In Reply to: Wow posted by TheHappyBurgermeister on April 03, 2025 at 14:21:37
senator so I can't give you a full list, but the way I see it, if there is enough of a support for a challenge for any or all of them (including AOC, because why not, all ideas need to be tested in the field at some point) they should be primaried. That's how the system is supposed to work.
I don't get the weakening argument. How do you separate the cases where in incumbent lost after beating a primary challenge purely because they were weakened by the challenge itself, as opposed to already having been weakened in the eyes of the voters, which is what allowed for the primary challenge to be there in the first place. IOW, how can we tell whether the primary challenge is the cause of the eventual loss as opposed to an early indicator?
We differ quite a bit I assume because when I look at the Democratic Party, all I see is an empty shell. There is very little there there. It's ideologically hollow, inspirationally out of touch, and politically impotent on every front. And this is not just something that came out in 2024. This is what they've been for a long long time. I always thought Obama should have been the first step towards leadership changed to create a better party, but it turned out to be a step that was taken back in subsequent years in favor of more neoliberal nonsense.
Honestly, except for the fact that the only alternative out there is a fascist party, I don't see that the Democratic party has any intrinsic reason for its existence. I'd love to see it scrapped and a new party on the left being formed. Except ... .welll ... we got fascism that's already here and the party's staffed by folks who don't even think it's a good idea to stand up for something. To me that says a major overhaul is needed.
Jill Stein is an agent of Putin. I wouldn't even include her in this discussion as a comparison.
Thank goodness for Sinema and Manchin.
Well. I think we are in a radical disagreement here. :)