Yup. And at that time, we never found out if it was true or not. Since then, Republicans have been tirelessly working to ensure it is. And now we see the fruits of their labor: a Republican president as king.
Often I imagine had Carter elected to move on a Nixon conviction if we would be where we are now. I don’t think we would. Holding power to account doesn’t seem to be an American or Democratic thing to do. When it is, I believe we may have more geopolitical standing in accountability and Democracy. Until we walk the talk we seem to be a cesspool of quacking ducks.
The DNC kicked neoliberals out of the chair last year, and Martin has been giving all the money stolen from state parties via the “victory fund” back to the state parties this whole time
Holding that money and hanging it above the state’s heads is how the neoliberals maintained power.
That’s gone, been gone…
We won’t get a neoliberal candidate forced down our throats this time, we’ll get a candidate that Dem voters actually want, and they’re fucking tired of maga getting away from this shit and want someone actually willing to hold them accountable asap.
And without that money hanging over state parties heads, our next set of congressional leaders will similar not be neoliberals who fight progress harder than MAGA.
It’s like we’re up 250-0 in the first quarter. The battle for the party is over, progressives won. We just have to wait for the clock to run down, unless we can pressure neoliberala to resign now so they can be replaced in special elections ahead of primaries.
The oligarchs will try, but they don’t control the DNC, so it’s just gonna be billionaire owned media saying Newsom is great, and that’s not going to change anyone’s minds. They’re also pay for boys and bad actors to try and convince people on social media that voting in Dem.primaties are useless…
Like, I kind of feel like you not only are ignorant of what’s been happening with the party, but you literally didn’t read anything you just replied to.
Unfortunately it’s hard to tell if you just incapable of understanding this, or if there’s another reason you want people to disnegage from the Dem party as soon as we clawed it back from the oligarchs
I don’t believe minor changes will be enough to shake entrenched power. A huge number of the Dem’s voting base (and the sway votes they’ll need to win) are disengaged and will only check in around October while living the rest of their life tacitly ameliorated to mildly annoyed–the perfect marks for a handsome, put together, well spoken candidate who can claim to have experience running the 4th largest economy in the world.
Newsom’s got baggage, but not Adams or Cuomo level baggage. With moneyed interests behind him it’ll be enough to sway the right people and shove him down our throats.
Who has full and total control over the party, and is accountable to absolutely no one, even the voting members if the DNC that appointed them to the four year term…
Is a “minor change”?!
What the actual fuck would you consider a major change? Even a moderate change?
I think moneyed interests will outcompete progressive will. It doesn’t matter to voters who the chair is if they’re still seeing more ads for Newsom all throughout the primary and electoral seasons. I don’t think the DNC is gonna pull a reverse Hillary and force Newsom out if their base is promoting him in the primaries and I think their base is gonna promote him in the primaries.
I hope you’re right, I really do. I just don’t think it’s enough.
There’s still an inordinate amount of money in politics, a huge number of people that aren’t paying attention, a continued misunderstanding in how government works, and misattribution to what the President’s authority is enough that many people only vote on leap years. There’s also too many ideological purists that refuse to vote out of misguided fears that it constitutes an endorsement of the system or that it’s ineffective thereby ceding their opportunity to influence to stalwart Dems and waivering centrists.
The right has been working since desegregation to secure their political power and neoliberal ideologies have become a mainstay since the energy crisis. A couple of terrible terms isn’t going to be enough to break the ratchet and usurp decades of established power in one election–even if the chair of one of the parties is different now.
Popular enough to win the general election? No. Popular enough to primaries because the vast money/media coverage imbalance meant he was the only candidate many of the voters had heard of? Yes.
The proof is in the pudding and we haven’t seen a damned thing change with the DNC since he took over. Your claims are the same box full of false future promises we’ve seen from the DNC for decades.
Because before the leadership change, he was one of the most distinctly anti-DNC posters I remember interacting with. He was so incredibly critical of the Democrats it was easy to mistake him for one of those MAGA/tankie trolls trying to discourage people from voting (that was never actually his message, but it was easy to misinterpret it as such).
Point is, IMO he has street cred against being a “vote blue no matter who” type.
Can you explain how that makes you believe him? I recall the same thing as someone who is also highly critical of the DNC after what they’ve done this past decade and I have yet to see anything signaling change from them that would warrant even the smallest belief in what they say.
They recently blocked the release of the “autopsy report” of the 2024 election:
Despite a pledge from DNC Chair Ken Martin to release the post-election report, the committee announced Thursday it would not share it publicly.
The DNC wanted to avoid another public debate over how the party lost the White House to Donald Trump, and instead, turn its focus on its recent successes (such as?), according to this official.
“In our conversations with stakeholders from across the Democratic ecosystem, we are aligned on what’s important, and that’s learning from the past and winning the future,” Martin continued. “Here’s our North Star: does this help us win? If the answer is no, it’s a distraction from the core mission.”
