To me it is also Democracy 1.0 - the corporate cafeteria - someone selects the options on the menu and we pick amongst meh options VS Democracy 2.0 - food trucks - they come to you, are part of the community, and offer a more tasty selection. It feels more about how engaged you are as a candidate than how anti-system you might be.
People are tired of the duplicity of the moderate Democrats or even the so-called progressive Democrats like Fetterman who obviously lied to get elected. Vote for the real Progressives who will receive endorsements from Bernie Sanders and AOC.
Actually, she did say that, per the NYT which supposedly directly quoted her. I read the entire article which I think was poorly written.
One of the more stupid things done by the left (and I am on the left-a strong progressive) was to call for defunding the police. Terrible phrasing. The goal, I believe, was to have police step back in many areas and have better, more appropriately trained people handle certain situations to make it more likely that those situations would have better outcomes. But once the right heard "defund the police" all hell broke loose and they shrilly and endlessly treated it as if the police were to be abolished....
I was complacent for decades. As long as there was an appearance of slow forward progress, I felt no sense of urgency. The Me Two and BLM movements showed me that more needed to be done. But it is seeing younger Democrats demanding more than status quo policies that has truly encouraged me. Bold policy initiatives are what we need to embrace now. even LBJ, for all his war faults, pushed through civil rights legislation.
Ultimately I don’t trust moderates to be willing to break the system. If they had that fire in their belly they wouldn’t be moderates. They are willing to talk the talk but when push comes to shove are they going to give up on the positions they felt forced to take to get votes (like Biden on Student Loans) or are they going to take every legal pathway to make these things happen including (if necessary) primarying other moderates who won’t come along, Impeaching judges, and exposing the corruption of important and powerful people?
There is one reform that hasn't been mentioned enough, 435 Representatives in Congress and 100 Senators is not enough to represent or serve 340 million Americans.
The number of Representatives in Congress was capped at 435 in 1929. It was capped by an Act of Congress. The cap can be removed by another Act. Increasing the number of Representatives sooner rather than later would put an end to gerrymandering and help dilute the power of the money that bought the orange blight's regime. This country had become an oligarchy, instead of a democracy.
One point that was missing in this otherwise excellent Herve is money. I personally will not support any Democrat who takes.AIPAC money or supports sending weapons to Israel. What is happening in Gaza is shameful and I don’t want my government to have any part in it.
US Rep Wasserman-Schultz has received $$$$ from AIPAC and is now running in a newly gerrymandered,historically black district where she doesn’t live.Talk about clinging to power…
At this point I’d vote for just about any Democrat over a Republican but in a primary only FDR New Deal Democrats get my vote. Will never again try to guess who’d be the best general election candidate. That’s a strategy that’s failed time and again. Even when status quo Democrats win they don’t believe in the same moral code and are content to get fat paychecks while doing little to make things better for any but their corporate masters.
Do. Not. Trust. Elissa Slotkin. She is corporate-bought and paid for. She takes boatloads of money from crypto and A1PAC. She voted for the Laken Riley Act. She voted to confirm Kristi Noem. She does what she thinks will get her in good graces with whoever she's dealing with. Old school dem. She is not what we need for our future.
