They’re not idiotic, they have to pretend to do something opposing the Republicans while they help them transfer all the wealth to the rich and start imperial wars around the world, otherwise normal people might catch on and do something about it.
Is it time yet to consider a 3rd party?
Always has been
Always will be.
Why not? Every Sociopathic Oligarch is starting their own. I’m sure they’d love to
enslavehave you.
People always say the Democrats are out of touch. While that is certainly true, that’s not the real issue here. The Democrats know perfectly well what they would have to do to defeat Trump. It’s blindingly obvious, after all. The point is they don’t want to do any of those things.
It’s partly that, but it’s also that doing what Democrats want never seems to get the turnout that it should.
Biden did student loan forgiveness, which should have given him all the college votes, yet people shurg and go “Well yea! About time!”
He puts money into infrastructures and unions and again, people go “I guess, it’s a bit better than Republicans!”
Democratic voters suck ass at rallying behind any cause, because the base is filled with “well actually…!” people, that demand 100% problem completion on day one, otherwise they are not impressed.
And even if he solved every problem ever, they’d say, “Well yea, he should fix them… He caused most of them!”
Meanwhile, Republican voters will literarily vote for a rapist because they see the bigger picture. For as stupid as they are, they understand you have to be IN POWER to do anything.
Twirling your thumb in your asshole pining about raising taxes and fist past the post and equality for all and protecting minorities is a colossal waste of time if you don’t VOTE.
The other thing I’ve noticed with Democrats (actually pretty much any group left of the Republicans) is that they’ll splinter off into a dozen different groups at the drop of a hat and all infight with each other harder than they’ll fight their actual opponents.
The hard right is so effective IMO because they’ll glom together with people they don’t 100% agree with to push things in the general direction they want before they start arguing about the details.
But you don’t understand! Kamala was actually saying she would be personally killing Palestinian children with her bare hands or something! Clearly we should just stay home! - idiots
If your vote is guaranteed it’s not worth anything
In a perfect system yes. Until then, let’s enjoy the show. eats popcorn
If the plan is to tear it all down and build the perfect system, I’m down. I’ll subscribe to that newsletter.
Biden did student loan forgiveness, which should have given him all the college votes, yet people shurg and go “Well yea! About time!”
He dithered and only reluctantly did this. And then when he did, he did it in a way that a corrupt SCOTUS could overrule. There were other paths he could have taken, but he chose the least-confrontational approach and ultimately the court negated most of his efforts. His fault or not, very few people actually ended up getting their loans forgiven. If he failed to consider a hostile SCOTUS in his plans, then that is a strategic failure on his part.
He puts money into infrastructures and unions and again, people go “I guess, it’s a bit better than Republicans!”
His infrastructure bills are currently being torn to pieces as they were slow to actually spend their money. They were mired in everything bagel liberalism. A thousand requirements for dollar spent meant to solve every social ill under the Sun. But regardless, these bills didn’t directly help individuals. They may be necessary to curb the rise of China, but that’s not something that affects people’s lives directly. Unionization? Biden was unable to stem the decline in union numbers, and he himself chose to be a strikebreaker.
He dithered and only reluctantly did this. And then when he did, he did it in a way that a corrupt SCOTUS could overrule. There were other paths he could have taken, but he chose the least-confrontational approach and ultimately the court negated most of his efforts.
I’m gonna gut check this, because I remember him trying couple of times to work out student debt relief. Also, what other steps would you have taken to get student debt relief/forgiveness pushed though? The only step I can think of is after the “president is a king” SCOTUS ruling he could have just canceled them and told everyone to fuck off, but using those powers was clearly something that he didn’t morally agree with.
They left a lot of options on the table and then let the clock run out on them.
He picked the weakest method to start with, added many delays and means testing, then after being told no by Supreme Court just changed to going through the backlog of those who should have already been forgiven and called it him fulfilling his campaign promises.
Then on top of that allowed gop to force them to restart.
Exactly. And ultimately, voters don’t want to hear excuses. They don’t expect perfection, but they do expect some results. Republicans, even with limited majorities, always manage to achieve at least some of what they would call progress. Democrats OTOH just fine endless excuses. At some point, you’re either incompetent or admitting to your voters that you were lying to them - promising them something you would never be able to deliver.
