Democratic National Committee vice chair David Hogg’s plan to spend $20 million to primary older Democratic incumbents in Congress has sparked intense anger from some lawmakers.
They should have done this years ago. This opens the party to get republicans playing democrats to take over that party. We have seen this with at least 10 democrats constantly voting with republicans or a democrat completely switching parties during their term. Split the damn party or go home.
Mistake for who? Not a mistake for me, not a mistake tactically considering the policy and popularity polling, not a mistake when you consider that these people have been suppressing popular and well polling progressive policies and candidates for decades and still managed to lose the presidency and both houses to a goddamn moron…
All of this shit, all of these “reasons” they list in opposition to Hogg’s initiative, they are all bullshit. Bullshit and deflections and distractions from the fact that they are concerned exclusively about the bottom line for their wealthy benefactors, and about their own as well. The irony that is not lost on anyone is that they are the assholes who did this to us in the first place, and would you look at that, Donald Trump is about to hand them a tax cut.
They’re really upset about losing their expense accounts. Sure they get a salary, but every single one of them has an expense account that dwarfs their salary.
Both sides, the old guard is useless but he’s massively anti 2A, which is also not helpful right now.
Na the fascists are also going to need to get rid of the 2A soon. They don’t need headlines like “ICE impersonator shot by citizen while conducting an extra judicial abduction”
You can’t put that genie back in the bottle on any reasonable time scale, there’s more guns than people in the US, and half of them are basically invisible to authorities.
i know right. Where my no step snek libertarians in the face of tyranny tho?
Both sides, the old guard is useless but
but here comes the excuse…
he’s massively anti 2A, which is also not helpful right now.
How convenient!
Only a fool would willingly disarm with fascist trying to take absolute power
Sure. It’s not because he’s trying to push the party to the left. It’s because the party has suddenly come around to being single-issue voters who agree with republicans on yet another issue, this time guns.
Before that, it was genocide, immigration, and trans people. What will we agree with republicans on next?
Where was the outrage when AIPAC dropped money bombs on progressive primaries to silence opposition against Israel and the Genocide of Palestinians?
The DNC is dead to most USians, the party leadership just refuses to acknowledge it even when their candidates and strategies lose to literal outright fascists.
No, this is the bare minimum I will accept in order to not consider the DNC my enemy.
Burn it down.
Also, age isn’t the problem, the problem is money and a rigid party ideology.
Where was the outrage when AIPAC dropped money bombs on progressive primaries to silence opposition against Israel and the Genocide of Palestinians?
Well when people called it out, Reddit and Lemmy said anyone who saw this was:
- Antisemitic for not wanting murder
- A Tankie/Russian Bot
- Somehow wanting Trump to win by having better candidate to win against Trump
- Sore losers who didn’t like a “fair” election like Trump
- A Bernie bro who hates $THING
If you look at the lemmy.world modlog, so many people calling out this were removed and banned, and then the userbase acted dumbfounded when the legitimate users were “quiet” after being banned, so it verified their bias of “everyone who disagrees with what my favorite political tells me is a bot/troll”.
I agree, I lost a huge amount of respect for the people running and moderating lemmy.world after dealing with their reactions to people simply upset that a genocide is happening.
I had an interaction with one of their mods and it was very disappointing to see them so confidently on the side of silencing voices speaking up about genocide.
Sometimes I get the feeling lemmy.world is run by a bunch of centrists who’s hobby it is to undermine leftism because they are afraid of leftwing beliefs exactly the way pathetic conservatives are, and it makes it hard to take the entire community seriously.
Some of the prominent very active low effort posters like Pugjesus have absolutely trash views when you actually get into a conversation about their beliefs.
I had an interaction with one of their mods and it was very disappointing to see them so confidently on the side of silencing voices speaking up about genocide.
Was it JeffW or JordanLund? Both of those dudes can’t help defend genocide. Especially JL, he openly hates Black Lives Matter.
Sometimes I get the feeling lemmy.world is run by a bunch of centrists who’s hobby it is to undermine leftism because they are afraid of leftwing beliefs exactly the way pathetic conservatives are, and it makes it hard to take the entire community seriously.
And they call us the Russian Psyop/bot. I’ve had so many people say things like “I’m a leftist, but [defending the most conservative positions possible].” At least .ml is honest in their intentions.
Some of the prominent very active low effort posters like Pugjesus have absolutely trash views when you actually get into a conversation about their beliefs.
