How The Progressive Takeover Could Happen

[VBNMW_Realist]

Even if no major progressive candidate files, I think there is a very good chance the left wins the Democratic primary. Here's why: there could be a "dark horse" candidate who nobody knows about and isn't even political right now, comparable to what AOC was in 2016. And in 2020, the last seriously contested primary, a majority of the vote cast in most states on and before Super Tuesday combined for Democratic presidential primaries went to candidates that were not aligned with the party's establishment (Joe Biden and Michael Bloomberg). The progressive wing has grown significantly since then.

If there are even 30-40% of voters in the primary nationally who will vote for the progressive candidate no matter what their "credentials" are in terms of offices, it could catapult somebody you've literally never heard of into the Democratic nomination and likely give them the presidency given the Republicans are very unpopular. I hope this happens. It would be a good thing to have a president who was not a representative for years because it would be a major step for democracy that not only can anyone vote regardless of their history, but anyone can be elected.

[Fiendish Thingy]

1. Maybe

But I don’t see it as a “takeover” so much as ending the artificial suppression of progressive policies and finally permitting them to take their rightful place as the foundation of Democratic Party values, with hollow centrism relegated to the kids table in the Big Tent.

I prefer my presidential nominees to have some experience governing, but with clean hands and a clean conscience free of corruption.

[yardwork]

5. What "hollow centrism" did President Biden promote?

Also, remember that the president is not supposed to make laws.

Congress makes laws, the courts interpret them, and the president and their agencies implement them. At least that's what our Constitution requires.

Trump careening around like a dictator has confused a lot of people.

[Fiendish Thingy]

7. Joe Biden was the most progressive president since LBJ

He was sabotaged constantly, by the Roberts court, and even by centrist members of his own party, but his policy proposals were the most progressive in over 50 years.

(Some would argue they still weren’t progressive enough, which has some validity, but on a left/right continuum, Biden was the furthest to the left of any president since LBJ, even though he didn’t fall on the far left end of the political spectrum)

[yardwork]

8. I agree 100%

That's why he had to be stopped by the billionaires.

[Peppertoo]

11. Agree

[lapucelle]

2. A progressive takeover of what?

Folks need to do their homework, examine a candidate's record, and stop voting based on vibes.

Here are graphic representations of the voting records and stances of Democrats Joe Biden, Ro Khanna, AOC, Kamala Harris, Chris Murphy, and Chuck Schumer, in no particular order.

Not a single one is a "dreaded centrist" based on their actual congressional records.

[yardwork]

3. Do John Fetterman.

I'll bet his voting record looks similar. I'll bet it's way better than Dr. Oz's would have been.

Too many people think that what Congress critters say to the media counts as progress. It's all about how they vote. The votes are what creates laws.

[lapucelle]

9. John Fetterman is not a centrist either, but he is closer to the center than any of the others.

Fetterman is the perfect example of a candidate people supported based on vibes and celebrity endorsements. Before he was elected senator, Fetterman had a record of strong support for Israel. Anti-Israel folks who feel betrayed should have done their homework.

[The Revolution]

18. Yes, and people complained about Manchin

But if we had a few less Republicans right now amd a few more Manchins, boy would things be different.

[betsuni]

13. Thank you, I love those charts and was just thinking how I miss them!

Meaningless insult buzzword "centrist" replacing meaningless insult buzzword "establishment" to divide into Us vs Them.

[viva la]

4. 1932 comes to mind.

The political situation is both better (economically) and worse (morally) now. I don't know if there's any FDR out there, but someone with soaring progressive plans could inspire a lot of voters.

[yardwork]

6. I agree that Democratic candidates need to make big promises.

One thing FDR and LBJ had in common is that they didn't get bogged down in details. They pushed big ideas through. That caused some problems later but at least we had the beginnings.

LBJ and the Democrats in Congress wanted universal health coverage. They pushed through two of the cake layers: Medicare and Medicaid. The third layer was planned to cover everybody else but it got derailed. Obama finally got that pushed through decades later. But the greedy ones still try to dismantle everything.

[Celerity]

10. The ACA never came close to covering 'everybody else'. The alltime low unisured # still left nearly 26 million uncovered

https://www.kff.org/uninsured/health-policy-101-the-uninsured-population-and-health-coverage/?entry=table-of-contents-trends-in-the-uninsured-rate

snip

Trends in the Uninsured Rate

In 2023, there were 25.3 million uninsured residents ages 0-64, and the uninsured rate among the population ages 0-64 was 9.5%, the lowest rate in U.S. history (Figure 2). The analysis of the uninsured population focuses on coverage among people ages 0-64 since Medicare offers near-universal coverage for seniors—just 457,000, or less than 1%, of people over age 65 were uninsured.

