you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 86 points 4 months ago* (8 children)

Paul Rivera spoke for an hour to big donors about the autopsy, prior to the announcement that they would not be releasing it publicly. This report was crafted to assure that business as usual politics would continue. Democrats don't care if they lose as long as donations keep coming.

That's it.

That's the takeaway.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Democrats don’t care if they lose as long as donations keep coming.

    Right, but that's exactly why I assumed that the autopsy was accurate and on-point - because it found fault with things the DNC not only was but still is deliberately doing solely to keep the soft money rolling in, and in spite of the fact that those things will likely lead to a loss. That's the reality they don't want the voters to become (more) aware of.

    But since it's just a mealy-mouthed whitewash, it seems like they might as well have released it as promised.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    The report only confirms that and they were trying to avoid being called out.

    That or this AI slop of a report, with factual errors on almost every page and a blank conclusion section, isn't the real report and is just fodder hoping to ignore the issues they don't want to address.

    Either way we can draw the same conclusion about party leadership.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 4 months ago

    Either way we can draw the same conclusion about party leadership.

    True that. The names may have changed but the policies and strategies are the same now as they have been since at least 2016 - pimp the pro-corporate/pro-zionist "moderates" no matter what the voters want, at least ignore if not actively campaign against the progressives, again no matter what the voters want, and most important of all, don't do anything that might cut into the flow of soft money.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    To an extent. They and Republicans are committed to learning the wrong lesson. All these people refusing to vote Etc or voting third party. You will never get their attention or get them to learn from your actions. They will always look at the one of the two that won. And imitate them. It's what's happened for over 50 years. And the same people are still in charge.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    They aren't learning the wrong lessons because it's not the public that they serve, it's private interests. They know exactly what they are doing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    And if you're a voter or someone who believes they should serve their constituents. What kind of lesson would you generally call it when they serve special interests instead? You are not disagreeing with me.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago* (1 child)

    All these people refusing to vote Etc or voting third party. You will never get their attention or get them to learn from your actions.

    They know.

    Third party votes aren't cast to win an election. However, third party voters certainly change local politics, where all of their progress is being made.

    (for example, ballot initiatives in my state had massive third party participation, and have been successful)

    re non-voters, they are growing every year, now at about 36%. They know they can't get their attention or teach lessons, too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment