My feeling has always been that if they are doing a good job, they have nothing to fear from a primary challenge. But if they are a glorified seat warmer- why should the DNC continue backing them? Especially if it could risk losing that seat by continuing to do so? - ThreadSky

About ThreadSky

clarkes428.bsky.social • 6 days ago

My feeling has always been that if they are doing a good job, they have nothing to fear from a primary challenge. But if they are a glorified seat warmer- why should the DNC continue backing them? Especially if it could risk losing that seat by continuing to do so?

Comments

ajaxatax.bsky.social•6 days ago

Why not usher in new candidates under the shelter of a safe seat? Does the DNC want to control passing the torch in a way that preserves their traditions or not? Hogg's approach may have more bristles than sense...but something needs to give, or no amount of manosphere podcast consultants will help

ravva.bsky.social•5 days ago

DNC traditions are part of the problem. Because people's political memory is 30-40 years at best the tradition of the Dems is to be Big Business money taking neoliberal pawls to the ratcheting rightwards Republicans.

https://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org/stopme/chapter02.html

yourazneighbor.bsky.social•6 days ago

I’m interested in hearing David Hogg’s perspective. Aren’t you? I’m sure there’s a lot we don’t know yet about what happened to bring all of this about.

clarkes428.bsky.social•6 days ago

I think we can agree the approach was bad- and chock that up to inexperience but agree the argument for new blood is very much a valid one and as you say, better to get these "safe" seats replaced than to risk losing them over indifference to voters sick of the "same old same old."

Posting Rules

Be respectful to others
No spam or self-promotion
Stay on topic
Follow Bluesky's terms of service

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply