nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

What happened to the Democrats?- Honest Question

[Deleted User]

What happened to the Democrats in the US that they went from a party that got a 40 something year old man to the White House but less than two decades later are relying on a 80 something year old man to try and win a second term?

Why didn't Biden run in 2016 ?

Was it because of the hold Hilary Clinton had on the Democrats that it was seen as "her turn to run" or had Biden simply retired at that stage.

And did he have to "come out of retirement" to run in 2020 because there was no other viable options to stop Trump?

And where are the other viable options after Biden?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

patnor1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058339766/what-happened-to-the-democrats-honest-question

Socialism in short way to describe it.

They become obsessed with it. The bad side of it nothing to do with social values for the people but rather with what was called dictate of the proletariat they just appropriated it in a sense of dictate of corporations and approved (bought) people.

Sam Russell

Biden's son Beau died in May 2015 of brain cancer.

It was a devastating tragedy for the Biden family. Biden had previously lost his wife in a traffic accident.

tobefrank321

Biden has cited Trump as one of the reasons he stood in 2020 and in fairness to him he delivered but really only postponed Trumps return.

There's no-one else who has a huge profile on the Democratic side. Name recognition is huge in America.

Former Former Former

The bigger question is what has happened to the Republican Party, and how it has been completely hijacked by one man with very little interest in democracy or any other American values.

mrpdap

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121868994#Comment_121868994

But why didn’t the Democrats think ahead to 2024 once Biden was elected and have a new recognisable candidate ready to run?

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869013#Comment_121869013

But that's not what I started the thread for, so let's not go off topic with it.

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869054#Comment_121869054

How much has the selection of Harris as VP affected that I wonder.

I know VPs are not front and center but you would be forgiven for thinking that Harris was irrelevant at this stage.

Was she a possible candidate for 2024 and it became clear early on in her tenure as VP that she was not up to it or was Biden running again regardless of what anyone else thought?

Did the Democrats squander the opportunity to get a new fresh candidate for 2024 on a box ticking exercise with Harris or did a new fresh candidate even exist for 2024 ?

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121868807#Comment_121868807

...say wha!

...the democrats decided it was best to get into bed with the exact same entities embedded within the republicans, and not only that, to supersize it, sprinkle in a bit deregulation, financialisation, and happy happy days!

...all this directly shafted their intended base, i.e. working classes, by accelerating precariousness in nearly every aspect of their lives....

...resulting in the now defunct democrats!

...socialism, hahahaha, yea right!

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869234#Comment_121869234

all this directly shafted their intended base, i.e. working classes,

So where have the base gone and how do you get them back?

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869246#Comment_121869246

...they may not be able to, the damage is deeply imbedded now, the country clearly needs another major party, but that to may never occur, it simply doesnt suit the entities that have gained from the current situation, its very very messy stuff, ive always believed that that country is very slowly moving towards a civil war, even though that also may never truly occur, its certainly looking indefinitely messy....

...the initial base is clearly still there, but effectively unrepresented, or at best, very poorly represented...

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869234#Comment_121869234

People who refer to the Democrats (a party who'd be on the centre-right in any western european country) as Socialists are telling you two things:

They're wildly ignorant about political systems
They're consuming far too much content from the likes of Ben Shapiro and his ilk

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869054#Comment_121869054

No one with any serious ambition for presidency wanted to run a losing campaign against Biden.

patnor1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869319#Comment_121869319

People who never experienced socialism would not recognize it even if it kicked them in the ass.

Those who experienced it can clearly see writing on the wall.

Who is Ben Shapiro?

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869623#Comment_121869623

Can you name one actual Socialist policy of the Democrats?

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869623#Comment_121869623

who are these people, and where is this socialism in regards american society?

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058339766/what-happened-to-the-democrats-honest-question

Trump is only a handful of years younger though. This ain't some isolated problem, huge swathes of the American political system, especially at the higher echelons, is dominated by men and women north of 75. Bernie Sanders, Mitch McConnell, Chuck Grassley, the list goes on; the country is a functional gerantocracy with its lifetime appointments and corporatised democracy it makes "sense" it's dominated by those who have spent money and years getting to the top.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869691#Comment_121869691

'functioning', im not so sure about that, but good point, its a country in desperate need of younger policy makers, but that would threaten the status quo.....

