The Republican base is angry, too. Everybody’s angry.
Our parties are not concerned, they are making a FORTUNE. Openly, they don’t even bother to hide it any longer.
Not that I can tell. Establishment Dems do nothing but disappoint. How bad at your job do you have to be to lose to Trump?
Nope.
“Livid with rage” would be the more accurate description.
“Burnt out from rage” is closer to me but yeah
Does that “base” bribe the politicians? No? So why should they care?
I mean. They do pay them in the form of taxes. And also in the form of small donor donations to campaigns.
In some campaigns the large donations from rich donors are more significant than the total from small dominoes, but that’s not always the case.
While that is the case, this is just a kind of “basic income”, and just expected to be there. Contracts, nice trips, some extra cash, dinner invitations, etc, that are the nice and memorable cherries on top. And there is way more cherries here than ice cream and cream together.
It would be an astounding change in policy if they were.
angry doesnt quite cover it.
Has it ever?
The DNC official platform document says it wants to:
- Tax the Rich
- Remove citizens united
- Make voting easier
- Prevent climate disaster
- Protect forests
- Give everyone food and medical and expand affordable housing and transport
So, I mean, they understand what I am angry about. Only policy I wish they were better about would be dropping support of Israel but even on that they are infinitely better than GOP policy.
Actions speak louder than words. They’re happy to say they will do things that they have no intention of actually following through on while just doing a slightly less terrible version of a republican policy.
I wish they were better about would be dropping support of Israel but even on that they are infinitely better than GOP policy.
Curious about what you think the difference is?
Fun fact, the DNC have had 48 or less senators for over 13 years, but I agree that the many social, foreign affairs, and fiscal accomplishments of the DNC go vastly underreported.
I wish they were better about would be dropping support of Israel but even on that they are infinitely better than GOP policy.
Curious about what you think the difference is?
-
Vote records where GOP show up as a monolith for Israel while the DNC does not.
-
Biden admin officials saying peace is the goal. Pete Hegseth making an official statement that “death or exodus” is the goal. Large bombs withheld by the Biden Admin were deliveres under Trump according to Trump, and tanks enterred West Bank for the first time in decades.
-
Countless charts like this:
Thank you for providing evidence you only care about optics and still think Biden did anything to slow or oppose the genocide.
Also weird you are using a chart that isn’t accurate.
The Gaza Mortality Survey (GMS), a population-representative household study published in The Lancet Global Health, estimated 75,200 “violent deaths” between October 7, 2023 and January 5, 2025. This figure represents approximately 3.4 percent of Gaza’s pre-conflict 2.2 million population and sits 34.7 percent higher than the 49,090 “violent deaths” reported by the MoH for the same period.
The Gaza Health Ministry estimates that as of February 16, at least 72,063 people have been killed since the start of the war. Of those, 603 people have been killed since the declaration of a “ceasefire” in the Gaza Strip on October 10, 2025.
Israel has consistently questioned the ministry’s figures, but an Israeli army official told journalists in the country in January that the army accepted that about 70,000 people had been killed in Gaza during the war.
Or even the people in Biden administrations flat out saying it https://www.npr.org/2025/08/28/nx-s1-5515620/israel-gaza-biden-famine
What they told was a story of strong, sometimes bitter arguments within the administration on how far the U.S. was willing to go to pressure Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to allow more aid into Gaza. U.S. officials were left frustrated by hours-long, heated exchanges with their Israeli counterparts.
Thank you for supporting my argument? Not sure why you would link that when it directly opposes your statements.
-
Really not helping the case of they want to things with how poorly they campaign.
Also the DNC is just the organization to get people elected not anything in charge of policy so of course it would not have any of those.
I think you are exagerating the platform quite a bit, or just seeing what you want to.
https://democrats.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/2024-Democratic-Party-Platform.pdf
-
It says get to a fair tax code where the rich pay their share, and they equate it directly to taxxing them as much as the lower class is taxed. Thats barely “tax the rich” at all.
-
It never mentions citizens united anywhere in their platform.
-
It doesnt talk about making voting easier. It rambles on kissing Bidens arse a lot and then talks about restoring voting rights Trump took away.
-
I give the dems a “c” on climate change. They talk about a few specifics, after talking about energy independence and jobs. And once again, the whole party platform is written to emphasize Bidens weak-ass contributions and paint him as transformative.
-
Do a search on forests. Where are they promising to work on forests in there?
-
It doesnt specify food or medical care for all anywhere. Biden was never in favor of medicare for all, and neither is the DNC. They want to slightly expand medicaid by giving states slightly more funding, and offer “'affordable” care to all via Obamacare. Letting people buy in a marketplace is not the same as giving everyone medical care, and your shortening it to that wildly oversells what the platform doc says.
And it doesnt talk about giving everyone food. I dont know where you got that from.
And it doesnt talk about giving everyone food. I dont know where you got that from.
FYI all that account does is make up things to make dems look better
-
Then we will force them to pay attention
Yeah, but will we this time?
We have to, we have to force them to pay attention or else
Depends on how much that particular person in the base is giving them.
Oh I can answer that for you. The answer is no.
I’m surprised the magazine couldn’t find the answer. But of course it is a shill for lib views anyhow.
Sounds like an attitude problem in the electorate. Do they want republicans to win? It is selfish to think that politicians should earn your vote. I mean, that’s some elementary school level conception of democracy. Grow up already.
I just hope they’re angry enough with the GOP to realize its time to give the DNC supermajority for the first time since 1979.
But the DNC wouldn’t have a supermajority the democratic party would and obama had a supermajority.
True, but he only had that supermajority for four months
Actually, the DNC didn’t. They only had 58. Which is why the ACA version we got was watered down from the original Public Option identical to Germany healthcare.
The Democrats had 60 votes for a cumulative total of about four months (broken into two periods between July 2009 and February 2010). However, even within that window, the supermajority was practically compromised. Senator Ted Kennedy was battling a terminal illness and was frequently absent, and Senator Robert Byrd was often hospitalized, meaning Democrats rarely had all 60 votes present.
The Caucus had 60 votes to pass the ACA. The DNC had 58. Two independent senators were needed to pass it.
The DNC have not had 60 senators since 1979 anf have had 48 or less for over 13 years.
I never said the DNC had 60. I said Obama had a supermajority for four months.
You are technically correct about the strict party label, but I never argued that or stated that in my reply. I simply said Obama had a supermajority for four months, even if only technically.
Sanders and Lieberman formally caucused with the Democrats. In the U.S. Senate, caucusing means you organize with that party to determine leadership, committee assignments, and—most importantly—the voting threshold needed to break a filibuster.
So I’m technically correct, which is the best kind of correct.
Where did I ever say the DNC specifically had 60?
They demonstrably did not have a supermajority because they could not pass the original ACA during the less than 80 days in session.
Nope, for 72 days in session under Obama the DNC had 58. Which is why an Independent Joe Leiberman fucked us all over by denying us public option healthcare.
No is the simple answer. But voting and elections are not going to fix the problems the usa has created for itself. Its not just drumpf.
Dems don’t want to sell that reality. They want to whip up their base to vote harder so that they can squander another supermajority on something dumb, like giving Israel more arms to genocide. Then Israel re-initiates the Iran war so that the can Dems can be in charge of losing.
paywall
Be the change you want to see.
I think most angry democrats are actually looking for the DSA (Democratic Socialists of America).
Here is their platform:
To be clear, for those reading, the DSA is structured as a party and could act as an independent party if necessary, but they mainly run candidates in democratic primaries as they recognize that doing so is a more practical way to win elections in the short term.
