She should distance herself from that sinking ship. It's like continuing CPR on a victim who is already dead. Yeah you're trying but ultimately it's no use. Both main parties have been so tarnished that even being associated with the name is a smudge on the record.
this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
1012 points (98.8% liked)
politics
23558 readers
3309 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I agree with you, but I also feel that AOC is what the Democratic party is supposed to be. She is not the status quo.
I'm confident AOC could raise an impressive amount of campaigning money as a single senator. But, impressive enough to account for an entire party, taking seats in thousands of positions across hundreds of local districts? Much as I'd like it, I don't see how it can happen.
I'd also like it if campaign money wasn't necessary, but 99% of America doesn't actively follow politics; it's needed to bring it to their doorstep. We've been covering the gap in things like Elon Musk's campaign funds via a lot of volunteer work, but that can only go so far.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Make it clear to the Democratic Party establishment that progressive candidates will be on the ballot in every congressional district in Nov 2026, and they will be a spoiler candidate if they have to be. Either way, we are done with their shit. There will never be a better time.
they will be a spoiler candidate if they have to be
I'd rather phrase it as "and they better not run a neolib spoiler candidate". It's not the progressives with popular support who are spoilers, but the neoliberals who are only propped up by corpo lobbies.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Weird. The party that claims to be "for the people" keeps putting centrists in charge. We're ready for someone who is actually for the people!
Quickest way to mobilize the Democratic party is to threaten to put a progressive in charge
They learned their lesson with Obama. The funny thing is he’s not even a fucking leftist, the party is just so full of dinosaurs they think a modern centrist is a leftist.
With Obama they just learned how to take a somewhat progressive candidates and bend them into a moderate. It's the same thing that happened with Kamala, although of course it's hard to say if either were ever really progressive or if they just used that for votes and didn't mind discarding it once they got pressured by the party and consultants.
Kamala was never progressive.
Neither was Obama. Not long after he put a bow on the nomination, he voted for an expansive security bill. A lot of people were surprised, but not me.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Obama wasn’t even somewhat progressive before the Democratic Party. He was against gay marriage for a while.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
They’re definitely for the billionaire people.
DNC: I am here for the working people-- from billionaires, all the way to millionaires.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(8 replies)
Her rally with Bernie was pretty electrifying. I can see how her polices might be polarizing to some, but damn she can get the working class support. Just gott keep the momentum up and get people to actually vote.
load more comments
(1 replies)
"Democrat voters want leftist leadership"
Primaries should do it, then you just have to make sure the superdelegates don't ruin the result...
she's got my vote
Coming in a distant second was close ally Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT). The pair recently went to various states with their Fighting Oligarchy tour. Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) placed third in the survey with 8%.
Former Vice President Kamala Harris came in fourth with 6%. Following her was Pete Buttigieg with 5%, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) with 5%, Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) with 4%, and California Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA) with 2%.
LOL, Chuck Schumer didn't even place. That gives me a little hope.
I keep forgetting he's a Democrat
load more comments
(5 replies)
She's not the face of the Democratic Party
She's the face of a completely new and different party that has nothing to do with old Democrats.
To me, I've been viewing the US as being governed under a one party state for a while ... the Republicans and the Democrats form two halves of the same organization.
The US doesn't need a third party
They need to form a new second opposition party because the old one morphed into the monstrous thing we have today.
The US needs a third, a fourth, a fifth and several more parties as viable alternatives.
They to drop any weird FPTP systems, this will allow new parties to come into play.
This would also end the ridiculous gerrymandering shit
load more comments
(6 replies)
load more comments
(7 replies)
DNC: "Ewwww a progressive? We wouldn't be as rich with a progressive in charge!"
“Currently, there is no consensus on the face of the Democrat Party, as a majority of voters either give the title to AOC (26%) or simply say there is none (26%),” Co/efficient concluded.
Never heard of Co/efficient, but “Democrat Party” is a bit of a red flag. From mediabiasfactcheck:
FiveThirtyEight, an expert on measuring and rating pollster performance, has evaluated 20 polls by co/efficient, earning 0.7 stars for accuracy, indicating they are Mixed Factual by MBFC’s criteria. They also conclude that their polling moderately favors the Right with a score of -2.7, which equates to a Right-Center polling bias. In general, co/efficient is considered moderately accurate and demonstrates a right-leaning bias in polling.
MBFC gives The Guardian and Breitbart equivalent ratings for factuality, which is patently ridiculous
It's not a reliable gauge of anything, and it's harmful to trust its rankings
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(8 replies)