389
If that's what the people want, yes.
“If you ask me, it was not a good night for New York,” Rep. Greg Meeks, a powerful New York Democrat who is close with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, told CNN..
... Meeks added: “Instead of us making sure we put all of our resources to fight Republicans and to fight Donald Trump, we’re using it to fight each other. It just doesn’t make common sense to me.”
So close to a revelation...
It's all fucking power plays. They get it, but giving their base what they want means taking a step back and these ghouls want the power and money more than they want a healthy republic.
The current Democrats have the same morals as the current GOP, it's only the fact their base would totally rebel that keeps them from sucking Trump's toes.
Not your choice. Sucks to suck
Yes
The only correct answer.
"them" are the constituents and if they're taking over the party, it's working as intended.
What's crazy is the Democrats in power could have protected their seats with just a modicum of spine when it comes to trump. Something just slightly more than a strongly worded letter would have kept many casual "I-don't-follow-politics" voters blinded. But they are so incompetent that they couldn't even do that. And now they are surprised when they get challenged on it?????
It's not a lack of spine. We've been saying it for a while now. They don't serve the voters.
One Democratic lawmaker sitting in a battleground district told CNN that they are so concerned about the rise of the Democratic Socialists of America that they have recently begun having serious conversations with donors about leaving the party altogether.
The fact that their impulse is to get their donors opinions instead of their constituents is why they need to be primaried.
leaving the party altogether
Don't let the door hit you in the ass.
All these Bloombergcrats just piled into the party a few years ago, then realized Epstein wasn't around anymore and decided to bail.
Exactly, the only question anybody needs to be asking them is who's interests do you actually represent? Because it's become increasingly obvious that donors of certain Dems have basically hired them to fumble the ball and enable Republicans stay in power.
I think American Oligarchs realized decades ago that creating the conditions that lead to voter apathy and provide credibility to "both sides" arguments, would probably be a cheaper and more effective strategy than convincing a majority of people to actually vote against their own interests.
Not to mention this threat to leave the party bullshit is basically the same as the threat to leave California and NYC bc of wealth tax. Fucking go then and don't let the door hit you on the way out, because you're probably responsible for ~95% of the problem. All you've done is exploit people and help weaken democracy.
Anybody who believes it makes a lick of fucking sense to keep pretending the U.S. is the greatest country in the world and social safety nets are unnecessary, (while most Americans are now struggling to afford groceries, let alone healthcare and education), has already switched teams. They might as well put on their "corporations R people 2!" jersey and own who they've been representing this whole time.
who’s interests do you actually represent?
Hmm, let's see
they have recently begun having serious conversations with donors about leaving the party altogether.
Not a word there about constituents.
Anybody who believes it makes a lick of fucking sense to keep pretending the U.S. is the greatest country in the world and social safety nets are unnecessary...has already switched teams.
YUP. And the most infuriating part is that, since about Reagan, the left bave been the ones that been told we must acquiesce to centrists, that we couldn't win elections without, "moderates," that we had to accommodate Clinton and the third-way crowd.
Now, after a decade of slow declined followed by a decade of rapid collapse, it's clear that the centrists can't win in this political landscape. Do the party leaders see where the wind is blowing, listen to the voters, follow the progressives' victories, and tack to the left? Nope! They act as though pushing for social spending and welfare programs, AKA what the Democratic party stood for since FDR, is some sort of betrayal.
Moving to the right? "Look, we need a big tent, but we're all on the same team!" Moving back to the left in the slightest? "Fuck you, I'm quitting the team."
Status quo democrats right now.
This gif might be the best thing to come out this year.
Controlled opposition cries that actual opposition is taking some Ws. Keep them crying. Or just hang them.
AIPAC and fascist Israeli interests are not welcome. Bye Felicia
"Let them" ? Excuse me?
Mother fucker in a real democracy YOU don't have any say in the matter. What you're seeing happen is the will of the people. Yes, you will "let us" vote for the candidates that we want to vote for.
Try to take that away, it's about all we (barely) have left. See what happens.
American political parties aren't public institutions, their inner workings are beholden to nobody but their paymasters. It's a rotten problem so old everyone's stopped noticing the smell
They aren't, but popularity is their lifeblood. If their current candidates can't win popular votes vs. these people running to to their left, they have to choose between becoming politically diminished in power and relevance or moving to the left.
It seems that they are scrambling now to find a way to avoid the consequences of their diminishing popularity without doing anything popular. They spent ages trying to get their "help the little guy" image polished up, but it has been so long since the little guy had a win that fewer and fewer people are buying it. It seems that when leftists are presented a choice between a liberal wearing a badge that says "leftist" and a leftist, they usually choose the leftist. In typical American fashion, rather than trying to beat their opponents, they're trying to prevent opponents from existing.
load more comments
(4 replies)
“Obviously, the socialists had a big win last night. The question is, are we going to let them take over the party? Or are we going to stand up and fight back?” said Rep. Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey, a moderate Democrat who has criticized Mamdani’s politics and how he’s addressed allies of Israel. “Many of us believe, as I do, that if you’re a socialist, you’re not a Democrat.”
Get fucked Josh, also...
A democrat (lowercase "d") is broadly defined as a person who advocates for democracy and believes in the principles of political or social equality.
The name of your party, would disagree with your assessment. Also, the fact that your party used to represent the Jim Crow south and opposed civil liberties for non-whites, while, thankfully, it is now the one championing (at least comparatively against the Republicans) racial civil liberties and equality, means that your party has changed before and changed for the better. It changed to more closely align to the definition of the word. It can and will continue to change becuase, famously, change is the only thing that is permanent. And hopefully it changes to align even closer still to that definition. If you think you are representing equality while championing capitalism, corporatocracy, military dominance, and supporting apartheid and genocide states, well you need to either get a reality check or lose your job. And if your party is full of asshats like you, it might need an overhaul.
The idea of a moderate Democrat standing up and fighting back for anything is so patently absurd at this point.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Maybe all Dem centrists can finally move to the Republican Party where they belong
Keep going. This is the only way you're going to get any change short of all-out civil war.
No, they won’t let us.
"Oh my God! What if they take over and start doing things that actually benefit people?"
Won't somebody think of the rich donors!?
sharpening guillotine blade
Mmm rich donors.
This what you get got not listening. Cry some more. I look forward to the downfall. Socialists will rise because the DNC fell deep into greed.
If you want to win the next election, I'd advise you to seriously consider it.
They'd better
Step out of the way.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2026
389 points (98.7% liked)
politics
30194 readers
2573 users here now
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
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS