. Require donors to publish their names on political contributions. Say money is not considered a form of speech. Outlaw political fundraising.

Lobbying your rep means talking to them, not paying an attorney to sit in an office across the street from the capitol building so they can bend the ear of the senators/reps and invite them to taste an 80 yo scotch in the Cape this weekend while we talk what ifs on pending legislation.

Edit: respondent below is correct. Either pack court to overturn its own precedent or do an ammendment.

4

u/MissTetraHyde 16d ago

Actually the theory in Citizens United, which was upheld, was that money used for political purposes is speech and that censoring the usage of it violates the first amendment. An amendment to the Constitution cannot be overruled by a statute. I believe that passing legislation would actually not be sufficient to overcome the holding in Citizens as a result.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/biggersjw 16d ago

Actually no. Corporations are controlled by each State they are incorporated. As such, you can amend how and what a corporation is. The Supreme Court overstepped its authority with Citizens United because corporations are state controlled - not at the federal level. The final legal determination is controlled by each States Supreme Court.

Each State can simply put into the corporate law, the entity is not a person therefore they cannot contribute money or conversely, limit their contribution to the same legal limit an individual can contribute to a politician.

While this doesn’t do away with PAC’s, it would severely limit the contribution amount of money flowing into PAC’s. Since most PAC’s are LLC’s or some form of a corporation, they too fall within the scope of State corporate law.

There are articles/videos about this particular issue and how to get around Citizens United and go deeper into the legal process.

4

u/az_catz 16d ago

No, it would take a normal law passed through the House and the Senate, then signed by the President. The problem is it would need to clear the filibuster in the Senate, which is nearly impossible.

4

u/Citrakayah 16d ago

No, it would take a constitutional amendment. Congress cannot simply overturn Supreme Court rulings. They need to either pass a constitutional amendment or write a new law that accomplishes the same effect through different means that the Court won't say are unconstitutional. You will note many of the bills produced in Congress to overturn Citizens United are proposed constitutional amendments, not normal laws.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/joeshmo101 16d ago

What it would really take is for legislation to pass that says "Corporations are not people" because that was the justification behind Citizens United.

→ More replies (2)

14

u/portagenaybur 16d ago

Which won’t be in my generation unfortunately.

44

u/DickSlammington 16d ago

Certainly not mine either...

I'm watching a lot of my friends who were fairly liberal turn more conservative as we get to our 40s.

I have friends that don't own a home, are still struggling financially.. and honestly thought Trump was a better option even though Harris was proposing things like huge credits for first time home buyers...

It's like Americans don't want succeed..

4

u/SalandaBlanda Maryland 16d ago

Because people still think all they have to do is work hard and they'll be millionaires. Its just a current struggle and eventually they'll win big!

7

u/nobodysfool24 16d ago

This country was built on racism… “Melting Pot” is coded cheap labor…

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Delta-9- 16d ago

The conservative propaganda machine may the most effective large-scale social engineering effort in history. Even the CCP and other propaganda-driven regimes had to resort to overt and explicit state violence to get their citizenry aligned.

→ More replies (0)

6

u/onlyoneq 16d ago

Not with that attitude

2

u/iprobablybrokeit 16d ago

We all thought that about Roe too. Until we didn't.

3

u/Schonke 16d ago

Snyder v. United States is even more important to repeal if you want to get rid of people seeking political office for money and power...

3

u/thatcommiegamer 16d ago

This might be unpopular here in liberal Reddit Mecca but if you have the political will to do all that you might as well just remake the whole constitution.

There is no universe in which our ruling class willingly gives up power. Things are likely to get bloodier before they get better. We can never get the New Deal coalition back together, a coalition that only existed because of how powerful the threat of communist revolution is. The working class has been on the back foot since the 70s (and even then, the New Deal only really applied to white members of the working class).

China, for all the good it does, is not the USSR and cannot be that ideological challenger to US hegemony that forces the ruling class to give us concessions. We needed to organize 2 decades ago, but now is the best time we have.

3

u/VariationBusiness603 16d ago

You are entirely correct, of course. I am not american myself, but it's not all that different here. People still believe that democracy means putting a paper in a box to chose between 2 people pre-approved by the capital that exploits us. And nothing else.

You people will likely have to wait for the mid-term and watch the most obvious display of ratfuckery ever and hope that's enouth for the people to drop the ridiculous "let's vote the entrenched fascists out" nonsense. And finally start organizing.

1

u/thatcommiegamer 14d ago

You people will likely have to wait for the mid-term and watch the most obvious display of ratfuckery ever and hope that's enouth for the people to drop the ridiculous "let's vote the entrenched fascists out" nonsense. And finally start organizing.

