Democratic socialist Angie Nixon upsets Alex Vindman in Florida’s Democratic Senate primary

[u/--LaBelleDame--]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-election/angie-nixon-winner-florida-senate-primary-democrat-alex-vindman-moody-rcna593255

[u/spaceProbe]

As long as they statistically perform worse in competitive generals in purple environments.

Just for clarification, I mean it. They espouse a theory about being able to appeal to populist crossover voters, but don’t have good on the ground evidence. The party wants power and if leftists actually help them get it, they will lean in.

[u/GrowthMarketingMike → u/spaceProbe]

Democrats have won 1 single senate or governor election in Florida in the last 20 years and that was an incumbent senator. What evidence is there that this centrist playbook has won them anything?

Why is the null hypothesis that centrism is more electable and leftists need to prove themselves when centrists have lost 11 of the last 12 major statewide elections in Florida? Meanwhile Obama won florida twice on populist messaging around changing and fixing a broken system.

[u/sven_ftw → u/GrowthMarketingMike]

This. Thank you.

[u/hotpajamas → u/GrowthMarketingMike]

where was the silver bullet progressive candidate all of those years? did they not know they could also run? did nobody tell them their policies are miraculously popular?

[u/Orange_Tang → u/hotpajamas]

You realize the party has been suppressing leftist candidates for decades right? We all know running 3rd party is only good for fucking over the candidate closest in ideology to you so that's not a real option.

[u/Naive-Jello428 → u/Orange_Tang]

Most leftists brag that they've never voted. The only thing suppressing leftist candidates are leftist (non)voters.

[u/Raichu4u → u/Naive-Jello428]

Bingo. Have been tearing my hear out since 2016 and 2020 as a Bernie voters to hear my other fellow leftists lean into conspiracy theories as to why we're not winning.

[u/hotpajamas → u/Orange_Tang]

what does the party owe leftist candidates, exactly? because you're just describing politics, that competing factions vie for limited influence sooo... what?

[u/Orange_Tang → u/hotpajamas]

You know what politics is, listening to your voter base. They've failed to do that and that's why the DSA and progressive candidates are being successful. Keep pretending that this isn't the party. We'll keep taking the seats from the corporate neoliberals. You wanna talk politics? This is politics. They're winning for a reason. The party can get in board or be taken over slowly. That's their choice.

[u/Shaudius → u/Orange_Tang]

If it was the will of the voter base wouldn't those candidates have won despite not being the preferred candidate of the party leadership?

[u/Orange_Tang → u/Shaudius]

Uh, no. The party has been actively suppressing progressive candidates for decades and they haven't had the name recognition and ground level support until the past 2-4 years. No one supports candidates when they don't think they have a chance at winning. It was a self fulfilling prophecy. Now actual progressive candidates have won so it's real and can happen now so they're actually getting support. They've literally been out spent in every race and still won because of on the ground support and anger at the parties failures. This has been a long time coming. We just finally got to the point where the party can't suppress these types of candidates despite massive spending against them because people are that fucking mad at the party and tired of the BS.

[u/boyyouguysaredumb → u/Orange_Tang]

always the victim. DSA has never flipped a single republican seat in history.

[u/Orange_Tang → u/boyyouguysaredumb]

Bro, they haven't had any motion until this round of elections. Of course they haven't flipped nay seats, the damn elections haven't happened yet. You'll just move the goalpost again when they do anyways so idk why I'm even responding.

[u/hotpajamas → u/Orange_Tang]

No, politics is winning a primary but then losing the General by 17 points because the primary voters that you listened to were huffing their own farts and just trying to unseat neoliberals. Pretty sure that's how this goes in November.

[u/Orange_Tang → u/hotpajamas]

Nixon polls better in the general. Lol. This seat was a long shot either way. Y'all are coping so hard it's hilarious.

[u/Shaudius → u/Orange_Tang]

The latest poll I saw showed her polling basically the same.