Eh. I get what you’re saying, but so much of the disillusionment from the potential dem base is coming from their constant promises and constantly arriving at the obvious conclusion decades late and then acting like they’re the most progressive politician in human history. While in reality it’s a half step toward the policies we should’ve enacted forty years ago.
It’s not that people are like “so what.” It’s the deep seeded knowledge in all of us that the party will try to throw us crumbs and claim like they’ve always been on our side and are the most righteous policy makers that are saving us, when in reality they’re walking hand in hand with people that are pushing us to absolute limit of barely acceptable and then dangling what they’ve known they should’ve done forever ago in front of us when we’re finally at our breaking point.
They don’t care about us. They’re not beholden to us, and it shows. They’re beholden to money and are performatively throwing us scraps when they have an opponent so far right that it’s literally the threat of fascism. And they are very much responsible for the continued rightward march of the entire country.
You’re just proving what the guy you responded to said.
Under democrats we got gay marriage, the repeal of don’t ask don’t tell, the affordable care act, net neutrality, other stuff I can’t think of at the moment, and instead of accepting slow progress the response is “you should have done that 40 years ago, I’m going to stay home because you’re not moving fast enough for me.”
On the other hand, republicans kept voting every fucking chance they had and after 50 years they got Roe overturned because those scraps add up eventually.
No gay marriage was the courts, and now may end up being removed like Roe v Wade.
On the other hand, republicans kept voting every fucking chance they had and after 50 years they got Roe overturned because those scraps add up eventually.
By actually doing a long term plan and doing absolutely anything needed to get it done.
With dems we get half solutions, like ACA.
Republican voters say the exact same things about Republican politicians.
They constantly talk about how conservative shitbags that waffled on this one thing are RINOs.
They make up conspiracies where Democrats are stopping their preferred solution even when Republicans control every branch of government.
They just have the votes.
It’s not understanding, it’s blind faith.
No gay marriage was the courts, and now may end up being removed like Roe v Wade.
And who was it that appointed those judges?
So steps towards a goal from republicans are part of a long term plan to what they need, but from Democrats they’re half assed? Come on man. We were never going to get socialized medicine in one step.
The point here is that under Democrats there is progress. Would it be nice if it happened faster? Hell yes. But right now we’re racing backwards, and that sure as hell isn’t going to get us anywhere good unless you’re an accelerationist.
And who was it that appointed those judges?
GOP after dems thought they’d play nice or by the rules.
No the point is the dems refuse to long term plan or plan at all for when in power. That’s the issue.
when in reality they’re walking hand in hand with people that are pushing us to absolute limit of barely acceptable and then dangling what they’ve known they should’ve done forever ago in front of us when we’re finally at our breaking point.
Please, talk to some ordinary Americans sometime. Some of the real, salt-of-the-earth types who regularly and reliably vote, and who make up the majority of the country.
You know, morons.
“The Dems aren’t going left enough fast enough!” is not generally the refrain, even from those who do vote Dem.
Of course not, that’s some commie shit.
The refrain is more like, “the dems don’t actually want to help us, they’re just distracting us with performative outrage”
And when you ask them what performative outrage that is, their answer is generally less “They made minor economic concessions to the working class!” and more “They acknowledged that BROWN people and TRANS people have RIGHTS”
It’s actually, “the economic changes they made have no impact on me and instead seem targeted at minorities”
Chalk it up to a half-century of reactionary “welfare queen” propaganda, the truth is that democrats aren’t addressing the grievances of the working class and the Republicans are. Those grievances dont just go away if you stop talking about brown and trans people. Even if you’re willing to throw them under the bus - those voters will just vote for the person actually running them over.
Either democrats become as fascist as the Republicans, or they break through to those reactionary voters by proving that they’re willing to break some billionare kneecaps and make life better for everyone, not just the most visibly impoverished.
Democrats won’t, though. They’ll fight tooth and nail against the popular energy in their own base in order to keep their tenuous relationship with donors like Ackmann, and that will guarantee their loss.
And when you ask them what performative outrage that is, their answer is generally less “They made minor economic concessions to the working class!” and more “They acknowledged that BROWN people and TRANS people have RIGHTS”
I think a big issue is people expect democrats to enact the thing’s they promise to enact and then they don’t. And there’s insane coping and denial used to justify it instead of allowing real critique.
Biden did student loan forgiveness,
Biden tried, no loans were forgiven, some loans were forced to be more ethical, but nobody was freed from the debt.
