What happens to the Democratic Party now? (1 Viewer)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
    Heathen

    Heathen

    Just say no to Zionism
    Joined
    Sep 28, 2019
    Messages
    1,215
    Reaction score
    1,098
    Age
    34
    Location
    Utah
    Offline
    I’m sure much of us are having 2016 flashbacks this morning with a sick feeling to our stomachs..

    2 of the last 3 elections Democrats have lost to a far right demagogue

    Harris didn’t get close in many states to even Biden’s performance. We could very well lose the Presidency, Senate AND House depending on results the next few days…..

    What went wrong?
    What could’ve been done better?
    What can we change in the future to ensure voters are motivated like they were when Obama was elected?

    Democrats have no choice but to admit there’s a huge problem with some aspect of their platform— and to do a deep introspection of what’s going wrong..
     
    DaveXA said:
    Yeah, I tend to agree. And although it's shallow reasoning, I don't want any more political families/dynasties or retreads. Although Michelle doesn't neatly fit into a typical political type, she's still the wife of a former President. Not really fair, but I prefer to get away from the same political families, Bushs, Clintons, Trumps etc.

    That said, I'm a fan of Michelle. Would vote for her over probably 9 out of 10 Republicans/conservatives. I just think it's a lot of baggage to run in the shadow of someone else. And people do get tired of the status quo. The Democrats need to start with a clean slate and build what a winning candidate would look like and vigorously pursue that. Recruit and vet those candidates hard and put them through the wringer so they prove they can handle the pressure of a Presidential campaign.

    I will say though, I can see the case for not overreacting because there really isn't anyone else like Trump out there. Maybe his kids, but I don't see that same charisma and ability to work a crowd as he does. That said, you know Republicans are gonna trot out some other MAGA type like MTG, Hawley, Cotton, etc.

    All that said, the Democrats didn't just lose the WH. They lost ground in Congress. There's more work to do than fielding a winning Presidential candidate. We'll see what happens, but I'm not at all optimistic about 2026 prospects. Might eventually feel differently about 2028, we'll see.
    Click to expand...
    Yeah, Trump is completely a creation of media. He is cunning which is not the same as smart. He is also symptomatic of the failure of American civic life.
     
    Last edited:
    Optimus Prime said:

    What happens to the Democratic Party now?​


    Storm the Capitol on January 6th 2025?

    We know there are no consequences to the party and you win back the White House next time around
    Click to expand...
    Except now we’re not dealing with a lawful Republic, but The Empire. Those who try the derail the coronation this time will be deemed terrorists, foreign agents, and will be given the death penalty. 🤔
     
    coldseat said:
    I've given this a little thought in trying to process the nihilism I feel right now for this country. I don't believe the trajectory we're on is salvageable, to be honest. For that reason, I think Democrats should just keep functioning as they are, the alternative.

    What I think we need now is new thinkers and ideas on what country based on different principles would look like. We need to start organizing now and putting out thought for how to pick up the pieces and start something new once this country collapses. I'm not saying that's going to happen in Trump's presidency, but it will eventually because our country is committed to this path. So we need new ideas for what a multi-cultural, non-racist, non-elitist, economically fair and viable country would look like. One were propaganda is outlawed and the truth is a pillar of our principles. One where industry and religion have a proper roll, but where they are not allowed to influence or participate in crafting of our laws. Start gathering in communities to put some of these ideas to work in small settings. Write into existence a new way forward that isn't beholden to the past.
    Click to expand...
    Here are the approx numbers:
    • US Adult citizens: 337M
    • Harris: 71M (21%)
    • Trump: 74.6M 22%)
    • Ambivalent Non-Voters: 191M (56%)

    Logic, law abiding, and reasoned, we are currently outnumbered by ambivalence and self serving STUPID motivated by hate, not just hate, but blind hate, completely hostile to the ideals set forth in our Constitution, which is now just a piece of toilet paper to wipe our arses with. Whether they know what they wrought or not, really does not matter at this point, they voted to burn it down. So be it.

    Do you think the billionaires are going to rally for democratic principles? No they’ll move to save their arses and preserve their wealth. You and I and our democratic ideals are expendable. But that’s the irony here, democracies only last when there is majority agreement to have the democracy. Our system is set up so 22% (74.6M) could vote down our democracy because the majority 56% (191M) did not give a damn, or maybe they wanted this too? 🤔

    We’re all going to suffer, and at this point I really hope they all suffer horribly for their lack of vision.
     
    SteveSBrickNJ said:
    This article seems to fit nicely in this thread.
    I present it here for those who might find it to be interesting reading...
    *
    www.yahoo.com

    Democrats are coming off a 2024 beating. Will their rising stars block a Republican trifecta?

    After losing the White House and both chambers of Congress this November, Democrats in Congress are looking for a way forward as the minority.
    www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com
    Click to expand...

