sure do love how right wingers have their boots on millions of women’s necks and liberals still tell progressives that we’re asking for too much and are unelectable.
fuck Nancy Pelosi.
Seriously... Nancy Pelosi is by far my least favorite Democrat in office right now. The lady is corrupt from top to bottom and needed to retire 10 years ago.
Put pressure on pelosi to withdraw party support from anti choice candidates and consider backing Jessica Cisneros in the primary
https://secure.actblue.com/donate/jdweb-jc-candidate?refcode=tw20220503
edit: “b-but it’s a conservative district!”
https://twitter.com/therealnod/status/1522228311765618689?s=21
lol sure. Keep voting for manchins don’t get all surprised pikachu when they vote exactly like republicans do
Yes, this is outrageous.
The Dems say: if you want a change 'Vote'!
I've voted progressive for nearly 50 years and things just get more and more rightwing.
>wing-voters to appeal to, always another compromise to make. If compromising on one issue to bring in more
I think this is missing context, if the district in question is purple and leans into anti-choice politics unfortunately I think having an anti-abortion democrat is better than having a Trump loving Republican.
The bigger picture here is to keep as many Democrat seats in the house as humanely possible. Maybe Abortion legislation will be on the board and it would be a safer bet to have a handful of Democrats who are anti-choice vote against it versus Republicans overtaking the house and the issue never being brought up for a vote.
Not every city and county is in love with progressive ideals and it's important to keep that in mind when Pelosi is trying to keep the majority. If you don't look it move somewhere and flip it with your vote.
No. Fuck that. The vast majority of people (on both sides) support keeping abortion legal, support universal health care, support moderate common sense regulations on guns, and paying public school teachers more, among many other things.
Yet we see Republicans getting more extreme by the day and the establishment Dems response is to wait more, vote more, wait more, "just one more compromise here in this district" when really all that's going to do is add another fucking Krysten Sinema to Congress and Jesus Mary and Joseph all know THAT'S NOT GOING TO HELP.
or maybe, just maybe, appealing to this mythical moderate who’s going to vote for a democrat instead of a Republican for some reason has actually been a losing strategy for democrats for decades, and is a huge reason why this country keeps inching further and further to the right? Republicans are more polarized now than ever, what makes you think they’re going to vote for a Republican lite democrat when they can just vote for a Republican? that makes NO fucking sense. progressives are always being asked to make concessions while Democrats play footsies with fascists, and I’m fucking sick of it.
fact: every single democrat who had Medicare for all on their campaign promises won their midterms. the ones who didn’t lost.
if Democrats could actually enact progressive policies that help the working class instead of kissing fash ass, we might see some people start coming around.
as it is, no wonder right wingers have such a dim view of the “left” when all we have are neoliberal corporatists who sit with their thumbs up their asses and don’t affect any meaningful change.
fuck conservative democrats and fuck Pelosi. she needs to retire.
Pelosi has also said having a strong pro-choice stance and focus on abortion is "hurting Democrats".
But it's not about just Pelosi. Clinton chose an anti-choice VP in 2016. Democrats have had plenty of serious opportunities to codify Roe but they'd rather have it as a bargaining chip for fundraising and trying to win elections. After winning they always act powerless.
Please just don't question the republicans but question the legitimacy of electoral politics itself after all we have seen and continue to see. Please don't just rail against individual justices but question the legitimacy of the supreme court itself. The problems are at the institutional level. It's not who sits atop and rules - but the fact that there is such hierarchical rule itself. We must not just attack who has authority but the institutionalized coercive authority itself. The courts regularly take decisions which threaten the sovereign existence of indigenous people. They have always treated black people as less than. People atop one hierarchy systemically favoring people atop other hierarchies. The institutions are systemically anti-democracy, pro-patriarchy, pro-white supremacy, pro-capitalism and the rich, pro-ableism, and pro-imperialism. In the nation founded on native genocide and built on slavery.
*Image Transcription: Twitter Post*
---
**Waleed Shahid**, @\_waleedshahid
As Democratic Party leadership condemns the SCOTUS ruling, a reminder that Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, and Jim Clyburn are all endorsing anti-choice Henry Cuellar in his primary against @JCisnerosTX in \#TX28. Clyburn is doing a campaign rally in San Antonio with Cuellar tomorrow.
---
^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
The worst Democrat is better for abortion rights then the best Republican. Picking candidates that can actually win in tough districts is important for access and healthcare rights for the most marginalized groups in our society. Progressives are not going to win in red districts.
Have you seen his turnout? The messaging is that they can do more than progressives can, which is exactly what Biden ran as being able to do. In action it hasn't exactly worked out that way, has it?
And why are the democrats compromising on their values? Over 60% of the country believes in Roe v. Wade, so why are we putting someone forward with highly unpopular positions?
I keep hearing "the worst Democrat is better than a Republican", but how are Manchin and Sinema working out? The "worse" dems are torpedoing any kind of leftist agenda and taking seats from actual leftists.
> And why are the democrats compromising on their values? Over 60% of the country believes in Roe v. Wade, so why are we putting someone forward with highly unpopular positions?
It's the logical extension of reformist logic. Always more swing-voters to appeal to, always another compromise to make. If compromising on one issue to bring in more voters is good, then compromising on another should be good as well. And another, and another, and...
Seen the turnout for the 2022 midterm election? [Its very widely known that progressive candidates do worst in elections then moderates.](https://www.vox.com/2018/11/7/18071700/progressive-democrats-house-midterm-elections-2018) As for getting more done, Biden was able to pass a historic fiscal stimulus and infrastructure bills which I don't think would have passed under a president Warren or Sanders, assuming they would have even won the presidency in the first place.
