Can you name a couple actual issues where they are further to the right now than they were under the Clinton administration?
I don't believe in guilt by association and Harris didn't adopt any of Cheney's conservative ideas on issues, IIRC.
Nice moving the goal posts. "Lets take a neoliberalists of neoliberals and make him the standard".
I know people who don't believe the earth is round or that climate change exists. That doesn't make those topics debatable. It just makes those people wrong. Who you associate, especially in that scenario, is not just a choice. It is a statement.
I subtracted your "40 years" from the current year and landed in the Reagan era, then moved up the timeline to the next major figure in the Democratic Party, reasoning that moving the other direction would stretch the goalposts beyond what you had claimed. If the party has been "running right for over 40 years" then surely it has also been "running right for over 30 years."
Democrats in my neck of the woods have gone very soft on crime in recent decades. And they keep trying to expand their idea of a social safety net any way they can. So I have no idea what you're talking about.
...and are often held back by establishment Dems.
which you can prove by a signigifcant rise in crime and lower budgets for the police, right?
And worse educational outcomes, and a depressed economy, and ineffective social programs...
in comparison to places run by Republicans?
www.consumeraffairs.com
You said they were moving to the right, right?
State laws, mostly, e.g. https://sos.iowa.gov/elections/pdf/candidates/primcandguide.pdf#page=17
I said in my neck of the woods. My aggressively progressive state is in the bottom ten for education.
The best states for public education in 2025
What are the best states for public education in 2024? ConsumerAffairs analyzed the data across four key metrics to rank each state.
And some other very progressive states are in the top 10.
I wonder what this means for Donal's thesis that American progressives have been moving steadily rightward over the past 40 years.
www.mediaite.com
strawman.Democrats must move to center instead of promoting extremists views, such as democracy.
Rahm Emanuel Tells WSJ Democrats Must Move to Center to Win: Party Brand Is ‘Toxic’ and ‘Weak and Woke’
Rahm Emanuel, who is reportedly considering running for president in 2028, told The Wall Street Journal that Democrats need to move to the center if they want to win again, blasting the party's current brand as "toxic" and "weak and woke."
◊◊◊◊ him. He should be rotting in prison for his role in covering up Laquan McDonald's murder. Another career centrist ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ who would rather see Trump than a progressive win. He's a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ nerd trying to play gangster.Democrats must move to center instead of promoting extremists views, such as democracy.
Rahm Emanuel Tells WSJ Democrats Must Move to Center to Win: Party Brand Is ‘Toxic’ and ‘Weak and Woke’
Rahm Emanuel, who is reportedly considering running for president in 2028, told The Wall Street Journal that Democrats need to move to the center if they want to win again, blasting the party's current brand as "toxic" and "weak and woke."
New Mexico?
Don't you mean New America?
LOL! That's rich! In reality though, Democrats demonstrated during the last Presidential election that democracy is something they simply toss out the nearest window. Harris never received a single primary vote and the Democratic Convention was "closed" rather than being "open". When the leaders of a party choose their candidate without allowing the people opportunity to participate in the democratic process of voting, that's not "democracy", it's correctly defined as "oligarchy". The best part is, it's undeniable.Democrats must move to center instead of promoting extremists views, such as democracy.Rahm Emanuel Tells WSJ Democrats Must Move to Center to Win: Party Brand Is ‘Toxic’ and ‘Weak and Woke’
Rahm Emanuel, who is reportedly considering running for president in 2028, told The Wall Street Journal that Democrats need to move to the center if they want to win again, blasting the party's current brand as "toxic" and "weak and woke."
Remember for people like theprestige, people so uneducated that they don't know their rights is a good thing. Just because he is mistaken in his belief that his won't be one of the human faces the boot is stamping on is beside the point.
◊◊◊◊ off Rahm, the party has bedn doing that for decades, with disasterous results.Democrats must move to center instead of promoting extremists views, such as democracy.
Rahm Emanuel Tells WSJ Democrats Must Move to Center to Win: Party Brand Is ‘Toxic’ and ‘Weak and Woke’
Rahm Emanuel, who is reportedly considering running for president in 2028, told The Wall Street Journal that Democrats need to move to the center if they want to win again, blasting the party's current brand as "toxic" and "weak and woke."
So, every other western democracy is an oligarchy? Because, that is what pretty much every other democratic system does. The parties chose candidates, and the voters choose from among the parties. That is a better system. I just think the dems should have done that a bit sooner.
It's a different system. And the difference involves more than just the party picking candidates. A multi-party parliametary system isn't the same as the winner-takes-all Presidential election system the US operates under. Primaries serve an incredibly important function in US presidential elections. The fact that other systems that operate in a very different way don't have primaries isn't a reason for US parties to abandon primaries. That's an incredibly superficial understanding of both.
Biden lost by 1 1/2% of the electorate. Seriously, anything the dems can do that will swing something like 150k voters in the swing states matters.
I'm probably going to regret asking how much the Jewish American vote actually shifted in any given swing state.
Biden lost due to about 100,000 votes in MI, PA and WI.
Probably not by much but still, I like pointing out that this wasn't some sweep, it was incredibly close, it wouldn't have taken much for the Dems to have won so almost anything might have mattered. I think some of those things are obvious, running and obviously decrepit old man until nobody could deny it for instance. The Israel-Palestine question, I couldn't actually guess if taking a harder stance in one direction or the other would have mattered. I think Biden tried to have it both ways there and with Ukraine*, not sure that mattered either but I don't think it helped.
That, which is why I find the folks refusing to even consider what the dems did wrong so frustrating, it would take so little. They can't change what the GOP is doing, they can't change how voters react to that, but they can change what they are doing.
I'm fairly skeptical of the proposition that Biden kissing Bibi's ass (more than he did) would have helped Harris win, especially with all the think pieces about how Dems lost support on the left for not condemning Israel enough.
Hard agree, but in this case the party was trapped between two constituencies with few good alternatives available.
