Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHow Hillary should explain why young voters don't need a rebel.
Kevin Drum at Mother Jones provides his take on what Hillary should say:
A rebel? No, that's not what we need. What we need is a revolution.
But how do we get that? FDR got one. But he was no rebel: he was a rich patrician from the Hudson Valley. LBJ got a revolution, and he was no rebel either. He was a mainstream Democrat from Texas who loved to wheel and deal. Barack Obama got a mini-revolution, and do you think he's a rebel? He's not. He's a pragmatic, evidence-driven, modern progressive.
So where did these revolutions come from? Listen to a few numbers. When FDR was elected in 1932, he got a Congress to die for: 60 Democratic senators who could power through almost any filibuster and a 71 percent majority in the House. In 1964 LBJ got 68 senators and 68 percent of the House. In 2008, Obama got 60 senators and 59 percent of the House.
What does that mean for young votersor anyone else who wants to shake up the political establishment? It means we need a 50-state strategyalong with 50 states of grindingly hard work from the bottom upto elect big Democratic majorities to Congress. And to go with that, we need a president who's not only obsessive about pitching in to this tough slog from the top down, but knows how to work with Congressincluding the few Republicans we'll probably still needto get things done.
That's not Bernie. God love him, but he just isn't much interested in getting more Democrats in Congress. Last quarter I raised $18 million to help Democrats get elected this cycle. Bernie raised nothing. Bernie has no real interest in a 50-state strategy. I do. Over a 25-year career in Congress, Bernie has accomplished virtually nothingbecause he's always been more interested in playing the gadfly than in building majorities for change.
If you want a revolution, don't fall in love with someone who talks big. Fall in love with someone who cares about the same things you do and knows how to get them done. And help us get a Democratic Congress. It's not sexy, but that's where revolutions are born.
Link: [link:http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum|
But how do we get that? FDR got one. But he was no rebel: he was a rich patrician from the Hudson Valley. LBJ got a revolution, and he was no rebel either. He was a mainstream Democrat from Texas who loved to wheel and deal. Barack Obama got a mini-revolution, and do you think he's a rebel? He's not. He's a pragmatic, evidence-driven, modern progressive.
So where did these revolutions come from? Listen to a few numbers. When FDR was elected in 1932, he got a Congress to die for: 60 Democratic senators who could power through almost any filibuster and a 71 percent majority in the House. In 1964 LBJ got 68 senators and 68 percent of the House. In 2008, Obama got 60 senators and 59 percent of the House.
What does that mean for young votersor anyone else who wants to shake up the political establishment? It means we need a 50-state strategyalong with 50 states of grindingly hard work from the bottom upto elect big Democratic majorities to Congress. And to go with that, we need a president who's not only obsessive about pitching in to this tough slog from the top down, but knows how to work with Congressincluding the few Republicans we'll probably still needto get things done.
That's not Bernie. God love him, but he just isn't much interested in getting more Democrats in Congress. Last quarter I raised $18 million to help Democrats get elected this cycle. Bernie raised nothing. Bernie has no real interest in a 50-state strategy. I do. Over a 25-year career in Congress, Bernie has accomplished virtually nothingbecause he's always been more interested in playing the gadfly than in building majorities for change.
If you want a revolution, don't fall in love with someone who talks big. Fall in love with someone who cares about the same things you do and knows how to get them done. And help us get a Democratic Congress. It's not sexy, but that's where revolutions are born.
Link: [link:http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum|
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 629 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How Hillary should explain why young voters don't need a rebel. (Original Post)
kstewart33
Feb 2016
OP
Fight corporatism by voting for a corporate sellout-that makes a lot of sense.
hobbit709
Feb 2016
#1
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)1. Fight corporatism by voting for a corporate sellout-that makes a lot of sense.
polly7
(20,582 posts)2. ummm ......... that's not a revolution.
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)3. Hillary should stop lying to the American people for starters
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)4. Better a rebel than a collaborator.
Green Texan
(31 posts)5. No thanks.
I will not vote for Hillary.