So apparently Martin was either lying or isn’t wielding unchecked power like that person claims. Furthermore, Martin is stating that the party only cares about winning and anything that doesnt help them win is simply a “distraction.” This means if the DNC feels its more popular to have ICE round up and throw immigrants into concentration camps, they’ll do it. If they think more tax cuts for the 1% is popular, they’ll do it. They’re abandoning all pretenses of ideology in favor of populism. They’re not interested in solving problems, but rather winning by telling people what they want to hear. These are their real statements and actions. That user is trying to sell you a bill of goods of more future promises with nothing to back it up.
To me this just reinforces my view of them being little more than patsies and controlled opposition for the Republican party. They only exist to legitimize a completely broken one-party system of the ruling elite while we’re treated as little more than cattle.
Okay, let me rephrase that: I believe that he believes what he’s saying – I don’t think he’s trying to “whitewash” the DNC (i.e. I don’t think he has an ulterior motive), as your previous comment accused him of. Whether he’s actually correct in his assessment might be another matter, but I believe he is expressing it in good faith.
Also, responding to this part separately:
Furthermore, Martin is stating that the party only cares about winning and anything that doesnt help them win is simply a “distraction.” This means if the DNC feels its more popular to have ICE round up and throw immigrants into concentration camps, they’ll do it. If they think more tax cuts for the 1% is popular, they’ll do it. They’re abandoning all pretenses of ideology in favor of populism. They’re not interested in solving problems, but rather winning by telling people what they want to hear.
I think you’ve got some misconceptions and false assumptions going on here:
“Populism” (i.e. listening to the majority, which is the working class) isn’t a bad thing. Bernie Sanders and AOC are “populist.” The word with a negative connotation that you’re looking for is “demagogue” – that’s what Trump is.
Your speculation about them deciding to support fascist shit is fearmongering. In reality, that’s incredibly unpopular amongst the actual people (as opposed to extremists amplified by sympathetic media) and I don’t think they’re that stupid that they’d support it by mistake. If anything, moving to “populism” means moving away from that.
The DNC’s problem up to this point has been exactly the opposite: refusing to do what their voters want and instead catering to what their rich donors want. Frankly, Martin claiming that they want to win (instead of being controlled opposition while raking in corporate donor graft) is the best fucking news I’ve heard in a while.
How arrogant to claim that i only know of things written in headlines and posted to Lemmy, while completely failing to elaborate on even a single point mentioned. Please enlighten us with actual examples of this “new” DNC in action.
I thought the POTUS couldn’t break the law? Or does that go out the window once they’re not sitting? Does Trump really want to set THAT precedent?
When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.
I believe Nixon had said that.
Yup. And at that time, we never found out if it was true or not. Since then, Republicans have been tirelessly working to ensure it is. And now we see the fruits of their labor: a Republican president as king.
Often I imagine had Carter elected to move on a Nixon conviction if we would be where we are now. I don’t think we would. Holding power to account doesn’t seem to be an American or Democratic thing to do. When it is, I believe we may have more geopolitical standing in accountability and Democracy. Until we walk the talk we seem to be a cesspool of quacking ducks.
Obviously not retroactive to before Trump!
Or after… or in-between trump 1 and 2.
Doesn’t matter if trump sets the precedent.
The DNC kicked neoliberals out of the chair last year, and Martin has been giving all the money stolen from state parties via the “victory fund” back to the state parties this whole time
Holding that money and hanging it above the state’s heads is how the neoliberals maintained power.
That’s gone, been gone…
We won’t get a neoliberal candidate forced down our throats this time, we’ll get a candidate that Dem voters actually want, and they’re fucking tired of maga getting away from this shit and want someone actually willing to hold them accountable asap.
And without that money hanging over state parties heads, our next set of congressional leaders will similar not be neoliberals who fight progress harder than MAGA.
It’s like we’re up 250-0 in the first quarter. The battle for the party is over, progressives won. We just have to wait for the clock to run down, unless we can pressure neoliberala to resign now so they can be replaced in special elections ahead of primaries.
They’re gonna shove Newsom down our throats.
The oligarchs will try, but they don’t control the DNC, so it’s just gonna be billionaire owned media saying Newsom is great, and that’s not going to change anyone’s minds. They’re also pay for boys and bad actors to try and convince people on social media that voting in Dem.primaties are useless…
Like, I kind of feel like you not only are ignorant of what’s been happening with the party, but you literally didn’t read anything you just replied to.
Unfortunately it’s hard to tell if you just incapable of understanding this, or if there’s another reason you want people to disnegage from the Dem party as soon as we clawed it back from the oligarchs
They control the entire media apparatus. You’re overestimating the importance of the DNC.
I don’t believe minor changes will be enough to shake entrenched power. A huge number of the Dem’s voting base (and the sway votes they’ll need to win) are disengaged and will only check in around October while living the rest of their life tacitly ameliorated to mildly annoyed–the perfect marks for a handsome, put together, well spoken candidate who can claim to have experience running the 4th largest economy in the world.
Newsom’s got baggage, but not Adams or Cuomo level baggage. With moneyed interests behind him it’ll be enough to sway the right people and shove him down our throats.