So that isn’t seen as a win by a lot of people who wanted loan forgiveness and got a half assed attempt that didn’t help.
Hell, he said he would forgive all student loans and make college free. Lol
He puts money into infrastructures and unions and again, people go “I guess, it’s a bit better than Republicans!”
Again, this isn’t really as true as I wish it was.
They put money into green energy corporations that hoard it offshore like other corps.
And Biden literally fought against unions while in office.
Democratic voters suck ass at rallying behind any cause, because the base is filled with “well actually…!” people, that demand 100% problem completion on day one, otherwise they are not impressed.
I try really really hard to not be contrarian about this shit, but Democrats aren’t making partial progress on anything, they are failing to make positive meaningful change for working class people at the expense of the rich, which is a requirement for fixing wealth inequality, which is the source of the vast majority of economic and societal issues. Until Democrats are willing to force their rich owners to make concessions they will not be capable of supporting these kinds of policies.
Also blaming voters for the outcome of an election is not valid, it’s up to politicians to provide something worth voting for and being capable of communicating those policies to their target voters.
Meanwhile, Republican voters will literarily vote for a rapist because they see the bigger picture.
Republicans vote for strongmen because their religious upbringing makes them subservient to anyone who can imitate the way their pastor made them feel.
Biden tried, no loans were forgiven, some loans were forced to be more ethical, but nobody was freed from the debt.
Factually untrue. My loans got forgiven.
Fuck em!
The Democrats know perfectly well what they would have to do to defeat Trump. It’s blindingly obvious, after all.
Is it? From a party whose voters want to go rightwards, now, wherein independents are already more right-leaning than that, and the only other major political coalition being even further right than that?
“Just go left, we’ll totally win 😊” is the same line that got people fired up for Corbyn, who proceeded to make no headway in a country already much less right-wing than the US.
Going left being better for the country does not equate to it being the path to electoral victory.
-Put conditions on any aid going to Israel.
-Arrest trump and his sycophants in Congress for their litany of heinous crimes against the American people.
-Force Biden not to run in 2024, have an actual primary and don’t put their thumb on the scale to nominate a corporate-owned bipartisan centrist.
I’m pretty pro-democrat, but they could have done all that shit in a day and locked in the next 8 years of federal elections.
Corbyn made no headway?
Yeah you can say that to suit your narrative, but it’s complete BS. In fact Corbyn had significantly more votes in 2017 and 2019 than Starmer in 2024.
The left has to convince voters, not follow them, wtf
Yeah you can say that to suit your narrative, but it’s complete BS. In fact Corbyn had significantly more votes in 2017 and 2019 than Starmer in 2024.
Which governments did Labour form at the time, again?
The left has to convince voters, not follow them, wtf
Electoral success and convincing people are not mutually exclusive options; the former is an immensely powerful tool for the latter. Unless your plan is “Hand the gun over to the fascists, put it to your head, and hope that when they pull the trigger it will inspire the masses to spontaneously learn the words to the Internationale in their hearts and rise up against fascism”, it involves some amount of concessions to the majority of voters.
But sure, run on gay marriage in 1940 until you win, I’m sure the Black folk who are being lynched won’t mind waiting another few decades, nor will the unions seeking better conditions, nor the folks trying to stop social security from being repealed etc etc etc etc.
Yeah, but first you were talking about how the general populace was going right. Corbyn clearly disproves that. This idea that success (which maybe doesn’t require to form the next government) translates to a higher share in votes might be a statistical thing, but it’s not constructive, it just leads to opportunism.
Since the majority of voters are workers it shouldn’t be that hard for the left to offer them something, right?
I don’t think your last paragraph makes much sense.
Yeah, but first you were talking about how the general populace was going right
They subsequently elected Starmer, of all people, didn’t they?
This idea that success (which maybe doesn’t require to form the next government) translates to a higher share in votes might be a statistical thing, but it’s not constructive, it just leads to opportunism.
I’m sorry, if Corbyn didn’t form a government, as majority or coalition partner, didn’t move politics in the UK left, nor politics in his own party left, nor moved demographics in the UK left… what kind of success are we looking at, here?
For the record, I’m not blaming Corbyn for this loss. Far from it. I’m only saying that going left is not enough
“Want to go rightwards” - are you fucking high?
