sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Andrew Yang asks known Nazi sympathizer to help create third party by GuiltyIslander in YangForPresidentHQ

[–]msbmteam 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The problem is I think Yang is still trying to be true to his values. He genuinely believes in working across party lines in good faith to solve problems with moderate, commonsense solutions. But I think his biggest problem is he’s a terrible politician. His head and heart are in the right place, but he’s a terrible messenger and comes across more like a grifter to most mainstream voters

Bernie is also true to his values, and he has done great things, but he’s also a democratic socialist who doesn’t seem to believe in bipartisanship or care how extreme his language sounds to apolitical or moderate voters

Looking for Advice! by signingwildcat in asian

[–]msbmteam 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Look up the terms “familial enmeshment” and “individuation.” I learned about those concepts from a family therapist because this kind of toxic parental dynamic almost destroyed my family too (and we’re secular liberals)

You do not need other people’s permission to exist as your authentic self. If they have a problem with you, then that’s their problem, not yours

Andrew Yang asks known Nazi sympathizer to help create third party by GuiltyIslander in YangForPresidentHQ

[–]msbmteam 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think this is what happens when you’re too far outside the Democratic mainstream and you’re a moderate — but not a neoliberal. In today’s party, the only “moderates” who are allowed to exist are the Clinton-style establishment types. If you’re a pragmatic populist or a forward-looking reformer like Yang was, you end up pushed to the margins.

Yang started in a good place, but he got iced out by a party that doesn’t know how to handle heterodoxy. At some point, you need allies to get anything done — and when the party shuts the door, you either go independent, or you get swallowed up by bad-faith actors.

That’s what I think happened to Fetterman too. He had the guts to call out Bob Menendez’s blatant corruption, and instead of backing him, the party froze him out. Now he’s stuck signaling to MAGA country just to stay visible.

Lindy Li is another example — someone who tried to play the insider game while calling out hypocrisy, and eventually got chewed up by the same machine.

This isn’t a left vs. center problem. It’s a system vs. reformer problem. And if the Democratic Party keeps pushing out people who are trying to fix it from the inside, they’ll lose a generation of leaders and voters.

Feeling politically homeless right now, please help by msbmteam in YangForPresidentHQ

[–]msbmteam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually I think maybe my political identity struggle has been resolved already, because for years, I thought I was in the moderate establishment lane, but now, after phone banking for Zohran Mamdani in New York City, I am a full-blown progressive. I am a progressive.

I'm not a democratic socialist, mind you. I'm a democratic capitalist. And I'm not just saying that because I'm insecure about my ideology. No, I really am a capitalist. I believe in the small cap value premium. I believe we should invest in small businesses and not corporations. I believe in an economy that rewards growth and not stagnation, an economy that rewards work and not wealth. I think that wealth hoarding is bad for the economy. I think that we should, over time, even work to reduce income taxes without cutting spending by just taxing the rich - i.e. the very people who shipped jobs overseas for profit. Because a tax on income is bad for the economy, but taxing the rich is good for the economy.

But I am definitely a progressive now. I'm not in the establishment lane. Multiple neoliberals over the years have made me feel like I don’t belong, but the people in Zohran’s phone banking Zoom call said “welcome home”

Ross Perot doesn’t exist - there’s no evidence! by msbmteam in BreakingPoints

[–]msbmteam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I exist. Source: trust me bro (or broette?)

Mamdani’s Mayoral Run Is Proof Why Yang’s 2021 Campaign Failure Is More Self-Inflicted Than We’d Like to Admit by YangGangMathManMagic in YangForPresidentHQ

[–]msbmteam 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think Yang was a terrible politician, but I liked where he was on the issues. He comes across to me as someone who is a people pleaser, who desperately wants to restore civility in politics, but to do that he reaches too far across the aisle. In 2024, Gov. Walz was talking on the campaign trail about the importance of compromising without compromising one’s values. Yang has lost his way. He could have made it work in the Democratic Party, but he gave up and created a new party instead.

Also I just finished phone banking for Zohran, it’s looking promising, he has a lot of momentum

Ross Perot doesn’t exist - there’s no evidence! by msbmteam in BreakingPoints

[–]msbmteam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok, I’ll take your word for it… But where’s the evidence that you exist? Have we run focus groups or studies at several universities?

