Helsing posted:

It would be very in character for the Democrats to decide that Trump is so bad that they will inevitably win in the next midterms and the next presidential election.

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

The senate revolves around seniority and Schumer was going to be leader regardless -- reminder Harry Reid was leader until this year, Pelosi has kept the caucus together incredibly well (her actual job) AND in the darkest of days elections the DCCC asctually picked up seats, and Perez has been a cabinet official, not exactly a senior leader of the party. Ellison is hardly an outsider either, having been a part of informal leadership for most of the Obama years.

Covok posted:

As a remimder, the right is actively trying to make the left fight itself.

XyrlocShammypants posted:

No one expected bush Obama or trump four years before the election. No one will predict the next winner 4 years out this time.

Covok posted:

You know, you've come into the Trump thread numerous times to defend Trump. Why do you think I wouldn't know your agenda here?

Covok posted:

The fact you only started posting here after the election to say dems suck and we should vote 3rd party is damning in and of itself.

Fulchrum posted:

mcmagic posted:

No. They need ~50 strong candidates 1 year from now.

Lightning Lord posted:

It seems pretty clear to me which party harbors people who would honestly consider killing everyone in this thread and which doesn't.

i am the bird posted:

Yes, hemorrhaging that powerhouse voting bloc they had from 1968 to 1992 and then winning the popular vote in five of the next six presidential elections.

Y'all have a point but the hyperbole doesn't help.

StealthArcher posted:

You know, as someone who has said over and over that Bernie Would Have Won™, I find it interesting you left 2016 off that list.


Oh right, it's because we gained in both houses. Hillary blew the election harder than a category 5, but our House/Senate races weren't a loss in the sense of losing seats.

JeffersonClay posted:

I'm saying Wikileaks is not doing us a favor by publishing the documents the Russians hacked to ratfuck our party.

Flip Yr Wig posted:

Given that whoever hacked the DNC email records did it with the intent to harm the democrats, I think we can assume we saw the worst stuff that was available to them.

JeffersonClay posted:

I too believe the readership of the Jacobin is a reasonable proxy for the US electorate, and am shocked and insulted you have not adopted my political positions wholesale.

The Ender posted:

I really don't think it ever crossed Clinton's mind that some people might not appreciate Kissinger's legacy. Like, that's just status quo politics to her & her husband. You go chase some tail, you blow-up some weirdos in other countries, you clutch your pearls and pretend to have empathy when a tragedy occurs. Politics!

JeffersonClay posted:

But he lost and y'all can't get over it.

JeffersonClay posted:

Bernouts: The primary is over and you lost. You weren't smart enough to figure this out in time for the last election so please do your best to figure it out for the next one.

JeffersonClay posted:

You'd think Bernouts would avoid re litigating the primary at every turn considering the terrible feelings of loss it caused them but some people are gluttons for punishment I guess.

Nocturtle posted:

I missed this, is it true? For example I can't find the individual votes from the 2011 DNC election anywahere online. Changing the rules for this specific election to allow a secret ballot would be a clear sign that the Democrat establishment views itself in open conflict with progressives (and fears reprisals). I'd be a little shocked if it's true.

Brainiac Five posted:

Secret ballots are bad now? You guys upset you can't threaten DNC members and stalk them over their vote or something?

Brainiac Five posted:

Let's eliminate secret ballots in general elections too. Transparency!

Brainiac Five posted:

If you want to shut me up, you'll have to kill me, babe. I enjoy the right to freedom of speech and will use it until you Bernouts make it illegal to criticize Bernie, at which point I will be murdered by your secret police. Looking forward to it.

Brainiac Five posted:

I believe that letting you fuckers say poo poo like "political guild" without objecting is tantamount to suicide.

Nocturtle posted:

Ruh-roh, there it is. The DNC changing party rules to reduce transparency is a bad sign, even if you don't think the Democrats need to reform it's a good way to alienate progressives. Maybe the thinking is progressives weren't going to turnout in 2018 anyway.

The parallels with the UK Labour party are getting really uncomfortable. In 2016 the Labour establishment even changed a bunch of NEC votes to secret ballots in an ultimately futile attempt to keep Corbyn out of the leadership race. I suppose it's expected existing power structures will try to resist challenges to their power, but it's a shocking to see in the leadership of massively defeated political parties. You'd think in that case there'd be universal acceptance that reform is necessary but nope.

Brainiac Five posted:

"Political guild" is a lie because it is deliberate deception to sway people towards interpreting everything done by the Democratic Party as part of a vast conspiracy.

JeffersonClay posted:

The Bernouts are mad as hell and they're not going to let little things like what words actually mean stop them from feeding their insane persecution complex.

Brainiac Five posted:

If you want to shut me up, you'll have to kill me, babe. I enjoy the right to freedom of speech and will use it until you Bernouts make it illegal to criticize Bernie, at which point I will be murdered by your secret police. Looking forward to it.