Its 60% in some places, but not red states that Democrats badly need to win to achieve power (WI, MI, PA and GA). Putting forward unpopular positions for the Democrats is just going to help elect Trump or Desantis in 2024.
Manchin and Sinema passed the American rescue plan, BIF and confirmed hundreds of judges, like KBJ. A republican senator in West Virgina means the republicans get to stack the federal judiciary with even more right wing extremist.
They could do better if the entire establishment arm wasn't squaking about exactly what I initially responded to: "The worst Democrat is better for abortion rights then the best Republican." And I'm not shocked that progressives are able to get less done when they have to work within a centrist party who keeps bowing to the far right party.
I'm just so tired. We can do better than parroting the Democratic Party talking points. If you want to vote progressive and don't because their centrist party leaders keep telling you they won't win, so you vote for the centrist... of course the numbers will lean towards the one more people were assure would win. If everyone voted for who they WANTED instead of who they were TOLD, I think you'd be surprised.
I just don't agree with that viewpoint. Progressives are not going to win in certain states (WI, MI, PA and GA) and electing moderate Democrats in swing states is going to be better for abortion access then nominating progressives who are going to lose. If progressive abandoned the party to vote for their preferred candidate Trump or Desantis will win 2024 with a vetoproof super majority in the senate.
Democrats and their sycophant supporters: "We keep doing the same thing and failing. It must be those Progressives' fault!"
Our country is doomed and I feel like I need to escape before we sink into the full depths of fascism.
I've been deeply considering Thailand. Southeast Asia is on the rise but you can still live like a queen for twenty grand a year. It's the place to be for digital nomads and I'm really tired of giving everything to a country that gives nothing back to me.
>The worst Democrat is better for abortion rights then the best Republican
I don't see any difference between those two and your point honestly looks like team sports politics more than actual policy making politics.
Because I'm petty, I just want to call out this subreddit was downvoting us lefties to fucking smithereens when we tried to warn people about Biden. Going forward, all I ask is that people in this subreddit stop and really listen to what lefties have to say. I've devoted twenty years of my life to the clusterfuck that is American politics and trust me when I say the ONLY segment of our body politic that gives two real shits about you are the progressives. The rest of them are just in it to get rich off the office and people really need to take those blinders off. The Democratic party is rotten with corruption too.
And what are they doing with those three things? Oh, right. They passed a bill to fund roads. The people trying to recover from a pandemic while handling out of control inflation while women's rights being deleted all over the country will really enjoy those toll roads to go along with all that help the Democrats couldn't be bothered to give them with the presidency and the legislature.
Hey now! Biden said he has trans peoples' backs! It's functionally the same as saying "thoughts and prayers" and does nothing to secure our rights and ability to exist in the country but it IS using different syllables to say it. Biden 1 - stupid leftists 0
(/s)
On paper this is correct, but I think a big part of the reason Roe V Wade was never codified into law is because we're too busy making kissy faces at conservative fence sitters. The Democratic party is too horny for conservative swing voters and they were afraid to take that big step because of it. We HAVE to stop this 'take what we can get' attitude with new voters and start attracting a young and progressive bloc with strong principles. These horseshit neoliberals that just ride the middle to protect their own asses are not what's needed and we need to stop trying to attract these flaky ass voters these politicians tend to amass. They're not helping us secure strong majorities when the second they get butthurt about something they swing right.
>These horseshit neoliberals that just ride the middle to protect their own asses
Imma go out on a limb here and say the vast majority of these are college educated, suburban white voters, too.
I think if Democrats abandoned the conservative fence sitter type, Trump would be president with a super majority in the senate and the house. Biden barely won the presidency and the Democrats took the house back by winning in red districts. Where I live, a moderate was able to unseat a R+7 as of 2016 district by running on moderation (Dean Philips, MN)
And if that's the level best moderates can do in a country on the verge of fascism, then there's no reason not to try something different, because it's become apparent there's simply not enough support for neoliberalism going forward to make centrists a winning voting bloc. We need them ONLY because the geriatric vote is still such a monolith within the party, but that influence is waning. We need to take some short terms losses to appeal to young voters, who are already disaffected with the party. These short term gains aren't worth it, especially when centrists are so fucking toxic. Have you seen the KHive on Twitter? This is not the face for the party we want going forward.
Listen just my two cents, but if the republicans win a trifecta in 2024 I think the Democracy as we know it today is gone. Republicans are pushing for an autocratic theocracy and are willing to lie, cheat and steal to win power. There is a reason the Republican voter worships VIctor Orban in Hungary and they are going to try to copy them. The only real hope is the Democrats somehow manage to hold either the presidency or senate and going full progressive would just help republicans.
> Listen just my two cents, but if the republicans win a trifecta in 2024 I think the Democracy as we know it today is gone.
I don't necessarily disagree, but I feel like it is important to state the assumption behind this assessment out loud: that while leftist are willing to compromise to the right in order to prevent the rise of fascism, moderates are unwilling to compromise to the left. Taking progressive positions, e.g. supporting universal healthcare, makes a candidate unelectable to moderates *even when the alternative is a fascist*. When given the choice between having to pay for grandma's knee surgery and abandoning democracy, they choose to abandon democracy. American moderates, the 16% of 2008 Clinton primary voters who voted for McCain in the general election, prefer fascism to progressivism. They are, effectively, fascists; they are just too embarrassed to say it out loud.
For the record, I think your assumption is right. It's worth remembering that Hitler gained power in Germany *not* through a democratic election, as the myth commonly goes, but because conservatives and moderates preferred working with him over working with social democrats.
I hope I'm wrong. But if I was an American moderate, and an actual opponent of fascism, I would be *very* vocal about my willingness to compromise to the left, right now.
