We are talking about two different things. You're talking about how the country would be better off. I'm talking about how to get elected.
We've been changing people's lives for the better even when we're not winning. That means more to me. I'm a bit older so I'm a bit more retrospective but I'd rather lose the election and stand for what I think right. It's more important that the country is better off. I might well be dead in 5 years. My kids and grandkids won't. I don't need to win now if they win in the long run. I don't see making the division and animosity greater as winning for anybody except our enemies.
Half the country doesn't understand socialism. He would have been slaughtered.
Unfortunately we can't do as much if we don't win elections.
And we are in a new environment where nothing but power will work to reap any rewards. It's sickening but true.
I know but it's like tacking into a head wind. Sometimes you can't head directly where you want to. Getting there is what's important. We've come a long way from the 50s I remember. I know we have a long way to go but as long as the human race is learning and growing we always will. It's when we think we're there that we have a problem.
Read the article.
Is the point of the article to change my mind about Bernie or to talk about populism as a winning strategy?
It talks about populism as a winning strategy. The article barely mentions whether Bernie would’ve won in 2016/2020 or not. Just a headline meant to get people to click, though obviously didn’t work with some of the posters here.
Discussed in the piece, that’s why I posted it.
I dont wanna read
I did read it and didn't find it terribly convincing. I don't so much think that his logic is wrong but I think he greatly underestimates how tightly people hold on to their misconceptions, especially when reinforced by their prejudices.
Of course, and thanks for reading and engaging. Like Faiz says, we’re talking about 4-5% of the population being the difference here.
jacobin.com
You know, sooner or later this is going to boil down to a more centrist appeal vs a "latte Liberal" appeal as Rev. Al calls it. A more "small town" centrist appeal is going to play where Democrats are eroding.
Yeah, I get that. I like some of the ideas and approaches. My concern is that socialism has such a bad reputation in the US, probably mostly undeserved, that I'm skeptical whether or not our losses wouldn't be greater than our gains.
Right. I’m not suggesting that Democrats run as socialists, and I don’t think Faiz is. Bernie had called himself one for decades so had to call himself one to remain consistent and on brand. It’s more about the working-class centered politics and policy than the socialist label.