I've been politically active since Bush and idk. We seem to just be making more liberals but these ones put on lip service to socialism. Americans just want their treats and, to be real, as long as those treats are built off the bodies of the poor and working class world wide? We don't deserve them.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Ok-Ad-2050 16d ago

That's a good first step.

1

u/Korashy 16d ago

Before citizen united they just served one master, who gave them the golden consultant parachute for when they retire.

They nice thing about that was they did need to retire though to actually make all the money privately before they died.

Citizens United is why you see so many octogenarian politicians clinging to power.

1

u/NoHorseNoMustache 15d ago

There was a big problem with lobbying money in politics before CU became a thing. Totally removing private donations to campaigns at a national level is necessary before we can fix this.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/naughtyhegel 16d ago

All the way back to Socrates, he said the people most fit for leadership were those who didn’t want power. And no, the problematic nature of that sentiment was not lost on him. Sorry to be such a nerd, I thought it was relevant.

2

u/peejay5440 16d ago

Crazy idea. Pay them lots more and forbid all other forms of income.

2

u/lazybugbear Texas 15d ago

He's a representative, just not our representative.

Fuck this guy.

Primary his ass.

We're done with milquetoast, status quo Democrats.

Get in line with what your constituents want or get a new party.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/filterdecay 16d ago

The dem party has been infiltrated with these traitors.

1

u/brashendeavors 16d ago

Trump is actually great for Democratic fundraising!

1

u/pickygirl707 16d ago

I totally agree with that it happens on both sides of the aisle

1

u/Bimm1one 16d ago

Most politicians are grifters, dem voters need to start exercising their right to elect other than establishment dems.

40

u/RecentDecision2329 16d ago

This is the reason to vote for people like AOC who don’t take corporate money

2

u/Thunderbridge 16d ago

Those people are socialists though!

12

u/Chmaziro 16d ago

The donors should permit it

Medicare for all would reduce health insurance overhead and workers comp costs.

Richness is wasted on the wrong people

4

u/Cross55 15d ago

See, but that would mean the workers aren't beholden to their whims tho

They're happy to spend that overhead to control the masses

31

u/Sla5021 16d ago

It's not ignorance it's malicious.

3

u/mrcanard 16d ago

Why we need more parties.

3

u/Montgomery000 16d ago

But it's usually only one or two who play the spoiler, it's been happening for decades. Any serious progressive legislation is foiled by one or two Democrats, despite having all the power to pass.

2

u/Greedy_Inflation_697 15d ago

You're starting to unpack Trump's appeal. Not that he's better or less corrupt, he's just way more gangster about it.

5

u/PennStateInMD 16d ago

AIPAC wouldn't allow it. Don't we fund Israeli healthcare in a roundabout way?

4

u/oneseason2000 16d ago

If they trade healthcare stocks, they are profiteers and cannot be trusted imo.

1

u/lcsulla87gmail 16d ago

Dont absolve him. These are choices hes making. We were one vote away 18 years ago.

1

u/BakedCheddar88 15d ago

Right, he’s just a mouthpiece for the establishment. His biggest issue is that he has the charisma of a wet noodle, so he can’t get away with his centrist bs like Pelosi could.

→ More replies (2)

35

u/CurlsintheClouds Virginia 16d ago

This is my thought. What a bold statement to make considering the current temperature.

1

u/Haltopen Massachusetts 15d ago

He's in a safe blue district and the DSA chose not to support a primary challenger in his district because he's still popular there despite being hated on the national level for being a spineless coward. He's not at risk of losing his seat until 2028

61

u/gangleskhan Minnesota 16d ago

I do think that for some people, being room illiterate is a point of pride. It makes them feels like they're smarter than everyone else. Same as the "moderate" both-sidesers.

12

u/turtleneck360 16d ago

The both siders are people who are too lazy to even keep up with the basics. So they spew “both sides are exactly the same” to make themselves look smart like they know everything.

6

u/elbow8075 South Dakota 16d ago

I find it amusing in a thread where the both sides are acting the same is being presented to you in real time, somehow you still find a way to blame those of us who see through the bullshit.

Kind of like how MAGA acts now that the corruption and rot is on display for all to see.

3

u/Illustrious_Run2260 16d ago

His room is full of donors

4

u/starliteburnsbrite 16d ago

This is 1000% intentional. He's gotta make sure the donor class knows they're still the priority. 

→ More replies (1)

2

u/14Pleiadians 16d ago

This man is controlled opposition. Dems have 2 jobs, keep israel funded, and to maximize healthcare profits.