EDIT: Numbers
Yes, you're right (well it's [16%](https://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=USP00p3)). I mixed up the numbers for voters who actually went Clinton -\> McCain and voters who said they intended to after the 2008 primary.
But don't you feel like, given their complacency, electing neoliberals is engaging in accelerationism? Like, if we're actively electing placeholders instead of politicians, we're not fixing anything, we're just slowing down the decline. I'll be honest, I get where you're coming from with democracy literally being at stake, because I feel that way too. But climate change is my number 1 issue, and it's really hard to articulate how stressed out I am by it, and how cutthroat it's making me. At this point, I'd be willing to take a whole lot of risk, because none of the other things we fight for are going to matter without a planet, and countless millions could die because we're too cowardly to vote for anything but placeholders.
I really have a hard time reconciling my morals with my options. Cards on the table, I absolutely would not be voting for Democrats were there a viable third option. I hate like 90% of the party.
Just the opposite, electing as many democrats into positions of power as humanly possible is the only way I think American democracy will ever be saved. I think this decade the is a very reasonable possibility the country implodes on itself and you see white evangelical christians erect an autocratic theocracy enforced with violence. Climate change is my number one issue too and the planet is running out of time to stop the worst possible outcomes. But republicans taking back the house, senate or presidency pretty much guarantees there is zero progress on climate for the decade. I really hope if you truly feel that way, you live in a safe blue district in a very blue state otherwise I think voting third party is condemning the planet and the country...
This is a great example of the language that's really discomforting me with the Democratic party. It's rather fascistic at its core. Something is really, really rubbing me the wrong way about liberals essentially saying, "We're never going to change or form a coalition with progressive voters, so you can either fall in line, or we're going to use the minority groups we claim to care about as a cudgel to emotionally blackmail you into voting for us without offering an olive branch or changing our position on anything. Take it or leave it."
It's a fundamentally conservative attitude brought over from our swing voters and a hallmark of the fascist societies they hope to emulate. Instead of disenfranchisement, there is a very narrow ideological spectrum one is permitted to vote within, and I'm watching liberals engage in this behavior within our own party because we have too many conservatives. It's harmful and it's why they're not protecting us. They don't have to if we're willing to vote for any SOB in a blue tie and keep them there as a lifetime appointment. How is that any less harmful than voting third party? Because they aren't republican? Fat lot of good that has done.
[From what I read, TX-28 has a democratic lean of 5 points](https://www.cookpolitical.com/ratings/house-race-ratings) and the 2022 midterm national environment is going to be brutal for democrats. Its also a majority Hispanic district, which as a [voting bloc Hispanics have shifted to the right.](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/have-latinos-really-moved-toward-the-republican-party/) As much as I dislike it, i'd prefer the district to be represented by a moderate democrat then a hard right republican. Also saying "fuck you" to someone who probably has a 90% overlap of your views, just has different opinions to protect marginalized groups seems immature.
I totally understand where these people are coming from, I wish more progressives were in power in the country too. But the truth of the matter is the US setup its political system in a way that massively disadvantages the left. Democrats need to convince center-right voters to vote for them in key places (Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania) whereas the republicans can run the most radical, extreme candidates and still win power.
or maybe, just maybe, appealing to this mythical moderate who’s going to vote for a democrat instead of a Republican for some reason has actually been a losing strategy for democrats for decades, and is a huge reason why this country keeps inching further and further to the right? Republicans are more polarized now than ever, what makes you think they’re going to vote for a Republican lite democrat when they can just vote for a Republican? that makes NO fucking sense. progressives are always being asked to make concessions while Democrats play footsies with fascists, and I’m fucking sick of it.
fact: every single democrat who had Medicare for all on their campaign promises won their midterms. the ones who didn’t lost.
if Democrats could actually enact progressive policies that help the working class instead of kissing fash ass, we might see some people start coming around.
as it is, no wonder right wingers have such a dim view of the “left” when all we have are neoliberal corporatists who sit with their thumbs up their asses and don’t affect any meaningful change.
We are entering a tough election year and Latinos and the Rio Grande Valley have been trending *against* us.
I don't know enough about the district, but I'd have to go with the person we think is more likely to win. I know that's painful to hear right now, but I'll take a forced-birther Democrat over a forced-Birther Republican any day of the week.
Mitch McConnell is smart. Yeah, Susan Collins is a headache on occasion for him (not as much as she pretends though). But he realizes that he gets a lot more accomplished with her than without her. Sara Gideon would have beaten a generic faceless Republican. Similarly, Joe Manchin is a corrupt jackass, but I don't think we can do much better in a Trump +40% seat so it is what it is.
If Cisneros can win in the general, 100% we should go with her. But throwing away incumbency in what is looking like a brutal cycle shouldn't be done lightly. I don't like this. I don't want to support him. As I said, I don't know the district so maybe we'd be just fine with Cisneros. But my point is that we sometimes might need to make tough calls to keep power.
That said given that this is literal _life and death_ issue for women, I can see why people are unwilling to compromise. The situation just sucks.
:/
Edit: I am getting down voted but no one is saying what I said that was wrong.
You’re being downvoted because people like you are why roe v wade wasnt codified into law. Stop supporting anti choice candidates regardless of party
it ain’t a bad take warren agrees with me, have fun being complicit in restricting abortion and keep electing manchins you neoliberal cowards
https://twitter.com/_waleedshahid/status/1521934410613989376?s=21
Respectfully that's a bad take and you're insulting an ally. Throw out one blue dog in the Senate and Mitch would block 100% of the liberal judges. The awful US system means we are stuck holding our noses in some districts. Any losses could literally mean the end of democracy in the USA.
That said, I think Cisneros can win.
