Another on point analysis about the Democratic Party as a whole. I've evolved a lot after the last general election by moving further to the left. We must make bold change. It tells me everything I need to know about the establishment Dems when they refuse to release their 2024 Election autopsy. I'm on board with David Hogg, and yes, Hasan Piker.
Good article. I don't have a full grasp of the intra-party factions and their disagreements. However, I will say this about that. It is absolutely false that internal dissension is always bad. I question anyone who asserts that. Whether dissension strengthens or weakens the party depends on how, why and what is being disputed. First off, it is impossible to have complete ideological lockstep. Look at the Republicans. They are currently tearing each other to shreds over ideological purity. So, let's not go down that road. Second, we can be adversarial without being personal. Think of it like the scientific method or a trial by jury. The best ideas are made better and stronger when they are challenged in good faith. You are forced to address weaknesses in your case. By making a case for your ideas using facts, logic and good insights you gain clarity. Better to find out you were wrong or sort of wrong in the primary than in the general election.
I think of a scene from an old movie starring George Clooney called "The Descendants". His character had grown apart from his wife over the years yet they never fought. He busted in on his good friends/neighbors one day and they were upstairs shouting at each other. They yelled down to him "come on in we're just arguing". The lesson there is the neighbors had a close, loving relationship and they hashed things out. The Clooney character had a perfectly peaceful, yet unloving marriage because they didn't have the arguments.
As to the issue of progressive v. static (I find static more descriptive than centrist because tell me how "centrist" isn't just another way to say "do nothing".), I like to think I know when push hard for progress and when to hold tight to a good thing already in place. So, for instance, let's push for Medicare for All. Then should we get it, let's do everything we can to preserve it and protect it from Republican depredations, i.e. be static. An effective party strategy should analyze the issue at hand and the facts on the ground and adjust accordingly. One size will never fit all. The standard should be the best interest of the people, not the best interest of those with a vested interest in a particular outcome. Thus, Medicare for All should be judged by whether it helps people rather than corporations. Ideology is fine for setting up your standards. But ideology must be applied in real situations.
I think Talarico does a really good job of translating progressive ideas into concrete examples that win hearts and minds. Let's not forget that talented candidates can make all the difference to election outcomes. Therefore, we don't necessarily have to engineer every single idea to death beforehand. We can set some broad parameters and give our candidates the room to reflect their districts or the entire electorate in the case of Talarico.
I have always said we need people on the extreme to move the middle. Otherwise there will never be any movement. On the other hand it is counterproductive and a bit juvenile to say if everything doesn't go my way then I am taking my ball and going home. Do we want to be a big tent party or not? I was heart broken in 2024 when people said the presidential candidate policies are the same in the Middle East so I am voting for neither. Maybe they did not think Trump would be Trump or that things here would always remain the same but we need to be ever vigilant and so much more.
Well, the national DNC feel likes Dallas county. The consultants $ controls everything. Until they lost. Badly. The consultant only know how to fight Democrats not Republicans and then they loose. I am not going to go into more. You know you and I need to have a long lunch in person, cause everyone will be off the record. But everything is about $ always. And it is very hard.
Another on point analysis about the Democratic Party as a whole. I've evolved a lot after the last general election by moving further to the left. We must make bold change. It tells me everything I need to know about the establishment Dems when they refuse to release their 2024 Election autopsy. I'm on board with David Hogg, and yes, Hasan Piker.
Good article. I don't have a full grasp of the intra-party factions and their disagreements. However, I will say this about that. It is absolutely false that internal dissension is always bad. I question anyone who asserts that. Whether dissension strengthens or weakens the party depends on how, why and what is being disputed. First off, it is impossible to have complete ideological lockstep. Look at the Republicans. They are currently tearing each other to shreds over ideological purity. So, let's not go down that road. Second, we can be adversarial without being personal. Think of it like the scientific method or a trial by jury. The best ideas are made better and stronger when they are challenged in good faith. You are forced to address weaknesses in your case. By making a case for your ideas using facts, logic and good insights you gain clarity. Better to find out you were wrong or sort of wrong in the primary than in the general election.
I think of a scene from an old movie starring George Clooney called "The Descendants". His character had grown apart from his wife over the years yet they never fought. He busted in on his good friends/neighbors one day and they were upstairs shouting at each other. They yelled down to him "come on in we're just arguing". The lesson there is the neighbors had a close, loving relationship and they hashed things out. The Clooney character had a perfectly peaceful, yet unloving marriage because they didn't have the arguments.
As to the issue of progressive v. static (I find static more descriptive than centrist because tell me how "centrist" isn't just another way to say "do nothing".), I like to think I know when push hard for progress and when to hold tight to a good thing already in place. So, for instance, let's push for Medicare for All. Then should we get it, let's do everything we can to preserve it and protect it from Republican depredations, i.e. be static. An effective party strategy should analyze the issue at hand and the facts on the ground and adjust accordingly. One size will never fit all. The standard should be the best interest of the people, not the best interest of those with a vested interest in a particular outcome. Thus, Medicare for All should be judged by whether it helps people rather than corporations. Ideology is fine for setting up your standards. But ideology must be applied in real situations.
I think Talarico does a really good job of translating progressive ideas into concrete examples that win hearts and minds. Let's not forget that talented candidates can make all the difference to election outcomes. Therefore, we don't necessarily have to engineer every single idea to death beforehand. We can set some broad parameters and give our candidates the room to reflect their districts or the entire electorate in the case of Talarico.
You have argued your case well and I tend to agree.
You read my mind, Michelle! Thank you!!! Already shared on bsky
I have always said we need people on the extreme to move the middle. Otherwise there will never be any movement. On the other hand it is counterproductive and a bit juvenile to say if everything doesn't go my way then I am taking my ball and going home. Do we want to be a big tent party or not? I was heart broken in 2024 when people said the presidential candidate policies are the same in the Middle East so I am voting for neither. Maybe they did not think Trump would be Trump or that things here would always remain the same but we need to be ever vigilant and so much more.
Well, the national DNC feel likes Dallas county. The consultants $ controls everything. Until they lost. Badly. The consultant only know how to fight Democrats not Republicans and then they loose. I am not going to go into more. You know you and I need to have a long lunch in person, cause everyone will be off the record. But everything is about $ always. And it is very hard.