And he’s so fucking smug! He will defend his trash opinions, say he’s the smartest one in the room, and then act like he’s the victim when he says something like “I don’t think you should ally with these people when ICE comes knocking” or “I don’t have to respect the pronouns of people I don’t like.”
Lemmy.world is a majority of my blocklist. I like a handful of users from it. But the mods and admins have cultivated a inverted MAGA mentalitt around themselves. Anytime you critize their favorite thing, you’ll be banned and blocked. And then they claim it’s evil when .ml does the exact same thing.
Dem insiders just don’t have the same values as their erstwhile voters
Dem insiders are criminally corrupt scabs who are largely to blame for fascism.
Also, age isn’t the problem, the problem is money and a rigid party ideology.
They’re not exactly the same thing, but they’re certainly correlated.
Im gonna agree and disagree at the same time. Money and party ideology are absolutely problems within our political systems, BUT age is also a huuuge problem. Its in my opinion if we had a majority of the dem party under 50 we would have seen such a better fight against this fascist bullshit. Hell even a republican party thats led by a significantly younger majority may have even helped to prevent this as well.
I dunno, Oregon’s reps are pretty old and trying to fight the good fight.
Okay I usually take a hardline anti-DNC position, but I have to say this is good stuff. Go get 'em Hogg! However I do wanna point out that if Americans don’t protect their right to free and fair elections none of this will amount to anything, so y’all still need to get stuff done on that front.
Useless old parasites upset they are being dislodged from the host.
What the FUCK did they think would happen after the most catastrophic election loss in a generation? The DNC and Democratic leadership should have enough of a sense of the gravity of the situation we’re in to resign in shame. Instead they have the audacity to complain?? Seriously, understand how big of a failure you’ve been a part of and actually DO SOMETHING to help solve it.
This is the same Democratic party leadership that ran Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden and Kamala Harris’s campaigns. The same Democratic party leadership that cares more about stopping Bernie Sanders than about stopping Donald Trump. They know who’s side they are on, and it’s not the same side as you and me. The Democratic party is unfortunately rotten to the core, and it’s all about the money. Imagine the concept of regulatory capture applied to politicians broadly and you will understand the modern Democratic party and the state of our government. We need a party built from the ground up to represent the working class, whether it be from the ashes of the Democratic party or otherwise. Primary them at every turn or run independent campaigns where feasible. The other challenge is that mainstream media is owned by the same corporate masters, so it will be an uphill battle regardless.
This is the same Democratic party leadership that ran Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden and Kamala Harris’s campaigns.
Yes but no. The people who won the party leadership elections a few months ago are not neoliberal establishment dems. They’re the kind of people who would, for instance, spend 20 million dollars to primary ineffectual establishment democrats.
Hogg is. They made all the DNC leaders sign a no-challenge pledge recently. Every one of them signed it, except David Hogg.
Also, notably, he isn’t doing these primary challenges in his official DNC vice chair capacity. This is on the side as part of his PAC initiatives.
This is the same Democratic party leadership that ran Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden and Kamala Harris’s campaigns.
Hogg has been vice chair of the DNC for like two months…
How is he responsible for what the old guard did when almost all of them got the boot months ago?
I should have been more clear. The post I’m replying to said “what the fuck did THEY think would happen”… which I took to mean the (presumably older establishment) dems that are whining about Hogg’s call for primaries. That’s who I’m talking about.
They literally think if they sit back, do nothing, and let the Trump regime destroy our government from within, that we will be forced to come crawling back to them next election.
Fuck that, fuck the Dems, we deserve much better than these selfish pricks.
I think it’s safe to say that the ancient Democrats who’ve been holding onto their seats by sheer force of incumbent political influence, contributed to turning Hogg into a school-shooting survivor. Obviously Republicans bear more responsibility thanks to their gun/violence fetish, but these Dems wouldn’t be so angry if he hadn’t touched a nerve. They’re clearly afraid of young people with new and rational ideas.
I hope these young’uns keep at it, their passion and drive is inspirational. Since the geriatrics in power clearly can’t smell their own bullshit anymore, fuck em. No one is entitled to power, you have to earn it like Hogg has through his dedicated activism. His organization has helped pass more than 250 gun safety laws, for example. He’s actually doing shit.
