Who should run for the Dems?

[dann]

One hour ago:

Abdul El-Sayed wins Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary, notching a Midwest victory for the left (NBC News, Aug 5, 2026)
The former public health official has defeated Rep. Haley Stevens, NBC News projects, despite facing a huge advertising disadvantage.
El-Sayed overcame a nearly $65 million onslaught of outside money and an establishment that had rallied around Stevens. Popular Gov. Gretchen Whitmer endorsed Stevens late last month — a move seen as a last-ditch effort to stop a rising El-Sayed.
Stevens conceded the race on Wednesday morning and said in a post on X that she had called El-Sayed to “offer him my full support.”

 

[ahhell]

No, you wouldn't want to see any evidence for that.
Your should try googling, "How did the Fighting Oligarchy Tour affect MAGA?"
Start reading something other than the NYP and watching something other than Fox News.

you’re always so confidently saying the most foolish things

Dann responded to me with ad hom and no evidence.

 

[dirtywick]

Dann responded to me with ad hom and no evidence.

i’d have to get an official ruling on whether or not that’s an ad hom but yes that post is an example of him not posting evidence. however he does provide the title of the evidence he’s referencing and how to find it.

but regardless of that, if you believe that damn doesn’t frequently provide links and evidence to what he is discussing in his posts as dudalb suggests, well i just don’t think that’s true

 

[dirtywick]

Of course you support him, because you seem to be pretty much a No Enemies To The Left guy yourself.

also for clarity the foolish thing i was referencing in my post was this. what an absurd statement

 

[dann]

Dann responded to me with ad hom and no evidence.

Did you google my question?
"How did the Fighting Oligarchy Tour affect MAGA?"

 

[dann]

What Abdul’s victory in Michigan means for the future (Bernie Sanders on YouTube, Aug 6, 2026 – 11:48 min.)
0:00 What the Michigan elections mean
2:14 The transformation of the Democratic Party
4:08 Our plan for the next Congress
9:46 None of that is possible unless we do this one thing...

He makes it pretty clear who should run for the Dems! And who shouldn't ...

0:27–> Last night, in my view, in the so-called purple state of Michigan, a tectonic shift took place in American politics. That's what I believe. With an historic voter turnout, the largest voter turnout in Michigan primary history, the people of that state stood up to an unprecedented onslaught of billionaire money. close to $70 million in ads coming from super PACs like Apac and others.
And despite that onslaught of money, they voted for a progressive candidate who has the guts to take on the oligarchs and fight for working people and for a sane and moral foreign policy. And let's be clear, what we saw in Michigan yesterday is absolutely consistent with what we have seen in election after election, in state after state, all across the country. We've seen it in Arizona, in New York, in New Jersey, in Ohio, Pennsylvania, California, Montana, Colorado, and elsewhere.
The people of America want change. They want real change. They understand that status quo politics and status quo
policies do not work for them just for the billionaire class. And what the American people are saying from coast to coast is: We want a government that represents all of us, not just the 1%.

 

[dann]

Steph Ruhle says ONE THING is fueling Democrats' primary battles (MS NOW, May 5, 2026 – 12:13 min.)
MS NOW’s Stephanie Ruhle joins the Morning Joe panel to discuss her latest opinion piece for MS NOW, “What Democrats’ Primary Battles are Really About.” Ruhle argues that the economy and affordability are the top issues Americans care about the most as they head to the ballot box this primary season. The panel debates how affordability is one slice of a large pie of topics facing Democrats as he head into the midterms and beyond.

6:26–>You know, the establishment should have a little bit of humility here because not only does it look like they lost this race, but they have struggled to actually win races with moderate establishment candidates against Republicans.So there's an element of, you know, 'We assume that it's going to be harder.' So there's an element of, you know, for El-Sayed to win in a general election.
But I think we should question those assumptions because voters, when you talk to voters, which I've done a lot of in the South, in Michigan, they are looking for fighters.That is true of independents, too.
That's true of people who have gotten tired of Donald Trump and are looking for an alternative.
So in some ways, El-Sayed's constant criticism of the democratic establishment is going to have a much broader audience than people think. (...)
The difference for the progressive fighters that have been successful, the most successful at every level so far in this country, in this cycle, is that the progressives are naming a villain. So they're not just talking about affordability like the establishment Democrats are, they are saying this is a top-down fight because we're the little guy, you're the little guy, and the villain is corporate and corporate America. The villain is Donald Trump and corruption.

Notice that this is what the progressives have in common with the Tea Party of yesteryear: naming a villain!
But where the Tea Party's villain, because of the fascist and conservative nature of the Tea Party, was immigrants, blacks, colored, LGBTQ+ and their woke allies, the progressive Democrats, the 'Anti-Oligarchy Party,' are much closer to the truth. Naming the people who actually benefit from the impoverishment of major segments of the population, the actual elite, is a step in the right direction, and it makes it so damn easy for working-class MAGAlytes to switch from Trump to SDA candidates. All it takes is to shift allegiance.