    Part that caught my eye:

    Elections for the 119th Congress saw a number of history-makers. Rep. Andy Kim, D-N.J., became the first Korean-American senator, while Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester, D-Del., and Democrat Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland became their states’ first Black senators. Their wins mark the first time two Black women will serve in the upper chamber at the same time.

    Sarah McBride, a Delaware state legislator, will also be sworn into the House next year, the first openly transgender person to serve in Congress.

    Identity politics.

    The 4 white guys mentioned, one's older and has no charisma (Walz), one is Jewish (Shapiro), one's gay (Buttigieg), Of course, that should not matter, but unfortunately it does.
     
    SystemShock said:
    Part that caught my eye:

    Elections for the 119th Congress saw a number of history-makers. Rep. Andy Kim, D-N.J., became the first Korean-American senator, while Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester, D-Del., and Democrat Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland became their states’ first Black senators. Their wins mark the first time two Black women will serve in the upper chamber at the same time.

    Sarah McBride, a Delaware state legislator, will also be sworn into the House next year, the first openly transgender person to serve in Congress.

    Identity politics.

    The 4 white guys mentioned, one's older and has no charisma (Walz), one is Jewish (Shapiro), one's gay (Buttigieg), Of course, that should not matter, but unfortunately it does.
    Click to expand...
    A year ago I thought Hakeem Jeffries might be a good choice for Democrats to look to. Kamala was ushered in and that was that. A year later I still think Ds would be well served to focus on Jeffries for inspiration. Jeffries for President in 2028?
     
    SteveSBrickNJ said:
    A year ago I thought Hakeem Jeffries might be a good choice for Democrats to look to. Kamala was ushered in and that was that. A year later I still think Ds would be well served to focus on Jeffries for inspiration. Jeffries for President in 2028?
    Click to expand...

    Newsom, Shapiro, and Buttigieg have the best debate chops. They would have to be the frontrunners. AOC might run to represent the progressive wing? Warren/Sanders are far to old.
     
    SteveSBrickNJ said:
    I was not familiar with him so I searched him by name online.
    Are you aware of this @Sendai ?
    *
    www.cbsnews.com

    Why Democratic Colorado Gov. Jared Polis says he's "excited" about Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for HHS secretary

    Gov. Jared Polis, Colorado's long-standing Democratic governor, is "excited" with President-Elect Donald Trump's pick for Health and Human Services Secretary.
    www.cbsnews.com www.cbsnews.com
    Click to expand...
    Yep. And he’s correct. Kennedy will be hell on drug and healthcare companies. He’s not gonna take away our vaccines. A little disruption can be good. I’ve followed governor Polis for awhile and not gonna let some binary thinking like this get in the way. He does fine work. He would have won over trump.
     
    Sendai said:
    Yep. And he’s correct. Kennedy will be hell on drug and healthcare companies. He’s not gonna take away our vaccines. A little disruption can be good. I’ve followed governor Polis for awhile and not gonna let some binary thinking like this get in the way. He does fine work. He would have won over trump.
    Click to expand...
    Ok. Good job standing by your original post.
     
    Sendai said:
    Yep. And he’s correct. Kennedy will be hell on drug and healthcare companies. He’s not gonna take away our vaccines. A little disruption can be good. I’ve followed governor Polis for awhile and not gonna let some binary thinking like this get in the way. He does fine work. He would have won over trump.
    Click to expand...
    You support RFK, Jr for head of HHS?

    Are you aware of his actual stances? That he wants to suspend all medical research for 8 years? You call that a “little disruption”? That he thinks the polio vaccine wasn’t the reason the cases of polio plummeted? That he thinks no diseases have been affected by vaccines, that it was all smoke and mirrors?

    What makes you think he won’t outlaw vaccines? He’s been trying to do that for decades. If he says he won’t, he’s lying. He’s a crazy person, without any scientific expertise, who thinks he knows more than the experts about everything.
     
    Sendai said:
    No, I don’t support Kennedy. But I know better than to think he can ban vaccines.

    www.newsweek.com

    Can Robert F. Kennedy eliminate vaccine rules as head of HHS?

    Kennedy insists he is not anti-vaccine but has repeatedly voiced opposition to vaccines.
    www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com
    Click to expand...
    That’s only one idiotic stance. He has many. Support for this mentally unbalanced charlatan isn’t the way to get meaningful reform. Good grief.

    Edit: you seemed to be fine with Kennedy as head of HHS, now you say you’re not. I’m confused?
     
    MT15 said:
    That’s only one idiotic stance. He has many. Support for this mentally unbalanced charlatan isn’t the way to get meaningful reform. Good grief.

    Edit: you seemed to be fine with Kennedy as head of HHS, now you say you’re not. I’m confused?
    Click to expand...
    I said I don’t support him. I’m not gonna get all worked up about it. People will still get their vaccines. And he could be a pain to drug and healthcare companies.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom