Our party does it's best to ensure our candidates are not so progressive they will scare off important donors.

I just don't think an ideological candidate has the best shot.

But then some centrists annoy the hell out of me.

candidates can win, especially if they claim to take on the establishment and fight for jobs and the middle class against powerful corporations. That has been our message and we forgot it. Progressives haven't forgotten it. They'll get my vote from now on

However nothing in this life comes easy. If you believe in something you go for it.

If a Democratic candidate is very vocal about economic inequality and class issues, it apparently scares off minorities, women and others who think he/she will toss their social concerns aside despite the underlying platform.

Meanwhile, Republican leaders are extremely class conscious and economic inequality worsens.

as economic issues.

Seems not too complicated but that wasn't done.

Last edited Tue Dec 20, 2016, 02:08 PM - Edit history (1)

On the other hand, I suspect that many Democratic primary voters assume the worst on social issues if the candidate speaks more about class issues. Opposing candidates who speak more about social concerns often have a better chance in primaries.

If I was a Republican mostly concerned about taxes and redistribution of wealth, I'd try to ensure that Democrats always had a candidate that was very vocal about social issues.

EDIT: Does anyone really think candidates like Jerry Brown, Howard Dean or Bernie Sanders want a return to the social conditions of the 50's? Apparently yes! See reply #14 for what I'm talking about.

full speeches he absolutely covers social issues.

... a different candidate talks about those issues more frequently. It's comparative.

There seems to be many voters who believe there's some Democratic candidates who want to return to the social conditions of the 50's.

We need catchy, pithy, rhyming conveyance.

One of them might choose to spend 75% of their time speaking about income inequality (treating social fights as a given) whereas another one might choose to spend 75% of their time talking about social concerns (treating class concerns as a given).

I contend that the latter will perform better in Democratic primaries and worse in a general election.

IMO, Sanders didn't have adequate media coverage for people to know where he was coming from until well after Super Tuesday. That created a huge deficit. I say this as someone who spent a ton of time talking to dem voters in one of those Super Tuesday states. They liked him but they knew Clinton better so they voted for her. Obviously this wasn't everyone, but it was a massive issue in the early states because of his lack of media attention (don't even get me started on why that was the case!). Had he done better in Super Tuesday states, he very likely would've won the primary, if you look at the numbers. There are other circumstances that kept him from winning that I also won't address because of the volatility here.

So returning to your point, if he'd made less of an issue about what distinguished him from Clinton, which was primarily the economic issues, you think he would've done better. You might be right, I'm just not sure.

To me, people who think a Democrat might want to return to the days of greater racism and misogyny are ridiculous.

To others, I might be called "racially insensitive" or the like. That's not how I see myself at all. If I like to focus more on the growing income inequality in this country, does that mean I don't care about issues like black people getting shot by cops? No!

I view Republicans as very class-conscious overall, especially among their most wealthy supporters, and I think many of them love that people are still battling each other over social concerns.

Candidates like Jerry Brown in '92, Howard Dean in '04 and Bernie Sanders in '16 all did very poorly among AA voters. It's not anything new.

Full disclosure: I didn't vote for Bernie in the primary because he seemed TOO liberal for me. I've also become more cynical over the years and figured that he wouldn't survive the primary.

compliant media, gerrymandering districts and voter suppression.

...Medicaid block grants, and they oppose increases in the minimum wage? So, to be more progressive, should Dems also adopt such Trump-like policies?

By telling people what they wanted to hear with no plans to back it up.

Allowed the biggest circus freak in history to sloodge his way into office ??
We don't need anyone on our side thinking this pus filled shit stain is a populist or is going to do one iota of good for this country.

Also, why is working class tied only to blue collar workers? Are white collar workers not part of the working class as well?

a little knowledge about economics helps us make better arguments. Instead we get this hate towards trade deals which are responsible for us enjoying cheap gadgets we then use to complain about trade deals.

our party has lost its soul. And yes, there are MANY studies that show how free trade killed jobs

I am not a bad person who is reflective of why "we lost our soul" - just stop.

We had excellent policies on the platform this year to address the concerns of those in the rust belt.

Her name was Hillary Clinton. I voted against a democratic socialist in the primary. He was not a progressive democrats so his nostalgia for the past was scary as hell to me. Those times sucked for me and mine. Not interested in going backwards.

I can't go along with this sort of thinking, sorry.

And simplistic (and false) internet memes.

Best of luck!

You can keep your cheap catch phrases and labels

Last edited Tue Dec 20, 2016, 05:58 PM - Edit history (5)

Most likely you'll continue

- to live in yr simplistic binary echo chamber
- make up false memes to shit on liberal democrats because they don't pass some purity test
- enable Republicans to destroy all the things hard working progressives have achieved in the blink of an eye..

Too many identified Hillary Clinton as centrist when she was not. The only way she was centrist was by being in the middle of the road withing the Democratic Party. Everybody seemed to ignored her past and focused on emails and other accusations.

Back during the time Gore was in Congress he was more in the middle of most Democrats in Congress. And Democrats covered more of a range than they do now. Clinton back in the 90's might be considered more extreme left if she had been the Senator then.

about fighting for the middle class, that doesn't love evil corporate policies like free trade that hurts regular people

That's who I'm voting for. They're called progressive democrats. They used to be just called Democrats

Like they are the only people who get laid off...plenty of people from every industry get laid off every day. Get another job...if there are no jobs at all where you live and you can't even commute to one then I guess that's not a viable place to live then. I commuted 1 hour and 45 minutes EACH WAY to get to my job for many years. I'm tired of hearing about the plight of the rust belt workers or manufacturing jobs....what do they want...hand outs? Go get another job.

Whole communities were decimated by free trade, a policy designed by giant mega-corporations to maximize profits at the expense of millions of working Americans and all some Democrats can say is who gives a shit get over it. And we wonder why we lost

and they chose the racist.

Sid

And they went for the pro free trade in even greater numbers than the dem candidates with record of opposing trade.

I do question those who think this a problem that can be solved through trade policy. History does not support that idea very well.

Hillary was to be Obama 3.0? "Obama says he'd be seen as moderate Republican "

I voted against Raygun,hate to see a D Prez say he would be in there with them back when they really fucked shit up.

http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/Politics/obama-considered-moderate-republican-1980s/story?id=17973080

We need big progressive solutions, and we need them twenty years ago.

who's fiscally progressive but socially center-right? Food for thought.

By old-school moderate, I mean those who side with working people over corporations, unions over bosses, the little guy over the fat cats, but one who's a bit more socially conservative than the typical progressive (but nowhere near as conservative as a repuke). In short, someone like Tim Ryan or Tim Kaine.

Or would you sacrifice practicality for purity?

You know, people with principles and the courage to speak the truth.