2

u/darthabraham 16d ago

the only people they talk to are their donors and each other. they dont realize how much regular people who are tuned in want to throw all of these people in the ocean.

4

u/JesusShaves_ 16d ago

The only people in the room he cares about are billionaire donors.

44

u/Wet_Side_Down 16d ago

The primary ballot box…

1

u/DukeOfGeek 16d ago

This right here.

102

u/Deadleggg 16d ago

Losing to Republicans doesn't hurt them.

Losing to Progressives hurts them more. They can't fundraise anymore and lose their positions in the DNC establishment.

It's why they fight Progressives so much harder and dirtier than Republicans. Republicans don't hurt their money.

13

u/MrWoohoo 16d ago

I had never really looked at it that way but you’re right.

1

u/No_ConflictsNow 16d ago

I think you have a good point however him making this statement is going to reduce support from mainstream dems because we are ALL sick and tired of the status quo. I’ve been a centrist but I’m leaning more progressive each day crap like this comes out of ‘leadership’s’ mouth. I used to like him because mainly there was finally someone else to takeover Nancy’s job… Now I wish someone like AOC would take Chucks job at least she’d be different. Jefferies is just like Nancy w/o the dress apparently.

1

u/taaretoille 15d ago

Either get on the boat or let go at this point.

→ More replies (6)

68

u/w1czr1923 16d ago

Watching Jon Stewart interviewing Fetterman and hearing Fetterman say that the reason they’re losing is because of the progressive wing was wild. I’m not someone who is super far left, in fact I consider myself to be somewhat moderate (still very left leaning) in that there are policies on the far far left side of the spectrum I don’t agree with an I don’t agree with 90% of anything right of center. But this… this interview was the most tone deaf thing I’ve ever listened to and really shines a light on how democrats are fucking themselves

22

u/codithou 16d ago

that interview really convinced me that guy is a fucking spineless idiot. his exact mentality is a sickness in the democratic party.

5

u/loosetranslation Indiana 16d ago

Honestly, given the general state of things and how unhinged the right is, I'm at the point where most actual progressive positions seem pretty moderate to me.

4

u/QuintonFrey 15d ago

Because if this were any other country in the world they would be.

2

u/Cross55 15d ago

Because the average democrat is a conservative in Europe

2

u/Default_Name_6969 16d ago

curious to hear what to dont agree with on the far left.

-2

u/Bomun_End 16d ago

It's ironic that Fetterman was the progressive wing's darling when he was running. He was endorsed by Bernie, and this very sub was obsessed with him, calling his opponent Lamb a corpo-establishment loser. The same thing was happening with Platner up in Maine until finally (FINALLY) enough red flags got through to get rid of him. So, in a weird way, Fetterman was right. A lot of the progressive wing's favorites end up being really, really bad. I guess he would know first hand.

Hey, remember the online leftist darling Tulsi Gabbard? Whatever happened to her? Oh, yeah...

7

u/ZenMasterOfDisguise 16d ago edited 16d ago

I am from the Philly area and left leaning progressives in PA never really backed Fetterman. He always seemed like a tool to me. People liked him over Lamb or Dr. Oz, but it was really only libs that liked him still. The people I know that hardcore supported Fetterman were the same people that liked Obama/Hillary/Biden/Harris, not progressives.

And people only liked Tulsi Gabbard on one issue, because she was a former US service member who was anti-war and in congress was pretty consistent on voting against use of military. Yeah she sold out pretty hard. So do moderate democrats like Obama though when he made the Patriot Act permanent law or escalated the Iraq war or built out the NSA surveillance state or the ICE for profit detention centers... so not sure your point, politicians on all sides can sell out their voters. Is Joe Lieberman proof that all moderates can't be trusted?

→ More replies (4)

33

u/Peralton 16d ago

We lost, what do we do? The same thing only samier!

7

u/Blue_Plastic_88 16d ago

We lost! We'll just keep moving to the right, then! That must be what our voters want! 🤔

3

u/OldWorldDesign 15d ago

We'll just keep moving to the right, then! That must be what our voters want

It's been their chief goal since republicans of Reagan's era took over the democratic party

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2009/01/26/two-santa-clauses-or-how-republican-party-has-conned-america-thirty-years

21

u/DefenstratedTwice 16d ago

Their tepid and cowering behavior while blatant fascism, corruption and crimes against humanity is tacit complicity at best and for many collusion.

11

u/FranticGolf 16d ago

Not just worst president but one of the worst human beings on the planet.

6

u/BrianBurke 16d ago

Don't you remember that time when he wouldn't shut up for 9 hours and saved democracy?