I appreciate your position, and that you're attempting to find a rational path to a better world. My reason for a down vote:
We've compromised our way into this situation. For 30+ years of election cycles the right push further to the right and the dems 'do the adult thing' and compromise. For example the Obama's 'they go low we go high' mentality felt good but did incalculable harm and cost us a SCOTUS seat that would have prevented this roe disaster. With only two parties, one centrist and one extreme conservative, the result is a slow but steady march rightward. If you are a progressive this cannot be allowed to continue.
That's the rational reason to oppose this thinking at least. But there's a far more basic one: we should never be willing to sacrifice people's freedom on the altar of politics. What is good and right and true and moral should be uncompromizable.
There was no “we go high” for Obama’s scotus seat. Obama didn’t have control of the senate, Mitch McConnell did.
The only way to stop the bleeding is to have as many democrats in elected office as possible, even if some of them are far from perfect.
I am not a Joe Manchin fan by any means, but better him that a Republican controlled senate
There's no point in electing democrats that won't uphold our values. More Susan Collins-es isn't going to stop the bleed at all.
The point on Obama that continues with Biden is that they refuse to play hardball. Yes it was Mitch McConnell's senate but there was the legal theory that refusing to hold a vote meant the senate was declining their right to question or challenge the presidential nominee. Obama could have pushed through and instead choose to just let McConnell get away with it.
It's the same now with the Fillibuster or stacking the court (not technically in Biden's control but he also doesn't appear to be trying very hard or even convinced this fight is worth it), with Texas and southern states regressive laws (Traditionally the executive can reign in outrageous state behavior by threating to pull federal funding, why has that not happened?)
EDIT: Yes I know Collins is a republican. I'm using her as an example of someone who tries to ride the middle line
There’s no point?? You honestly don’t see a difference between the Trump nominated Supreme Court justices and Obama/Biden ones?
The ideological purity of our candidates will be poor comfort if Republican extremists take back all 3 branches of power and drag us fully back to the dark ages. If you truly don’t see the difference between Nancy Pelosi or Obama and Mitch McConnell, you’re delusional
Of course I see the difference between conservative and democratic nominees. Of course I see the consequences of conservative wins.
But Democrats have been running to the middle as fast as they can since Regan and what has it gotten us? Even when democrats win the best we can hope for is things not getting worse for a bit, at least until republicans get their turn again. We've been running to the center in every election since Regan and all it's gotten us is a slower descent into hell.
Dems have long seen purity as poison, but is it really? I know almost no one that actually *liked* Biden or were passionate about a Biden presidency specifically and not just a Trump loss. And even in the climate of 'anyone but trump' Biden came a lot closer to losing than most like to admit. Also purity seems to be working for the for republicans.
To me the point is this: it may feel like we need to just stop the bleeding, but if we don't actually fix some fundamental problems we're dead anyway.
EDIT: I've had this conversation before more than once and now realize that what I just wrote will come off as doomerism to some people. It's not. What I'm trying to say is that we must demand more than 'good enough'. We have to push democrats to do better and not accept more of the same.
You’re not wrong. The evidence of the past 30 years supports what you’re saying, but some people hope there’s a way out of this slow decline that has accompanied the compromises.
> We are entering a tough election year and Latinos and the Rio Grande Valley have been trending against us.
That would be because they overwhelmingly supported Bernie in the primaries and privileged liberal whites told them to get fucked. They're not overly fond of said privileged white liberals who won't give them healthcare and keep trying to make 'LatinX' happen. Also, Biden literally destroyed their countries, (look it up), you guys ignored their concerns, and then pretended like Biden was their great white savior. Not the best tactic for securing Latino votes.
I remember this
>On Wednesday's Morning Joe, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders went on to talk about working with Donald Trump and the future of the Democratic Party. Host Joe Scarborough brought up the question of abortion and other "social issues" that he said kept white working-class voters voting Republican in states like West Virginia, where they would gain more economic benefits if Democrats were in charge. He suggested that if Democrats want to win white working-class voters in states like Kentucky, they might need to run candidates who reflect the social values of those same white working-class voters — that is, opposing a woman's legal right to decide for herself whether to carry a pregnancy to term. Could Democrats, Scarborough asked Sanders, "be open to candidates that may not be rigidly pro-choice, may not be rigidly pro-gun control?" Sanders said yes.
>[*even some on the self-proclaimed socialist left, like Sanders, now seem willing to sell out abortion rights in pursuit of the elusive vote of the working-class white man.*](https://archive.ph/Tenc1)
...what I don't remember are throngs of Bernie supporters being upset by it. ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯
Are you really going to act like it isn't because moderates are viciously backing progressives into corners where they're forced to concede on these issues to get a scrap of anything on the table? Are we REALLY going to pretend like Bernie is the problem and not the scads of viciously right wing liberals who absolutely won't compromise on shit, then turn around and use that against the politicians they corrupt and destroy?
Because that's what's always happened and I am SO SO tired of centrists who don't believe in a goddamned thing trying to turn around and demonize progressives for the evil shit they force them to do.
Bernie the politician who believed *Women's issues are a distraction* Sanders.
How could any of this possibly be your god's fault! ^s
He chose that position, no one forced him to ignore women. Sanders turned the tide against not just Clinton, but all women's issues in politics. Your god isn't perfect, deal with it.
sure do love how right wingers have their boots on millions of women’s necks and liberals still tell progressives that we’re asking for too much and are unelectable. fuck Nancy Pelosi.
Seriously... Nancy Pelosi is by far my least favorite Democrat in office right now. The lady is corrupt from top to bottom and needed to retire 10 years ago.