The chair of the DNC…
Who has full and total control over the party, and is accountable to absolutely no one, even the voting members if the DNC that appointed them to the four year term…
Is a “minor change”?!
What the actual fuck would you consider a major change? Even a moderate change?
I think moneyed interests will outcompete progressive will. It doesn’t matter to voters who the chair is if they’re still seeing more ads for Newsom all throughout the primary and electoral seasons. I don’t think the DNC is gonna pull a reverse Hillary and force Newsom out if their base is promoting him in the primaries and I think their base is gonna promote him in the primaries.
I hope you’re right, I really do. I just don’t think it’s enough.
There’s still an inordinate amount of money in politics, a huge number of people that aren’t paying attention, a continued misunderstanding in how government works, and misattribution to what the President’s authority is enough that many people only vote on leap years. There’s also too many ideological purists that refuse to vote out of misguided fears that it constitutes an endorsement of the system or that it’s ineffective thereby ceding their opportunity to influence to stalwart Dems and waivering centrists.
The right has been working since desegregation to secure their political power and neoliberal ideologies have become a mainstay since the energy crisis. A couple of terrible terms isn’t going to be enough to break the ratchet and usurp decades of established power in one election–even if the chair of one of the parties is different now.
That’s wild…
You think ad spending would be enough to make a neoliberal popular?
What are you basing that on? Because it’s not the last dozen plus years of reality…
Popular enough to win the general election? No. Popular enough to primaries because the vast money/media coverage imbalance meant he was the only candidate many of the voters had heard of? Yes.
👌
The proof is in the pudding and we haven’t seen a damned thing change with the DNC since he took over. Your claims are the same box full of false future promises we’ve seen from the DNC for decades.
Is this satire? That is a wildly optimistic take, if not. Wildly.
This person has single handedly taken on the task of white washing the DNC on lemmy. They’ve been posting stuff like this for months.
I actually believe him, and I’ll tell you why:
Because before the leadership change, he was one of the most distinctly anti-DNC posters I remember interacting with. He was so incredibly critical of the Democrats it was easy to mistake him for one of those MAGA/tankie trolls trying to discourage people from voting (that was never actually his message, but it was easy to misinterpret it as such).
Point is, IMO he has street cred against being a “vote blue no matter who” type.
Can you explain how that makes you believe him? I recall the same thing as someone who is also highly critical of the DNC after what they’ve done this past decade and I have yet to see anything signaling change from them that would warrant even the smallest belief in what they say.
They recently blocked the release of the “autopsy report” of the 2024 election:
So apparently Martin was either lying or isn’t wielding unchecked power like that person claims. Furthermore, Martin is stating that the party only cares about winning and anything that doesnt help them win is simply a “distraction.” This means if the DNC feels its more popular to have ICE round up and throw immigrants into concentration camps, they’ll do it. If they think more tax cuts for the 1% is popular, they’ll do it. They’re abandoning all pretenses of ideology in favor of populism. They’re not interested in solving problems, but rather winning by telling people what they want to hear. These are their real statements and actions. That user is trying to sell you a bill of goods of more future promises with nothing to back it up.
To me this just reinforces my view of them being little more than patsies and controlled opposition for the Republican party. They only exist to legitimize a completely broken one-party system of the ruling elite while we’re treated as little more than cattle.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/12/18/dnc-kills-its-own-public-2024-autopsy-00697403
Okay, let me rephrase that: I believe that he believes what he’s saying – I don’t think he’s trying to “whitewash” the DNC (i.e. I don’t think he has an ulterior motive), as your previous comment accused him of. Whether he’s actually correct in his assessment might be another matter, but I believe he is expressing it in good faith.
Also, responding to this part separately:
I think you’ve got some misconceptions and false assumptions going on here:
“Populism” (i.e. listening to the majority, which is the working class) isn’t a bad thing. Bernie Sanders and AOC are “populist.” The word with a negative connotation that you’re looking for is “demagogue” – that’s what Trump is.
Your speculation about them deciding to support fascist shit is fearmongering. In reality, that’s incredibly unpopular amongst the actual people (as opposed to extremists amplified by sympathetic media) and I don’t think they’re that stupid that they’d support it by mistake. If anything, moving to “populism” means moving away from that.
The DNC’s problem up to this point has been exactly the opposite: refusing to do what their voters want and instead catering to what their rich donors want. Frankly, Martin claiming that they want to win (instead of being controlled opposition while raking in corporate donor graft) is the best fucking news I’ve heard in a while.
Yeah, you really have to follow details of politics to understand what he’s talking about, and not just headlines on Lemmy.
The effect of the DNC rule changes or the effect the head of the DNC head are not things that are covered here.
How arrogant to claim that i only know of things written in headlines and posted to Lemmy, while completely failing to elaborate on even a single point mentioned. Please enlighten us with actual examples of this “new” DNC in action.
Ken Martin was the best choice of the short list for chair of the DNC. We will see what his leadership brings.
Sounds like a roundabout way of calling him the “lesser evil.” Sounds like the same old party to me.