340
How progressives are taking over swing states – and driving fear into Democratic elites
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2025
340 points (98.3% liked)
politics
26576 readers
565 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Perhaps US can finally get what it deserves, a true left.
If a Republican gets replaced then the outcome is left. If a Democrat gets replaced, few if any things change.
The important thing is not to split the vote.
The GOP got where it is today by repeatedly replacing establishment Republicans with more conservative republicans, until 'right wing nutjob' became the baseline. I no longer believe that replacing Republicans with corporate democrats will make things change. Slow the bleeding, maybe, but not change. Replacing corporate Democrats with progressives is the only way we're going to move the needle now.
Every Republican is in the RNC. They didnt run Independents against themselves like progressives are doing.
Ah, yes, "left" like Chuck Schumer.
Let's pursue that line of thought a little further. If Chuck Schumer were replaced last election, what would have changed? The 7 Dems and 1 Ind who voted to reopen the government, which did not include Schumer, would likely still have done so, but what if they hadn't? The government would have stayed closed. The ACA tax credits would still have expired. Peoples insurance rates would still be going up.
What "real change" do you think would have happened?
Schumer and any other dem is still better than any Republican, and with even a simple majority so much suffering would be completely avoided. Wanting better dems is fine but what we need is less Republicans.
We'd have had one fewer senator organizing the Dem capitulation caucus. We'd have also had one fewer senator capitulating to Trump in March. Maybe, just maybe, someone willing to fucking do anything about Trump would've been in office. Also if he was replaced in, say, 2019 there would have been one fewer pro-genocide reactionary voting to give Israel everything it wants.
*Delayed. It would've been delayed, just as it was in 2020, because that's the thing: Democrats don't fucking do anything. Their favorite excuse is the filibuster, but they can just get rid of it. It's literally that simple. Whether this is incompetence or malice (though it's obviously the latter), the Democratic establishment needs to go before anything resembling progress can happen. You'll never get fewer Republicans if their competition is Joe "nothing will fundamentally change" Biden or Kamala "most lethal army in the world" Harris. Trump is the result of 50 years of Democrats gargling corporate balls is Trump, and you'll never get rid of Trump if you don't do something about the corporate balls.
We might not have 1 less capitulating to Trump, we might have another Republican.
DNC have had 48 or often less seats for over 10 years. They talk about getting rid of the filibuster but doing so would just give Republicans the same free reign that they have currently.
The last time the DNC had a real majority, not even a supermajority, was the most productive congress in decades. Dems have spent decades taxing corporations and limiting their ability to influence politics and they get no credit for that endless uphill battle.
Whenever Dems relax the rules, like when they made a simple majority required for Cabinet Picks under Obama, it ended up backfiring, such as getting used by Republicans to put oil barons in charge of foreign policy, private school executives in charge of the Department of Education, Coal Lobbyists in charge of the EPA, and Pete fucking Hegseth in charge of DoD.
Dems dont have a magic bullet for all your problems, we need to vote into power a substantial majority or even a supermajority.
And is that because they're terrible at winning or because they don't want to win? Take your pick. Either way they need to go.
And they used that opportunity to pass checks notes Romneycare. So productive.
If they've spent decades fighting that "battle" and this is the result, maybe they're not actually fighting at all.
If you don't think they want to pass what they introduce: call their bluff and promote them and vote for them.
If you do think they want to pass what they introduce: call their bluff and promote them and vote for them.
If you want Republicans to win: insult the DNC
Sure, fuck the DNC and this is why.
At least you're being honest about promoting Republicans, now.
Yes, but that's an irresponsibly low bar. Aim higher.
Schumer hasn't done nearly enough to oppose Trump and spends more effort supporting genocide and opposing his own party. Like why the fuck was he siding with Trump against Mamdani?
Aiming higher accomplishes fuck all if the candidate doesn't win, which is pretty much guaranteed if we run independents against Democrats.
Schumer openly endorsed Mamdani before the election was over, admitted he was the DNC candidate immediately after the primary ended.
Aiming low also doesn't accomplish anything if the candidate doesn't win, and we've seen too many candidates lose after moving to the right.
I'm not saying Aim Low, I'm saying aim at the target, wherever it lands. Who are you accusing of moving right?
Harris. She started out somewhat progressive and was leading in the polls, and then she started campaigning with Liz Cheney and focus was on support from CEOs. I'm fairly sure that turn to the right contributed to her loss.
Her shit campaign team aside her policy stances included an unrealized gains tax on the rich, which alone could have changed course for this nation. This is a perfect example of the point I'm making, the DNC could theoretically be the most extreme radical left imaginable but people still wouldn't notice.
She wasn't extreme radical left, and went out of her way to appeal to the right. She refused to embrace even widely supported ideas like Medicare for All or condemning genocide. Mamdani, on the other hand, is unapologetically left, and won in a landslide.
Americans support far more progressive policies than many people believe, including themselves. Focus on policies that will help regular people, instead of the billionaires, and you will win.