People want common sense approaches to social problems. The party stabbed Bernie Sanders twice in a row after shitting themselves because he was going to win the Democratic primary.
More people I know who voted for Trump like and respect Sanders more than any other Dem candidate in the last decade because he’s authentic and true to himself and his beliefs. They don’t think his proposed solutions are going to work, but they’re willing to have a conversation and meet in the middle. The all or nothing ideologues running the Dems right now have no fucking idea what they’re doing, they’re trashing the joint - whether by malice or idiocy is moot at this point. Get these people OUT
“Want to go rightwards” - are you fucking high?
No, I just have the misfortune of preferring unpleasant data over feel-good circlejerks about how we’re TOTALLY the silent majority, despite all evidence to the contrary.
People want common sense approaches to social problems.
You do realize this is the exact line that right-wingers say amongst themselves about why people REALLY want a far-right corporatocrat theocracy, right?
More people I know who voted for Trump like and respect Sanders more than any other Dem candidate in the last decade because he’s authentic and true to himself and his beliefs.
Unfortunately, that transfers approximately not-at-fucking-all to electoral success in swaying them to vote for anyone but the fascist ghouls, in the same way that Nazi voters always knew one “good Jew” or modern American right-wing voters always know one person who “deserves” public services or is a “good” member of the LGBT community who deserves their identity.
They’ll vote for the Holocaust all the same, but at least you’ll get an asspat out of it, right?
They don’t think his proposed solutions are going to work, but they’re willing to have a conversation and meet in the middle. The all or nothing ideologues running the Dem right now have no fucking idea what they’re doing, they’re trashing the joint - whether by malice or idiocy is moot at this point. Get these people OUT
“The REAL problem is that the current Dems aren’t willing to compromise and meet in the middle with the fascists!”
Lord.
And you say this is a LESS far-right solution?
Jesus Christ.
I mean, here’s a poll published 2 months later stating that Democrats want the party to be more progressive. Couple that with the fact that the 62% of Democrats want to throw the centrist leadership out on its ass and I’m not sure, “people want moderates, actually,” is a reasonable conclusion anymore.
Well ACKSHULLY wanting common sense solutions is right wing coded!
Another 10 years of losses for you friend, gl. The vibe has been altered, these dipshit takes are going to deliver conservative rule for the next generation.
Well ACKSHULLY wanting common sense solutions is right wing coded!
Have you ever had a discussion with conservatives about what they think is ‘common sense’?
Have you ever paid attention to how often conservatives discuss ‘common sense’ solutions that appeal to people who want to think that their deeply politicized views aren’t political at all?
Do you know what ‘common sense’ is to fucking begin with?
Fuck’s sake. It’s like talking to someone who’s voted GOP for the past 50 years of their fucking life but insists that they’re a ‘moderate’.
Suppose you’re not going to answer about how Dems being ‘ideologues’ right now who won’t compromise, and how ‘meeting in the middle’ with fascist voters will totally be a less right-wing solution.
Or about the data explicitly proving you wrong. But I guess I must be high.
ChatGPT ass reply bro touch grass
ChatGPT ass reply bro touch grass
Lord.
I wish Stewart would run for office.
I think if Stewart won the white house and made Colbert his press secretary, and he played the character from the Colbert report and just framed everything Stewart did as the most hardcore American Conservative stance and talked about how Republicans need to get on Stewart’s level, they could actually shift the Overton window.
I understand the urge but please stop electing people from TV.
For every Trump, there’s a Zelenskyy.
But for every Zelenskyy there are 1000 Trumps, and all it takes is one of those dumbasses winning.
I was joking with my SO the other day about RuPaul running for president and we realised that since she’s a reality TV host but also has a successful business that hasn’t gone bankrupt and isn’t obviously a Russian puppet, she’s actually probably more qualified than the current sitting president for the job.
To be fair the shit I took this morning is more qualified for the job, so that’s not the high bar it should be.
Ukraine seems to have ended up with a good leader doing that. 😉
In most cases I agree. Stewart is not a political neophyte though. I mean it’s not like he runs a reality show
His humour requires wit, understanding and nuance. His product is much more intelligent and complex than say, a competition show where people compete for a " job" with some thinly veiled gangster.
So basically he’s waaaaaaay over qualified to be president.
I listen to his podcast weekly. I haven’t listened to the one from the OP, but in the past year I have become very disillusioned with Stewart.