Thanks for an article that identifies the sweet spot for Democrats confused by the surge of DSA and DSA-like candidates. Aligning Democratic moderates with these candidates could not be more important as the Nation faces an existential threat of becoming a long-term Mafia State. But it isn't merely Trump and his robber billionaires. There is a systemic problem Buttigieg noted as a major reason why Trump was POTUS #45 and #47. Government institutions at every level fail to deliver. That failure is disproportionately harsh as you descend the economic scale. The greater the need for government assistance, the more troublesome access becomes. Working people do not get the benefit of these government institutions; more often, they are ground down by them. A Cabinet officer ought to be able to get bridges built. A working man in need of unemployment assistance, a small business loan, licensing, or his own roads paved has the same problems as a Secretary of Transportation. When the economy is working against you, it's easy to blame the government and demand change. Trump has done that despite being an overt rapist, tax cheat, bully, and grifter. He sounds tough (not to Iranian leadership, apparently, but at least on his stump speeches in swing states) and angry voters want someone tough on their side. Schumer and, I think to a lesser extent Pelosi, were weak - giving in to more hard-nosed GOP leaders when Government shut-downs loomed. Hakeem Jeffries has not hardened the Democratic House response to Trump. Somebody has to stand up to the bully and if it's El Sayed or Beshear or Slotkin, the messaging has to be more than "he's rotten to the core." Americans want institutions that work and our healthcare system is not working. Our public education system is not working. Our public works systems are falling way behind. Our military is losing a war shamefully. Our civil servant system is broken. Our transportation systems are no longer the envy of the world. America, the most prosperous nation on the planet, is a huge debtor nation. Tax dollars pay enormous amounts of interest for borrowed money to keep this failing government system afloat. Should I go on? People want real change and the Democrat who can promise it in terms that resonate is going to win. Middle Americans want someone in the Octagon to knock the reigning champ on his ass. They don't care about the logo on their combatant's shorts.
The corporate Democrats see this stuff as "branding", not actually life and death issues for their constituents. Because it's not life and death for them. Even if their "team" isn't in power at the moment, they still do well, just not as well as if the lobbyists were paying it all to them instead.
What is the PLATFORM for the Republican Party? That used to mean something.
Billionaire fascist oligarchy.
To me it is also Democracy 1.0 - the corporate cafeteria - someone selects the options on the menu and we pick amongst meh options VS Democracy 2.0 - food trucks - they come to you, are part of the community, and offer a more tasty selection. It feels more about how engaged you are as a candidate than how anti-system you might be.
People are tired of the duplicity of the moderate Democrats or even the so-called progressive Democrats like Fetterman who obviously lied to get elected. Vote for the real Progressives who will receive endorsements from Bernie Sanders and AOC.
AOC DIDN'T SAY WOKE 1.0 WAS CRAZY! The way everyone loves to misquote that woman is wild
Actually, she did say that, per the NYT which supposedly directly quoted her. I read the entire article which I think was poorly written.
One of the more stupid things done by the left (and I am on the left-a strong progressive) was to call for defunding the police. Terrible phrasing. The goal, I believe, was to have police step back in many areas and have better, more appropriately trained people handle certain situations to make it more likely that those situations would have better outcomes. But once the right heard "defund the police" all hell broke loose and they shrilly and endlessly treated it as if the police were to be abolished....
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/12/style/woke-1-aoc-dsa.html
I was complacent for decades. As long as there was an appearance of slow forward progress, I felt no sense of urgency. The Me Two and BLM movements showed me that more needed to be done. But it is seeing younger Democrats demanding more than status quo policies that has truly encouraged me. Bold policy initiatives are what we need to embrace now. even LBJ, for all his war faults, pushed through civil rights legislation.
Revolution.
Ultimately I don’t trust moderates to be willing to break the system. If they had that fire in their belly they wouldn’t be moderates. They are willing to talk the talk but when push comes to shove are they going to give up on the positions they felt forced to take to get votes (like Biden on Student Loans) or are they going to take every legal pathway to make these things happen including (if necessary) primarying other moderates who won’t come along, Impeaching judges, and exposing the corruption of important and powerful people?
There is one reform that hasn't been mentioned enough, 435 Representatives in Congress and 100 Senators is not enough to represent or serve 340 million Americans.
The number of Representatives in Congress was capped at 435 in 1929. It was capped by an Act of Congress. The cap can be removed by another Act. Increasing the number of Representatives sooner rather than later would put an end to gerrymandering and help dilute the power of the money that bought the orange blight's regime. This country had become an oligarchy, instead of a democracy.
The number of Reps and Senators should be based on the population in each state. It is the only fair way to run the country.
