The only thing that the DNC respects is power.

[Yavin4]

Until left leaning groups/leaders (The Green Party, Jill Stein, Nina Turner, Cornell West, Ralph Nader, etc.) can actually register voters, field candidates, and win major elections (statewide and federal) on a regular basis, then and only then will the Democratic party move left. You have to demonstrate real political power to get them to take you seriously.

However, to get that political power takes hard work and dedication. Left leaning groups would have to leave the bucolic college campuses and organize the average American. They'd have to go to small towns, rural environments, the suburbs, and the urban areas. It's not enough to go on MSNBC and throw shade on the Democratic party establishment.

Right now the best that left leaning groups can do is spoil elections which has the opposite effect. It makes the party move more to the right to pick up lost votes.

[Orsino]

1. "Spoil" begs the question.

We will probably never be able to prove that the existence of third parties significantly saps Democratic turn-out.

[OnDoutside]

2. There's a reason they are always on the fringe. In their eyes

No one matches their purity.

[brush]

3. You kinda nailed it, especially the part where they don't like to actually work to...

build a grassroots apparatus that incentivizes volunteers to canvass, phone bank, do voter registration, do data entry, scheduling, fund-raising, practical platform planking — you know, things that the Democratic party does all the time, not just every four years during the presidential cycles.

[oberliner]

4. Jill Stein is an avowed enemy of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party

She is not our friend.

[JCanete]

5. Those with a voice are using it right I think. Sanders for instance, is inspiring people in their

localities to run for office. Hopefully they will be inspired to organize and promote a liberal agenda. It takes some people being visible and promoting these ideas for others to take up the mantle and use it. TYT is putting money into politics and promoting grassroots organizing, as an example.

I think you've got the DNC right. I think it is adverse to risk. What has worked and accounts for the way those in power have gotten and held their jobs is not likely to get thrown out without an actual need to reevaluate based upon changing tides. Those changes aren't likely to be influenced by the DNC leadership, and quite the opposite.

But you can't pretend that one major difference between the far left goals and those of the more established Democratic party isn't the money. The Democratic Party is long established, and has deep pockets(though not as deep as the GOP). Money is harder to come by the grassroots way...it comes far easier from corporate and rich private donors, orgs. etc. Funny enough, that kind of money tends to flow in only if those donors expect a return on that investment. Altruism is such a small part of that picture. It would be very hard to convince big donors that they would see a return on investment from a more class war oriented political agenda. It still needs to be done, but I think our hopes lie in people within the democratic party being inspired to put pressure on our leadership to move in that direction. It takes having outside groups as an alternative... assuming at least, that the goal of Democrats is to win elections and not just remain comfortably the minority party. It takes the democratic party evolving to accommodate the louder and hopefully left-moving demands of its voting base, and either making hard choices that might alienate their donors or getting their donors to see the writing on the wall.