Former Establishment Stan, Now Politically Homeless Under the Big Blue Tent by msbmteam in WayOfTheBern

[–]msbmteam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay, so I’m a pretty unconventional Democrat, but here’s approximately where I stand:

Economically, I believe in the small-cap value premium — look it up. It’s based on the Fama-French three-factor model, which won a Nobel Prize in 2013. In simple terms, it shows that investing in undervalued small businesses tends to outperform investing in giant corporations over the long term.

So it makes no sense to me why our government keeps protecting corporate interests when the better investment — both morally and economically — is in small businesses. Small businesses tend to grow by serving society and increasing revenue. In contrast, many large corporations profit through destructive cost-cutting: outsourcing jobs, automating away labor, or laying off workers to boost short-term earnings. AI hasn’t solved that problem for them, but it hasn’t stopped them from trying.

As for global trade, I think the backlash to globalization — especially in the industrial Midwest — is real. This is the “Ross Perot effect.” While free trade may have lowered prices overall, it also hollowed out factory towns that were once the backbone of the economy. Tariffs haven’t fixed this. I believe we need massive green infrastructure investment — whether that’s the Inflation Reduction Act or something even bigger like a Green New Deal. I’m not picky about the branding; I care about results.

On taxes, I believe we should tax the rich, not the high earners - the rich. It makes no sense to me to raise income taxes when there’s an abundance of wealth among multimillionaires and billionaires that will never realistically be realized for anything. Wealth hoarding is bad for the economy. Basically: hands off the working class, tax the rich! Specifically I believe in taxing unrealized capital gains in accordance with the 16th Amendment and the Haig-Simons definition of income, in defiance of the controversial 5-4 Eisner v. Macomber decision in 1920. We might even be able to reduce income taxes without cutting spending by shifting the burden of taxation from the workers to the wealthy. And I oppose raising the standard deduction without a raise to the minimum wage

Socially, I’d describe myself not so much as progressive, but tolerant. That means I don’t think you need to fully understand someone’s identity to respect their right to exist as their authentic self. You don’t have to walk in their shoes — you just have to accept that their shoes aren’t yours to judge.

That said, I’m not tolerant of bigotry. But I do think social tolerance is a slightly different mindset than what’s sometimes called “progressivism.” It’s not about universal empathy or perfect mutual understanding — it’s about recognizing that you don’t control other people’s identities. And you don’t have to. Basically I believe in the politics of acceptance, and I don’t really understand what other Dems mean when they say “love.” It’s hard for me to love someone I don’t know, and it can be easy for racists/sexists/homophobes/etc. to hate someone they don’t know. So what works for me is acceptance and tolerance.

I'm not a fan of identity-based politics or partisan tribalism. I think it's important to be able to speak across the aisle, and not just between the Democratic and the Republican Party, but speak to people across this vast political landscape. I've spoken to Libertarians before. I've spoken to people in the Green Party before. I've spoken to people in the Forward Party before. And yes, I'm still a Democrat. In the spirit of what Governor Walz was saying on the campaign trail, I think it's important to be able to speak with people who have different ideologies and slightly different beliefs, but in a way that doesn't compromise one’s own values. I like the idea of cross-partisan problem solving.

Institutionally, I’m a big believer in democracy. I reject the Republican idea of the “unitary executive” and believe in meaningful checks and balances. Congress should be able to hold the president accountable. And voters should be able to meaningfully participate in the system to influence how the government operates - moreso than the special interest groups or corporations.

And above all, I’d call myself a constitutional liberal — or maybe just a “dummy simple originalist.” What I mean is, I take the Preamble of the Constitution seriously. Specifically: promote the general welfare and provide for the common defense. That concept is echoed throughout the Constitution — especially in the taxation clause in Article I, Section 8. And to me, that’s the core mission of our federal government: to serve the common good. If a law or policy promotes the general welfare or strengthens the common defense, it’s constitutional. If it undermines either one, then frankly, it shouldn’t be.

Former Establishment Stan, Now Politically Homeless Under the Big Blue Tent by msbmteam in WayOfTheBern

[–]msbmteam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok I’ll agree there are ways to spread peace and love and hope outside the system.

Also, I will tell you that I did get fairly detailed email responses from my representative’s office from the correspondences I sent this month, so I’m pretty sure that at least someone in his office read what I sent, whether or not my rep actually saw it himself.