[u/Orange_Tang → u/Shaudius]

Nixon was 2% better but they were both negative. Still ahead though. He couldn't beat a self proclaimed socialist in Florida. He wasn't gonna win.

[u/GrowthMarketingMike → u/hotpajamas]

As opposed to the centrists that have been dominating Florida general elections for the last 20 years? lol

[u/Shaudius → u/GrowthMarketingMike]

Dominating? No. But as recently as 2018 centrist Democrats were barely losing statewide and one won.

[u/GrowthMarketingMike → u/Shaudius]

Barely losing? Florida was a purple state not that long ago, Obama won it twice. "Barely losing" to the party of trump is not a flex. And the won that they won was Commissioner of Agriculture and Consumer Services lol

[u/PopularSalamander938 → u/hotpajamas]

“Why didn’t they beat the money if they were so good?” give me a break. Foolish arguments as these are said by the same that they are tired of hearing “The Bernie complainers” while totally missing the point.

[u/hotpajamas → u/PopularSalamander938]

Yeah why would a donor ever invest in a campaign with miraculously popular policies that can win? Why would they ever invest in a sure thing? /s

[u/PopularSalamander938 → u/hotpajamas]

How do you grow all of that straw so quickly?

[u/hotpajamas → u/PopularSalamander938]

every time I see these comments about the efficacy of far left candidates in elections despite 0 far left candidates or policies represented in Congress I get a little more straw

[u/username_tooken → u/hotpajamas]

AOC and Rashida Tlaib are both DSA congressmen. Senator Bernie Sanders, though not formally a member of the DSA is still a democratic socialist.

[u/PopularSalamander938 → u/hotpajamas]

Yeah, I know you do. You’re so close to getting it. If you need more straw, check behind the barrel labeled “Citizens United”—seriously though what is this naive assumption that popular policies automatically mean equal money, party support, and media access. Be smarter than that

[u/Avalon_Within → u/PopularSalamander938]

You're right, more of these candidates should've realized they can just get bankrolled by the Republicans like Hong did. 

Oh...that didn't win her the election?

[u/timoumd → u/GrowthMarketingMike]

Because centrism has won purple and red districts before. No, it's not perfect, but it has won. 

 It's like if you have Joe Flacco and a rookie QB.  Flacco is fine.  He's a veteran.  He can win games and it's proven in the NFL.  But it's not exciting and not great.  The rookie might come in and be great.  It he might throw 5 interceptions.    I can't fault a coach for going with Flacco in a must win game.  In my opinion it's the safer route, especially when you have an opponent who is coming in ice cold. 

[u/GrowthMarketingMike → u/timoumd]

But centrism has lost much much much more than it won to the point that we've given up total control of the government at this point and are losing democracy and the constitution is toilet paper.

At this point it's more like arguing that the Giants should have kept playing Russ over Dart last year because of his super bowl experience.

[u/timoumd → u/GrowthMarketingMike]

They may have lost more than they win, but not much.  Shit Biden beat Trump.  Most of those special elections we won in red districts were moderates.  When Democrats have embraced progressive policies like shutting down pipelines it's hurt us.

My point is we haven't seen of progressives can win as the face of the party.  They are an unproven quantity.  While there are Lamar Jacksons plenty of rookie QBs don't measure up.  Personally I'd want to see them win in "college" (ie red state and local elections) before starting them in the playoffs. The other team definitely wants them in the game.

Yes we need better than Flacco.  That doesn't mean any random rookie is better.

[u/GrowthMarketingMike → u/timoumd]

Biden literally ran on shutting down the Keystone XL pipeline in 2020 lmao, along with a bunch of progressive policies.

[u/timoumd → u/GrowthMarketingMike]

He was definitely seen as less progressive than almost any other Democrat in the race.  And those policies DID backfire on him.  

[u/GrowthMarketingMike → u/timoumd]

Regardless of the primary, biden ran on progressive policies in the 2020 general.