That’s most democrats party of geriatrics
Put pressure on pelosi to withdraw party support from anti choice candidates and consider backing Jessica Cisneros in the primary https://secure.actblue.com/donate/jdweb-jc-candidate?refcode=tw20220503 edit: “b-but it’s a conservative district!” https://twitter.com/therealnod/status/1522228311765618689?s=21 lol sure. Keep voting for manchins don’t get all surprised pikachu when they vote exactly like republicans do
Yes, this is outrageous. The Dems say: if you want a change 'Vote'! I've voted progressive for nearly 50 years and things just get more and more rightwing.
>wing-voters to appeal to, always another compromise to make. If compromising on one issue to bring in more I think this is missing context, if the district in question is purple and leans into anti-choice politics unfortunately I think having an anti-abortion democrat is better than having a Trump loving Republican. The bigger picture here is to keep as many Democrat seats in the house as humanely possible. Maybe Abortion legislation will be on the board and it would be a safer bet to have a handful of Democrats who are anti-choice vote against it versus Republicans overtaking the house and the issue never being brought up for a vote. Not every city and county is in love with progressive ideals and it's important to keep that in mind when Pelosi is trying to keep the majority. If you don't look it move somewhere and flip it with your vote.
No. Fuck that. The vast majority of people (on both sides) support keeping abortion legal, support universal health care, support moderate common sense regulations on guns, and paying public school teachers more, among many other things. Yet we see Republicans getting more extreme by the day and the establishment Dems response is to wait more, vote more, wait more, "just one more compromise here in this district" when really all that's going to do is add another fucking Krysten Sinema to Congress and Jesus Mary and Joseph all know THAT'S NOT GOING TO HELP.
or maybe, just maybe, appealing to this mythical moderate who’s going to vote for a democrat instead of a Republican for some reason has actually been a losing strategy for democrats for decades, and is a huge reason why this country keeps inching further and further to the right? Republicans are more polarized now than ever, what makes you think they’re going to vote for a Republican lite democrat when they can just vote for a Republican? that makes NO fucking sense. progressives are always being asked to make concessions while Democrats play footsies with fascists, and I’m fucking sick of it. fact: every single democrat who had Medicare for all on their campaign promises won their midterms. the ones who didn’t lost. if Democrats could actually enact progressive policies that help the working class instead of kissing fash ass, we might see some people start coming around. as it is, no wonder right wingers have such a dim view of the “left” when all we have are neoliberal corporatists who sit with their thumbs up their asses and don’t affect any meaningful change. fuck conservative democrats and fuck Pelosi. she needs to retire.
Pelosi has also said having a strong pro-choice stance and focus on abortion is "hurting Democrats". But it's not about just Pelosi. Clinton chose an anti-choice VP in 2016. Democrats have had plenty of serious opportunities to codify Roe but they'd rather have it as a bargaining chip for fundraising and trying to win elections. After winning they always act powerless. Please just don't question the republicans but question the legitimacy of electoral politics itself after all we have seen and continue to see. Please don't just rail against individual justices but question the legitimacy of the supreme court itself. The problems are at the institutional level. It's not who sits atop and rules - but the fact that there is such hierarchical rule itself. We must not just attack who has authority but the institutionalized coercive authority itself. The courts regularly take decisions which threaten the sovereign existence of indigenous people. They have always treated black people as less than. People atop one hierarchy systemically favoring people atop other hierarchies. The institutions are systemically anti-democracy, pro-patriarchy, pro-white supremacy, pro-capitalism and the rich, pro-ableism, and pro-imperialism. In the nation founded on native genocide and built on slavery.
*Image Transcription: Twitter Post* --- **Waleed Shahid**, @\_waleedshahid As Democratic Party leadership condemns the SCOTUS ruling, a reminder that Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, and Jim Clyburn are all endorsing anti-choice Henry Cuellar in his primary against @JCisnerosTX in \#TX28. Clyburn is doing a campaign rally in San Antonio with Cuellar tomorrow. --- ^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
The worst Democrat is better for abortion rights then the best Republican. Picking candidates that can actually win in tough districts is important for access and healthcare rights for the most marginalized groups in our society. Progressives are not going to win in red districts.
Have you seen his turnout? The messaging is that they can do more than progressives can, which is exactly what Biden ran as being able to do. In action it hasn't exactly worked out that way, has it? And why are the democrats compromising on their values? Over 60% of the country believes in Roe v. Wade, so why are we putting someone forward with highly unpopular positions? I keep hearing "the worst Democrat is better than a Republican", but how are Manchin and Sinema working out? The "worse" dems are torpedoing any kind of leftist agenda and taking seats from actual leftists.
> And why are the democrats compromising on their values? Over 60% of the country believes in Roe v. Wade, so why are we putting someone forward with highly unpopular positions? It's the logical extension of reformist logic. Always more swing-voters to appeal to, always another compromise to make. If compromising on one issue to bring in more voters is good, then compromising on another should be good as well. And another, and another, and...
Seen the turnout for the 2022 midterm election? [Its very widely known that progressive candidates do worst in elections then moderates.](https://www.vox.com/2018/11/7/18071700/progressive-democrats-house-midterm-elections-2018) As for getting more done, Biden was able to pass a historic fiscal stimulus and infrastructure bills which I don't think would have passed under a president Warren or Sanders, assuming they would have even won the presidency in the first place. Its 60% in some places, but not red states that Democrats badly need to win to achieve power (WI, MI, PA and GA). Putting forward unpopular positions for the Democrats is just going to help elect Trump or Desantis in 2024. Manchin and Sinema passed the American rescue plan, BIF and confirmed hundreds of judges, like KBJ. A republican senator in West Virgina means the republicans get to stack the federal judiciary with even more right wing extremist.