2

u/rabbitlion 16d ago

Joe Biden who threw the election the second time did step down. He hasn't been involved much since. The people who were leaders in 2016 also no longer are, for the most part.

2

u/Sped_monk 16d ago

They are complicit in what is going on. They benefit just as much as the right when there is division in America.

4

u/Mr_MacGrubber 16d ago

99% of politicians only care about money and power. Losing the presidential election likely makes the former easier to get as they can fundraise more.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/OddlyFactual1512 16d ago

They are there for the money, not the people. Why would they step down when the money is still there?

5

u/JagmeetSingh2 16d ago

the problem is even on here people blame the left for the losses and insist if only the democrats went further right it would have won them the election

6

u/RelevantOldOnion 16d ago

"even on here" this is reddit lmao what do you mean "even on here". 

"The website full of anonymous upper class white suburban male American IT guys in their 30s and 40s is right wing?!?!"

2

u/Zahgi I voted 16d ago

But "they" didn't actually lose in either case. "They" meaning the <1% who own both major political parties and the oligarchy that controls all three branches of government now.

As long as we are given two candidates who will support the status quo of ridiculously low taxes on the rich and absurd loopholes to bring that tax rate effectively to zero they win...and we lose.

This is their ONLY goal and criteria. It's why Trump hasn't been removed from office, even though they could order their politicians to do this in a week, and why we keep getting the "lesser of two evils" choices for president for the past three elections.

The DNC is doing exactly what they are paid to do (re: nothing for the 99% that would cost the rich "their" money). Jeffries wouldn't have gotten the job without being one of them.

2

u/Persistant_Compass 16d ago

The democratic party awards incompetence 

1

u/1HappyIsland 16d ago

Running the WORST possible candidate who knew? Who in Democratic leadership should be President? I am a lifelong D and there are no candidates even close. Where is the leadership? All they want is power and money. Not a single one has done anything including AOC and Bernie.

1

u/Folderpirate 16d ago

Yup Biden himself had to beg them to not make him th primary as his cancer raged through him.

But the dnc ignored that until the cancer got to stage 4 before dropping biden then announcing his cancer later.

They literally forced a man with cancer to run until he ignored the cancer enough for it to turn into stage 4

1

u/Langolier11 16d ago edited 15d ago

Honestly might need to protest them in their states

1

u/Nuggyfresh 16d ago

Stepped down? They did their job as heels to prevent good things from happening perfectly and have been compensated fabulously for it 😵‍💫

1

u/genericusername11101 16d ago

Not when we keep preaching vote blue no matter who.

1

u/SilentRunning 15d ago

They were doing their job when the lost the last two times to the Orange Mussolini. You can't expect them to actually WORK for ordinary people...can you? s/

It's too late for them to step down, we need to kick them to the street.

1

u/Purplociraptor 15d ago

Mitch McConnell won't even stay down and he's been dead for months. People in power do not want to give it up.

1

u/KamalaWonNoCap 15d ago

They're elected for their ability to fund raise, not push legislation. The DNC is broke now which makes the situation even more perplexing...

1

u/classless_classic 15d ago

They are more concerned with protecting their jobs than getting elected or doing what is right.

1

u/Old_Cryptid 15d ago

Honest question: why would they step down? There's zero political pressure on them to do their jobs much less quit.

→ More replies (6)

250

u/Tomato_Sky 16d ago

What’s really telling here with Jeffries is that it isn’t a cost thing. It’s ideology. So how did the Dems fall so far from being the party of the social contract and safety net to being corporate shills.

Everyone on the left and anyone paying attention has seen that Medicare for All as suggested by Bernie and others will reduce costs, full stop. It’s safer, more efficient, and saves money. The last holdout was that it would cost too much. Now that we’ve crossed that off- the democrats opposing it without reason never supported the safety net, the most profound pillar of their platform.

Jeffries was given the gavel to lead a party he never stood for. I’d imagine a lot of them ran on “Not a Republican,” but now we’re seeing the posioned among ranks that aren’t willing to push party ideals… from the top.

82

u/dragunityag 16d ago

So how did the Dems fall so far from being the party of the social contract and safety net to being corporate shills.

Citizens united.

Excepting times like now where people actually seem to be making an effort to be politically aware, most people just vote based on whose the loudest and the loudest is usually the one with the most money to spend.

32

u/Tomato_Sky 16d ago

I worked in politics before citizens united and probably up until it. I could not have predicted how bad it got so quick. I disagree that the culmination has to be identical. I really do have hard blame for Dems picking uncharismatic wienies for the past 30 years with Obama breaking through.

I think anyone with Obama’s messaging at a minimal could run the table on an overspending loud mouth. But Kamala and Walz were tepid and had no message. Clinton, zero message. Gore? Lockbox. The missing pieces in those campaigns weren’t more money, it was less disappointment before the vote was even casted.

