In an interview with NBC News' "Meet the Press," Sen. Bernie Sanders said that Vice President Kamala Harris' changing views are part of "doing what she thinks is right in order to win the election."
Progressive policies are popular. But progressives have done a shit job of turning that enthusiasm into political capital. Waiting every four years for a nationally appealing, ideologically perfect candidate to magically fall in our lap seems to be a winning strategy—for republicans. Too many would be progressives give up if they can’t have the whole cake handed to them instead of rolling up some sleeves and learning how to work from scratch.
Progressive policies are popular. But progressives have done a shit job of turning that enthusiasm into political capital.
That’s because there is another type of capital…fucking money…involved.
Progressive policies may be popular, but the candidates that espouse them are immediately rolled by the corporate / industrial machine that runs the entirety of the media apparatus.
That’s how a Democratic vice presidential candidate can be viewed by people in the country as disqualified from the race for drinking a milkshake with a straw, while the Republican presidential candidate can attempt to overthrow the government, be found to be a rapist in court, be convicted of felonies, poop his way through a case of depends at every rally, free associate about locking up his political opponents, discuss shooting protestors, be the oldest candidate ever picked by a major political party for president and still never be viewed as disqualified for the position.
Trump (an incredibly dull, almost comically idiotic person) realized this himself years ago, which is why he said he could shoot someone and not lose any votes.
Way too many people in this country believe that it just so happens that every individual progressive candidate just doesn’t have the “gift” to turn their political positions (that are unpopular with business / industry / media / moneyed interests) into popularity at the polls when it’s obvious that every progressive candidate is immediately met by a wave of media discontent the moment they seem close to getting any real power.
EDIT: FDR was considered to be a centrist until he got in there. There is another way things could work which is that someone could run as a progressive sleeper candidate and pivot to the middle in order to get support for the campaign and then govern more from the left after they win.
Progressive policies are popular. But progressives have done a shit job of turning that enthusiasm into political capital. Waiting every four years for a nationally appealing, ideologically perfect candidate to magically fall in our lap seems to be a winning strategy—for republicans. Too many would be progressives give up if they can’t have the whole cake handed to them instead of rolling up some sleeves and learning how to work from scratch.
That’s because there is another type of capital…fucking money…involved.
Progressive policies may be popular, but the candidates that espouse them are immediately rolled by the corporate / industrial machine that runs the entirety of the media apparatus.
That’s how a Democratic vice presidential candidate can be viewed by people in the country as disqualified from the race for drinking a milkshake with a straw, while the Republican presidential candidate can attempt to overthrow the government, be found to be a rapist in court, be convicted of felonies, poop his way through a case of depends at every rally, free associate about locking up his political opponents, discuss shooting protestors, be the oldest candidate ever picked by a major political party for president and still never be viewed as disqualified for the position.
Trump (an incredibly dull, almost comically idiotic person) realized this himself years ago, which is why he said he could shoot someone and not lose any votes.
Way too many people in this country believe that it just so happens that every individual progressive candidate just doesn’t have the “gift” to turn their political positions (that are unpopular with business / industry / media / moneyed interests) into popularity at the polls when it’s obvious that every progressive candidate is immediately met by a wave of media discontent the moment they seem close to getting any real power.
EDIT: FDR was considered to be a centrist until he got in there. There is another way things could work which is that someone could run as a progressive sleeper candidate and pivot to the middle in order to get support for the campaign and then govern more from the left after they win.
Say you have no idea about money in politics without saying the words citizens united
Progressives have been dropping the ball since before 2010? Why yes I agree.
This is exactly what I’ve been trying to convey.
Ah, so you were. Ngl wasn’t following usernames and somebody’s ‘y tu Bernie’ had me rage posting
Enraging people is all they seem to be able to do.
Have a great day.