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869704#Comment_121869704

Functioning only in the sense of the gerantocracy part - as in it's not codified but it's sure the end result.

As to younger blood, this is where the farce of a two party system enters the equation: the young blood in the Democrats can trend far more left than the older crowd, yet this is a scenario where Nancy Pelosi and Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (or Bernie Sanders) are in the party means you have the constant inability to affect ideological change while opposing points along a broad centrist-left axis exist.

patnor1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869648#Comment_121869648

You need to slow down buddy and think about what do you read. I get that sometimes fingers are faster than brain but go ahead and reread my comment.

I clearly stated that they appropriated socialist policies in regards to corporations and policy makers. Not to the benefit of the people.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869817#Comment_121869817

...but thats actually not socialism at all, its actually the opposite, yes im aware that that statement is regularly used, but we all know, its actually not true, its just another, but far more extreme version of capitalism..

patnor1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869879#Comment_121869879

Excuse me we all (seems to be your preferred pronoun) but I do not think for a second that for example using taxpayer money to bail out failed banks is even close to be extreme version of capitalism. In capitalism they will be left out to die and someone else would gladly jump in their place. We live in era of subsidies, dotation, bailouts, assistance and entitlement.

Try corporate socialism.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121870396#Comment_121870396

...but thats clearly and simply untrue, bailouts have nearly always been a part of a capitalist state and economy, this has nearly always been the case, and on a global level to...

...its just supporters of more extreme versions of capitalism, such as free market fundamentalism etc, will never accept this reality, never....

patnor1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121870432#Comment_121870432

...as I said... people who never experienced socialism... would not recognize it... even if it kicked them in the ass...

[Deleted User]

I think what’s happening over there is anti-politics and the rapid debasing of democracy and it will happen here too if we aren’t careful.

The US is an extreme example, but for the last couple of decades or more political discourse over there is just personalised vicious attacks, negative campaigns and paranoid conspiracy theories being whipped up.

The GOP has basically been destroyed and is now some kind of weird combination of religious fundamentalism and Qanon conspiracy nuts, while the Democrats seem to have no candidates and are withering away and running octogenarians.

The quality of candidates is at the rock bottom and nobody in their right mind would run, so you get a lot of people who fit that description - loud, obnoxious - anyone remotely sensible is rapidly driven away or just never comes forward.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121870508#Comment_121870508

...and again, where is the socialism in regards american society?

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121870396#Comment_121870396

Failed banks have a much more quantifiable and apocalyptic effect on a capitalist economy than almost any other industry. A capitalist county by definition won't let a bank fail cos it's literally the bloodstream of its ethos.

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869817#Comment_121869817

So the answer is no then.

Bailing out private enterprises is not socialist.

mrpdap

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869522#Comment_121869522

…. which shows the madness of the US competitive nomination process. Fight it out lads and lassies and we’ll nominate the winner as our candidate. Rather than having an process within the party to identify and select the best candidate.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121873787#Comment_121873787

Why would any sitting President need or should run against a spread of candidates? It'd be a collosal waste of time, money and risked eroding the base for the sake of ... ... what? A nominal sense of due process? Has there ever been a sitting President voted out by their own party? Leaving aside the fact that if someone did arrive that wasn't Biden, it would immediately turn the narrative into "why is he still President if even the DNC rejected him?"

The thread title is patently mislabelled cos it's not a Democrat problem, if indeed there even is a problem. The main elephant in the room (as it were) with American politics is the quasi-authoritarian, Unitive Executive Theory driven wing of populists who have taken over the previously economically conservative party - not the Democrats.

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121869691#Comment_121869691

it's dominated by those who have spent money and years getting to the top.

That's a fair point.

But in 1992 and again not long after in 2008 Clinton and Obama bucked that trend.

I think had Trump won in 2020 that was the end of Biden (and indeed Trump as he could not have run in 2024) and the field would then be open to younger candidates on both sides.

But that didn't happen and it's between these two again.

Maybe 2028 will produce someone, not AOC though, she doesn't do well out of her liberal NY base, she would just be another Elisabeth Warren.