Because neoliberals aren’t in charge of the DNC and haven’t been stealing money from state parties to save for an uncharismatic moderate in 2028…
Like, you know what better than having a billion plus war cheat right now?
The fact that we had one and already dumped the money on state parties. They e been running at campaign levels for 17 months now, that’s why progressives keep winning.
When voter outreach happens, everyone starts realizing they support progressive policy and so does everyone else. Those people vote in the primary and get progressive candidates to the general where they easily beat Republicans.
Anyone who thinks money is best used in advertising blitzes weeks/days before an election are streets behind.
“Progressives keep winning”
A progressive winning in New York City is easy.
Don’t get me wrong. I like Zohran Mamdani or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. But could they actually win in Texas? In Nebraska? In Iowa? That’s a real question.
Look at the Senate race in Michigan.
-
The President is unpopular.
-
He started a trade war with Canada.
-
Gas prices are at a record high
It should be an easy win for Abdul El Sayed. Yet the race is extremely tight.
What are you even talking about?
2 years ago people included NYC as a place that would never elect a progressive, now people are fucking say obviously NYC has a progressive…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mayors_of_New_York_City
Look at that fucking list, all Republicans and corrupt neoliberals.
The day Mamdani won his primary the DNC chair endorsed him for the general and quickly (two weeks) gave a pbs interview about how the main parts of what Mamdani has is what the party needs. Even if policy positions would change place to place.
Like, you just invented a fucking straw man everyone else already accounted for and act like it’s a unique though.
Just what the fuck are you doing?
Edit:
Mamdani won his primary 6/24/25, this interview is 7/9/25:
Like…
You’re giving an example that proves my point, but you understand this so little you think it refutes it…
I don’t know if logic is going to help here.
People have very short memories.
People also have very short memories.
It’s not just that, a lot of people are weirdly insistent on the myth that progressive fiscal policy isn’t popular everywhere.
It fucking is.
I grew up in a county that voted over 95% trump the last three elections. I haven’t lived there for a long time, but I know the people and most of them are closer than 3rd cousins to me.
They’ve always wanted progressive policy, it’s just for the last 30 years that hasn’t been an option for them.
Stuff like better schools, better healthcare, workers protections, living wages…
All that is insanely popular all over the country. The problem is neoliberals never want to fix it, and with the prior top-down party structure they could crush progressives all over the country.
We’re back to bottom up, and progressives thrive there because it’s voters picking candidates and not billionaire donors.
We won’t just see a blue wave, we’ll see a wave of progressives who actually put in the work to fix shit
It seems to me that progressive policy, in general, is popular everywhere. Here in Missouri we got legal weed when it was put to a vote, the same with abortion rights. Across the border in Oklahoma they got one of the most lenient medical marijuana policies in the country. There are a lot of examples of similar things in other red states. The left needs to figure out a way to push progressive legislation without tying it to a party.
The left needs to figure out a way to push progressive legislation without tying it to a party.
I mean, it’s not like it’s a mystery…
Read that PBS interview, all the DNC had to do was keep their thumb off the scales, and that’s what’s happening.
The idea that it took some crazy strategy and loads of money was neoliberal propaganda to excuse why their chosen candidates wouldn’t actually help anyone.
It is not hard to be an honest politician when you get to run in fair elections.
And primaries never have to be fair, that’s why it’s important the party elects leadership whose sole focus is running fair and unbiased primaries. Not doing that for 30 years is why shit is so fucked right now.
But could they actually win in Texas? In Nebraska?
Yes, but they have been heavily propagandized so the way you frame your message means everything.
-
I mean, based on the decisions Democrats have made in the previous two years, why would you support them? They’ve been worthless. Less than worthless. Schumers and Jefferies have no place in the party, let alone as leadership.
But because to them the party is something they possess, something they own, it’s theirs to do with what they will. And this leads to certain contradictions. They aren’t playing to resist Trump. They’re playing to maintain control of the party.
Get rid of evil first then we can get rid of the centrist in office worshipping rich dicks,
