2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHow come there are not more "Democratic-Socialists" in Congress/Senate/State/Local ?
Note to the GDP Host: This is a relevant discussion as it relates to Bernie Sanders candidacyFirst off I am talking about politicians that better represent Bernie's positions. I don't care if they are called Democrats, Socialists, whatever.
It is a fact that a national candidate for President is going to build a policy platform that is appealing to a broad cross section of the country. Why are people shocked, outraged, mad, disgusted at this simple reality? If you run a national campaign in a general election with outside the range of current policiy positions should you be surprised when it doesn't win? Even in a Primary (which is the most activist political participants) it isn't winning.
On the other hand, it should be much easier to increase representation in more regional or state or local elected positions. IF there were more representation down through the hierarchy for Bernies positions, then I would suggest, there is actually more evidence that such positions could win a national election.
There are not more because these views are in the minority and can't win elections.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Hard to believe that someone who posts as much as you and pretends to be so smart, does not know the answer to your own question.
It's as if you are merely trying to be something like a toy to be played with.
The reason we don't have a government by the people is because government is bought by those with big money. Duh!
BootinUp
(47,177 posts)swaying votes.
cali
(114,904 posts)BootinUp
(47,177 posts)in a national campaign for President. I hope he does well and we see more like him.
cali
(114,904 posts)Is the only successful third party in the country. Progressives are in the Vermont Senate and House and hold statewide office. Progressives have dominated Burlington politics for years and last week all three dem gubernatorial candidates auditioned for the party, seeking its endorsement and saying they'd all run as Dem/Prog hybrids.
BootinUp
(47,177 posts)then I would have accepted that the D party was further left than I thought. And thats what we would have gone with.
nc4bo
(17,651 posts)She's been AWOL from growing the party for quite sometime now.
America loves it's socialist programs just fine but I don't think the kingpins appreciate them as much.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)--imm
forjusticethunders
(1,151 posts)that a lot of so-called progressives are not interested in doing (no, virtue-signaling about how progressive you are while doing none of the groundwork to make it happen doesn't count)
BootinUp
(47,177 posts)RW propaganda beating down common sense views. Whatever the causes are, I don't think the solution is putting up a less popular national platform.
imagine2015
(2,054 posts)I assume the Hillary method is acceptable to you.
Is that right?
BootinUp
(47,177 posts)trends of the last 30-40 years. If she didn't have strong proposals on it, then Bernie could have attacked her proposals more. Fact is he is relying on a false perception.
snort
(2,334 posts)BootinUp
(47,177 posts)TheBlackAdder
(28,211 posts).
It's the degree of selfishness that is key. Envy, jealousy and personal greed factor into it.
Even the most liberal Democrats have levels of self-affectation, where they want things in their pocket first.
You go to church and you hear about helping the poor, and the next words out of mouths are "family first."
.
Todays_Illusion
(1,209 posts)a Business First platform. Liberal candidates are not recruited and are not supported.
BootinUp
(47,177 posts)is that they will normally support candidates they have deemed have a shot.
Clearly money is available to run more socialist leaning candidates even if not from the DNC. Again talking about races down the ballot.
But in the end you are always fighting current political climate. Its better now than 20 years ago. My belief, is that another strong D President with a good economic record will go a long ways to changing more minds on Reaganomics.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)...settle for the less evil crappy candidates.
BootinUp
(47,177 posts)Not sure how that is meaningful other than being a way to dismiss the reality. Fear campaigning is now the norm.
I say fuck that, I demand good and honest, not quite as shitty doesn't cut it.
BootinUp
(47,177 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)....paid for, corrupt slime is a requirement to "win elections."
I strongly disagree. I have ethics, you should try that.
BootinUp
(47,177 posts)I won't take the position that some elected officials in the D party NEVER vote for personal gain instead of party philosophy. But I am more than willing to argue (in some other thread) that it can be shown that the D party philosophy does not come from a position that corruption is the requirement. You aim your weapon at the wrong side. Simple as that.
This thread was meant to discuss why AMERICAN VOTERS aren't electing socialists in battleground states for example for any significant elective offices.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Clearly, I hit a nerve.
Cognitive disonance is a thing.
BootinUp
(47,177 posts)then I can see how you just KNOW that the D party is all corrupt and everything. Since this thread is NOT about that, and you don't want to discuss the OP apparently, I bid you a good day.
Henhouse
(646 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)The philosophy of the Vermont Progressive Party is rooted in Democratic Socialism.
This guy, a Vermont State Senator, and long time VT Prog is running for Ltd. Guv. Expect to seem him in Congress someday.
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/2015/12/10/zuckerman-to-announce-run-for-lieutenant-governor/77082926/
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)over the last century by US facsists.
History is your friend.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)BootinUp
(47,177 posts)I mean a politican with views similar to Bernie's.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)And is willing to kill the corporate goose that lays the golden eggs?
Follow the money
BootinUp
(47,177 posts)to run for other offices in battleground states for example. Didn't Bernie just prove that incorrect?
Isn't a more logical conclusion that its Bernie's policies are not able to win elections?
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Personal enrichment style. They want to get rich.
BootinUp
(47,177 posts)Some day the reality will maybe hit you that if anyone thought they could win races handily with Bernie's policies they would live comfortably enough and sleep terrific. But you apparently think no one is smart enough to figure that out.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)And you don't deny it
BootinUp
(47,177 posts)Skwmom
(12,685 posts)Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)Still see it here (DU, that is) on the regular.