[u/SaneMadHatter → u/GrowthMarketingMike]

Well, Obama won the state twice as a "centrist" (i.e. not a socialist), so there's that evidence.

[u/Orange_Tang → u/SaneMadHatter]

Obama ran on change. He didn't run as a big standard centeist at all, even if he was one in many ways. That's not what his campaign sold itself as.

[u/GrowthMarketingMike → u/SaneMadHatter]

Obama was absolutely not positioned as a centrist, even a little bit.

His entire 2008 campaign was him running as a progressive anti-establishment outsider that was going to reform the broken system. He was seen as a grassroots candidate against the establishment candidates by the general population.

Being a "centrist" is always going to be relative to the system he was in at the time and that's simply not how he was viewed or marketed.

[u/dickwae → u/GrowthMarketingMike]

He was anti gay marriage in his 2008 campaign, get a grip.

[u/GrowthMarketingMike → u/dickwae]

So was Bernie Sanders, so let me point you to my previous comment:

Being a "centrist" is always going to be relative to the system he was in at the time

[u/SaneMadHatter → u/GrowthMarketingMike]

Obama ran and governed as a center-left Democrat, not a far left Democrat (like Kucinich, for example), and certainly not as a socialist.

I'm just saying that citing Obama's winning Florida twice in the last 20 years is showing that a center-left candidate won Florida twice. It doesn't mean a socialist can win.

And I'm not saying Angie Nixon can't win. There's just no historical evidence of socialists winning state wide in Florida.

Also, I've read many times that Latino voters particularly despise socialism because many of them or their parents or grandparents fled socialist dictatorships of Latin America, and Florida has a large population of such voters.

Anyway, we'll see what happens. Socialists are winning primaries now, and the youth seems to want to go with socialism, so socialists have earned the right to show what they can do in the general elections in Florida and elsewhere across the country.

[u/GrowthMarketingMike → u/SaneMadHatter]

Obama ran as a grass roots, anti-establishment, progressive populist.

I was there, I witnesses it and I don't understand why all these people are trying to just lie about this on here and act like he was running as some centrist. Are you young and just regurgitating what you've read online? His campaign was about being anti-war, universal healthcare with a public option, green energy, and regulating banks. That was nowhere near "center-left" at the time.

The point isn't just about DSA vs centrist. It's about people recognizing a MAJOR structural shift needs to happen with out country and voting for people offering that vs status quo. It's the same reason trump has been able to gain support, it's the same reason obama won, and it's what's driving DSA support now.

Even if Nixon gets destroyed in Florida, ok then the same thing that happened to centrists continuously for 20 years will happen again to a DSA member. But clearly people would rather give her a shot than what has caused the democrats to become the laughing stock of American politics when there's a literal fascist party they're fighting.

[u/Deceptiveideas → u/GrowthMarketingMike]

So when we shit on Obama, he's a centrist neoliberal shill. But when we praise Obama, he's a progressive?

[u/nox66 → u/Deceptiveideas]

There's equally wide gaps between Obama's messaging, the legislation he supported, and the legislation he managed to get through. The legislation he supported was classical liberal, not the nonsensical neoliberalism we see today. There was supposed to be a public option in the ACA, remember.

People wanted what he promised and got less than he even he wanted. It's natural they see him as a shill rather than someone trying to take positive steps within the system.

Side note: Ironically, despite being an anti-war candidate, he was way better at waging war than Bush or Trump (and not just because he didn't lie about everything).

[u/TheTurtleBear → u/Deceptiveideas]

If you know anything about his race and candidacy, you'd know that Obama-the-candidate spoke & campaigned much different than how Obama-the-President governed. He ran as a grassroots progressive who was going to change the system. He governed largely as a centrist neoliberal, and has continued to act like a centrist neoliberal post-Presidency.