Not only that they’re afraid of both the real left and real right of young who can vastly transform the country for the better if they worked together
Which they are doing already. But if they do it even more on every level then that will be HUGE transformations every day not weeks or months or years or decades
The greatest strength the younger generations have is adaptability and having a clearer mind of what to focus on as a collective
They strength themselves, and even more so with others
That’s a great point. The party is only hurting itself in the short and long term by not welcoming younger candidates and trying to elect people who are actually willing to wield their power by trying shit out, rather than just further entrenching themselves by wielding their political influence. That’s the difference, the younger generations are willing to try out new policies and see if they work. That’s how this whole fucking system is supposed to function. Try something out, if it doesn’t work then too bad, you lose the next election and continue working on your ideas while the other party tries their shit out to see if their ideas work. We’ve strayed so far from that, that everyone is just accustomed to the government not trying big things, and nobody trusts that the other side would ever govern or compromise in good faith.
That’s why their anger is so frustrating to me. They’ve been there forever and done jack shit, and whine like children when someone young comes along and acts more mature by offering to fix the shit the elders have refused to.
If it has to be democrats instead of a new party, this is literally the only way to make it work.
Good Job David Hogg and Leaders We Deserve, hope you oust a ton of these ancient shitbirds.
The neoliberals no longer have the chair…
Ken Martin does…
And the same DNC voters who elected him, elected David Hogg as a vice chair…
Like, this is the party.
Why would we push for a new one, when we just got control of the old one after decades?
We’re not doing another 2016
We can have leftist leadership or admit we want a fascist dictatorship.
The DNC have had over 50 years to choose to force their rich doners to make concessions. They’ve shown they aren’t interested.
The Neoliberals don’t get to be in charge anymore.
The Neoliberals don’t get to be in charge anymore.
They’re literally not tho…
Like, the battles were fought, the war was won…
You just don’t seem to be politically engaged enough to have noticed.
So in your view, the current makeup of democratic leadership, representatives and senators is what “fixed” should look like?
democratic leadership, representatives and senators
The DNC is the party…
The DNC is saying we need to primary those elected politicians because they no longer reflect the values of the Dem voter base.
The neoliberals are no longer running the party (which again, is the DNC)
But I applaud you for asking when you weren’t sure
I must have missed the part where the DNC ran a non Neoliberal canidate.
Martin has been making the same AIPAC-slave moves as the last dem corporation leader. The time you spent learning his name was completely wasted. He might as well be the last guy.
Until there’s no more first past the post, a progressive party would have to replace the democrats, or it would split the “default non-stupid” vote.
Good fucking riddance, if they wanted their seats they should have defended our country and stood against nazis.
“What a disappointment from leadership. I can think of a million better things to do with twenty million dollars right now,” swing-district Rep. Hillary Scholten (D-Mich.) told Axios.
“Fighting Democrats might get likes online, but it’s not what restores majorities,” she added.
The issue is we get majorities and then nothing gets done with depresses turnout.
We don’t want to primary these old conservatives, we’d much rather them represent their constituents, but they’ve shown time and time again they won’t.
We’d rather they get out of the way and resign, but they won’t put the future of the party over their own personal power.
So fuck em.
I agree about “fuck em”, let’s get out with the old and in with the new.
But what majorities are you talking about? I keep seeing this repeated all over the internet- the sentiment that Democrats get nothing done when they have control. The problem is that I’m 33 years old and the Dems have only had control of the federal government for a few months of my life, and that’s when they passed the ACA. I can’t really make a judgement on what the Dems do when they’re in power because they largely have not been.
you owe it yourself to read up on american political history and; if you did; you would learn that every time they’ve had control of all 3 branches of government; they’ve squandered it by letting a one or 2 democrats derail all of their plans, meanwhile republicans steamroll over their own dissenters every time they’re in control.
you’d start to see that this pattern keeps happening again and again.
What times are these?
As I said, they have only had control for 4 months in my lifetime. Before that you need to go back to 1961-1969 with Kennedy and Johnson. I would actually need to do more research to find out whether they had a Supermajority or not, but it’s not even worth looking up because going that far back in time shifts the politics of the parties significantly and is not very relevant to today. The Democratic Party still has plenty of Southern Conservatives all the way into the Carter years.
So I would love to know what pattern you are seeing.
democrats had full control from 1993–1995, 2009–2011, 2021–2023 and majority control from 2011-2015 & 2023-2024. in other words: 12 years of complete or majority control out of the last 33 years.
every single time their agenda was thwarted by one or two lone dissenters within their caucuses; where republicans completely steamrolled over their own dissenters.
I think they’re including technical majorities that failed to effect meaningful change because of DINO shitbags like Manchin and Sinema.
