Democrats have always had accusations of “socialism” and “communism” thrown at them, and their problem is that they always run away from it and denounce it just as hard because they don’t want to be associated with such an “evil” ideology as that. But socialism is exactly what this country needs and there is growing support for major change in our country. They keep trying to fight for the same voters as the Republicans, when Republicans don’t want anything to do with them. And yet they ignore a rising leftist movement witch actually helped Dems win when moderates running on more of the same lost.
Socialism is the future and Dems need to start acknowledging that.
But what they need to do is come up with different terminology, since socialism is such a trigger-word for the right.
They also need to actively sell the benefits as something real and positive for the lives of ordinary people who are suffering from the current system.
This is a recipe for electoral disaster for the Democrats.
The United States as a whole is a center-right country. On many social issues, the Overton window has indeed shifted to the left in recent decades, but the nation is firmly center-right with respect to economics.
You may think that “socialism is exactly what this country needs” and that “socialism is the future,” but only a distinct minority of voters agrees with you.
The Republican Party had landslide victories in the 1980s. In 1984, Reagan carried 49 states in the electoral college. This wasn’t just a landslide; it was a blowout.
There’s a reason why the Democrats became more centrist following this election, with the rise of the centrist New Democrats. The more progressive wing of the party forgets the lessons of the 1980s at their peril. Give in too far to the extreme left wing of the party, and they could look forward to the political wilderness once again.
Speaking as a centrist myself, it is my humble opinion that since the GOP has sprinted in the opposite direction (catering to their extreme right wing), this would be a disaster for the county.
I sincerely hope the Democrats don’t forget what won them presidential elections in 1992, 1996, 2008, 2012, and 2020: centrist Democratic candidates.
I sincerely hope that the Democrats don’t forget what lost them the presidential election in 2016, and produced only a marginal victory in 2020 against the worst imaginable Republican candidate.
You and @Boudicca90 seem to be arguing that the Democratic loss in the 2016 presidential election and narrow win in 2020 is because the Democratic Party did not cater to the progressive wing of the party to a great enough extent. Perhaps so.
But consider for a moment that catering to the progressive wing of the Democratic Party to the extent that they did may also be the reason. It may even be a much larger factor than the first one.
The bottom line is that politics on the national stage is always a balancing act, and this balancing act takes place not only within the party but among the larger population of independent and Republican voters as well.
On a related note, here’s an interesting article I was just starting to read that seems to be germane to this discussion:
Yes, that’s what I am saying, and the success of candidates who ran on progressive issues vs. the failure of moderate candidates has shown that. The Democratic Socialists of America had a 72% success rate nationally with the candidates and issues we endorsed and campaigned for.
There is no balancing act when the only choice is various positions on the right. Just like Republican ideas of bipartisanship and compromise are the Dems falling in line with whatever they want, that is exactly how the Dems act towards us. We are constantly told to sit down, shut up, and wait our turn. No more.
We are going to push the issues we care about even more forcefully in the coming years, and we are going to make sure we have a seat at the table in a Biden Administration, whether he wants us to or not. He has already gone back on a number of promises he has made towards progressives during the primary (which is why we thought Bernie working with him was a waste of time) and it’s only going to continue unless we put pressure on him. The Democratic establishment can either get on board, or they can keep losing.
Unlike the OP, I’m not throwing in the towel, especially as the fight is just beginning.
There is no need to rename socialism just because the government tried to demonize it to fulfill their imperialist aims and make us afraid. I do agree that we need to connect it to what workers in this country really care about, which is why I don’t bother spouting too much theory at people I am trying to convince. AOC does a particularly great job of this.
ummm–does that 72% include [i]anywhere[\i] in flyover country?
You’re preaching to the choir.
If you want to win converts, you need to leave your church and reach out to the rest of the country.
And to do that you need to drop the word socialist entirely. It scares people,
To most Americans, when you say" I am a socialist" , they react the same way that you do when somebody tells you “I’m a Jehovah’s Witness”.
You cut off the conversation immediately, and say " I already know you’re not my type–leave me alone, and get off my property".
It actually looks like the percentage is more like 75%, and no, we don’t have nearly the presence in flyover country. Though that is changing as we’ve been growing rapidly lately. The region of California I live in is fairly conservative compared to the rest of the state, but we had quite a bit of success with local campaigns as well. In fact, we still tend to focus more on local issues since we have a somewhat decentralized organizational structure.