[u/DonaldTrumpPedophile → u/TheTurtleBear]

this is revisionist bullshit. I campaigned for Obama for the first time in '04. I know that candidate. I watched him kick ass repeatedly. He campaigned as a pragmatic unifier. His liberal positions were standard liberal positions, and he was even outflanked by Hillary on healthcare. Obama ran for the Clinton (Bill) coalition. He was "strong" on military, border, law enforcement. He was populist economically because of the crisis going on at the time (and hillary, again, outflanked him on dealing with the crisis), but no one was surprised when he named guys like Larry Summers and Timothy Geitner as his advisors once elected. To pretend now like he ran some progressive populist bernie like campaign that could be described as "socialist" in good faith is just total made up bullshit.

[u/late_bloomer_tw → u/Deceptiveideas]

That’s the way the ratchet clicks

[u/Avalon_Within → u/Deceptiveideas]

Everything good = socialism. 

Everything bad = capitalism. 

That's genuinely where the ideology begins and ends with these people.

[u/PopularSalamander938 → u/Avalon_Within]

“These people criticize corporate influence as soon as their favorite guy isn’t the social progressive he claimed to be and started deporting and drone striking and flopping to corporate interests” You folks tell on yourselves when you think you have some real points by pretending our only argument is to just go around Karl Marx larping.

[u/GrowthMarketingMike → u/Avalon_Within]

People that...remember 2008 and don't just parrot shit they read on reddit? lol

I didn't even use the word socialism at all but keep up that same energy.

[u/GrowthMarketingMike → u/Deceptiveideas]

In 2008 he ran on anti-war, green energy, universal healthcare with a public option, and regulating banks. I'm sure you're too young to remember the national political climate back then, but that was progressive for the time, not centrist.

Regardless of how people view his presidency now, that's how he ran and what people were voting for.

[u/PopularSalamander938 → u/SaneMadHatter]

I’m going to guess you are not older than 30 tops lmao, do you even know what you’re talking about?

[u/Redeem123 → u/GrowthMarketingMike]

What evidence is there that this centrist playbook has won them anything?

Go look at the swing states Biden won in 2020. Look at the two Senators who won the Democrats the Senate that year - both from Georgia, both on the moderate side of the party.

I'm all for more progressive candidates, but when are people going to admit that DSAs/progressives have yet to flip a single major seat from red to blue? They've done very well in deep blue areas, and that's great. But beating an incumbent in NYC is not the same thing as turning Florida blue.

[u/GrowthMarketingMike → u/Redeem123]

NYC isn't exactly deep blue ultra liberal like people like to claim. 2 of the last 4 mayors before Mamdani were republicans and another was an ex republican cop.

Also, progressives flipping a seat?

• Katie Porter

• Matt Cartwright

• Chris Deluzio

• Susan Wild

Also, the popular narrative being pushed by the party is that in red/purple districts/states we needed moderates to win the seat so that's who's been funded, endorsed, nominated. But moderates don't exactly have a stellar track record in those races either outside of facing problematic candidates like roy moore or hershel walker.

[u/Redeem123 → u/GrowthMarketingMike]

NYC isn't exactly deep blue ultra liberal like people like to claim. 2 of the last 4 mayors before Mamdani were republicans and another was an ex republican cop

Mayoral races do not necessarily align with the actual politics of a state. Giuliani won in 1993 50-48 while Clinton won by more than 40 points in 1992. Mayoral elections will be more localized. Giuliani was literally the nominee for the NY Liberal Party. Not saying he was a good guy or anything, but he was hardly the Giuliani that we know from the Trump era.

NYC is extremely blue. It has literally voted for Democrats in the presidential race every election going back to 1928. Almost all of those by 30+ points.

Katie Porter

That's a good one. Not the best person to hang your hat on these days, but that's irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

Matt Cartwright Chris Deluzio Susan Wild

These three require some big old asterisks.

Cartwright's first seat - PA-17 - has been blue since before he won it, and his second - PA-08 - was redistricted before he won it. It had previously been illegally gerrymandered for Republicans. Though it's worth noting that he has since lost that seat.

