General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Party Loyalty [View all]sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)what may be misunderstandings, rather than do what many others here do.
Where I think the crux of the disagreement as to getting the policies we believe in addressed, is the word 'winning'.
Eg, we know that progressive policies are popular with voters across the political spectrum.
During the mid terms, eg, many Dem activists decided to try to rebuild the party from the ground up and focused on Local elections.
There they got progressive/democratic issues on ballots wherever it was possible. AND WON, across the political board.
They also found and supported Progressive Dems for local elections and had huge victories, contradicting all the talk of 'progressives can't win'.
They gave up on DC and went to work themselves, choosing their own candidates, funding them, knocking on doors and won most of the elections they focused on.
To me, winning means getting your policies on the agenda of those you elect.
Losing means, electing people to put your policies front and center, only to find they are voting WITH those you did NOT elect.
I used to buy that 'winning elections' meant actually winning a lot of what you worked for. But after so many huge issues turned out to be supported by many we elected to OPPOSE, I now think that voters need fresh, new thinking to get this party away from the right leaning track they are on.
To do that, candidates need to run on Democratic issues. They did NOT do that in the mid terms for whatever reason and they LOST.