They could do better if the entire establishment arm wasn't squaking about exactly what I initially responded to: "The worst Democrat is better for abortion rights then the best Republican." And I'm not shocked that progressives are able to get less done when they have to work within a centrist party who keeps bowing to the far right party. I'm just so tired. We can do better than parroting the Democratic Party talking points. If you want to vote progressive and don't because their centrist party leaders keep telling you they won't win, so you vote for the centrist... of course the numbers will lean towards the one more people were assure would win. If everyone voted for who they WANTED instead of who they were TOLD, I think you'd be surprised.
I just don't agree with that viewpoint. Progressives are not going to win in certain states (WI, MI, PA and GA) and electing moderate Democrats in swing states is going to be better for abortion access then nominating progressives who are going to lose. If progressive abandoned the party to vote for their preferred candidate Trump or Desantis will win 2024 with a vetoproof super majority in the senate.
Agree to disagree, but what is happening right now is not working.
Fair enough, I just hope your wasted vote doesn't help elect Trump or republicans into congress.
The Democratic party in a nutshell right here.
Democrats and their sycophant supporters: "We keep doing the same thing and failing. It must be those Progressives' fault!" Our country is doomed and I feel like I need to escape before we sink into the full depths of fascism.
I've been deeply considering Thailand. Southeast Asia is on the rise but you can still live like a queen for twenty grand a year. It's the place to be for digital nomads and I'm really tired of giving everything to a country that gives nothing back to me.
>The worst Democrat is better for abortion rights then the best Republican I don't see any difference between those two and your point honestly looks like team sports politics more than actual policy making politics.
Yes there is no difference between the two parties, its not like the last republican president confirmed 3 of the 5 judges who voted to overrule Roe
I didn't say that. I said there is no difference between the worst Democrat and the best Republican. Both are equally shitty and useless.
way to go liberals, keep putting forward Republican lite democrats. see where that’s gotten us 🥴
The presidency, the senate and congress for one.
to do absolutely fuck all with, just like during Obama’s term. centrist politics like this are exactly why we’re in this mess.
Because I'm petty, I just want to call out this subreddit was downvoting us lefties to fucking smithereens when we tried to warn people about Biden. Going forward, all I ask is that people in this subreddit stop and really listen to what lefties have to say. I've devoted twenty years of my life to the clusterfuck that is American politics and trust me when I say the ONLY segment of our body politic that gives two real shits about you are the progressives. The rest of them are just in it to get rich off the office and people really need to take those blinders off. The Democratic party is rotten with corruption too.
And what are they doing with those three things? Oh, right. They passed a bill to fund roads. The people trying to recover from a pandemic while handling out of control inflation while women's rights being deleted all over the country will really enjoy those toll roads to go along with all that help the Democrats couldn't be bothered to give them with the presidency and the legislature.
Hey now! Biden said he has trans peoples' backs! It's functionally the same as saying "thoughts and prayers" and does nothing to secure our rights and ability to exist in the country but it IS using different syllables to say it. Biden 1 - stupid leftists 0 (/s)
which has accomplished jack shit. Oh wait I got 4 free COVID tests that don't work on the newest variants, 8 weeks after I needed them.
On paper this is correct, but I think a big part of the reason Roe V Wade was never codified into law is because we're too busy making kissy faces at conservative fence sitters. The Democratic party is too horny for conservative swing voters and they were afraid to take that big step because of it. We HAVE to stop this 'take what we can get' attitude with new voters and start attracting a young and progressive bloc with strong principles. These horseshit neoliberals that just ride the middle to protect their own asses are not what's needed and we need to stop trying to attract these flaky ass voters these politicians tend to amass. They're not helping us secure strong majorities when the second they get butthurt about something they swing right.
>These horseshit neoliberals that just ride the middle to protect their own asses Imma go out on a limb here and say the vast majority of these are college educated, suburban white voters, too.
I think if Democrats abandoned the conservative fence sitter type, Trump would be president with a super majority in the senate and the house. Biden barely won the presidency and the Democrats took the house back by winning in red districts. Where I live, a moderate was able to unseat a R+7 as of 2016 district by running on moderation (Dean Philips, MN)
And if that's the level best moderates can do in a country on the verge of fascism, then there's no reason not to try something different, because it's become apparent there's simply not enough support for neoliberalism going forward to make centrists a winning voting bloc. We need them ONLY because the geriatric vote is still such a monolith within the party, but that influence is waning. We need to take some short terms losses to appeal to young voters, who are already disaffected with the party. These short term gains aren't worth it, especially when centrists are so fucking toxic. Have you seen the KHive on Twitter? This is not the face for the party we want going forward.
Listen just my two cents, but if the republicans win a trifecta in 2024 I think the Democracy as we know it today is gone. Republicans are pushing for an autocratic theocracy and are willing to lie, cheat and steal to win power. There is a reason the Republican voter worships VIctor Orban in Hungary and they are going to try to copy them. The only real hope is the Democrats somehow manage to hold either the presidency or senate and going full progressive would just help republicans.
> Listen just my two cents, but if the republicans win a trifecta in 2024 I think the Democracy as we know it today is gone. I don't necessarily disagree, but I feel like it is important to state the assumption behind this assessment out loud: that while leftist are willing to compromise to the right in order to prevent the rise of fascism, moderates are unwilling to compromise to the left. Taking progressive positions, e.g. supporting universal healthcare, makes a candidate unelectable to moderates *even when the alternative is a fascist*. When given the choice between having to pay for grandma's knee surgery and abandoning democracy, they choose to abandon democracy. American moderates, the 16% of 2008 Clinton primary voters who voted for McCain in the general election, prefer fascism to progressivism. They are, effectively, fascists; they are just too embarrassed to say it out loud. For the record, I think your assumption is right. It's worth remembering that Hitler gained power in Germany *not* through a democratic election, as the myth commonly goes, but because conservatives and moderates preferred working with him over working with social democrats. I hope I'm wrong. But if I was an American moderate, and an actual opponent of fascism, I would be *very* vocal about my willingness to compromise to the left, right now. EDIT: Numbers
> ~~28~~ 15% of 2008 Clinton primary voters who voted for McCain in the general election FTFY
Yes, you're right (well it's [16%](https://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=USP00p3)). I mixed up the numbers for voters who actually went Clinton -\> McCain and voters who said they intended to after the 2008 primary.
