Pretty remarkable thing to say at a moment when the Republican Party, having successfully been pulled right by the Tea Party, is dismantling the federal government in exactly the ways the Tea Party demanded.
you don't get reconstruction without a groundswell of radical republicans and abolitionists sweeping the whigs out of the way, and a victory in a brutal civil war.
hopefully we can somehow avoid the second historical condition, but there's no way to get there without some degree of the first.
It's not a bad idea, but (and you didn't say otherwise!) one thing people need to realize is that a "Tea Party for Dems" will be a lot harder because the sort of big, well-monied forces that *underwrote* the Tea Party will push *against* the same sort of revolt among Democrats.
I definitely agree with you when it comes to strategy but would a left Tea Party movement have the funding to work? A small version of that was Justice Democrats and two of their members got beat in primaries because of big money donors.
Lemme get this straight. Trump, Musk, Miller are out there destroying our Government but everyone on the planet hates the Democrats? All the good the Biden admin has done disappears because the Dems are in the minority and don’t have the numbers to stop Trump?
They have procedural tricks available to them to stop or slow Trump's stooges, but refuse to use them. Not a single Senate Dem has denied unanimous consent for any of his nominees, and many have even voted to confirm them.
The votes for the nominees are entirely symbolic. Dems cannot block any of the votes.
And what would it matter if the cabinet noms are slowed down to 6 months from now when you have Musk’ DOGE flouting the constitution yesterday, today, & every single day? I prefer that they triage & prioritize.
Yes, the Dems’ approval ratings are low. You can’t have $$$ spent for decades w/o results. Propaganda, disinfo, & misinfo works. How many people are even aware of what the Biden Admin has done for them? Meanwhile, Trump, who heads the party of the cruelty is the point, has higher approval ratings.
Tea Party for Dems is good. It needn't even be terribly ideological. Moderates, liberals, left can coalesce around a broad positive vision of government for the common good and in opposition to royalists, both real and economic. What matters now is if you've got guts.
The fact we aren't already universally united on nazis are bad. Fascists are bad. And those people should be talked about negatively more than anyone else? Should tell you some things.
Y’all have been trying to tea party Dems for close to a decade. When will you admit failure? Because right now you’re all engaging in political prosperity gospel.
This is why i say white people are the ultimate trojan horses. Doesn't matter what group, party, movement, etc white people are in. These always and i mean ALWAYS allow nazis in too.
I have been saying this. Leftists need to join their local dem groups in mass and start pulling them left. It can be done. We just need to start local.
this, plus building coalitions with people already in the dem groups so that their numbers and influence expand within the party, instead of just being an angry internal rump faction.
But AOC did what the Tea Party did in primarying out a more establishment member, and I think that's what people are saying when they mean a Tea Party from the left.
I take it to be a coordinated primary campaign that energizes the party's base. I don't think people are saying that Democrats need their own version of a recalcitrant Freedom Caucus after the election is over.
The analogy is too ambiguous. Tea Party in the sense that they force incumbents to take more positions popular with the base? Yes. Tea Part in the sense that they’re spouting nonsense and can do nothing but obstruct? No
I think the latter would be the Freedom Caucus, so I think it's easy to draw the distinction there. The Tea Party was about getting fighters more aligned with the party's base elected.
If I’m remembering correctly the Tea Party was about telling everyone the ACA was going to kill their grandma and that Obama was born in Kenya, and then the first Freedom Caucus-ers were just the last ones standing from
that crowd and the incumbents who decided to hitch their wagons
Not everyone is using the call for a Democratic "tea party" movement to be a leftist policy push. Fundamentally the main gripes the base has with current elected are not on policy design questions but on willingness or not to oppose Republicans. I think that produces different outcomes.
And?
If you like self-hurting populism, join MAGA.
Do you, in all honesty, think that MAGA movement is beneficial to either the GOP or to the country, or to the majority of the followers?
Major "Lindy Li" vibes.
The TEA party was always a lie, a way for the unreconstructed to shirk responsibility for the destruction for which they eagerly voted. Primarying peacetime Democrats would not at all entail that kind of (self-)deceit.
I just think this should be a point of consensus whatever ideological camp you're in, frankly. "Do you think the Republican Party, as an institution, is on a campaign to destroy American society and are you committed to stopping it?" How many safe seat Dems would say yes? Why shouldn't they?