Every interview is an absolute softball “what’s your favorite color” BS where each and every answer is a boot that is slobbered on with “BAM”, and “BARS” and every misdirect and deflection by the guest is just accepted and the root of the few harder questions goes unanswered without protest outside of maybe the Christie interview.
The Jeffries interview was absolutely embarrassing, for example.
It’s very different from Stewart 15+ years ago.
One has to have a high IQ to like Rick and Morty ass post
Dumbass. It was a joke about Trump’s TV background
Nah, they’re the only ones we have any idea about. Not to mention zelensky has been killing it.
I kinda like repeated reaffirmation of a candidate’s values, especially if it is very public and consistent.
thats how the US got in this predicament in the first place. elect a cunt who had a single line in home alone. I mean, Schwarzenegger was gov of Cali at some point and any german speaking mf could tell you that Arnold, while beloved and a huge teddy bear, was never the sharpest bulb in the shed.
Schwarzenegger was good for environmental issues in California, and RFK Jr played a part in that as well
Uhm no. He really fell from funny to bland in less than half a year for me.
The guy struggled with the definition of fascism like 3 months ago.
He and Colbert are white guy good guy optics dudes from television, I swear they are only 3 steps away from half of Trump’s cabinet if you put them near power.
Being a bit funny, or having done the “save the 9/11 firefighters” skit doesn’t qualify you to lead a nation. Fck the TV personality cult.
Stewart is a milquetoast both-sides-er. He can criticize and he’s good at it, but he stands for very little and instantly retreats behind his “I’m just a comedian” shield when pressed to take a stance.
You’re confusing him. It’s not a big deal, he’s some guy and we’re just two people on the Internet, but he’s a left populist, not a “both-sides-er.” He’s fed up with institutional politics becoming ineffective, not with people being too “left.”
I’ve been watching him since the beginning too, I wouldn’t say that 10 years ago, but this is where he’s at right now.
Stands for little….really? Ask 911 first responders
Ah yes, one of the most milquetoast stances possible. What’s next? Is he going to take a brave stance like childhood cancer is bad and raising children is good?
Maybe he’ll hold another Rally to Restore Sanity, telling the left they’re just as bad as the right and that they need to compromise with Republicans more and be nicer to bigots.
Are you kidding? People are literally alive that wouldn’t have been because he fought tooth and nail to get those people health care.
Are things only worth doing if they’re “extreme” in your mind? Fucking brain rot.
I said the guy is milquetoast and refuses to take real stances on much of anything and the rebuttal is to say he once stood for an incredibly safe and uncontroversial thing, which does not disprove my point.
To be a politician, you have to actually stand for something and come up with a platform of policies you’d enact at the risk of alienating people. Every time people ask him what he would do on a topic he’s criticizing, he always dodges the question. He’s a political coward that has far more in common with Chuck Schumer than any of you people downvoting me want to admit.
I just backed up another person’s example. I’m not going to waste my time listing all of his stances.
Why would you watch him for 25 years if you hate him so much?
I’ve been listening to his weekly podcast (it’s good), and maybe it’s a product of having longer conversations, but it is very clear to me that you’re wrong.
You can be friends with someone and recognize they’d be terrible to live with.
He’s good as a comedian who criticizes politics, which, to be fair to him, is all he seems to want to be.
Dude. What did he do to you to make you so irrational?
I’ve been watching the man for 25 years and I’m able to separate the fact that he’s an enjoyable clown pandering to an audience from his actual politics.
You know. Somehow I don’t think you get the humour …
He probably though the Colbert Report was a right wing comedy show.
Zzzzzzz
John Oliver over Stewart any day.
Oliver is not qualified.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for holding the presidency. To serve as president, one must:
- be a natural-born citizen of the United States;
- be at least 35 years old;
- be a resident in the United States for at least 14 years.
An Stewart really doesn’t have the best interests of lower class.
What evidence is there of this?
Compared to who? Pelosi? Trump?
Compared to any of them. Sure he’s better than the two you listed, Bernie is still better than all 3, as would AOC. John Stewart is a fun talk show host for some people, but he’s still just a status quo neo-liberal with his interests aligning with the upper class.
There should be a net worth cap to be president
I’m likely misremembering, but afaik, they USED to relinquish any businesses they had going for them so that they wouldn’t everhave conflicting interests but obviously Trump doesn’t follow any standards
I am listening to this episode right now. He’s spot on. These idiot libs seem to want another loss.