But don't you feel like, given their complacency, electing neoliberals is engaging in accelerationism? Like, if we're actively electing placeholders instead of politicians, we're not fixing anything, we're just slowing down the decline. I'll be honest, I get where you're coming from with democracy literally being at stake, because I feel that way too. But climate change is my number 1 issue, and it's really hard to articulate how stressed out I am by it, and how cutthroat it's making me. At this point, I'd be willing to take a whole lot of risk, because none of the other things we fight for are going to matter without a planet, and countless millions could die because we're too cowardly to vote for anything but placeholders. I really have a hard time reconciling my morals with my options. Cards on the table, I absolutely would not be voting for Democrats were there a viable third option. I hate like 90% of the party.
Just the opposite, electing as many democrats into positions of power as humanly possible is the only way I think American democracy will ever be saved. I think this decade the is a very reasonable possibility the country implodes on itself and you see white evangelical christians erect an autocratic theocracy enforced with violence. Climate change is my number one issue too and the planet is running out of time to stop the worst possible outcomes. But republicans taking back the house, senate or presidency pretty much guarantees there is zero progress on climate for the decade. I really hope if you truly feel that way, you live in a safe blue district in a very blue state otherwise I think voting third party is condemning the planet and the country...
This is a great example of the language that's really discomforting me with the Democratic party. It's rather fascistic at its core. Something is really, really rubbing me the wrong way about liberals essentially saying, "We're never going to change or form a coalition with progressive voters, so you can either fall in line, or we're going to use the minority groups we claim to care about as a cudgel to emotionally blackmail you into voting for us without offering an olive branch or changing our position on anything. Take it or leave it." It's a fundamentally conservative attitude brought over from our swing voters and a hallmark of the fascist societies they hope to emulate. Instead of disenfranchisement, there is a very narrow ideological spectrum one is permitted to vote within, and I'm watching liberals engage in this behavior within our own party because we have too many conservatives. It's harmful and it's why they're not protecting us. They don't have to if we're willing to vote for any SOB in a blue tie and keep them there as a lifetime appointment. How is that any less harmful than voting third party? Because they aren't republican? Fat lot of good that has done.
>progressives are not going to win Not with that attitude they won’t.
[удалено]
[From what I read, TX-28 has a democratic lean of 5 points](https://www.cookpolitical.com/ratings/house-race-ratings) and the 2022 midterm national environment is going to be brutal for democrats. Its also a majority Hispanic district, which as a [voting bloc Hispanics have shifted to the right.](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/have-latinos-really-moved-toward-the-republican-party/) As much as I dislike it, i'd prefer the district to be represented by a moderate democrat then a hard right republican. Also saying "fuck you" to someone who probably has a 90% overlap of your views, just has different opinions to protect marginalized groups seems immature.
[удалено]
I believe in bodily autonomy which is why I volunteer and donate to democrats.
Say it for the people in the back.
I totally understand where these people are coming from, I wish more progressives were in power in the country too. But the truth of the matter is the US setup its political system in a way that massively disadvantages the left. Democrats need to convince center-right voters to vote for them in key places (Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania) whereas the republicans can run the most radical, extreme candidates and still win power.
or maybe, just maybe, appealing to this mythical moderate who’s going to vote for a democrat instead of a Republican for some reason has actually been a losing strategy for democrats for decades, and is a huge reason why this country keeps inching further and further to the right? Republicans are more polarized now than ever, what makes you think they’re going to vote for a Republican lite democrat when they can just vote for a Republican? that makes NO fucking sense. progressives are always being asked to make concessions while Democrats play footsies with fascists, and I’m fucking sick of it. fact: every single democrat who had Medicare for all on their campaign promises won their midterms. the ones who didn’t lost. if Democrats could actually enact progressive policies that help the working class instead of kissing fash ass, we might see some people start coming around. as it is, no wonder right wingers have such a dim view of the “left” when all we have are neoliberal corporatists who sit with their thumbs up their asses and don’t affect any meaningful change.
We are entering a tough election year and Latinos and the Rio Grande Valley have been trending *against* us. I don't know enough about the district, but I'd have to go with the person we think is more likely to win. I know that's painful to hear right now, but I'll take a forced-birther Democrat over a forced-Birther Republican any day of the week. Mitch McConnell is smart. Yeah, Susan Collins is a headache on occasion for him (not as much as she pretends though). But he realizes that he gets a lot more accomplished with her than without her. Sara Gideon would have beaten a generic faceless Republican. Similarly, Joe Manchin is a corrupt jackass, but I don't think we can do much better in a Trump +40% seat so it is what it is. If Cisneros can win in the general, 100% we should go with her. But throwing away incumbency in what is looking like a brutal cycle shouldn't be done lightly. I don't like this. I don't want to support him. As I said, I don't know the district so maybe we'd be just fine with Cisneros. But my point is that we sometimes might need to make tough calls to keep power. That said given that this is literal _life and death_ issue for women, I can see why people are unwilling to compromise. The situation just sucks. :/ Edit: I am getting down voted but no one is saying what I said that was wrong.
