politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
The Republican Tea party movement started with Ron Paul running in the 2008 Republican primaries, and that having an impact on the kinds of Republicans who won the 2010 primaries and became part of the House flipping that year. Bernie started a progressive movement for the Democratic party by .. running in the 2016 Democratic party. And that had an impact of more progressives running in the 2018 primaries (hello Squad) and helping flip the House that year.
Well maybe progressive voters should have kept at it, then. It's a long road to change an organization that big. I would actually put the moment as being in the 2020 primaries when a bunch of the moderates dropped out to coalesce for Biden before super Tuesday when it looked like FPTP was helping Bernie. But that just again speaks to the fact that not enough progressives were coming out to vote.
Ok we're on the same page mostly. The Tea Parties continued momentum was, in no insignificant part, thanks to the billionaire Koch brothers co-opting it by funding a bazillion primary challenges to win over state legislatures towards their goal of calling a Constitutional Convention to rewrite it in their anarcho-capitalist ideals. They weren't quite as interested in the US Congress or the presidency.
So, I still maintain that Bernie already started the movement in much the same way that Ron Paul started theirs. Just by running in the primary and inspiring both voters and candidates to go out to the primaries.
Sometimes just getting a platform to speak your ideas is enough to get things going. Progressive ballot measures did well in 2024. Conservative voters can change their minds when confronted with first hand experience. Bernie convinced a Fox News studio audience to like Medicare for all. And even losing the primary after that, the exposure could very well help you get the signatures to appear on the general ballot as an independent.
Okay I see what you're saying now. Yeah I think we are on the same page. It's really all about persistence and progressives voting consistently. I was thinking more about how the movement he started didn't continue on its pace, not necessarily that nothing he did mattered.
I also think the 2020 primaries is complicated in just that the moderates that dropped out weren't polling super well anyway so them dropping out didn't give Biden as much of a boost as much as just him being Biden. That said, Bernie should have been the candidate but not enough people voted for him in the primary to get that to happen. He also still faced the "He's not a democrat" accusation which was a problem for him in both primaries he ran in. Again, if more progressives had come out to vote for Bernie, he would have won.
It's all about voting in the primaries.
It's an interesting event to think about. Because if it did solidify numbers that weren't they with all the candidates still in, then that means a ranked choice system still should have put Biden as the winner. And if it didn't really provide Biden extra numbers he needed to win, then it was coordinated messaging against the rising movement, and it worked but also turned away voters they needed to hold onto in the long run.
I mean the thing that signaled Biden had any chance in 2020 was him winning South Carolina pretty big and that showed the establishment moderates that there was someone to back who could win against Bernie. Since Bernie had a plurality not a majority it was a tough race to win outright. Super Tuesday solidified his lead but then Covid happened less than 2 weeks later and made it so Bernie couldn't have made up for his losses on Super Tuesday. Basically guaranteeing that Biden would win. The people that dropped out before ST were Buttigieg, Klobochar, and O'Rourke had kinda already crashed and burned. But Pete was the more left leaning out of those people so even with him dropping out it would make sense for much of those voters to go to Bernie. So realistically a Bidens bump started with South Carolina and the moderates then realized he was their only chance. Again, Bernie could have, and likely would have over come this without COVID. But he didn't. If voters in South Carolina had picked Bernie Biden wouldn't have gotten any bump and Bernie would have continued his way to a plurality of votes. Biden also eventually got a majority of voters to his side while Bernie has never had a majority of voters. Mind you, neither did Obama. But Obama was...Obama. Being a young charasmatic person who can inspire in your speeches helps a whole lot.
Bernie was doing well but couldn't overcome that Biden was viewed as a strong candidate by moderates overall, that covid happened, and also that he just wasn't a Democrat. People had the same thought process for Bloomberg because he was a Republican. They wanted a democrat at the head.
This is also why it will be easier for someone who has always been a Democrat to win the presidential primary as a progressive. Bernie also has the trouble with being a guy with great ideas but still being an old dude and going on tangents that aren't necessary to make his point. He is also not the best at inspiring in his speeches, not that they can't be inspiring. Just that he's not as Charismatic as Obama was. Someone like AOC though has the charisma down, has the ideas down, has the ability to talk like a normal person down, is young, and is able to use things like social media and be just as normal as anyone else.