I remember when conservatives were so successful at demonizing “liberal” that Dems of all kinds ran away from that label. They let the enemy set the tone of the conversation and it wasn’t until they started asserting themselves as such and owned the label that things changed. That’s where socialism is now and the way to change things is to normalize socialism as a valid and growing political ideology.
A Trump slogan very popular with the electorate was “drain the swamp”. [unfortunately Trump vastly increased the swamp].
But what about Obama, Clinton and Biden and “draining the swamp”? Unfortunately all are strong supporters of swamp filled politics. For example many of you consider Obama to be a liberal. So what happened in years around 2008? There was a vast amount of financial crime. And how of many of these criminals went to prison? Something like one or so.
So if the Democrats were serious about draining the swamp they could attract a lot of Trump supporters–and you do see some swamp draining initiatives from the progressives.
I think progressives need to do a better job proving they can be effective leaders.
I laugh when the Greens party runs people for president yet cant get a person into an elected position over say city council (list of current Greens holding office).
Get elected to office. Prove you can create jobs, keep the streets clean, control crime, spend taxpayer funds wisely. All the basics.
Joe Biden earned more Democratic votes than any candidate in history. By over 10 million votes, and by a higher % of the population than anyone in a hundred years (if my math is correct). I supported Bernie in the primaries, and still think he’d be a wonderful president, but it’s nuts to have any confidence that he could have done better. This was AMAZING turnout. Democrats and progressives should be very pleased about how high turnout was. The problem was that Republican turnout was also high, if not as high as Democratic turnout. But in terms of getting people to come out and vote for him, Biden did better than any Democrat in a century, if not more.
If winning elections is about getting progressives to come out and vote for the Democrat, then Biden did as well in that measure as anyone in a long, long time.
Biden doesn’t deserve the credit for that, though. People weren’t voting so much for Biden and the status quo he represents, as voting against Trump.
The Democratic turnout was motivated by getting rid of Trump and putting someone sane in the White House, not by anything inspiring Biden had to offer.
I think, in this case, a bit of frankness might be useful:
A progressive who gives up is not a very good progressive. The whole concept is that we’ll always be fighting for progress. We’ll never achieve it.
Oh and Biden did get votes for being Biden—from Republicans. It is and will always be important in a democracy to reach out beyond your ideals. Democracy always is some level of compromise.
But this is not a dealbreaker for progressive causes, in the slightest. If it were, then progressive governments couldn’t exist at all. The main problems I see in the progressive movement right now are a lack of building up the base and bench, and people who have bought into the lie that, if you can’t get 100% of what you want, you might as well give up.
We’ve been more progressive in the past as a country. We can do it again. I’m not saying I don’t understand the desire to give up. But don’t give in to that. Giving up is the only route that assures failure.
He deserves some credit. I know some “moderates” who wouldn’t have voted for Bernie or Warren, but did vote for Biden. I had worried that there were some progressives who wouldn’t vote for Biden, but their numbers appear to have been minimal. Considering the sky-high Republican turnout, I think it’s possible Biden was the only candidate with a chance at enough votes to beat that Trump turnout. Like it or not, Trump gained supporters (at least 10 million!), and an incumbent who gains supporters is very very difficult to beat, historically speaking. And Biden did it. He deserves some credit for that.
Biden was sufficiently not Trump (especially after adding Harris) to keep most Democrats engaged in voting.
What he brought in were lot of independents and enough Republicans that couldn’t stand Trump and well Biden isn’t so bad1. These people probably would not have voted for Bernie or Warren.
What then hurt Biden was that damn poor timing Defund Police crap that the Republicans ran with. Around June, Biden was doing really well with suburban women, by October nowhere near as well and it appears it was the Defund the Police & the overplayed violent protests in the cities (yes, I know most of the violence was by the police).
1Please see that I’m trying to express the opinions of those republicans, not my own.
I think that’s true for Biden because the progressive wing was more vocal in the interim between 2016 and 2020. Voters are not of uniform intelligence, either smart or dull. Some actually believe that Joe Biden is a flaming commie no matter what the actual views of Democrats as a whole are, while some realize that he is not firmly progressive let alone socialist. However, some in the middle probably thought that he was socialist due to the vocal progressive wing of the party that he wasn’t part of.
I don’t think that’s true for Hillary: the standard red baiting was already baked in and wasn’t very different from previous elections.