Quo Vadis, Democrats?

[The Minsky Moment]

Can Harris be considered a Democratic leader or is she just a failed candidate trying to make some book sales at this point

You use the words
"Democratic leader"
"Failed candidate"
"Trying to make some book sales"

as though they are somehow alternative options, when really they are just different ways of saying the same thing.

[HVC]

I guess writing books is the new fiddling

[crazy canuck]

Can Harris be considered a Democratic leader or is she just a failed candidate trying to make some book sales at this point

You use the words
"Democratic leader"
"Failed candidate"
"Trying to make some book sales"

as though they are somehow alternative options, when really they are just different ways of saying the same thing.

 

[Tonitrus]

Can Harris be considered a Democratic leader or is she just a failed candidate trying to make some book sales at this point

I think she would have a been a solid lock for governor of CA (it would not necessarily have been a good re-launch for POTUS, and anything over one term might age her out)...but if she decided to start laying the groundwork for another POTUS run, I think she is off to a horrendous start.

Trying to set up president Walz?

He did come off very well in the campaign.

Strong disagree...I like the man, but he doesn't have "it".  He is good where he is a governor, possibly future a Dem cabinet or other position.

[garbon]

Can Harris be considered a Democratic leader or is she just a failed candidate trying to make some book sales at this point

I think she would have a been a solid lock for governor of CA (it would not necessarily have been a good re-launch for POTUS, and anything over one term might age her out)...but if she decided to start laying the groundwork for another POTUS run, I think she is off to a horrendous start.

Trying to set up president Walz?

He did come off very well in the campaign.

Strong disagree...I like the man, but he doesn't have "it".  He is good where he is a governor, possibly future a Dem cabinet or other position.

Why? He's an old, straight, cisgender white man. Sounds perfect for America.

[Sophie Scholl]

The lack of opposition leadership or even consistent speaking out by Harris, Biden, Clinton, Obama, and Gore (I legit looked to see if he was still alive) have been brutal. It's like they served their time and are more than happy to see the situation they helped create consume the nation and world with as little pushback as possible. Senate and House leadership are equally bankrupt in their approaches and dedication. It honestly infuriates me how meekly they are going into the night. 

[Tonitrus]

The lack of opposition leadership or even consistent speaking out by Harris, Biden, Clinton, Obama, and Gore (I legit looked to see if he was still alive) have been brutal. It's like they served their time and are more than happy to see the situation they helped create consume the nation and world with as little pushback as possible. Senate and House leadership are equally bankrupt in their approaches and dedication. It honestly infuriates me how meekly they are going into the night. 

Honestly, I don't think we want speaking out by most of those (Obama being the exception).  Harris is busy in self-sabotage/aggrandizement and Biden/Clinton/Gore are much too old and/or...hmm..."out of place" to present relevant or compelling messages.

The problem they're are facing in the Congress is two/three-fold; 

1. Schumer is too old.  He probably feels that he still has the passion, but that is the problem we always see with age and power.  They never see when it is their time to step down and pass on the torch.

2. Jefferies is impotent...and I don't mean that in a personal sense, the party that out of power in the House will always suffer from that.  We'd like them to do things...but they cant.  We say we want to hear more...but honestly, even if they did, we don't listen.  We don't care to listen to House speeches or oversight committee meetings. 

3. Pushed for party/nation-wide leadership almost never come from the Congress.  Obama bucked that trend, but only because of a convergence of events (Presidential race/primary, outgoing POTUS, economic crises) and caught some lightning in a bottle that allowed him to bust over the momentum.  If the DNC has their way, that election was supposed to be Hillary Clinton's...but he maneuvered around that.  House members also very rarely have the political foundations to break into a nation-wide role.  Senators are usually the only ones from the Congress (due to 6-year terms and needing state-wide approval) who can manage to equalize their chances with state Governors.  That is why the current likely front runners are Newsom, Shapiro, and Pritzker.   

What the Democrats likely need for leadership is a younger, energetic/compelling "acceptable outsider"...somewhat in the vein of Obama, but more moderate to balance away from too-left-wing-for-swing-voters factions of the party (and even Obama ran more moderate than his actual politics in order to win).  Do any of the aforementioned three fit that role?  Dunno.

[Tonitrus]

Looking back at the 2024 election...I think the Democrats winning that election was near a near-impossible ask.  I don't Biden or Harris had any chance to win...nor anyone tied to the administration ...because they would have had to run against it.

Even an outsider Democrat would have needed to burn down the incumbents to make themselves credible and have even a small chance...something that I think has never happened in American politics.

[Sophie Scholl]

For sure it is too late for any of those folks to weigh-in and get vocal. They had their chance and did nothing with it. Honestly, I am beyond sick and tired of this seeming obsession with running a Moderate or trying to reach across the aisle. It has failed time and time again and left us in the situation we are in now. I think Obama's betrayal of "Hope" and "Change" is a major reason why youth turned away from believing in Democrats and in neo-liberal concepts over socialism. There are far more votes, support, and playing toward the future by going Left rather than continuing the failed moderation and reaching out to the Right that we've seen for decades. We need radical change and course correction if we're to have any chance at all of saving things. Those won't be accomplished by a Moderate or a typical Dem Party type.

[Admiral Yi]

If there are so many more votes in going left than in going moderate, why did Bernie lose to Hillary?

[Sophie Scholl]

How'd that work out for the Democrats, the country, and the world?

[Sophie Scholl]

Even beyond that, that was 8 years ago and a loooooot has happened since. I doubt Bernie would be the candidate to run anymore and while the number of possible moderates has declined due to death via old age and what not, the number of much more radical aligned young voters continues to grow.

[HVC]

But don't polls show that the radical orientation the youngins are going towards is right?

[crazy canuck]

But don't polls show that the radical orientation the youngins are going towards is right?

There is no other radical orientation in the US.

[Admiral Yi]

Even beyond that, that was 8 years ago and a loooooot has happened since. I doubt Bernie would be the candidate to run anymore and while the number of possible moderates has declined due to death via old age and what not, the number of much more radical aligned young voters continues to grow.

Well, if the number of radical young voters has increased enough to win primaries and generals, you're all set.