Trump's narcissism drains attention from how badly anti-democratic the GOP has become. That is greatly aided by Dems who keep on with "the fever will break" after Trump and claim "the country needs a Republican party".
For me it is less about whether they are aware of what's happening and more about their capacity to lead in a world of social media. They are giving speeches to likeminded retirees at Rotary Clubs while Andrew Taint and Tim Bonghitter are talking to millions of youngs
You're saying elected Dems support destruction of American government? If so, you understand nothing, not one thing, about the country or its politics.
Ask em the question. Are you asserting they'll all say "yes, it is. The Republican party is currently an insuurectionary enterprise trying to actively dismantle the state and it's constitution in all its parts"?
I wouldn't worry too much about flipping the House. As far as the Senate is concerned, the Republican Party is going to continue accruing power in that chamber unless Democrats back adding new states. Even safe Dems aren't serious about addressing this, which is indicative of the problem here.
Maybe it's silly but I cling to the idea that seeing a real "opposition party" emerge in the primaries would drive excitement in the general, making flipping seats more likely
Schumer isn't going to be up again until 2028, unfortunately, and I suspect that he will retire at the end of this term. He will have a rough primary if he doesn't after this.
How is Durbin bad? He's actually been a very effective whip in his tenure. Schumer i think is going to step down and something tells me he's trying to get AOC to be his replacement, but he's also telling her to play ball on messaging a lot more to broaden her appeal for a statewide race
also it is honestly straight-up more important to defeat dems in safe seats who intentionally paralyze the party and make opposition to the GOP impossible than it is to pour more money into consultant pockets in contested senate seats with parachuted in candidates sleepwalking through a 5 point loss
the majority that guy wants to monomaniacally fund campaigns for is a majority of fettermans, sinemas, and cuellars who won't be there to actually oppose the executive or constructively govern
Win what, exactly?
What did rural Americans or Latinos for Trump, or even Arabs for Trump won
after they stopped celebrating football-fans-style.
I want my wins to be meaningful.
We're talking about what kind of democratic party we want, so bringing up trump supporters is a non-sequitor. One thing that I would like Dems to win is a future government where it is possible for Dems to ever enact policy again.
Agree. A safe Dem seat is still a Dem vote; it’s about expanding and that means going after the Rep seats. And since the chaos of the last month will continue non-stop I say Dems should expand their strategic plan to fight not just the moderate/swing Rep districts but also the deeper red seats.
We are literally a fucking month into feeling the effects of our refusal to crush the GOP after their violent coup attempt failed and there are still people thinking we need to run that same game plan back?
My only concern about the house is what’s to stop red states from tinkering with polling locations, drop boxes, etc if there is no DOJ to enforce election rules. The DOJ would be more likely to continuously sue California for not having votes counted by a week after Election Day, for example.
I agree that we need to admit new states because it's the right thing to do--but few apart from DC are likely to be reliable seats for Dems. The Territories' non-voting delegations a present are mostly either explicitly Republican, or very moderate Dems.
Yup. If you had Senators who were actively interested in the project of diminishing the Senate's power (a big ask, I know, but we're in dangerous times and everyone has to make sacrifices), then you could also play around with Senate rules.
For example: if you lowered the threshold for passing a bill in the Senate to lower than a majority (say, 20 yeas needed for passage) then you could effectively stop the chamber from vetoing any bill that passed the House.
I like that idea, but how would they do it, exactly? That's not a criticism, I'm just curious. I guess you could also reverse-gerrymander by stipulating that if you get 30 yeas from states representing a majority of the overall population, it passes, though there may be logistical problems with that
Also, I don't get why you couldn't give time and $ to both better candidates in primaries *and* the Dems in the general. Those are two different elections months apart from each other!
People want every single elected Dem to loudly promote good stuff and attack bad stuff at almost every possible opportunity. This is not great (many are bad at messaging and all are busy). Also forcing them into primaries is not a good way to make this happen.
There are factions within the party. You can tell what faction someone is in pretty easily, by how they vote, what they sign on to, what their messaging aligns with. It's not about how busy they are, or how good they are at comms, it's about where they're situated in the current crisis.
What’s the risk? Best case, you replace a snoozer with a fighter. Worst case, you lose the primary challenge and the incumbent Dem shows up to the general having had a wakeup call.
This is an important general problem. I live in a very blue state, and the lack of serious primary challenges to incumbents at all levels, local/state/federal increases the influence of big donors and other insiders at the expense of the public, who are safely ignored. We need contested primaries!