Jon Stewart is not impressed with the Democratic Party’s plan to craft a Project 2029, which he said will just be a “a rehash of all the consultant driven, careful nonsense” that caused them to lose the presidency to Donald Trump.
It’s not the party doing this…
It’s the neoliberals that were run out of the DNC creating their own club and hoping progressives fall for the bait and fight to be included in a place they have no power and will be ignored.
Don’t take the bait. Let them hold their own meaningless meetings about what the least they can do would be.
Stewart was pretty specific about who/what he was complaining about, but articles are missing the details and all of them seem desperate to turn people off from the new and I proved DNC now that neoliberals don’t control it.
It’s the neoliberals that were run out of the DNC
Which Neolibs, specifically?
This is the first I’ve heard of the neoliberals being driven out of the DNC and frankly I find it a bit hard to believe. Outside of the win in NY I haven’t heard of any other significant shakeups in the party, and frankly the number of politicians in the DNC you’d need to oust to dislodge the neoliberals makes me think I’d have heard something.
The DNC is definitively a neoliberal party. Obama was one of the most neoliberal presidents we have ever had, as far as social attitudes go. He massively carried water for the whole “if I made it, anyone can” and “black people suffer from a culture of poverty” type of nonsense, both of which serve an agenda that is against providing social safety nets and actually helping people improve their lives. Neoliberalism is all about blaming individuals for the failures of government as a means to avoid bolstering social services
“Neoliberals have been run out of the DNC” is absolutely nonsense. Neoliberals running the DNC is 99.9% of the problem with the DNC today. Its the reason why true progressive politics fail so often
He massively carried water for the whole “if I made it, anyone can” and “black people suffer from a culture of poverty” type of nonsense,
Fuck’s sake, I see we don’t remember any of Obama’s actual presidency in exchange for some weird online circlejerk version.
Lol dude. If you think my perspective is not sound and that Obama isnt a classic neoliberal politician then you need to study his presidency yourself. The only one here confused about what actually went down is you.
Here, have an article to get you started
Literally the only thing remotely distant from neoliberalism that Obama ever accomplished was Obamacare, and even then that was just a half-assed version of actual progressive policy like single payer healthcare or medicare for all. And the reasoning behind why we never got real progressive policy when they pushed Obamacare is because the DNC is a neoliberal party in sheeps clothing. Just as Obama was. Read a thing or two before you say dumb shit online. The democrats had full control of the government, they could have revolutionized our country just as magats are doing now, instead they barely accomplished anything. They didnt because theyre a bunch of neoliberal fuckers. Its factual, not subjective
If I wanted campist apologia from genocide deniers, I could read Jacobin rag on my own time. I’ll pass on someone trying to use it as a replacement for having thoughts of their own. I note that you didn’t actually respond to what I actually objected to,
He massively carried water for the whole “if I made it, anyone can” and “black people suffer from a culture of poverty” type of nonsense,
But I guess that would require you to defend the points you make, and wouldn’t that just be an awful fate?
Oh fuck off dude, youre pathetic and you know it. Go back to licking neoliberal boots
Oh fuck off dude, youre pathetic and you know it.
For… objecting to something that you said, and that you have been entirely incapable of mounting even a nominal defense of, probably because you’re aware that it was said as bad-faith bullshit with no grounding in reality?
Uh, okay.
You…
You think the result of the NYC mayor’s Dem.orimaty is a shakeup in the DNC?
The reason so many people aren’t aware the DNC got better, is apparently they have no idea what the DNC is…
and frankly the number of politicians in the DNC you’d need to oust to dislodge the neoliberals
Like, you just fundamentally do t know how this works…
You’re conflating any elected politician at even city level, with the voting members of the DNC…
And like. You know the chair election was 5 months ago? Right?
You’re acting like it’s a hypothetical that something that has already happened might happen?
How the fuck did 21 people read you comment and no one tried to help you understand?
From the perspective of current power the Neoliberals are the DNC.
It is only some grassroots movements in the party that try to change that.They are just at the start and the DNC is fiercly fighting them.
The only way you make sense is if you think Mamdani is the future of the DNC.
deleted by creator
This guy got $866,425 from AIPAC in the previous 2 years.
That gives “dad are you coming to pick me up from baseball practice” vibes.
there is only one joke we have to share it
