How come there are not more "Democratic-Socialists" in Congress/Senate/State/Local ?

[BootinUp]

Note to the GDP Host: This is a relevant discussion as it relates to Bernie Sanders candidacy

First off I am talking about politicians that better represent Bernie's positions. I don't care if they are called Democrats, Socialists, whatever.

It is a fact that a national candidate for President is going to build a policy platform that is appealing to a broad cross section of the country. Why are people shocked, outraged, mad, disgusted at this simple reality? If you run a national campaign in a general election with outside the range of current policiy positions should you be surprised when it doesn't win? Even in a Primary (which is the most activist political participants) it isn't winning.

On the other hand, it should be much easier to increase representation in more regional or state or local elected positions. IF there were more representation down through the hierarchy for Bernies positions, then I would suggest, there is actually more evidence that such positions could win a national election.

There are not more because these views are in the minority and can't win elections.

[RobertEarl]

1. Big money buys elections

Hard to believe that someone who posts as much as you and pretends to be so smart, does not know the answer to your own question.

It's as if you are merely trying to be something like a toy to be played with.

The reason we don't have a government by the people is because government is bought by those with big money. Duh!

[BootinUp]

8. I don't buy that explanation at all. I would instead point to propaganda

swaying votes.

[cali]

34. Funny you won't address my post that in Vermont it's alive and well

[BootinUp]

35. Its a fine point cali, but it still points to problems

in a national campaign for President. I hope he does well and we see more like him.

[cali]

36. Every presidential candidate faces hurdles. Btw, the Vermont Progressive Party

Is the only successful third party in the country. Progressives are in the Vermont Senate and House and hold statewide office. Progressives have dominated Burlington politics for years and last week all three dem gubernatorial candidates auditioned for the party, seeking its endorsement and saying they'd all run as Dem/Prog hybrids.

[BootinUp]

38. Agreed. If Sanders had won the primary

then I would have accepted that the D party was further left than I thought. And thats what we would have gone with.

[nc4bo]

2. Ask Deb?

She's been AWOL from growing the party for quite sometime now.

America loves it's socialist programs just fine but I don't think the kingpins appreciate them as much.

[immoderate]

3. Because voters don't support their own best interests.

--imm

[forjusticethunders]

4. Because building a leftist consensus is a full time job

that a lot of so-called progressives are not interested in doing (no, virtue-signaling about how progressive you are while doing none of the groundwork to make it happen doesn't count)

[BootinUp]

7. I'm sure that must be a partial explanation. Perhaps more though is

RW propaganda beating down common sense views. Whatever the causes are, I don't think the solution is putting up a less popular national platform.

[imagine2015]

5. And exactly how do you think a national candidate should appeal to big business and Wall Street?

I assume the Hillary method is acceptable to you.

Is that right?

[BootinUp]

6. If you dig into her proposals you will see she is for reversing

trends of the last 30-40 years. If she didn't have strong proposals on it, then Bernie could have attacked her proposals more. Fact is he is relying on a false perception.

[snort]

9. Low information, undereducated Voters.

[BootinUp]

11. Or over exposed to RW lies. nt

[TheBlackAdder]

10. There are, they just don't call themselves that, because everyone is self-affecting to a degree.

.


It's the degree of selfishness that is key. Envy, jealousy and personal greed factor into it.


Even the most liberal Democrats have levels of self-affectation, where they want things in their pocket first.


You go to church and you hear about helping the poor, and the next words out of mouths are "family first."


.

[Todays_Illusion]

12. For starters, the new DNC, since the 90s, stopped supporting a liberal platform and switched to,

a Business First platform. Liberal candidates are not recruited and are not supported.

[BootinUp]

14. My argument and only speaking in generalities

is that they will normally support candidates they have deemed have a shot.

Clearly money is available to run more socialist leaning candidates even if not from the DNC. Again talking about races down the ballot.

But in the end you are always fighting current political climate. Its better now than 20 years ago. My belief, is that another strong D President with a good economic record will go a long ways to changing more minds on Reaganomics.

[99Forever]

13. Because too many are willing to hold their nose and....

...settle for the less evil crappy candidates.

[BootinUp]

15. That's a chicken or the egg argument, isn't it?

[99Forever]

16. Huh?

Not sure how that is meaningful other than being a way to dismiss the reality. Fear campaigning is now the norm.


I say fuck that, I demand good and honest, not quite as shitty doesn't cut it.

[BootinUp]

17. The OP is about winning elections, not purity contests. nt

[99Forever]

20. So you must think being a bought and...

....paid for, corrupt slime is a requirement to "win elections."

I strongly disagree. I have ethics, you should try that.

[BootinUp]

21. You're arguing a different point and its an unproven assumption anyways.

I won't take the position that some elected officials in the D party NEVER vote for personal gain instead of party philosophy. But I am more than willing to argue (in some other thread) that it can be shown that the D party philosophy does not come from a position that corruption is the requirement. You aim your weapon at the wrong side. Simple as that.

This thread was meant to discuss why AMERICAN VOTERS aren't electing socialists in battleground states for example for any significant elective offices.

[99Forever]

23. And you just didn't lke my answer.

Clearly, I hit a nerve.

Cognitive disonance is a thing.

[BootinUp]

24. If you can tell all that from my posts above

then I can see how you just KNOW that the D party is all corrupt and everything. Since this thread is NOT about that, and you don't want to discuss the OP apparently, I bid you a good day.

[Henhouse]

18. A Socialist can't win outside of Vermont....n/t

[cali]

19. There are in vermont

The philosophy of the Vermont Progressive Party is rooted in Democratic Socialism.

This guy, a Vermont State Senator, and long time VT Prog is running for Ltd. Guv. Expect to seem him in Congress someday.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/2015/12/10/zuckerman-to-announce-run-for-lieutenant-governor/77082926/

[PowerToThePeople]

22. There have been several national purges

over the last century by US facsists.

History is your friend.

[AgingAmerican]

25. Because it is a two party system

[BootinUp]

26. There's a reason I used quotes and explained that

I mean a politican with views similar to Bernie's.

[AgingAmerican]

28. You mean a candidate that has not sold out to Corporations?

And is willing to kill the corporate goose that lays the golden eggs?

Follow the money

[BootinUp]

29. So you think its because that good candidates can't get (enough) money

to run for other offices in battleground states for example. Didn't Bernie just prove that incorrect?

Isn't a more logical conclusion that its Bernie's policies are not able to win elections?

[AgingAmerican]

30. Follow the money

Personal enrichment style. They want to get rich.

[BootinUp]

31. So you found 1 guy, Bernie, can't find any others?

Some day the reality will maybe hit you that if anyone thought they could win races handily with Bernie's policies they would live comfortably enough and sleep terrific. But you apparently think no one is smart enough to figure that out.

[AgingAmerican]

32. It's about greed and personal enrichment

And you don't deny it

[BootinUp]

33. Well, you made your opinion clear, for what its worth. nt

[Skwmom]

27. Because our government is filled with people who sell out and cash in.

[Cal Carpenter]

37. Decades of cold war red-baiting, to start

Still see it here (DU, that is) on the regular.