9

u/ReturnOfBane 16d ago

long before that. They took off the mask back when they screwed us over with the Taft-Hartley Act.

9

u/transliminal2 16d ago

Today, most people (sadly) don't know what Taft-Hartley is, but good on you to recognize it as the turning point for the Democratic Party, when in 1947 a recently economically populist Democratic party first turned its back on the Labor Movement during the early days of the mid-century Red Scare. Taft-Hartley crippled the growing Labor Movement and began its slide into virtual irrelevancy by the 1980s.

3

u/No_ConflictsNow 16d ago

Exactly that - dont forget to thank ole Mitch McConnell and his keepers whenever they get around to having a funeral for him. CU his lifelong ambition. McConnell vs. FEC —> CU.

4

u/Busy-Dig8619 16d ago

No. It was Clinton. He brought this poison in and it is killing us.

3

u/nope-absolutely-not Arizona 15d ago

I'll never forget for as long as I live when Bill visited my dying mill town 30 years ago to do a victory lap for NAFTA.

1

u/smokeweedNgarden 16d ago

Not even just vote, but willfully follow the loud amd brash in all acts of life.

We need to stop acting like leadership has a charisma check. 

1

u/wildwalrusaur 15d ago

It goes back far further than that. CitU only amplified/accelerated what was already happening

The corporatist takeover of the DNC goes all the way back to RFK assassination

4

u/theguy_12345 16d ago

Yale reported m4a would save 1t annually. Thats 1t less in gdp. That means less tax receipts and could potentially deleverage some investments/assets.

They are not trying to save money because they're invested in our current established socioeconomic organization.

3

u/fordat1 16d ago

Jeffries was given the gavel to lead a party he never stood for

He stands for the party who you kidding. He was elected by the dem politicians.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/ilir_kycb 15d ago

So how did the Dems fall so far from being the party of the social contract and safety net to being corporate shills.

It’s simple; they never were anything but corporate shills.

The party's principles are all about serving capital and nothing else. It's the exact opposite of what you think it is.

Honestly, I find it alarming and frustrating that so many people misunderstand the Democratic Party's goals so badly.

And just to be clear, FDR was also just a defender of capital's interests.

FDR's social democratic policies (New Deal) were only politically possible because of the communist threat posed by the USSR. Social democratic policies are always just a concession made by the ruling capitalist class to the working class out of fear of communists. Since the USSR no longer exists, social democracy is in decline worldwide. Social democrats are essentially political parasites who feed off the existence of a communist threat to capitalism. Without a communist threat, they crumble because they are no longer needed by the capitalists; the social democratic parties in Europe demonstrate this very clearly, as they have all been in decline since the fall of the USSR.

Social democracy is a tool and a weapon of the capitalists. Social democracy is a tool used by the ruling capitalist class to pacify the working class without having to relinquish any political power. This ensures that social democratic concessions can be revoked at any time.

In short, New Deal-style policies are not possible without a communist threat. Even the New Deal served the interests of the capitalists and was designed from the outset solely to prevent the emergence of a genuine revolutionary communist movement in the United States.

The “New Deal,” the policy of the Roosevelt regime expressed in the National Industrial Recovery Act and associated measures, represents the most comprehensive and ruthless attempt of finance-capital to consolidate its power with the entire strength of the State machine over the whole field of industry, to hold the workers in subjection under extreme and intensified exploitation with a universal lowering of standards, to conduct on this basis and on the basis of the depreciated dollar a world campaign for markets, and to prepare directly the consequent inevitable war. ― R.P. Dutt - Fascism and Social Revolution

Some resources on the topic:

2

u/doberdevil 16d ago

What’s really telling here with Jeffries is that it isn’t a cost thing. It’s ideology. So how did the Dems fall so far from being the party of the social contract and safety net to being corporate shills.

Because people keep crying that both parties aren't the same and they continue to vote blue no matter who. There's no accountability for them, and that AIPAC money they get has more zeroes on the checks. Poor people vote, but they don't donate. They can't afford to.

3

u/Tomato_Sky 16d ago

I’ve been annoyed with the blue no matter who campaigns, not of the people, but the kinds of campaigns where the candidate just kind of shrugs their shoulders and tells you how bad the Republican are.

