this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2024
152 points (95.8% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7228 readers
125 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/21778444

Summary

Historians suggest Democrats might have fared better against Donald Trump by embracing the economic issues championed by Senator Bernie Sanders, who has long pushed for a focus on “bread-and-butter” concerns for working-class voters.

Despite Kamala Harris’s progressive policies, polls showed Trump was favored on economic issues, particularly among working-class and Hispanic voters.

Historian Leah Wright Rigueur argued that Sanders’ messaging on economic struggles could be key for future Democratic strategies.

Sanders himself criticized the party for “abandoning” the working class, which he said has led to a loss of support across racial lines.

top 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hydrashok@sh.itjust.works 45 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

No shit.

Thanks, DNC and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. Took an incredible upwelling of enthusiasm, energy, and grassroots engagement, and completely squandered it by nominating Hillary instead.

It still pisses me off. It should be the end of President Sanders’ second term.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 25 points 2 weeks ago

They didn't just squander it, they actively crushed it with a vengeance. The DNC would rather lose to trump than allow Bernie's vision for America come to fruition.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 37 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

This assumes that Democrats want to win at any cost. Listening to Sanders is a bridge too far.

Democrats would rather lose than do even the most tepid social democratic reformism.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

That's why refusing to vote isn't an effective strategy for changing the democrats. They don't care. Non voters are just murdering trans people to make a point that they won't listen to.

[–] Didros@beehaw.org 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The people who kill are not those who refuse to vote. It's those that vote to kill.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 0 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Allowing someone to be killed through deliberate inaction is the same as killing them. You're responsible for the actions you chose not to take.

[–] Didros@beehaw.org 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You've killed thousands if that is true. You could have said something to prevent a suicide, you could have spared a dollar to save a homeless person who froze that night. You are a mass murderer if you really think that. It's a sad way to live.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz -2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Are you sure you saw the word "deliberate"?

[–] Didros@beehaw.org 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

How are my examples not deliberate?

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz -2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Drag did say all drag could to prevent a suicide whenever one of drag's friends was down. And it worked, none of drag's friends are dead yet.

[–] Didros@beehaw.org 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So you deliberately only assist those you consider "a friend"?

We really don't need to keep dragging this out. My point is simply that voting for the "lesser evil" is not morally superior to voting for your ideal candidate or protest voting. And fighting for an actually left movement to take power benefits us all.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 0 points 1 week ago

Drag has helped plenty of acquaintances too, and they were all alive last drag saw them, but many dozens, drag has no way of knowing. The vast majority of people drag has ever met, drag will never see again.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 weeks ago

Did you even volunteer for Harris or donate to her campaign? 🙄

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 20 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It is difficult to get a campaign strategist to understand something when their ~~grift~~ career path depends upon them not understanding it. — Upton Sinclair, probably

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Upton is the only other socialist in the USA that I'm aware of who gained mass traction with voters. Much like with Bernie, the DNC did everything in their power to keep him from getting elected. The Democrats and the Republicans actually pooled their resources to keep him out of office and defeat him for the Governor's seat in California. He only lost by 260,000 votes, which I believe makes him the most successful socialist in US history. He was an amazing person, and an excellent writer.

Everyone here should read The Jungle immediately, if they haven't already. Seriously, stop what you're doing and start reading that book. It's one of the most impactful books in US history, and the reason why we had sweeping food reforms and the creation of the FDA. He said of America's response to his book "I aimed for their hearts, and I accidentally hit them in the stomach". He tried to open America's eyes to the grueling conditions faced by immigrant workers, and the extreme wealth disparity in the country, but all the people cared about were the horrors he exposed in our food supply chain.

[–] Niquarl@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago

There were socialist mayors in the USA so they actually won elections, I think that's more succesfull that getting loads of votes.

[–] Vertelleus@sh.itjust.works 14 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

DNC won't change unless heads roll. They just roll in the fund raising money, getting a president is just a bonus.

[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

DNC won’t change ~~unless heads roll~~

It's serving its purposes, why would it.

[–] Vertelleus@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

"The system is working as intended and must be destroyed."

[–] Dr_Fetus_Jackson@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago
[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

i would vote for bernie in 2028 over newsome.

[–] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Love the guy (even if he seeks to save capitalism from itself, not replace it) but he is old.

[–] zante 7 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Up next : did Marx have a point ?

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Every single day Marx and Lenin continue to be vindicated. Try as liberals and progressives might, as time passes their analysis only gains more evidence supporting it. That's why I keep an intro to Marxism reading list on hand if people want so I can link it whenever.

[–] Jentu@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 weeks ago

I hear that's what historians are saying

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

I've been saying the same thing for like a decade now, but it's not like the DNC actually cares.

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago

When good ol' Capt. Obvious feels like being a redundant dickcheese: