• AreaKode@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    226
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    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!

    • fluxion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      137
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Quickest way to mobilize the Democratic party is to threaten to put a progressive in charge

    • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Conservatives, they are putting conservatives in charge. Don’t be fooled by how republicans label themselves. They haven’t been conservative since before the turn of the century.

      It’s DNC leadership that has taken up that mantle.

        • tburkhol@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          Voter turnout in primaries is pathetic. In 30 states, you have to be registered with the party - i.e.: give them your name and address for fund-raising purposes - to vote. This all works to bias primaries to ‘establishment’ candidates, or at least people well known among party apparatchiks. They are, theoretically, the best way to get progressives or populists into office, but practically, those progressives are fighting demographics and the general apathy of voters under 40.

          The same phenomena that let MAGA take over the GOP keep the moderates in charge of the Dems. At least, until someone figures out how to motivate all the young internet revolutionaries to actually go and vote instead of memeing about how useless voting is.

          • 13igTyme@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            3 days ago

            You’re blaming the DNC for something that is controlled by each individual state.

            • tburkhol@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Not really. I’m saying that the system discourages change. If there’s blame for the DNC, it’s that their message has constantly been something along the lines of “be reasonable & empathetic; improve the world through measured change” which tends to demoralize people who think the system is seriously fucked. That empowers the career politicians. GOP propaganda, at least for the last 50-or-so years, has been “More guns! More babies! No brown people!” which tends to attract passionate radicals.

              • 13igTyme@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                Okay, but the states decide if there are open primaries or not. The State is to blame for that, but it can be changed if made a state ballot measure.

                That’s not really up for debate. It’s literally state law and dependent on the state. The DNC and GOP don’t decide that.

                  • 13igTyme@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 days ago

                    It was, but the rest of your statement went on to say this is for the purpose of blah blah and putting on your tin foil hat to somehow blame the establishment, any establishment.

                    It’s decided by the people. If there was a state ballot measure to remove closed primaries and make them open, it would then be up to the people to decide.

                    There are also multiple types. Blue and red states all do different things and there is no trend.

                    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_primaries_in_the_United_States

        • gobbles_turkey@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Sort of, sometimes. They can and will heavily disadvantage candidates they dont like. Like when they gave Hillary the questions for debates beforehand but not to Bernie, and let hillary control the funding of races, including her own. And like when they cut new hampshire out of the primary results this year because the New Hampshire dems wouldnt move the date for the primary to when the dnc wanted. So sure you could vote in that primary, but nothing was done with the results. Straight to the garbage can with those ballots.

          Russia says they have a democracy too, with votes and everything. Not saying we’re the same, but proving we have “democracy” by the fact that voting happens is not that firm of a thing. Its easily corrupted.

    • rational_lib@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      The party The people that vote in the primaries for the party that claims to be “for the people” keeps putting centrists in charge.

      Most people don’t vote in the Democratic primaries. Did you?

    • chunes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Sadly I don’t think it’s possible to have a party “for the people” with only two parties. There’s too much pressure for both of them to champion the status quo.

    • Signtist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      It all makes sense when you realize who makes the cutoff for what they consider “people.”