this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2026
120 points (85.7% liked)

politics

29966 readers
2426 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cursed_Fig@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

damn, didn't ANYBODY in the comments section bother to read the article?

[–] CombatWombat@feddit.online 22 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

Nope! Most all everyone just reacts to headlines and doesn’t even click through.

I guess I’m just a coastal elite, but I didn’t find the argument that Dems have tacked left and the electorate has stayed the same particularly compelling. The part about the working class identity was annoying — there’s so many people who want to think of themselves as some kind of merchant or artisan class that I don’t think really exists, and they would be much better off if they realized that if you live off the income you get from your work, you’re working class. Overall, I didn’t find the analysis persuasive.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 17 points 2 days ago

Everybody who says the democrats - who are right wing by international standards - are too left are just lying.

[–] Cursed_Fig@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I also disagreed, but I can't coherently argue why, which is obviously a sign to reflect on my opinions.

One thing that stood out to me was the broad, encompassing usage of "left". The author lumps together the theatrical leftism like this photo with political leftism like codified worker protections.

I did think he made an excellent point that "down with oligarchs!" isn't going to resonate with a lot of working class people.

edit: I also think the author failed to acknowledge that conservative think tanks and media savvy have certainly influenced opinions and even the LANGUAGE used to discuss topics among all classes, so to imply that the working class hasn't changed at all isn't fair.

[–] awfulawful@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 days ago

I agree. The author presents a thesis that Democrats have tracked left, and then presents two issues where they have (abortion, job guarantees), one issue where they have returned to where they were in 1990 and the working class has tracked right (healthcare), and then just an identity question (liberal) which is not actually an issue. It's far from a comprehensive data analysis.

The author misses out on a huge area where Democrats (and the left in general) have consistently gotten worse at: communication and persuasion. Part of this is the failure of the Democrats to identify, push, and promote charismatic candidates (find a single human being who feels more excited about left ideas after hearing Pelosi, Jeffries, or Schumer talk). The other big part is the concentration of media power in fewer organizations and more ideologically right owners. Even more, the party of the young whiffed on social media entirely which could have lessened the impact of the latter part.