Tinidril

He violated MSNBC policy by speaking the truth.

What you are suggesting here is not all that dissimilar to what the Democratic establishment has been trying to do all along. I recognize the populist messaging could make a significant difference, but I don't think that is enough to overcome the fundamental flaw in the strategy. I think that any capitulation to Republican framing just sets up a situation where Republicans look like "Coke Classic" and Democrats are the cheap imitation. Republicans will always be willing to go harder on the populist rhetoric than Democrats, and will therefore always appear more willing to overturn the existing power structures, even resorting to violence when necessisary. (The inaccuracy of this perception is another matter.)

Contrast that with Bernie's approach. He never compromises an inch on his messaging. That's why he is viewed across the political spectrum as the most genuine person in politics. There is no hidden agenda, and that does get recognized. All the socialist edges you might shave off to gain appeal in red districts will backfire, because voters will believe (arguably correctly) that the real agenda is being hidden from them. Their distrust of the establishment will translate into distrust of the revolution.

Take immigration for instance. Democrats dropped all messaging around the value of immigration and the character of immigrants in order to appeal to Republican voters. That solidified Republican framing of the issue, and made Democrats look like they were simply offering half-measures compared to the Republican solution. The did the same thing with Trans rights. They threw trans people under the bus for political expediency, and it just solidified prejudices which led to more support for Republicans. Years ago, they did the same for gay rights.

The thing is that right wing framing is utter and complete bullshit and, at some level, I think right wing voters know it. But, when life seems hopeless, people aren't going to let go of a vision of a better world without something else to grab onto. These people are scared out of their wits, and Democrats are trying to tell them to let go of the life preserver, while offering nothing at all to replace it. I don't think they are unreachable at all (not all of them at least) but I do think they are unreachable through pandering.

I feel more sorry for those kids because they had Charlie Kirk as a father in the first place. I have no sympathy whatsoever for anyone that would marry that asshole.

"Charlie Kirk proven wrong."

This sucks. I don't think he was conscious long enough to know that justice has arrived. Thoughts and prayers asshole.

I think we're largely in agreement. As for a reform party, I think building on the DSA is the way to go. The DSA just needs to start organizing more on a national level instead of operating in geographic silos.

I'm seeing a lot of Democratic boomer types finally start waking up to how weak and ineffective Democratic leadership is. I think they are vulnerable to takeover, but doing it fast enough doesn't seem likely. We really need a Mamdani blowout.

I'm entirely in agreement there. I'm not optimistic enough to say "half" but I think it would be enough. The suburban NIMBY types are the most difficult to reach. Those are the ones who just want to return to the neo-liberal consensus. They are just as hateful and deluded as the white supremacists, and even more bigoted in their own way.

While there are issues with even small businesses, a liberal government can regulate them pretty effectively to the benefit of everyone, including owners. Its when businesses grow to the point where governments are beholden to them that things start to get really out of whack. I would be content to remain a primarily capitalist type economy if the system were designed to make business growth beyond certain levels disadvantageous. Anti-trust exists as a kind of band-aid for the fact that markets, left to their own devices, favor continual consolidation with nothing pushing the opposite direction. That band-aid is insufficient to constrain the expansion of corporate power.

Don't equate Democrats with the left. The Democrats also sat on those files for the entire Biden presidency. The whole reason Epstein didn't sink Trump way back in 2016 is that Democrats were protecting Bill Clinton and almost certainly other powerful figures in the Democrat establishment. Blue MAGA isn't that different from red.

As president, Bill Clinton benefitted from pretty much the entirety of the Internet boom. He had nothing to do with that great economy, but he did help set the gears in motion for the 2008 mortgage crisis. He also took advantage of the great economy to dismantle or cripple most of the federal safety net programs and kneecap unions.

Oh, I'm completely on board with organizing and being prepared to defend ourselves. It's the only way forward. All it would take is a short general strike, but we need to take into account that a whole lot of American workers like what's going on, and even more just want to return to the same neoliberal consensus that got us here. Those fractures are the biggest problem to solve.

And I guess I'll watch and learn. Standing by for what I'm sure is about to be a riveting adult discussion.