Even without those DINOs they still didn’t have a Supermajority. Honestly I think most people just don’t understand the difference between a majority and Supermajority and mistakenly believe 50 is enough in the Senate.
So the best thing the Democrats could do when they had a super majority was pass the Republican healthcare plan? And you don’t see why that’s a problem?
was pass the Republican healthcare plan?
Technically it was a more conservative version of the Republican healthcare plan…
But that comment also incredibly misrepresents how long Dems have held dual majorities, which is a much bigger issue.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Congresses
Yes. Sadly, it was RomneyCare, and the very first thing VP Biden did in negotiations was throw out the public option as a pre-concession to republicans. They hadn’t even begun debating the bill yet.
Biden was the VP at that point but yeah fuck that shit
Oops, fixed, ty
Who said anything about dual majorities?
Removed by mod
The criticism is valid but antiquated. It was Romney’s healthcare framework for Massachusetts, and Obama (in typical fashion) led with a compromise to attempt to avoid a fight with conservatives and conservative democrats. By agreeing to private insurance mandates and not even fighting for a viable public option, I agree that Obama really missed a once-in-a-generation opportunity.
The reason why it doesn’t make sense now to level the criticism that it’s a “Republican healthcare plan” is that we’ve shifted several Overton windows to the right since then. A “Republican healthcare plan” in 2025 is an uninsured ER visit, where they are allowed to turn you away; you die in the street, after which your surviving family is billed for the corpse cleanup.
That compromise with a group that had been screeching about hiw they won’t work with you for the previous 15 years is exactly how we got to where we are today.
Yes, for sure. While everyone else was in realpolitik mode, it seemed clear to me you don’t start a negotiation with a bad faith opponent by ceding your strongest position.
Obama governed as a centrist, and while I agree he probably escaped unscathed without any long-term ill will because of it, he squandered a ton of opportunities. Oh, and we got Trump as a reaction to the GOP’s boogeyman propaganda anyway.
It was literally based on Mitt Romney’s healthcare bill in Massachusetts. Unless you think the guy that ran on the Republican ticket AGAINST Obama wasn’t a Republican.
Romney was indeed a Republican, but a moderate one. The Church of Latter Day Saints has always been a weird outlier in American politics, and as a Mormon Romney largely follows that tradition. Utah itself is a great reminder that the trends Americans see with the two-party system, where every issue is a binary choice with the GOP or DNC each picking an option, the reality on the ground is more complicated.
It’s also worth looking to how Romney was the first senator in US history to vote to impeach his own party’s president. He did it again the 2nd time Trump was impeached too, along with a handful of others.
That’s not to say that I like Romney at all, or even that I like the ACA or even that I like the Democrats.But Romney is perhaps the furthest left Republican and created that initial bill with the intention of being a bipartisan compromise. He’s far closer to Neoliberal than Nazi. And while it was the foundation, his bill was NOT the final bill that passed into law. The bill that did pass saw 100% of Republican senators vote against it. It passed 220-215 in the House with 1 meaningless Republican vote. To say it was a Republican bill is simply historically inaccurate.
Calling another user a Russian bot is a civility violation so your comment is removed.
But further, the reason Obamacare is often called “a Republican plan” is two-fold:
First, there’s not a lot of daylight between Obamacare and what Mitt Romney implemented in Massachusetts as “Romneycare”. Democrats would like to believe otherwise, Republicans would like to pretend otherwise, but there it is:
https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/romneycare-vs-obamacare-key-similarities-differences/
"you guys had a proven model that we built the Affordable Care Act on this template of proven, bipartisan success. Your law was the model for the nation’s law.” - Barack Obama.
Second, unlike universal health care, Obamacare forced people into the clutches of the for profit health care system when, ideally, it should have eliminated it. Forcing people to give money to companies is a Republican bulwark, not a Democratic one.
My apologies if a crosses a line with the comment, but calling the ACA Republican is demonstrably and factually false and, in my opinion, actively spreading disinformation.
The bill passed the Senate 60-39, with 1 abstaining. All 39 Republicans Senators voted against it. It passed 220-215 in the House with only 1 Republican vote.
If you want to say it wasn’t enough, that’s completely fair and I would agree. If you want to say the Democratic Party, both back then and today, is dominated by Neoliberal interests and suppresses Progressives or Socialists or whoever else then I would also agree. But none of that was the conversation- the bill that passed was demonstrably not Republican.