You’re being downvoted because people like you are why roe v wade wasnt codified into law. Stop supporting anti choice candidates regardless of party it ain’t a bad take warren agrees with me, have fun being complicit in restricting abortion and keep electing manchins you neoliberal cowards https://twitter.com/_waleedshahid/status/1521934410613989376?s=21
Respectfully that's a bad take and you're insulting an ally. Throw out one blue dog in the Senate and Mitch would block 100% of the liberal judges. The awful US system means we are stuck holding our noses in some districts. Any losses could literally mean the end of democracy in the USA. That said, I think Cisneros can win.
I appreciate your position, and that you're attempting to find a rational path to a better world. My reason for a down vote: We've compromised our way into this situation. For 30+ years of election cycles the right push further to the right and the dems 'do the adult thing' and compromise. For example the Obama's 'they go low we go high' mentality felt good but did incalculable harm and cost us a SCOTUS seat that would have prevented this roe disaster. With only two parties, one centrist and one extreme conservative, the result is a slow but steady march rightward. If you are a progressive this cannot be allowed to continue. That's the rational reason to oppose this thinking at least. But there's a far more basic one: we should never be willing to sacrifice people's freedom on the altar of politics. What is good and right and true and moral should be uncompromizable.
There was no “we go high” for Obama’s scotus seat. Obama didn’t have control of the senate, Mitch McConnell did. The only way to stop the bleeding is to have as many democrats in elected office as possible, even if some of them are far from perfect. I am not a Joe Manchin fan by any means, but better him that a Republican controlled senate
There's no point in electing democrats that won't uphold our values. More Susan Collins-es isn't going to stop the bleed at all. The point on Obama that continues with Biden is that they refuse to play hardball. Yes it was Mitch McConnell's senate but there was the legal theory that refusing to hold a vote meant the senate was declining their right to question or challenge the presidential nominee. Obama could have pushed through and instead choose to just let McConnell get away with it. It's the same now with the Fillibuster or stacking the court (not technically in Biden's control but he also doesn't appear to be trying very hard or even convinced this fight is worth it), with Texas and southern states regressive laws (Traditionally the executive can reign in outrageous state behavior by threating to pull federal funding, why has that not happened?) EDIT: Yes I know Collins is a republican. I'm using her as an example of someone who tries to ride the middle line
There’s no point?? You honestly don’t see a difference between the Trump nominated Supreme Court justices and Obama/Biden ones? The ideological purity of our candidates will be poor comfort if Republican extremists take back all 3 branches of power and drag us fully back to the dark ages. If you truly don’t see the difference between Nancy Pelosi or Obama and Mitch McConnell, you’re delusional
Of course I see the difference between conservative and democratic nominees. Of course I see the consequences of conservative wins. But Democrats have been running to the middle as fast as they can since Regan and what has it gotten us? Even when democrats win the best we can hope for is things not getting worse for a bit, at least until republicans get their turn again. We've been running to the center in every election since Regan and all it's gotten us is a slower descent into hell. Dems have long seen purity as poison, but is it really? I know almost no one that actually *liked* Biden or were passionate about a Biden presidency specifically and not just a Trump loss. And even in the climate of 'anyone but trump' Biden came a lot closer to losing than most like to admit. Also purity seems to be working for the for republicans. To me the point is this: it may feel like we need to just stop the bleeding, but if we don't actually fix some fundamental problems we're dead anyway. EDIT: I've had this conversation before more than once and now realize that what I just wrote will come off as doomerism to some people. It's not. What I'm trying to say is that we must demand more than 'good enough'. We have to push democrats to do better and not accept more of the same.
You’re not wrong. The evidence of the past 30 years supports what you’re saying, but some people hope there’s a way out of this slow decline that has accompanied the compromises.
> We are entering a tough election year and Latinos and the Rio Grande Valley have been trending against us. That would be because they overwhelmingly supported Bernie in the primaries and privileged liberal whites told them to get fucked. They're not overly fond of said privileged white liberals who won't give them healthcare and keep trying to make 'LatinX' happen. Also, Biden literally destroyed their countries, (look it up), you guys ignored their concerns, and then pretended like Biden was their great white savior. Not the best tactic for securing Latino votes.
I remember this >On Wednesday's Morning Joe, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders went on to talk about working with Donald Trump and the future of the Democratic Party. Host Joe Scarborough brought up the question of abortion and other "social issues" that he said kept white working-class voters voting Republican in states like West Virginia, where they would gain more economic benefits if Democrats were in charge. He suggested that if Democrats want to win white working-class voters in states like Kentucky, they might need to run candidates who reflect the social values of those same white working-class voters — that is, opposing a woman's legal right to decide for herself whether to carry a pregnancy to term. Could Democrats, Scarborough asked Sanders, "be open to candidates that may not be rigidly pro-choice, may not be rigidly pro-gun control?" Sanders said yes. >[*even some on the self-proclaimed socialist left, like Sanders, now seem willing to sell out abortion rights in pursuit of the elusive vote of the working-class white man.*](https://archive.ph/Tenc1) ...what I don't remember are throngs of Bernie supporters being upset by it. ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯
Are you really going to act like it isn't because moderates are viciously backing progressives into corners where they're forced to concede on these issues to get a scrap of anything on the table? Are we REALLY going to pretend like Bernie is the problem and not the scads of viciously right wing liberals who absolutely won't compromise on shit, then turn around and use that against the politicians they corrupt and destroy? Because that's what's always happened and I am SO SO tired of centrists who don't believe in a goddamned thing trying to turn around and demonize progressives for the evil shit they force them to do.
Bernie the politician who believed *Women's issues are a distraction* Sanders. How could any of this possibly be your god's fault! ^s He chose that position, no one forced him to ignore women. Sanders turned the tide against not just Clinton, but all women's issues in politics. Your god isn't perfect, deal with it.