Unfortunately, it's also the reason why it will much too easy for them to switch back.
As a Marxist, I would focus on the capitalist system, which enables those villains to enrich themselves at the expense of the majority of the people.
Without understanding how capitalism works (only $0.61 on Amazon), the change in attitude will be superficial and thus very frail.
However, for the time being, putting the blame on the oligarchs, who live up to their role as villains by acting in atrociously villainous ways, appears to be the winning strategy!

 

[dann]

Talarico EXPANDS Lead Over Paxton In Texas Senate Poll (The Majority Report on YouTube, Aug 6, 2026 – 13:43 min.)

 

[Reformed Offlian]

Did you google my question?
"How did the Fighting Oligarchy Tour affect MAGA?"

This title made me think there was a band on tour called "The Fighting Oligarchy" that conservatives really didn't like for some reason.

 

[ahhell]

Did you google my question?
"How did the Fighting Oligarchy Tour affect MAGA?"

No, I have not. You responded to me with insults and telling me to do my own research. Also, I'm not making any claims here, so I don't feel any obligation to provide evidence.

 

[dann]

You are the one who said:

I'm not sure I see a lot of evidence for that.

i.e. evidence that Bernie Sanders' "Fighting Oligarchy Tour was what finally put a stop to MAGA's momentum!"

I then said:

No, you wouldn't want to see any evidence for that.

And I recommended that:

Your should try googling, "How did the Fighting Oligarchy Tour affect MAGA?"
Start reading something other than the NYP and watching something other than Fox News.

You found that terribly offensive and wrote:

Dann responded to me with ad hom and no evidence.

So I asked you:

Did you google my question?
"How did the Fighting Oligarchy Tour affect MAGA?"

To which you now answer:

No, I have not. You responded to me with insults and telling me to do my own research. Also, I'm not making any claims here, so I don't feel any obligation to provide evidence.

So thank you for the confirmation that "you wouldn't want to see any evidence for that."

 

[dann]

This title made me think there was a band on tour called "The Fighting Oligarchy" that conservatives really didn't like for some reason.

Maybe Sanders should have hyphenated it, The Fighting-Oligarchy Tour, but I'm not sure it would have made it less ambiguous.
Google claims there's no Fighting Oligarchy Band, which is a pity.
It's also a pity that The Fighting Oligarchs never happened.
I would definitely have paid to see that!

 

[ahhell]

You are the one who said:

i.e. evidence that Bernie Sanders' "Fighting Oligarchy Tour was what finally put a stop to MAGA's momentum!"

I then said:

And I recommended that:

You found that terribly offensive and wrote:

So I asked you:

To which you now answer:

So thank you for the confirmation that "you wouldn't want to see any evidence for that."

Thank you for not providing any evidence of your claim and making your prophecy self-fulfilling.

 

[dann]

Thank you!
It was in no way self-fulfilling. I couldn't have done it without you!

 

[theprestige]

Maybe Sanders should have hyphenated it, The Fighting-Oligarchy Tour, but I'm not sure it would have made it less ambiguous.

That would have made it a noun, an oligarchy that fights. Which may actually be a fairly decent description of the Sanders campaign.

 

[dann]

That would have made it a noun, an oligarchy that fights. Which may actually be a fairly decent description of the Sanders campaign.

Are you sure? That's not what I've been teaching my students!
In the case of, The child is three years old, three is an numeral, years is a noun, and old is an adjective.
In the case of, A three-year-old child, [three-year-old] is a hyphenated compound adjective to the noun child.
I don't think it does anything to otherwise change any of the three words that the compound adjective consists of.
Is it a grammar rule I'm unfamiliar with?

 

[Reformed Offlian]

Are you sure? That's not what I've been teaching my students!
In the case of, The child is three years old, three is an numeral, years is a noun, and old is an adjective.
In the case of, A three-year-old child, [three-year-old] is a hyphenated compound adjective to the noun child.
I don't think it does anything to otherwise change any of the three words that the compound adjective consists of.
Is it a grammar rule I'm unfamiliar with?

You know, the rule that hyphenated words are always nouns and not adjectives. Like "self-fulfilling" and "do-it-yourself" and "ride-or-die". Do you not have any ride-or-dies in Denmark?

 

[ahhell]

This does make think that Harvard or Yale should change their mascot to the fighting-oligarchy.

 

[TragicMonkey]

In the case of, A three-year-old child, [three-year-old] is a hyphenated compound adjective to the noun child.

You could drop the word "child" and simply use "a three-year-old" as a noun.

 

[jt512]

I just read the DSA manifesto...and I read it on their website, just to be sure it was not being twisted....and it scared the hell out of me.
It pretty much advocates getting rid of the Constution..abolish the Presidency, the Senate, the SUpreme Court abolish the police and abolish prisons, have no military, and open the borders without any restrictions.
I can only hope that Some of the DSA Candidates signed up just because the name sounded good, and never got around to reading the manifesto, because the Manifesto, quite frankly, seems alot more hard line Marxist then classic social democracy.

Democratic socialism is not social democracy. Which word is the noun and which is the adjective matters.