No, I’m saying that Barack Obama, the architect of the plan, straight up told everyone he based it on Mitt Romney’s health care plan in Massachusetts.
That’s what people mean when they say “Republican Plan”. It’s a copy pasta from Mitt “Corporations are people, my friend” Romney.
Then why didn’t Republicans vote for it?
And not just votes. Republican Attorneys General across the country tried to get it overturned in the courts. The House and Senate Minority Leaders have quotes strongly against it. Romney himself did not hold any office at the time the ACA was passed, but was preparing for his next presidential campaign. He described it as “an unconscionable abuse of power…the act should be repealed”.
If you look more closely at the Massachusetts state government in 2006 when Romney was governor and passed “Romneycare”, you’ll find that the state Senate was dominated by Democrats 34-6, while the state House was dominated by Democrats 139-20-1. There’s a much, much stronger case that Romneycare in Massachusetts was a Democratic piece of legislation than there is that the ACA was Republican.
The Republicans had plenty of control of the federal government before Obama, and their plan of "leaving Americans with nothing* was already in place. That’s what the Republicans voted for in 2010 by voting against the ACA.
It was absolutely a Republican bill. The Democrats tried to implement universal healthcare in 93 but the Gingrich controlled House shut it down. If Obama and said he wanted to offer a tax break to first time gun owners, the Republicans and Fox News would have called it a communist plot to create a Democrat controlled militia. The Republicans are only ever interested in obstruction
The problem is that I’m 33 years old and the Dems have only had control of the federal government for a few months of my life, and that’s when they passed the ACA.
What?
We literally had it 2021-2023…
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Congresses
And from 07 to 11…
What are you talk.ing about “a few months”?
They had control of the Presidency and the House of Representatives. I never said they didn’t have that- I said they didn’t have control of the Federal Government.
The Senate was tenuous. Just having 50 Dem Senators (well, that’s not true either because you need to include Independents to get to 50) isn’t good enough- you need 60 votes to have a filibuster-ptoof majority. The Dems just barely scraped that together in 2009, complicated in part by Ted Kennedy’s seizure and eventual death and Al Franken delayed in getting seated due to recounts. They only had 60 votes (still including Independents) from September 24th 2009 - February 4th, 2010. 4 months of controlling the federal government.
That is why when the 2008 financial crisis happened and the Dems wanted to pas a stimulus package in 2009, they had to get Snowe, Collins, and Spectre (who would leater switch parties to get them to 60) from the Republican side in order to get that passed.
They absolutely did not have control of the Supreme Court at any point in the Biden administration and the Republican SCOTUS shut down a lot of what the Biden administration tried to do. I remember checking every day for months to see how they would rule on Student Loan forgiveness, for example.
This is why they have the perception of being powerless- because they’ve pretty much never had the power. The Republicans love people who say the Democrats are useless. They love saying Biden didn’t do what he promised when he DID and the GOP-dominated Supreme Court reversed it. They love being able to stall Democrat legislation and blaming a Democrat president. Everything the Dems have done outside of those 4 months have required careful compromises and negotiation with the GOP to pass.
They had control of the Presidency and the House of Representatives. I never said they didn’t have that- I said they didn’t have control of the Federal Government
They also had 50 D senators and Harris as the tiebreaker…
They had the whole federal government for two years but didn’t get shit done because suddenly the guy who campaigned on being a literal “senate whisper” who said he could get R votes wasn’t able to get every D vote.
If you can’t understand 2021-2023, stop trying to cover earlier too.
You’re skipping the whole “fillibuster” thing. You need 60 to even have a vote on a lot of issues.
The filibuster that the Democrats always refuse to abolish. The fact that the filibuster still exists in 2025 is proof that they don’t care about Americans.
We don’t have a parliamentary system where a party can kick out an elected member for not supporting the party’s agenda and replace them with someone else. Each member is individually elected to represent their state or district. For better or for worse, they get to decide what is best for their constituents and their constituents get to respond in the next election.
Joe Manchin was the major impediment in 2021-2023. He mostly supported the party’s agenda but had some sticking points. He had to be onboard with whatever passed given the razor thin majority.
I saw all these screeds about how he should be kicked out of the party, but the objective reality is there is very little you can do to pressure a centrist Democrat from a state that voted for Trump by 50 points. The only option available was to placate him and come to a compromise (which he ultimately agreed to for major climate change reduction investment).
The reality is that the Democratic Party is not monolithic, it has some centrists who don’t support some of the more ambitious goals of the party. If you want bigger action, you have to have a bigger majority. Slim majorities give small wings of the party outsized influence on policy.