We got that message loud and clear 10 years ago. But Dem strategists have tampered down Dem candidates to sacrifice the 30% independents to cut 1% from that 30% Republican base. The people who would vote for Putin over a Democrat. Completely void of their own messaging. Hey Harris, what would you change? Nothing? Okay.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (25)

139

u/TheHandsOfLiberation 16d ago edited 16d ago

They already got two. Losing to trump, for any serious party, would have been the "we need to dramatically improve immediately" moment. But the DNC isn't a serious party. They're here as an alternative for us to vote for when we're angry with the brazen corruption and evil of the GOP. Not as an alternative party that moves towards its platforms, but as the nice thoughts of what we could theoretically support.

The DNC hasn't actually intended to help all this time. But now it's like the dog that caught the car. They talked about these good policies for so long that kids who grew up hearing about them are now actual progressives winning elections. The DNC didn't want that part. It was just supposed to be a lite version of conservative agenda with some dangled carrots.

Just like how MAGA is the kids who grew up with 50 years of fox propaganda and actually believed the lies. The original evil conservative knew it was all bullshit that was engineered to get away with bootlicking billionaires. But their messaging sunk in and now many voters actually want all those destructive policies.

One thing that warms my heart is that the GOP lost control of their monster, and the DNC is in that process now. Trump hijacked the whole scene the minute he won that first election. With the way primaries have been going lately, we're soon going to see a progressive do the same on the left, and then Jeffries and Schumer types won't have the power to hem and haw. They get away with that now because they're in charge. They can pretend they represent what the left wants. But soon the real progressive is going to be voted in, and the corpo centrists will have no choice but to change how they vote, or lose their elections.

15

u/JarvisProudfeather North Carolina 16d ago

The DNC is almost like a union for establishment corporatist politicians at this point. They exist to protect incumbents and the donor class. They have made it abundantly clear they couldn’t care less about the voters.

3

u/jjbananamonkey 15d ago

They’re terrified of the DSA overtaking the DNC in power.

1

u/TheHandsOfLiberation 15d ago

May be too late for them I hope. More than anything else, popularity and attention are the most powerful forces in modern politics. Even more powerful than money, which is why some of these DSA people are winning despite being outspended by 10x or more.

19

u/Routine_Freedom_5129 16d ago

Controlled opposition is what they are

6

u/TheHandsOfLiberation 16d ago

It's what they are right now. I believe it won't be for long. The empty promises they told us when we were kids are now the ideals many of us are fully dedicated to. They didn't intend to, but they breeded a generation of real progressives who aren't just talk.

8

u/Routine_Freedom_5129 16d ago

I hope so, but they've already made it clear they'll rather tank the whole thing before letting progressives get much control.

1

u/TheHandsOfLiberation 15d ago

They can't choose who wins elections. If a progressive appears on the ballot, they will win the primary. Outspending progressives by 10x hasn't been enough. Once progressives are on the general ballots, the DNC doesn't get a choice anymore, and they'll be forced to get behind progressives. The alternative is political suicide for the entire party by agreeing to betray their party voters.

1

u/ilir_kycb 15d ago

The Democratic Party is a tool of the ruling capitalist class and will never be anything else. It will always serve solely the ruling capitalist class and nothing else.

8

u/Striking-Sundae- 16d ago

Meh...Schumer has been in a reliably blue state and doesn't care. The guy has been sucking off of the government teat since 1975 and has no reason to change.

22

u/TheHandsOfLiberation 16d ago

He'll lose to progressive challenges. That time is here. Not some distant future. When a real progressive wins the presidency, and we ARE heading that way, people like Schumer will not be seen as leaders anymore. Just like how Trump changed what it means to be a republican, and suddenly all GOP officials had to do a 180 and start sulking off Trump, the same will be true when a progressive wins. Suddenly Schumer will be offering 100% support, or he'll get primaried just like Trump opponents within the GOP got primaried.

12

u/red23011 16d ago

I'm hoping that AOC runs for his seat and wins when his current term is over.

3

u/darkshark21 16d ago

I am thinking she will run against him in 2028.

7

u/Kool_AidJammer 16d ago

I hope you’re right but I’m not as optimistic.

5

u/jjbananamonkey 15d ago

Someone like Francesca Homg would have gotten 15% of the primary last election cycle and now only lost by 1%. She wasn’t even a strong candidate. As long as we continue to vote the time for change is now

2

u/ilir_kycb 15d ago

No, all of this was only possible because Trump is in tune with the interests of capital. The changes Trump brought about within the Republican Party were very minor and in line with the capitalist system.

However, the same thing is impossible on the left, through progressives in the Democratic Party, because it goes against the interests of capital.

In US America, capitalists are the ruling class who own everything and control everything. That cannot be changed so easily.

1

u/JimmyDejesu 16d ago

If you get fair elections again. Thas a big if.