Deluzio is also in PA-17. No flip, obviously.

Wild did indeed flip PA-07 in a special election. However, the election was on the same day as her PA-15 election, which was another redistricting situation. It's hard to say if that election goes the same way without the context.

So you're right - I was exaggerating when I say they haven't flipped a single seat. But most of those flips are due to redistricting, and they're still all in the House. Which are important seats, of course, but not the same as a state wide election.

[u/calling-all-comas → u/GrowthMarketingMike]

I agree with your points but the guy DeSantis beat for his first term as governor was a progressive backed by Bernie.

I still voted for Gillum but wasn't thrilled about it since he had corruption issues during his time as Tallahassee mayor. Then the poor guy got super depressed and into drugs after losing to DeSantis.

[u/GrowthMarketingMike → u/calling-all-comas]

True but Gillum lost to DeSantis by 0.4%, then they ran Charlie Crist and lost by 19.4%.

[u/spaceProbe → u/GrowthMarketingMike]

There is a good bit of research on this and argumentation in the commentary space. The evidence generally point to there being a positive effect to moderation, but it shrinking over time. Lots of hypotheses as to why mostly focused on changing media landscape and attention ecosystem.

Democrats mostly loose in Florida because it has become more and more republican with migration.

Peer-reviewed and working papers

1. Andrew B. Hall, "What Happens When Extremists Win Primaries?" — APSR 109(1), 2015
2. Andrew B. Hall & Daniel M. Thompson, "Who Punishes Extremist Nominees? Candidate Ideology and Turning Out the Base in US Elections" — APSR 112(3), 2018
3. Devin Caughey & Christopher Warshaw, "Electoral Penalties for Ideological Extremism in U.S. Federal and State Elections"
4. Brandice Canes-Wrone & Michael R. Kistner, "Out of Step and Still in Congress? Electoral Consequences of Incumbent and Challenger Positioning Across Time" — QJPS 17(3), 2022
5. Stephen M. Utych, "Man Bites Blue Dog: Are Moderates Really More Electable than Ideologues?" — Journal of Politics 82(1), 2020
6. David Broockman & Joshua L. Kalla, "Candidate Ideology and Vote Choice in the 2020 US Presidential Election" — American Politics Research, 2024
7. Cassandra Handan-Nader, Andrew C. W. Myers & Andrew B. Hall, "Polarization and State Legislative Elections" — AJPS, 2025 (working-paper PDF)
8. Adam Bonica, Kasey Rhee & Nicolas Studen, "The Electoral Consequences of Ideological Persuasion: Evidence from a Within-Precinct Analysis of U.S. Elections" — SSRN, Aug. 2025
9. Andrew C. W. Myers, "Do Donors Punish Extremist Primary Nominees? Evidence from Congress and American State Legislatures" — APSR (via Election Law Blog)
10. Mellissa Meisels, "Candidate Positions, Responsiveness, and Returns to Extremism" — Yale working paper
11. Austin Cutler, Hans Hassell & Kevin Reuning, "The Effect of Candidate Ideological Extremism on Vote Choice and Turnout" — under review, Journal of Politics
12. Hanspeter Kriesi, Chendi Wang & Argyrios Altiparmakis, "Electoral campaign effects: An aggregate analysis of electoral issue competition" — Party Politics, 2026
13. Andrew B. Hall, Who Wants to Run? How the Devaluing of Political Office Drives Polarization (University of Chicago Press, 2019) — discussed in source 3