Prior to the implementation of the ACA, gaps in the public insurance system and lack of access to affordable private coverage left over 40 million people without health insurance......

snip


my thoughts:

The ACA is far better than that what was before it, especially the prohibition on blocking people with pre-existing conditions, but it is far far from an overall satisfactory system, both in terms of the number of uninsured and also the wealth extraction due to the still extremely high healthcare costs compared to the rest of the advanced world. It leaves intact the rapacious profit motive at the centre of the US healthcare system.

Healthcare is a basic human right, but a massive part of the American system (whether private firms, political actors, or simply US citizens, etc) fails to believe that. The results of that denial and the failure to address it adequately are catastrophic.

[betsuni]

15. ACA was never thought to be finished, of course, like Social Security or Medicare. Improving laws is Congress's job.

Al Franken describes some problems he wanted to fix once Democrats had the majority again and could pass reforms, says:

"As recently as November 7, 2016, I was very excited about implementing these ideas as part of the new Democratic Senate majority under President Clinton. In fact, from the moment the law passed, Democrats have been open -- even eager -- to talk about how to improve it and address problems that have arisen as the law has taken effect. Because figuring how to improve laws and address problems is kind of Congress's job. But Republicans have shown no interest in fixing Obamacare. And while it may be easy to dismiss their intransigence as politics as usual, that isn't how things usually go. For example, many Republicans vehemently opposed the creation of Social Security and then of Medicare. But that didn't stop them from supporting, and in some cases even suggesting, ways to improve those laws as it became clear where they needed improvement. ... That's how things are supposed to work. ... But that's not what Republicans thought their job was."

Republican playbook: make government dysfunctional and prevent Democrats from governing to make them appear to not do anything and blame them for the dysfunction. Then come attacks from non-Republicans that Democrats are fine with the "status quo" because out-of-touch and unaware that "the system is broken," content to "nibble around the edges" instead of making change, and the obligatory slander about being corrupt and bribed by campaign contributions. Idiots believe it and chant centrist centrist centrist or whatever the insult du jour is.

[yardwork]

16. Obviously.

It was the very best he could do and now even that is rolled back.

[lapucelle]

14. John Conyers introduced his Medicare for All bill in every Congress beginning in 2001

until he retired in 2017 (with the exception of the 111th Congress in which he deferred to President Obama), but despite the fact that he had dozens of House co-sponsors, Conyers was never able to find a senator willing to write a matching companion Senate bill.

Similarly, in the 1990s, a major obstacle to the adoption of President Clinton's plan were "my way or the highway" politicians who never bothered to do anything concrete in the many years that followed.

[sheshe2]

19. There was John Dingell Jr as well.

John Dingell Jr.’s Political Position

John Dingell Jr. is generally regarded as a progressive Democrat rather than a centrist, though his approach was pragmatic and often bipartisan in execution.

Throughout his 60-year career in the U.S. House of Representatives, Dingell championed a wide range of progressive causes — from civil rights legislation like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to environmental protections such as the Clean Air Act of 1990, Clean Water Act of 1972, and Endangered Species Act of 1973 Wikipedia. He was also instrumental in passing the Medicare Act and the Water Quality Act of 1965, and later supported the Affordable Care Act Wikipedia. These legislative priorities align with the core progressive agenda of expanding social welfare, protecting the environment, and advancing civil liberties.

Dingell’s leadership on the House Energy and Commerce Committee — first from 1981–1995 and again from 2007–2009 — gave him influence over major policy areas, including health care, energy, and environmental regulation Wikipedia+1. His oversight role often involved holding powerful agencies accountable, which further reflected his commitment to transparency and public accountability — values often associated with progressive governance.

While he worked across party lines on some issues and supported certain bipartisan measures, his consistent record of supporting expansive federal programs, environmental protections, and civil rights legislation places him firmly in the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. His longevity in Congress also meant he adapted to changing political landscapes, but his foundational legislative record remains aligned with progressive priorities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dingell

[EdmondDantes_]

12. We're currently experiencing what a president with 30-40% of the public not caring about experience can do

Sorry but the presidency shouldn't with be someone who has never held office and says what people want to hear.

The next president is going to have a very long list of things to fix and should have the experience and connections to hit the ground running. Even Biden struggled a little on that probably due to needing to focus on the covid vaccine rollouts.

We shouldn't want anyone to be able to be elected on nothing but hope without a demonstrated track record.

[MineralMan]

17. Which Primary Are You Talking About?

Every state holds primaries. Most of them are done already. In Minnesota, we have one for our empty Senate seat next month. Or are you talking about President. There's no single primary for that office, either.

So, I'm confused over what you're discussing. You say "Primary," but there is no one "primary" election. Dozens of them, instead.