this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2026
63 points (98.5% liked)

chat

8619 readers
284 users here now

Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.

As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.

Thank you and happy chatting!

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I’m curious what the general consensus is here cause I am so so fucking tired of listening to people talk about Graham Platner.

I’m amenable to the possibility of him being decent but I am not holding my breath over it.

it’s just another perfect example of the inherent flaws in “the left” ever hitching its wagon to the fucking Democratic Party.

That phrase “the left” makes my skin crawl in general. I am so tired of having to constantly wrest the identity of a historic movement away from this or that charlatan, it is humiliating to me and my peers to invest faith and trust in these people.

But without a party, who can we say represents “the left”? With the crimes of chattel slavery and now Palestinian genocide, is this party really the vehicle?

As far as I’m concerned any Democratic politician has a massive bar to clear for any support from me. More importantly I think we can point to some disturbingly clear examples that the institutional forces of Democratic Party politics easily overawing any individual representative of “the left”

I don’t like to disparage people choosing optimism in general. It just seems so glaringly obvious that without an enforcement mechanism outside of the Democratic Party there is very little to create any kind of actual accountability and there is nothing but unlimited reward for participation and substance-less posturing.

Wonder what the PSL is up to! Wish them nothing but good things.

Curious where everyone is besides sick of this. WHO gives a fuck! It’s Maine! Hardly anyone lives there! Have you ever seen a black fly? Too scary in general this is just par for the course

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AssortedBiscuits@hexbear.net 27 points 1 day ago (3 children)

it’s just another perfect example of the inherent flaws in “the left” ever hitching its wagon to the fucking Democratic Party.

It sounds like people just didn't understand what made 2016-era Sanders special. People liked 2016-era Sanders because he wasn't a card-carrying Democrat. He was just some dude with a history of progressive politics who only went through the motions of being a DINO in an attempt to steal the Democratic nomination from Clinton in the primaries. That's why people liked Sanders. People said similar things about Trump. That's the whole deal about Trump taking the Republican nomination from the "cuckservatives" like Jeb! and Ted Cruz.

AOC, Mamdani, et al are a regression for the very simple reason that they are sincere members of the Democratic Party. Unlike 2016-era Sanders (or more accurately, people's false impression of Sanders during 2016 when they thought Sanders would form his own party after losing the nomination instead of bending the knee), they are not there to undermine the Democratic Party. Even without getting into how they fall short from a socialist perspective, they don't even challenge the duopoly in any meaningful sense nor do they try to advocate around progressive causes like abolishing the electoral college.

Here's hoping a charismatic person who's totally not affiliated with PSL would crash the 2028 Democratic primaries in order to steal the nomination from Gruesome Newsome.

[–] ZWQbpkzl@hexbear.net 3 points 12 hours ago

The fact is running in the Democrat Primary is absolutely an unavoidable tactic that every leftist/socialist must embrace if they want to actually hold officr. Its functionally nothing more than a preliminary runoff election. But after that you must maintain a strong "fuck the DNC" attitude. Do not seek party endorsements. Embrace any "not a real democrat" label. And for the love of all that's holy, do not even think about touching ActBlue or NGPVan. Squat that (D).

[–] LaBellaLotta@hexbear.net 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That’s such an excellent point and it had completely escaped me but you’re absolutely right.

Bernie Sanders had more of a proven record of antagonizing the Democratic Party establishment than anyone who’s come to represent “the left” since.

My greatest fear is that the momentum of “the left” whatever the fuck that means is captured, redirected and squandered by the Democrats because historically that is just what they do! And now the narrative become ““the left” has been tried and is a dead letter” to a whole generation who come afterwards.

[–] AssortedBiscuits@hexbear.net 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You know how Lenin said how you should only participate in bourgeois elections to the extent where you can show to the working class how much of a sham bourgeois elections are. That was basically Sanders' run in 2016. There was a certain level of audacity, which still make Hilldawg stans seethe to this very day, of some dude who had never once registered as a Democrat strolling up to the Democratic primaries and giving the presumptive career Democrat nominee a run for her money. AOC sucking up to Pelosi look completely pathetic in comparison.

Sanders fucked up/revealed himself to be a sheepdog in disguise by not channeling that anger and outrage over getting ratfucked towards forming his own party. Most post-Sanders electoralists are essentially arguing that Sanders failed because he was an independent instead of a Democrat and that had he been a Democrat, he would've won the primaries against Clinton somehow. In fact, the opposite would be true: had Sanders been a Democrat, he would've ate shit even harder because a lot of people only liked Sanders because he wasn't a loser Democrat like Clinton.

[–] RedWizard@hexbear.net 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Exactly! The comparison to Trump and Sanders is very important, because at the time they both represented a break from the norms of the existing parties. When Sanders failed to capture the anger after being sandbagged by the Democrats he actually seeded a bunch of voters TO Trump because now HE was proven to be the OUTSIDER who could actually fucking win. There is a whole stratum of people who saw Sanders loose and then Trump scoop the win, who went "Aw hell yeah, Trump is daddy now!".

Had Sanders captured that energy, by announcing a grassroots working class party, god only knows how history would have gone.

[–] AssortedBiscuits@hexbear.net 4 points 16 hours ago

Had Sanders captured that energy, by announcing a grassroots working class party, god only knows how history would have gone.

My idea is that:

  1. ML parties like PSL will have less members since many people would've joined Sander's party instead.

  2. The DSA would probably be a defunct org since given the choices between Sander's party and more radical parties like the PSL, why would anyone hitch their wagon with the DSA? In many ways, the DSA is (poorly) filling the void that should've been filled by Sander's party.

  3. I think a lot of the current crop of so-called progressives like AOC would either not have political careers or simply run as generic Democrats without any hint of progressivism. What would AOC's political career even look like? Would she join Sander's party or would she just be some generic Democrat? Much of the online arguments and struggle sessions over whether so and so is legit or controlled opposition would not exist or look very different. Perhaps people will accuse alt-history AOCIA or alt-history Mamdani of joining Sander's party to undermine it from within.

  4. Most of the leftist influencer space would have less obnoxious politics since instead of glazing the Democrats and coming up with excuses for their failures, they would be glazing Sander's party (and coming up with excuses for their failures) instead.

  5. Sander's party would be at the crossroads after al-Aqsa Flood when Sander goes completely mask off as an unrepentant Zionist. I do not think Sanders can control the anti-Zionism that almost everyone within the party would believe in, but what happens to the party is anybody's guess. Maybe there would be a mass exodus of members which causes the party to collapse. Maybe Sanders would be expelled from the party for being a Zionist piece of shit. Hell, maybe the bourgeoisie moves to crush the party through the security apparatus.

There's a timeline where Sander's party develops their politics well beyond Sanders to the point of expelling him for being a reactionary and eventually merging with PSL.

[–] Le_Wokisme@hexbear.net 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

i thought mamdani was dsa and ran for the dem primary for new york reasons

[–] AssortedBiscuits@hexbear.net 13 points 1 day ago

The point is that Mamdani's still a registered member of the Democratic Party. Meanwhile, Sanders went back to being an independent as soon as the primaries ended. The fact that AOC et al are all members of the Democratic Party means that at best, they thought Sanders being an independent was the main reason why he got ratfucked in both 2016 and 2020. But everyone knows that Sanders didn't fail because he had an "I" after his name instead of a "D" on C-Span, so why aren't more of these so-called progressives and socialists following in Sander's footsteps by being third party/independent?

[–] TheBroodian@hexbear.net 12 points 1 day ago

Mamdani being a member of dsa is largely coincidental and arbitrary. He was backed by the Fight initiative like Fetterman and Platner.