Yes, because Democrats are locked out of power and have an R+5 Senate bias to overcome. Win more often and you can do what you want. Until then, getting angry on the phone doesn’t do anything to stop anyone.
So Dems are the only ones who have to play nice and adhere to arbitrary rules about electability?
I used to care but now I’m only supporting the Dems who are the most committed to fighting fascism.
Take off the commentator hat and get angry like the rest of us!
What do people think is the best way to “fight fascism”? We have enough evidence that getting angry about Trump doesn’t win elections in the same way that running annoyingly heterodox and bipartisan-appealing candidates in purple seats does. Win and strip the power from Trump. Then do what you want.
The problem is “then do what you want” often immediately becomes “make sure not to do anything, really” so allegedly as to protect those seats
May 11, 2025 15:41eh, if Democrats had 250 House seats like they did in 2008, they could get a lot more aggressive while also giving members in the reddest areas room to specifically break from the party (yes, you'd have more purple seat members, but it'd be easy to get some to play along at any given time).
you can't pull the card of a mandate when you only win 222 house seats in a D+2 popular vote. big reason that the 2019 House caucus could afford to be that aggressive was that they washed into office on a D+7 wave.