9

u/PiccoloAwkward465 16d ago

Being in second place is still a pretty decent deal for them, I guess. Every day I believe more in the "controlled opposition" concept.

1

u/OldWorldDesign 15d ago

Losing to trump, for any serious party, would have been the "we need to dramatically improve immediately" moment

Losing to Trump was also supposed to be a wakeup call to the republican party in 2016 when he stepped into the wide lane they'd been clearing since Nixon:

If we nominate Trump, we will get destroyed… and we will deserve it.

-Lindsey Graham

1

u/ilir_kycb 15d ago

But soon the real progressive is going to be voted in

That's not going to happen—you can already see how the so-called “leftists” who get elected are shifting to the right.

If you are part of a political movement that is truly capable of and willing to fight against the interests of the ruling capitalists, you will be murdered in US America.

→ More replies (1)

70

u/clamb2 New York 16d ago

Somehow they got smoked in 2024 and learned nothing.

51

u/Routine_Freedom_5129 16d ago

Because as long as they get their bag they don't give a fuck

5

u/Simmchen11 16d ago

This!!!!

25

u/JcbAzPx Arizona 16d ago

They want this country to be what Trump is turning it into. They just don't want it to be this fast. They want to boil the frog so they might avoid the backlash they know is coming.

24

u/clamb2 New York 16d ago

They answer to the same billionaire donors.

5

u/AnalogFeelGood 16d ago

Both pockets are on the same pants.

2

u/Bocchi_theGlock 15d ago

The DNC chair promised to release autopsy, then backtracked, lied about it to Pod Save America and others, gaslighting (horrible interview, Trumpian vibes, repeating irrelevant lines & didn't engage genuinely)

Promised DNC members to vote against release because he'd give them exec summary, but never delivered

Then CNN got a copy and was going to release, so he went ahead - but with a disclaimer on every single page of the DNC does not support this.

Then didn't resign. Like holy shit how corrupt and broken the party is. And these kinds of folks run the campaigns, they're obsessed with careerism, super nepotistic.

47

u/Flammablegelatin 16d ago

They're all just performative cowards that don't actually want to make anything better but their pocket books.

66

u/Stennick 16d ago

They don’t own the POTUS, the SCOTUS, the House, the Senate, or the majority of governorships. How much more kicking do they need?

99

u/AyJay_D Maine 16d ago

Apparently even fucking more.

6

u/Rombom 16d ago

Backwards logic, you want the democrats to do something that requires power but you want them to do it before you actually give them the power to do so.

4

u/Proper-Raise-1450 16d ago

This is about them not even supporting doing it if they had power lol.

→ More replies (10)

68

u/antigop2020 16d ago

They would rather lose and allow a fascist regime to take over than to pass Medicare For All. Their entire leadership needs to be voted out.

3

u/TooCozy21 16d ago

I think you mean voters would rather allow that.

1

u/fred11551 Virginia 15d ago

The last election saw Americans overwhelming say they want more right wing policies. If you want democrats to shift left, left wing politicians need to beat them. Right wing politicians winning shows that the average American voter wants them to shift right.

→ More replies (12)

3

u/DillBagner 16d ago

The individual politicians need to lose their jobs. It doesn't matter to them if their party isn't the majority party if they're still in office.

5

u/Striking-Sundae- 16d ago

Still get paid for performative bs and easier to say that there is nothing they can do...

3

u/Fuzzylogik 16d ago

How much more kicking do they need?

right outta politics and their cushy positions

→ More replies (4)

32

u/Old_Ninja_Prime 16d ago

They’ve already gotten the kick. They need new leadership. Get these flaky centrists out of office.

6

u/TheGargageMan 16d ago

We can lose fighting for something, or we can lose by surrender.

5

u/sirZofSwagger 16d ago

As a society we cant afford that again

6

u/Cmdeadly 16d ago

It's a career choice not a moral choice, they can lose forever and still make millions of dollars why would they hurt the gravy train?

6

u/No-Promotion-1921 16d ago

That would presuppose they care about winning.

They don't. Shumer 8 co. would prefer a Republican over a Progressive. These old bags of dust need to be retired, forcefully. Let them live out their life in their mansion bought by Aipac.

3

u/starliteburnsbrite 16d ago

They've gotten it time and time again but they don't change.

3

u/Lucky-Earther Minnesota 16d ago

Looking at the way primary results are turning out, perhaps we will just get some new, better leadership.

3

u/ClaroStar 16d ago

Apparently losing to the most appalling president in history, twice, is not enough.

3

u/green_marshmallow 16d ago

And their first and only reaction will be to blame low voter turnout.

They are paid too well to ever learn the lesson, and would rather being the limo opposition to Republicans.

