• Hellahunter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Well, I’d argue Nancy is more representative of wealthy American neo-liberals, which most of us are not.

      I’d even argue is Nancy even a dem at this point she’s more of a centrist parading around as a dem.

      • StaticFalconar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        While Nancy’s actual politics may be more centrists than dem, shes still one of the old guards that must go away for any actual change in the party.

          • Allonzee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            Dems are a far right party that only look centrist if you squint looking at them from inside fascist crazy town.

            To basically anyone in the developed world, of which we are not, Luigi murdered a mass murderer, to any fascist or neoliberal here, we have to let murderers for profit let the free market decide who gets life saving healthcare, as just 1 of innumerable examples.

            Neoliberals don’t squee like little girls at the hello kitty store when people suffer and die needlessly when it facilitates private profit as the Fascists do, but they don’t see it as the social fabric betrayal and atrocity it is either. “free market forces, mr dying homeless person, but I support your right to die in the gutter of hunger and exposure as any identity you choose!” Because it’s free to, but people need their basic survival met first, and that takes resources that go to them and not the robber barons that pay off both parties.

        • Hellahunter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I totally agree with you she must go, she’s part of the let’s maintain the status quo dems.

      • frostysauce@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        she’s more of a centrist parading around as a dem.

        And that perfectly represents the party as a whole.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        You know “centrist” is not a political party, right? Fuckin kids these days, what are they teaching you…

      • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s a funny take. The former speaker of the house who hand selected her replacement and was the leader of the Democratic caucus for more than a decade, and you’re basically calling them a DINO

        • peregrin5@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          MAGA regularly calls Mitch McConnell a RINO. Why should we handle Nancy any differently?

              • peregrin5@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                It means that a true Democrat or Republican is one who represents the views of their constituents. Not who holds the reins of power in their respective parties. This is a valid definition.

                • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I don’t believe that is a valid definition. A good politician is someone who represents the views of their constituents. A true Democrat (or whatever party) is someone who represents the views of the party. The views of the party may be influenced by party candidates on behalf of their constituents, but those views are decided upon by a group of people that aren’t elected by a public ballot and have no obligation to democratic voters. If you don’t like the platform of the party, you’re supposed to go join a different party (but we’re kinda fucked with that right now). If you’re talking about who represents the views of the democratic party, it’s difficult to find someone who represents them better than Pelosi.

                  • peregrin5@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Instead of valid definition I should have said a “good definition”. There is no real definition of a “true Democrat” or vice versa for Republicans. Both your definition and my definition are valid definitions.

                    If you don’t like the platform of the party, you’re supposed to go join a different party

                    The other option is to slowly replace the members of the party in positions of power. Why do you think AOC is encouraging young people to run for office? She has the right idea.

                    The fact of the matter is that the US has a two party political system. This isn’t changing unless one of the parties gains power and essentially gives it up to implement a new system.

                    Another fact is that young people aren’t running for office so all of our politicians are part of the gerontocracy and all hold particular views from having been born in a generation most of us no longer relate with.

                    The only way to change things is to get young people into office at the lower levels and work their way up by building political careers until they are the ones in the positions of power in the DNC.

                    The ones who will hold the reins and make change happen are the ones who actually decide to run for office. This is the system of the United States that allows it’s citizens to control what happens in the higher echelons of government.

                    Yes voting is a part of it but it sounds like you are unhappy with the choices you are given to vote for and that’s purely because the people you would like to vote for are not running for office and winning. If they are running and not winning that is because they are not popular with the public which is another conversation but I think the majority of you are getting stuck in the “not feeling like doing anything but protesting” phase and not actually running for office.

    • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The centers of both parties are functionally allies, the power structure of the Democratic party despises the kind of progressive politics AOC and Bernie do far more than the Republicans they claim to oppose even when those Republicans are literal out in the open fascists. Chuck Shumer is exhibit A and will become a historical touchstone for discussions about how neoliberalism always in the end sets up the conditions for fascism and then pathetically collapses in the crucial moment of resistance against fascism.

      Fuck that, both parties need to go, how many times has the Democratic party laughed in the face of Bernie as they blatantly undermined him?

      No, I treat Republicans as an existential threat, which means I also logically see the entrenched power structures of the Democrats that are happy to lose to Republicans rather than evolve, as an existential threat.

      Pelosi is a Democrat through and through, AOC and Bernie are Democrats because they have no choice in the status quo.

        • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Actually one of the biggest arguments in geology/evolutionary biology is whether evolution tends to be a slow, continous steady process or whether it happens in explosive spurts seperated by periods of little evolution.

          There is abundant evidence that both happens, so your metaphor is tenous at best.