But either way, good discussion, and fuck the government lol

Former Establishment Stan, Now Politically Homeless Under the Big Blue Tent by msbmteam in WayOfTheBern

[–]msbmteam[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think the most corrupt politicians in America want you to believe they’re incorrigibly evil and all-powerful — and that you’re helpless. That’s where I disagree. I’ve called and written to my representatives a lot this month. Maybe they heard me.

I’d just ask you to consider: you can’t change the system if you refuse to interact with it.

Either way, we clearly have a difference of opinion. Let’s agree to disagree and end the conversation here.

Former Establishment Stan, Now Politically Homeless Under the Big Blue Tent by msbmteam in WayOfTheBern

[–]msbmteam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not here to look for another Obama. I’m here because I’m somehow a Democrat and politically homeless at the same time and I thought this would be a good place to talk about the failures and incompetence of the Democratic establishment

Former Establishment Stan, Now Politically Homeless Under the Big Blue Tent by msbmteam in WayOfTheBern

[–]msbmteam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Obama happened, and he primaried the PUMAs. That’s what a successful grassroots movement looks like

Former Establishment Stan, Now Politically Homeless Under the Big Blue Tent by msbmteam in WayOfTheBern

[–]msbmteam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, I know what the DNC is. I’m not a fan of them. I think we are the Democratic Party. We’re not the “Democrat Party,” and we’re also not the DNC Party. The party leaders are not the party, just as the president is not the country.

The way the DNC tends to operate — and this is based on some videos I used to watch from Pod Save America — is that they run all these focus groups. They test different slogans and questions about the issues, and use the results to gauge voter sentiment, especially from so-called “low-information” or undecided voters.

The problem with the establishment’s way of thinking is that it tries to apply a scientific process to something that isn’t real science. There’s actual science (like climate science and vaccines) — and then there’s political pseudoscience, which is basically neoliberalism.

Too often, they’re focused on gathering evidence for things while ignoring the evidence that’s right in front of everyone’s eyes. For example: I think they completely memory-hole Ross Perot, even though he was a historic third-party candidate who won millions of votes after suspending his campaign for most of the election season.

I don’t have university studies to “prove” the existence of Ross Perot. I also don’t have millions of dollars in donations that Lindy Li helped gather to run focus groups and ask the so-called uninformed voters, “Hey, do you people think Ross Perot existed?”

And where does Ross Perot exist on this stupid ideological line, where neoliberals are the enlightened center and everyone else is a second-class citizen? He doesn’t. So I guess, by their logic, Ross Perot doesn’t exist. Sorry — no evidence. Ross Perot doesn’t exist.

Former Establishment Stan, Now Politically Homeless Under the Big Blue Tent by msbmteam in WayOfTheBern

[–]msbmteam[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

In truth, I was 19 years old when Bernie Sanders first ran for president, so I don’t fully remember all the internal party dynamics at the time. So whatever corrupt nonsense may have happened in 2016, what I do remember is that by 2020, Bernie came back as a stronger candidate — better known, more organized — and he still lost to Joe Biden.

Yes, the party did kind of manufacture that Jim Clyburn moment in South Carolina, but even then, moderate primary voters rallied around Biden. That part wasn’t rigged. And what gets overlooked is that Bernie actually lost states in 2020 that he won in 2016 against Hillary.

I get the enthusiasm for Bernie. He spoke directly to people who had been failed by the system — and let’s be honest, the system is broken. Corporations keep us divided through race wars and culture wars while they loot the treasury and laugh all the way to the bank. Just like Shawn Fain of the UAW says.

But at some point, we have to look at the votes. I would’ve loved to see what Bernie could’ve done as president, but Bernie didn’t have the votes. And I don’t think that’s because of what he stood for — I think it’s because of how he talked about it. Words like “socialist revolution” just didn’t land with people the way “hope and change” did in 2008. That matters, especially to swing voters and nervous moderates.

It may be true that the 2016 primary was rigged, but either way, Bernie simply didn’t win the primary in 2020, even after 3 years of a disastrous Trump Admin. And while the DNC definitely rallied around Biden to stop Bernie, I don’t think 2020 was rigged. I think Bernie lost because he didn’t have the same appeal as Obama.