3

u/14Pleiadians 16d ago

They didn't come up with catchphrases like "Vote blue no matter who" because they have awesome policies.

We have the "fuck everything up" party and the "ha, I'm not the fuck everything up party so you HAVE to vote for me or else they'll put you in a camp" party"

6

u/AwildYaners Hawaii 16d ago

They got it. When Trump won his second term.

AND they still don’t fucking learn. Mostly because the establishment dems profit off the very corporate machine that churns out dollars to our republicans.

It’s why they’re mad at the new progressives taking hold across America; people like Mamdani that are actually trying to make changes.

2

u/TheVog Foreign 16d ago

Wouldn't change anything when someone can turn coat after being elected. See: Fetterman, Manchin, Sinema. The entire system is shit, as 2-party systems typically are.

2

u/VoidOmatic 16d ago

Seriously, everyone wants progressives with backbones.

2

u/edfitz83 16d ago

AOC for speaker

2

u/CaterpillarReal7583 16d ago

They arent leaders, just spinless men controlled by aipac

1

u/roll_that 16d ago

And a kick in the balls

1

u/Thattimetraveler 16d ago

They just love to lose I swear

1

u/Flat-Fun-7298 16d ago

What would you call the last one? Neither party represents you and the 3rd largest party's nominee won with less than 500 votes. This is what a duopoly looks like.

1

u/ElliotNess Florida 16d ago

The Democratic Party needs to go the way of the Whig and Dixiecrat parties and GTFO (for basically the same reasons)

1

u/darthvalium 16d ago

Another one!?

1

u/Honest_Error6408 16d ago

if all the "fighters" think the way Hakeem Jefferies does it definitely needs a kick in something.

1

u/Rombom 16d ago

Yeah let's just keep electing Republicans who are actively harmful instead.

1

u/JDnUkiah 16d ago

I agree. AND you are too kind … not the ONLY place they need a kick!🦵

1

u/Particular-Most-1199 16d ago

And the testicles

1

u/pickygirl707 16d ago

A lot of them definitely should have been primaried

1

u/ATheeStallion 16d ago

Agreed. Except all the progressive Dem candidates lost in many state primaries recently.

1

u/SunshineCat 16d ago edited 16d ago

We need to stop voting for these fucking corrupt and slimy individuals. There should be no candidates but platforms. We support a platform that includes Medicare for all. Those who don't support it should be removed from the party/platform we voted for and immediately replaced by another party member. There should be no drama surrounding an individual's irrelevant "feelings"---we don't care about them, we care about the platform. If they don't support the platform, they need to be expelled.

1

u/MySpoonsAreAllGone 16d ago

Yup, they all need to be kicked out until we get progressives in office who actually care about the people

1

u/joliette_le_paz 16d ago

Hahah! Oh yeah, and put who in power? Smh!

1

u/dudleydidwrong 16d ago

There are not many moderate Republicans left. Unfortunately, most of them are in Democratic party leadership positions. Since 2015 they have put more effort into blocking Bernie Sanders than they have in blocking Trump.

1

u/RoninIX 16d ago

They are so far right up the corporate ass, you can't see where they stop and the CEOs start.

1

u/M0BBER 16d ago

Don't wait for the election, the next protests should be at your local DNC office. Demand regime change. Demand new leadership... They don't get to tell us who the leaders are, that's our job.

1

u/ChicagoThrowaway422 15d ago

The DSA is that kick. I don't agree with some of their signature policies and yet I love that they're eating up the DNC. It's completely deserved.

1

u/3pointshoot3r 15d ago

It's outrageous that the Democratic leadership is FAR to the right of the overwhelming majority of the Democratic party.

1

u/PissedCarrier420 15d ago

Yes, more republican control will get you universal Healthcare. You people really never learn. Nothing will pass that will override a veto in 2027-2028 regardless.

Yes, Hakeem Jeffries blows. But he's going to be in congress. Instead of fantasizing about more Republican control How about you get on your member of congress to pick a different leader for the democratic caucus?

And there is a reasonable debate to be had on how we do universal healthcare. Medicare for all is not the only option. I would be more in favor of something like medicare for all who want it. I wouldn't wanna swap my employer healthcare for medicare. Now, if for some reason I had to and the law forced my employer to Give me that compensation in a different form I could support that.

1

u/Cross55 15d ago

They already have, they just double down

1

u/LauterTuna 15d ago

seems like a new party is needed

1

u/Varrianda 15d ago

Trump winning twice wasn’t the kick in the ballot box?

1

u/Jealous_Value_5076 16d ago

Destroy the DNC, and let DSA plant the insurgency at this point

→ More replies (14)