Why can't Democrats just say it:

[Chasstev365]

Republicans are allowing the madness of King Donald every day to get worse and worse.

What would be the downside? I really don't understand. Do they actually still believe in decorum and rules in a polite society?

[dutch777]

1. They can do that. Just saying the GOP is standing in the way of better healthcare, affordability & stability works too.

The more we make the midterms about issues the American voter wants solutions to and less about Trump per se, the weaker GOP candidates' case becomes. Trump is so obvious, we don't need to run against him again, rather GOPers who will be on the ballot and their inaction or lack of viable ideas on solving problems. It's been fifteen years since the ACA went into law and where is that GOP viable alternative?

[Scrivener7]

2. There is so much low hanging fruit that we are not picking. The messaging

game would be ours hands down if we just played it. And we could use it to pressure edge republicans to actually do something. But we don't.

It boggles the mind.

[leftstreet]

3. Maybe they'll suggest Republicans wear body cams n/t

[gab13by13]

4. Jason Crow said it,

Hald of the Democrats want to fight now, the other half wants to wait Krasnov out and beat him in the election.

[paleotn]

12. I don't think we can wait that long. Jan 2027 if a new Congress is seated.

I keep thinking he's going to do something really, really stupid like invade Greenland and Repukes will help with the lift. But at what cost? Hell of a conundrum we're in.

[hamsterjill]

20. Again, we are waiting on something that may not happen.

Ala Merrick Garland. Trump is already alluding to the idea that there shouldn't be mid-term elections and Dems need to be addressing that RIGHT FREAKING NOW!!!

I'm tired of waiting for actual forward movement and visible action.

[hatrack]

5. No, NO!! We must focus on the Abundance Agenda, because that's what our consultants said!!!

[paleotn]

11. I guess Hakeem Jefferies, Mark Kelly, Elissa Slotkin, AOC, et al. didn't get the memo?

[ShazzieB]

25. Also Jamie Raskin, Eric Swalwell, and many others

Many Democrats have been speaking out. Perhaps a more coordinated communication strategy might help, but I get tired of seeing Democrats accused of doing nothing.

As for the midterms, the campaigning for those is barely getting started, with most candidates concentrating on winning their party's nomination and focusing on those they are running against in their respective primaries. Once everyone knows who's running for which party, things will heat up as Democrats start going after their opponents in the general election and vice versa. I'm hopeful that as time goes on, we will start to see a lot more examples of Democratic candidates going after their Republicans opponents based on issues like affordability and how the GOP is sitting idly by while Schlump destroys the country. At least I sure hope so!

[Chasstev365]

16. We do Democrats always have to present a positive message and agenda that the corporate media ignores?

For once, Democrats need to be brutal and make Republicans own the mess were in.

Kamala had a positive message and agenda; the media ignored it
Hillary had a positive message and agenda; the media ignored it.
Kerry had a positive message and agenda; the media ignored it.

Even if people have turned on Trump, there is a disconnect with their Rep or Senator. If we don't defeat that, the Republicans could remain in control of both Houses, which means the shitshow will continue into Trump's 3rd Term.

I say when they go low, kick them in the balls with the truth!

[LymphocyteLover]

6. I'm a Democrat and I'm saying, as are you too, I assume. Some elected Dems are saying it too-- like Jasmine Crockett!

[Katcat]

7. Sometimes

I just think they are too old and out of touch. You can’t play marbles when the opposition is playing with dynamite.

[paleotn]

8. Really no downside to much these days.

Although a number of Dems are saying exactly that.

[Efilroft Sul]

9. Coloring within the lines for decorum's sake only guarantees Democrats march in an orderly fashion to the camps.

[creeksneakers2]

10. We say that all the time

Democrats are doing all they can. Please support Democrats and go after Republicans instead.

[betsuni]

13. Schumer: "The bottom line is, Senate Republicans continually fall in line behind Donald Trump, no matter how reckless,

no matter how unconstitutional, no matter the potential cost of American lives."

Of course Democrats say it all the time. Blame & Bash! This is a forum for supporters of Democrats and progress.

[tritsofme]

14. Why don't Democrats use some random phrasing that came out of your head? Gee, I don't know?

The implication that Democrats do not denounce Trump is just silly and absurd.

[Chasstev365]

17. Reread my original post: You missed my point entirely

I never said Democrats don't denounce Trump. I said they don't effectively make Republicans own either their complicity or their approval of Trump! Republicans have the power to impeach Trump by next week, but they do nothing!

[tritsofme]

19. It's just not true. Democrats denounce Republicans for falling behind Trump all the time.

But let’s stay grounded in reality here for a moment, there is absolutely nothing that Democrats could “say” that would make Republicans impeach Trump next week.

[betsuni]

30. Yes, it's not true. Gaslights make it pretty dim in here.

[Beartracks]

15. Yes - the problem with the Republican party is REPUBLICANS, not just Trump.

He's their out-of-control Frankenstein, but they just sit on their hands and let democracy burn.