The worst thing that can happen is that the general consensus candidate gets pushed further left. We can't keep capitulating these Overton Window battles to the right.
I think the folks disagreeing with you think there's this huge capturable middle when elections seem to me to be much more about turning out a base. Median Voter Theorem has cooked everybody's brains who ever took Poli Sci 101.
And - addendum - don’t get me wrong - I’d rather have the majority, but it’s all base building! You create strong group first by eliminating weak pieces (ie: safe seat Dems who aren’t meeting the moment) and when you take back the majority you have a stronger, more active coalition.
so many of the responses i'm reading here are just the classic "i'm afraid of conflict/uncertainty, but that sounds cowardly and stupid, so i'm going to turn that into something that SOUNDS like pragmatic and reasonable strategy"
the strategy that, you know, has brought us to here and now
a reason the "every dem has to get primaried" isn't even to necessarily win the election against them, but to force dems where they are right now to have to actually try and give a shit. right now they're fully set on "ride things out, wait to come back into office, it'll be fine"
and it's pretty clear they won't actually act to deal with the problem unless they start getting serious primaries. they've blown off every other kind of pressure that regular people have tried to make, they're still doing unanimous consent and taking long weekends.
People getting mad at you for saying the OBVIOUS —something that is implied by all their memes about the GOP (we should have politicians that oppose them) but implication they don’t like—should not worry so much about the effects of democracy. They can split the Democrats like they always do.
Babe I'm gonna hold your tit gently while I say this but you've been materially wrong about almost every aspect of politics since the mid 90's. Perhaps sit this one out.
That is, in fact, not what I said. We are extremely likely to take the House in any event and my point with the Senate is that Democrats are likely to continue losing power in that chamber, even if they win in 2026, unless the party, beginning with safe Dems, gets serious about adding states.
"I guess you don't care about controlling the House and Senate." - online people arguing against challenging the leadership of a party that's controlled the Senate for only 14 of the past 30 years, and controlled the House for only 8 of the past 30.
We have progressed from "well you should have primaried them if you don't like their politics!" To "primarying reps if you don't like their politics is the tool of the enemy. We do not need it. We will not use it."
Comments
Neoliberal centrism cannot fail, it can only be failed, I guess?
GOP was willing to destroy their party to achieve their goal of destroying the government
A Dem Tea Party is a bad analogy
Reconstruction Isa good analogy
hopefully we can somehow avoid the second historical condition, but there's no way to get there without some degree of the first.
To be honest, I'm kinda picky who's money I'd take here...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/oct/13/tea-party-billionaire-koch-brothers
I agree
This person you're quoting is a peasant
And what would it matter if the cabinet noms are slowed down to 6 months from now when you have Musk’ DOGE flouting the constitution yesterday, today, & every single day? I prefer that they triage & prioritize.
We could have had a strong Admin who protected democracy & human rights, worked for the American people, & faced the challenge of climate change.
https://www.politifact.com/article/2024/sep/30/kamala-harris-2024-campaign-promises-here-are-her/
It is certainly a choice whether to blame or support.
Going after Dems who might then fail to get majority so you can blame them for not doing enough is not a strategy. Prioritizing flipping the GOP is.
https://time.com/secret-origins-of-the-tea-party/
We need real leadership. More AOCs, who is not a leftist tea partier by any stretch.
that crowd and the incumbents who decided to hitch their wagons
Not even a full hour.
If you like self-hurting populism, join MAGA.
Do you, in all honesty, think that MAGA movement is beneficial to either the GOP or to the country, or to the majority of the followers?
Major "Lindy Li" vibes.
That said, we should still primary the democrats and get some fighting spirit into the party.
Tea Party didn’t actually get that money folks through in 2010.
Also, contest every seat in the general election.
https://bsky.app/profile/brewtowne.bsky.social/post/3ljasnzxixc2b
I think I'd rather put up with him for the 3 years.
What did rural Americans or Latinos for Trump, or even Arabs for Trump won
after they stopped celebrating football-fans-style.
I want my wins to be meaningful.
As for the partisan makeup of the Senate, this piece offers valuable insights: https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/the-end-of-the-line-for-red-state-senate-democrats/
But "adding new states" seems Peter Pannish. Dems cannot simply clap harder to bring it about.
Bernie Bros would literally do anything but reflect.
the strategy that, you know, has brought us to here and now
We need younger, brasher, tougher out of the Democratic Party and we need it yesterday.