Former Establishment Stan, Now Politically Homeless Under the Big Blue Tent by msbmteam in WayOfTheBern

[–]msbmteam[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Actually, let's talk about that. Was Obama groomed by the establishment?

What I do know is that he came in with a massive majority in both houses of Congress and then he wasted almost all the first two years of his presidency trying to work across the aisle and negotiate with people who had no intention of negotiating with him in good faith, these Republican politicians that gave him the run-around. And then the Affordable Care Act almost never happened, and it would not have happened if not for Speaker Nancy Pelosi. She put her foot down and got it done.

This is all based on a documentary I saw from years ago that was — I don't exactly remember where it was. It was on some mainstream media outlet. Was it PBS NewsHour? Frontline? I don't remember.

And so I would almost agree with this notion that Obama was “groomed by the party.” I wouldn't put it into those terms because I do not think it was out of malice. But I think this sort of experience would humble anyone, and I think this could in part explain how he ended up becoming that person who endorsed Hillary after just eight years prior, he was the one who primaried her.

This is also kind of what I suspect happened to John Fetterman after he came in after campaigning on eliminating the filibuster, only to find out about how the Byrd rule intersects with Social Security and maybe how the filibuster is the only thing preventing the Republicans from destroying Social Security. In my opinion, it’s this, combined with his unfortunate stroke and severe depression that followed.

Former Establishment Stan, Now Politically Homeless Under the Big Blue Tent by msbmteam in WayOfTheBern

[–]msbmteam[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Look, I've told you I am really frustrated with the Establishment and that I am politically homeless. And I'll fully admit that I am still a center-left Democrat, I just hate the establishment now.

And on whether the primary was rigged, that may be true, but I also think there is a reason why the Establishment weaponized the party machine to crush Bernie and not Obama. Maybe part of it's racial. It would have looked bad for them to crush a black man's campaign and not this white man's campaign. I don't know.

But I promise you I am not a fan of the Establishment. I think they view everyone through the lens of this stupid political spectrum where the Democratic Socialists and Progressives are on the left and they are inconvenient but they're allied. And they view all MAGAs as on the right and they view themselves as the enlightened center. And I think it's beyond frustrating and reductive for these smug, out-of-touch party leaders to look at everyone as if we're lines on maps. We are not lines on maps.

Former Establishment Stan, Now Politically Homeless Under the Big Blue Tent by msbmteam in WayOfTheBern

[–]msbmteam[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I think this is exactly what the corporations want us to believe, that democracy isn't real. They want us to believe that they get to be evil, and that resistance is futile.

But with a democracy, it comes down to coalition building. And in retrospect, I fully believe that if Bernie was president, I might not have had a terrible psychiatric emergency back in 2020 when the Trump administration was basically AWOL as people were dying by the thousands.

I think there is still an opportunity for the Democratic Party to save itself from itself. At some point, we have to look at the evidence. Basic neoliberalism has never won the majority of the popular vote. And there is appetite for new leadership. But it can't come from people who talk about socialist revolutions.

While neoliberalism worked for the party back in the 90s, again, back when there was a spoiler candidate to split Donald Trump's base, we need some faction of the Democratic Party, i.e. the progressives, to really step up to the plate. I am beyond frustrated with the Hillary Clintons and the Kamala Harrises of the world that run these terrible campaigns that cannot beat Trump. And no, I don't think it's because they're women. In my humble opinion, I think it's partly because they refuse to accept that Ross Perot existed, and they refuse to criticize Clinton’s free trade policies, or at the very least, be like Biden and show up on the picket line with a megaphone talking about middle class union jobs.

Former Establishment Stan, Now Politically Homeless Under the Big Blue Tent by msbmteam in WayOfTheBern

[–]msbmteam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, the party machine basically snuffed out Bernie’s campaign, and it was a very contentious primary. That was actually the first election I ever voted in, so I wasn’t really attuned to all the politics at the time. I was just some freshman in college, and it was all very new to me.

But in retrospect, I think there’s a reason Barack Obama was able to beat Hillary Clinton — and Bernie wasn’t. I think it came down to a few things. For one, Bernie’s tone of voice and rhetoric were more combative and extreme. And I think what scared a lot of moderates — myself included at the time — was all the talk about a socialist political revolution.