We don’t have a parliamentary system where a party can kick out an elected member for not supporting the party’s agenda and replace them with someone else.
-
That doesn’t mean no pressure can be applied, if it does then Biden is a liar and ignorant of how our system works… Why didn’t you speak up when he kept claiming he could apply pressure to get Republican votes? But regardless of if it could have worked, Biden refused to try public pressure
-
The fact that we can’t kick them out of the party is why the new DNC is advocating to primary them out.
-
The “intense anger” tells you this is absolutely the right thing to do.
Frankly this is a good idea in the long term despite a possible short term loss.
The Tea Party hurt the Republicans in the short term, but they took over the party and purged the liberal elements. They replaced Eric Cantor with a speaker who does everything they want. They’re a monolithic block now and have been winning out on their strategies ever since.
AOC ousted 10-term congressman Joe Crowley in a primary by a huge margin. A few more of those couldn’t hurt.
We should be doing this to every single motherfucker who clearly is doing insider trading.
I agree, we do need a “Guillotine Party” to do for us what the Tea Party did for the GOP.
Unfortunately, Hogg and gun control are part of what needs to be removed.
As always, there’s some excuse for why the person who is trying to move the party to the left shouldn’t be doing that.
It’s neat watching the party go from “Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good! It’s just a little genocide!” to “This guy who is primarying centrists who hold us all back doesn’t agree with republicans enough!”
Of all of the people in this thread for whom the second amendment fills the void where a personality would be in a more complete person, not one cares about the incumbents’ opinions on firearms.
As always, there’s some excuse for why the person who is trying to move the party to the left shouldn’t be doing that.
I don’t know if you didn’t get the memo or something, but the left likes guns now. Gun control is not “moving the party to the left”. Gun control is a plank in the old, establishment platform, and needs to be thrown out along with those ancient fossils.
Of all of the people in this thread for whom the second amendment fills the void where a personality would be in a more complete person, not one cares about the incumbents’ opinions on firearms.
Nobody gives a shit about the incumbent positions on anything, with the possible exception of their retirement. Get them the hell out of office, and bring in some actual leftists.
Nobody gives a shit about the incumbent positions on anything, with the possible exception of their retirement. Get them the hell out of office, and bring in some actual leftists.
Provided that the person calling for it has the opinions you prefer on guns. And only guns.
Provided that the person calling for it has the opinions you prefer on guns. And only guns.
No, that conclusion does not follow from the facts at hand. There are any number of issues that raise my ire. I’ve railed just as vociferously against Hogg for guns as I have against any number of democratic fossils, for reasons ranging from pro-genocide, to appeasing Republicans, to senility. Gun control is just one of many disqualifying conditions. That he and I share an absolute disgust for Retired-in-Place Democrats is not sufficient to rehabilitate his image. He is an honorary fossil, and needs to go along with them.
Just seems like whenever there’s someone who is trying to get the party to move to the left, suddenly there’s some criterion for why they shouldn’t.
Bernie’s too old and that was a problem from 2016 until the second Biden announced. It’s a problem again now that Biden is out of office. AOC is a woman and that’s suddenly a problem because she’s seizing the moment. Hogg doesn’t agree with the NRA on guns.
There’s always some excuse.
Just seems like whenever there’s someone who is trying to get the party to move to the left,
Again, “gun control” is not a leftist issue. Gun control is keeping the party from moving left.
Further, Hogg isn’t trying to move the party to the left. He openly supports legacy Democrats like Pelosi and Hillary who built the failed party, and he is looking for younger candidates who will keep the party right where theose decrepit fossils planted it.
deleted by creator
And the kids that die as part of your demand for gun ownership rights, you just dont care about them at all do you. You need to man up and take care of your community.
Any other job where you fail as hard and as often as those old fossils do, you get the fucking boot. Why do they think they’re entitled to their fucking seat? You fucked up and have been responsible for having the world’s worst person elected twice now. Time to go.
Every Democrat seat should face a primary. Every year. No party funds should be spent until after the primary or all people on the ballot should get the same party stipend.
Should. But they are not gonna.
The hell they aint
Everybody go home, no point in doing anything. You heard 'em.
What are you going to do about it? - Democrats who hold the power to do the thing you think they should do.
Let me guess - the older lawmakers who voted for some of Trump’s cabinet nominations?
Exactly. And those older law makers get in the way anytime people want to even attempt to make things better.