Herve? The word was “article “. Does anyone hate AI as much as I do? Actually I just need to start proofreading. What a pain.
One point that was missing in this otherwise excellent Herve is money. I personally will not support any Democrat who takes.AIPAC money or supports sending weapons to Israel. What is happening in Gaza is shameful and I don’t want my government to have any part in it.
In Florida,it’s almost everyone…except US Rep Maxwell Frost.
https://www.trackaipac.com/congress
US Rep Wasserman-Schultz has received $$$$ from AIPAC and is now running in a newly gerrymandered,historically black district where she doesn’t live.Talk about clinging to power…
In a primary that is important. I. The general election I will support any democratic who is running against someone who is more evil than.
Only the people on the ballot can win, and the lesser of two evils will do less damage and may do some good on some issues.
Agree!!
At this point I’d vote for just about any Democrat over a Republican but in a primary only FDR New Deal Democrats get my vote. Will never again try to guess who’d be the best general election candidate. That’s a strategy that’s failed time and again. Even when status quo Democrats win they don’t believe in the same moral code and are content to get fat paychecks while doing little to make things better for any but their corporate masters.
Do. Not. Trust. Elissa Slotkin. She is corporate-bought and paid for. She takes boatloads of money from crypto and A1PAC. She voted for the Laken Riley Act. She voted to confirm Kristi Noem. She does what she thinks will get her in good graces with whoever she's dealing with. Old school dem. She is not what we need for our future.
I gather speaking out strongly against ICE may have also helped Peggy Flanagan in her massive win.
“Anti Establishment Moderates”
That really puts the “Moron” in “OxyMoron”
Really just sounds like a newer version of Carville’s “Radical Centrism” in 2024.
Look how well that went?
Thanks for an article that identifies the sweet spot for Democrats confused by the surge of DSA and DSA-like candidates. Aligning Democratic moderates with these candidates could not be more important as the Nation faces an existential threat of becoming a long-term Mafia State. But it isn't merely Trump and his robber billionaires. There is a systemic problem Buttigieg noted as a major reason why Trump was POTUS #45 and #47. Government institutions at every level fail to deliver. That failure is disproportionately harsh as you descend the economic scale. The greater the need for government assistance, the more troublesome access becomes. Working people do not get the benefit of these government institutions; more often, they are ground down by them. A Cabinet officer ought to be able to get bridges built. A working man in need of unemployment assistance, a small business loan, licensing, or his own roads paved has the same problems as a Secretary of Transportation. When the economy is working against you, it's easy to blame the government and demand change. Trump has done that despite being an overt rapist, tax cheat, bully, and grifter. He sounds tough (not to Iranian leadership, apparently, but at least on his stump speeches in swing states) and angry voters want someone tough on their side. Schumer and, I think to a lesser extent Pelosi, were weak - giving in to more hard-nosed GOP leaders when Government shut-downs loomed. Hakeem Jeffries has not hardened the Democratic House response to Trump. Somebody has to stand up to the bully and if it's El Sayed or Beshear or Slotkin, the messaging has to be more than "he's rotten to the core." Americans want institutions that work and our healthcare system is not working. Our public education system is not working. Our public works systems are falling way behind. Our military is losing a war shamefully. Our civil servant system is broken. Our transportation systems are no longer the envy of the world. America, the most prosperous nation on the planet, is a huge debtor nation. Tax dollars pay enormous amounts of interest for borrowed money to keep this failing government system afloat. Should I go on? People want real change and the Democrat who can promise it in terms that resonate is going to win. Middle Americans want someone in the Octagon to knock the reigning champ on his ass. They don't care about the logo on their combatant's shorts.
The corporate Democrats see this stuff as "branding", not actually life and death issues for their constituents. Because it's not life and death for them. Even if their "team" isn't in power at the moment, they still do well, just not as well as if the lobbyists were paying it all to them instead.