“Let’s start with the obvious — a tyrant sits in the White House,” Walsh added. “The very thing our Founders feared most is here. Throw in the fact that one of our two major political parties is a real and direct threat to democracy and the rule of law. These are unprecedented, dangerous times in America. I know it. You know it. There are even Republicans who know it.”
At some point, progressives need to excise themselves from the democratic party. I don’t share anything policy wise with Joe Walsh. He can go fuck himself.
Unless the US adopts some kind of proportional representation system (or even at the least discards FPTP), doing that would only ensure that no progressive voices are heard in the government.
The better and more practical option is to take over the democratic party. That is unless you want to have no control over the government.
Yeah I don’t trust this guy. He’s got no moral backbone or real ideology other than a desire for power. I seem to remember him being very vocal against Trump at points, then backing away from criticisms at important times during Trump’s first term. Putting a D next to his name now definitely doesn’t make me trust him. Even fucking Trump would have stuck with being a Democrat if he thought it would have made him rich and powerful.
If Walsh actually wanted to help this country he’d run as a Republican, but be vocal against Trump. Or better yet, just remain an independent. This country needs to start electing 3rd party candidates, especially with name recognition on his side, he might have a decent chance with the positions he’s taking.
We don’t need more people like Fetterman weaponizing the title of Democrat to keep putting a “bipartisan” spin on Republican policy, and move the party more towards the right.
If that’s where the Democrats really believe we should be headed then yeah now is the time (before we get any closer to midterms) to decisively say we’re going to need a new party for left candidates.
No Republican with any common sense or shred of decency would have this take: 2012 Republican Joe Walsh: abortions to save mother’s life never necessary
People can change, and I applaud him if he has genuinely changed,… but we also need to stop pretending like an older conservative with name recognition, is somehow the best way forward for the party.
There are younger progressive candidates who actually have the drive to make this country better than it was in the first place, instead of just returning us back to normal, only to keep compromising, and losing the little ground we managed to get back over and over again.
I don’t know the guy’s whole history, and his prior support of the GOP is GIANT red flag to me. However he’s saying a bunch of the right things I would want to hear from a reformed GOP:
“I’ve opened my eyes and listened to people who don’t think like me,” he said. “And by doing so, I gained a greater understanding of and appreciation for LGBTQ issues, structural racism, the need for empathetic immigration reform, the dangers of climate change, and the role government must play to help care for the neediest and most vulnerable among us.”
- support for LGBTQ? - check
- recognition of critical race theory? - check
- seeing the need for immigration reform? - mostly check, I’d need to hear more on his views before I give him a pass on this one considering what little I know of his past
- admission of climate change dangers? - check
- support of a government that helps the weakest among us? - check
He could be a lying bastard, so I don’t trust him yet, but these match a whole bunch of my political positions, so I’m hopeful we might have yet another person trying to fight for them. So no free pass, but time will tell.
He could be a lying bastard, so I don’t trust him yet
He is a lying bastard and we should not trust him yet, or probably ever, but he might be a useful tool in getting more open minded conservative voters to take stock and reevaluate their positions. The enemy of your enemy is not your friend, but they can still be used to attain your goals.
I don’t trust a word he says.
Its obviously a digression from the main point of your comment, but that isnt what critical race theory means.
The existence of structural racism is just a political-sociological fact. Critical race theory is specifically a field of legal study that examines structural racism within the legal system exclusively. The “theory” aspect comes from the more debatable points of to what extent explicit racism in the law that has since been rectified (by civil rights laws or whatever else) still impacts the modern legal system.
Technically I suppose you could say any recognition of structural racism is still critical, and it would be called critical social inquiry in any capacity, if youre talking from an academic perspective. But the main point is that admitting structural racism exists =/= “critical race theory”
A little late.
Sure, but we can’t be picky. If we refuse any late arrivals we’ve handing the world to trumpism forever.
Better late than never.
Not when it’s too late<<<<we are here
You’re typing here… Presumably not in a coal mine with a database ID on your arm.
This guy has been against Trump for a while, at least.
And the party will keep moving further right…
Exactly. All of the rats fleeing the fascist ship they created will now promote the same cancer in the D party “as a Democrat”.
Welcome to the illusion of choice in the corporate dictatorship. All roads lead to fascism.
If leftists don’t vote for the candidate furthest to the left because they “aren’t left enough”. Then the party will replace those votes by appealing to those to the right.
Implying they’ve done anything other than run to the right and ignoring voters on the left?
Well if the left doesn’t turnout to vote. If course they’re going to go right to try and get the voters who actually vote. And it seems the right votes more consistently then the left.
The right has the option of 2 parties, of course they vote more than the ones without a party
Election results have proven that leftists aren’t the majority. Politicians are beholden to the voters not leftists.
Yes that’s why the dnc does their best to always avoid or force out any left like candidates.
When has the dnc run or allowed a leftist candidate to run?
That’s not how it works. Leftists won’t be “allowed” to take over the DNC. Voters will need to create the political will to run leftists. There hasn’t been enough demand for leftists candidates. There are enough examples of leftists wining primaries and losing elections to prove that.
Citations please
Prove it then. Don’t just say it can be done, do it.
Like Kamala did?
The Dems would rather wait until enough Republicans get fed up with the MAGA Nazi incompetence enough to vote Democrat, than actually be a true opposition, or leftist, party.
The majority of voters chose Trump. Unfortunately that’s how a democracy works.
How about you take the opportunity to just shut the fuck up, Joe? You don’t have to be in politics, you know?
Character is more important than 100% ideological parity. Republican Party politicians have no values; it’s a party organized around mutual benefit for the worst humanity has to offer: opportunists, morons, abusers, bullies, grifters, liars, rapists, and authoritarians. Their leader somehow embodies every single one of those qualities. Not to say Democrats are perfect by any means, but I’d rather someone own up to their mistakes and right the ship late than never at all. I’ll happily count Walsh as an ally for that reason.
I mean, the Tea Party was largely funded by the Koch brothers to fight to remove taxes on them. Many Libertarian movements only exist for those sorts of reasons.
Koch eventually went Democrats because he wanted open borders because the cheap labour reduces wages for everyone.
So it makes sense that Koch related followers are doing the same.
How is Koch going democrat?
They didn’t, they just supported illegal immigration because it gave them low wage workers that they could exploit in their pollution factories. To some shallow political thinkers, that’s the equivalent of a Democratic position, and if you have one Democratic position, even if it is blatantly self-serving, it means you’re a Democrat.
He died.
His surviving brother still seems pretty Libertarian.
There’s a bunch of articles about it, he’s talked about it. He donated to them, and opened his networks up to their usage/advertising:
Charles Koch says he’d work with Democrats who share his values
Sure, he’ll support Democrats as long as they have Republican values.
🙂
As the Republican party has become the Nationalsozialistische Amerikaner Arbeiterpartei, The democratic party long ago became the Republican party.
And though Joe has been a critic of trmp for a while, he is still an R through and through.
Since the green party is home to Russian plants, what choices does the non right wing US citizen now have to represent them?
Since the green party is home to Russian plants, what choices does the non right wing US citizen now have to represent them?
The same as we’ve always had, none.
And the march ever rightward continues.
Not sharing a tent with these fucks.
Neither is @[email protected]
Not the Palestinian
genocidewar, Not more/bigger rich people tax breaks at the expense of the poor, Nor insider trading, filibustering zip, 14th amendment slavery, But a tea party Democrat party is where voters find their bravery.
deleted by creator