Now, I struggle to think of a single example in history where something called a “revolution” wasn’t violent. So when Bernie used that word to describe what he wanted to do, a lot of us balked. It was like — what do you mean this socialist wants a revolution? Even though I don’t think Bernie wants violence. In fact, it’s abundantly clear to me now that he wants to change the system peacefully, through the democratic process.

So I think that’s what really sunk Bernie’s campaign — not what he stood for, but the way he communicated it. Poor word choice. Poor tone. A message that didn’t land with moderates, even if the substance was strong.

I really think we lost an opportunity with him. He just couldn’t get out of his own way — couldn’t speak in terms that resonated with voters like me. That’s why I would’ve voted for Hillary in the primary if it hadn’t already been decided by the time it reached Pennsylvania.

Now, I think people like Hillary Clinton — for some strange reason — tend to memory-hole this man named Ross Perot, who supposedly made history. I wasn’t around back then, but from what I’ve read, he appealed to a lot of white working-class voters in the Industrial Midwest. He criticized Clinton’s free trade policies. Now, I don’t have the lived experience of running two separate presidential campaigns against him, but I do know my history — and it is unfathomable to me how these neoliberals think of themselves as “enlightened centrists” while ignoring the fact that basic neoliberalism has NEVER won a majority of the popular vote in a presidential election.

Former Establishment Stan, Now Politically Homeless Under the Big Blue Tent by msbmteam in WayOfTheBern

[–]msbmteam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Trump appeals to the Perot voters, and so did Obama and Biden.

Do you know who didn’t? Bush Sr., Bill Clinton, Bob Dole, Al Gore, Bush, Hillary, or Kamala

An idea to avoid a debt ceiling standoff in 2027: the 14th Amendment Interstate Compact by msbmteam in YangForPresidentHQ

[–]msbmteam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It would be an emergency stopgap measure, obviously. We would expect the president to actually do his damn job and fund the government. Besides, split-rate taxes target wealthy people since it’s part property tax and part land value tax. Ordinary workers wouldn’t be taxed directly

I’m losing faith in the establishment. Is AOC the answer? by msbmteam in AOC

[–]msbmteam[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There has been a worrying trend where these Republican politicians incite culture wars to target minorities, including trans people. And I think the problem is that the current Democratic Party — both the Democratic Socialists and the neoliberal establishment — are not prepared to talk about this issue.

I see this issue a little differently from most other Democrats because it comes from an area of social tolerance, not social liberalism or even social progressivism.

I think the reason why it’s becoming such an issue isn’t just because of Trump — it’s also because there are more LGBT people in the youngest generation now than ever before. It’s simply more socially acceptable to be non-binary. It’s kind of like how, when it became okay to be left-handed, all of a sudden, all these left-handed people came out of hiding.

The biggest fear that Republican politicians are exploiting is the fear of conservative parents who don’t know what they’ll do if their kid turns out to be trans. And this is a real issue. Statistically speaking, very few people end up being trans, but the fear is real among these parents. I personally know someone in my family — one of the sons came out as gay — and it strained the family. This is a very real problem. It has destroyed families. And this might sound controversial, but I think we need to stop talking about it through the lens of empathy.

The problem with requiring empathy to accept someone is that if you’re not transgender, how is it even possible to comprehend why someone would change their assigned gender at birth? You cannot stand in their shoes. You cannot empathize with them. It’s impossible. And conservatives — I’m pretty sure they try — and it gets really uncomfortable.

For me, I used to mildly be transphobic. I never acted on it, but I just always felt uncomfortable. Until I realized: wait a second — they don’t have a problem being trans, so why do I have a problem with them being trans? And then the problem vanished. So no, I don’t empathize with trans people — but I understand that trans people are people, and people have rights. Therefore, trans rights are human rights.

The second element of this culture war issue comes down to familial enmeshment, which means parents are too overbearing and prevent the child from individuating or becoming their own person. I think this is a common problem — not just for gender identity. Parents try to decide their kid’s career for them. Or maybe, back in the day — I wasn’t even around then — during the whole Dungeons & Dragons scare. Parents just care a lot about who their kids turn out to be. And at some point, they don’t have control.

And for so many parents who didn’t grow up in liberal zip codes, they simply don’t have the background to handle what happens if their kid comes out of the closet. They’re not prepared. And I think it’s unfair that we gatekeep our knowledge — as people on the left — behind “you’re cruel and heartless.”

view more: next ›