=============

[Exp]

18. RULES ONLY APPLY TO DEMS, RIGHT?

[czarjak]

21. ANY MEANS NECESSARY

They meant it!

[mdbl]

22. Doesn't seem very productive.

[LiberalArkie]

23. Like the LEO's are afraid of breaking a nail single-handedly apprehending a person, I think our Democratic leaders are

afraid of getting dirt and dust on their suits. "What would my donors think if I said anything against them".

[kirby]

24. Almost half the country still support Trump!!!

It is madness.

[Tetrachloride]

26. Dems are channeling Merrick Garland

[Dan]

27. I was listening to a pod-caster video

He made some interesting points - which I hope will not be perceived as an attack on Democrats, but what he said resonated with me.

The primary point he made that the GOP is slowly but surely stripping rights away from the working class, via policy, misinformation, combined with racism and misogyny. Once they strip some rights away, the Democratic party resumes power and slowly but surely reacquires some of the rights that have been stripped away. Some, but not all. So, gradually the nation is trending rightward.

The problem is that both parties are somewhat beholden to their donors - and they share the some of the same donors. That is one of the primary reason we don't have universal health care. The Healthcare lobby has more power than we the people combined with the additional power that Citizens United bestowed on Corporations.

This Pod-caster advocated for a third party that would benefit the workers Or a real Democratic party leadership that would actively fight for the working class without regard for the donor base. People like Congressperson Crockett, AOC, etc., those that are leading the charge and have media savvy to counteract the right-wing media.

It was interesting because I have a friend that is currently trying to form a third party for some of the same reasons that this pod-caster made. While very progressive he has turned off the Democratic party due to what he perceives as their half-ass measures to address the needs of the working person. And, unfortunately he believes that our party is more interested in their fund raising over the people. He believes that the old people in the party are more interested in their seats (and will do nothing that jeopardizes the seats) than benefiting the people.

On parts I do have to agree - I think that the party would be better served by pushing more of the younger generation of Democratic leaders than catering to the needs/beliefs of the elderly members of the party. I do believe that change is in the air and that the younger people are going to lead our party in changing and finding news ways. The young people will fight while the elders seek compromise (with the exception of Nancy P., who I hope will live forever as a demonstrator of a fighter). I do question whether compromise is the way forward given what we are currently experiencing and the character of the GOP.

Like I said, I hope that this won't be perceived as an attack on the Democratic party but maybe something to think about as we go forward.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

35. "This Pod-caster advocated for a third party..."

Third party = MAGAt votes.

Who's the podcaster?

[Dan]

36. Don't remember

No, he wasn't advocating for MAGA but he did recognize that with the current state of the GOP - any viable third party alternative would impact the GOP more (His opinion - reference Ross Perot example).

[Warpy]

28. The Democratic Party has historically been the larger of two parties

precisely because the power center has been pro corporate even as the periphery has nearly always defended the constitution and the amendments to it. As much as we'd love to return to January 1933-January 1937, the first four years of FDRs presidency were an aberration, forcing sweeping changes where they were most needed because the country was in economic crisis and quite frankly facing revolution.

That's one reason the party won't go there, they have almost as much of a stake in keeping the game going as the radical plutocrats, tech bros, and crypto dudes do. They do, however, see the next crisis on the horizon and will try to take steps to prevent the worst of it. That's why I'm a registered Democrat, even though Social Democrat* is closer to the truth.

Don't expect radical change from the Democatic Party until and unless the country experiences another massive economic crash. Changes will be so incremental as to be invisible until then. However, the Republicans have always met crisis with total paralysis, their dogma blinding them to what the crisis actually consists of, let alone allowing them to deal with it effectively. That's the other reaon I'm a registered Democrat.


*Democratic Socialism: Moves toward decentralized and democratically controlled ownership of all facets of the economy with the eventual goal of abolishing capitalism altogether. It sounds pretty good but is open to real abuse and can devolve faster than cyclical capitalism does, along with stifling innovation and lessening productivity. See: Rssia, although this wasn't their only problem, the main one being that the Boilsheviks hated democracy.

Social Democrats: A mixed system of socialism and capitalism is created, with things moving back and forth between the two paradigms as a socialist entity stagnates or a capitalist entity becomes predatory. This blunts the destructiveness of capitalism while allowing it to exist since it's capable of quicker response to changing human needs.

I can deal with messy. Purity is for plaster saints.

[mucifer]

29. I am hearing dems say a lot and the press ignores them. I have heard great speeches in congress. But, people keep

blaming dems for the chaos.

[Vinca]

31. I've been wondering what has happened to Princess. She used to be able to rein in Daddy Dearest a bit and surely

she must realize what is going on in Minneapolis is very, very bad. 6 kids in a van coming back from a basketball game get taken to the hospital from tear gas? Don't any of them care??????????????????????????????

[MorbidButterflyTat]

32. They are saying it

Some people refuse to listen.

[doc03]

33. We need someone to write a strongly worded letter.

[JI7]

34. Democrats have said things like that and more but I am wondering

do you think voters are just uninformed or don't know ? And if "Democrats" said that specific thing things would be different ?