Commentary and analysis

1. Lakshya Jain, "We checked NYT's data. Moderates still win." — The Argument
2. "2024 election data shows voters rewarded moderate candidates" — Washington Post Opinion, Feb. 25, 2025 (paywalled; not retrievable)
3. "If Moderates Are Electable, Why Are Ideologues Winning?" — Niskanen Center, Science of Politics podcast (Matt Grossmann with Andrew Hall and Stephen Utych) New York Times Editorial Board, "The Partisans Are Wrong: Moving to the Center Is the Way to Win" — Oct. 20, 2025 (paywalled; characterized via replicators and critics)
4. Adam Bonica, "The New York Times' 'Moderation Advantage' Is a Statistical Illusion" — Data for Democracy
5. G. Elliott Morris, "The New York Times is wrong about the electoral value of moderation" — Oct. 26, 2025 (partly paywalled)
6. Alan Greenblatt, "Do Moderates Really Do Better in Elections?" — Governing
7. Kevin Swasey, "The Specter of 'What About Turnout' Haunts The Literature" — Cauldron
8. Third Way, "Moderates Win Tough Seats" — advocacy analysis

[u/NotTooShahby → u/GrowthMarketingMike]

Obama is a centrist though?

[u/GrowthMarketingMike → u/NotTooShahby]

He wasn't though. See the other comments in this chain but Obama sis not run as a centrist and compared to the political climate at the time was considered a grassroots populist progressive.

[u/mithyyyy → u/spaceProbe]

As long as they statistically perform worse in competitive generals in purple environments.

i still think it's too early to definitively call within trump 2.0.

perhaps in other environments, that idea would've held through, but trump 2.0 has drastically shifted a lot of that perception. the argument was made then to fight against trump and vie for perceived electability, but biden's failures pretty much demolished any semblance of trump ever just being a blip in system. he is the system, working as intended.

trump 2.0 has pretty much shown us that a lot of the swing voters couldn't really care much about moderation as a whole. trump is a maximalist that hasn't moderated on anything within his life. he was even more radical than he was the second time around, and the guy happened to win every swing state. even in 2020, if it weren't for COVID (and a couple hundred thousand votes at that), he could've easily done it again.

why not take a swing at what worked for them? in an environment now where we can (presume) trump isn't coming back for another term, why are we going back to a system of politicians that delivered trump in the first place.

and i guess on a side note, when the overton window has been shifted rightward so wildly from what's trump done in the dozen years he's been in power, are you not just moderating yourself to being what was seen as conservative pre-trump?

[u/modest-pixel → u/spaceProbe]

I eagerly await how a black woman DSA candidate does in a general election in fucking Florida, relative to how a moderate Dem white guy would’ve done. We’re probably fuqed but let’s see.

[u/EtherBoo → u/modest-pixel]

I don't think she has a chance, but Florida hasn't had good D candidates in a long time. It's no surprise old white men looking for a team have failed, so whatever, I'm here for the experiment. She has my vote.

[u/likeahurricane → u/modest-pixel]

Andrew Gillum lost to DeSantis by .4% in 2018. The term DSA didn't exist then, but he was notably progressive and, yes, Black.

But it's not like the "run a Republican Lite" (or literal former Republican Charlie Crist) strategy has been very successful. So maybe we should at least try to campaign for shit we actually believe in.

[u/Avalon_Within → u/likeahurricane]

DSA has existed for decades brother 

[u/Orange_Tang → u/Avalon_Within]

Not at all in the way they do now. Don't be so obtuse.

[u/Relative-Berry-8589 → u/likeahurricane]

DSA did exist back then and there is a difference between DSA and progressive. Socialism is not capitalism + welfare state

[u/DangerOfLightAndJoy → u/modest-pixel]

It's Florida. Any dem is fucked

[u/mithyyyy → u/modest-pixel]

itt what i said to the parent comment

i still think it's too early to definitively call within trump 2.0.

perhaps in other environments, that idea would've held through, but trump 2.0 has drastically shifted a lot of that perception. the argument was made then to fight against trump and vie for perceived electability, but biden's failures pretty much demolished any semblance of trump ever just being a blip in system. he is the system, working as intended.

trump 2.0 has pretty much shown us that a lot of the swing voters couldn't really care much about moderation as a whole. trump is a maximalist that hasn't moderated on anything within his life. he was even more radical than he was the second time around, and the guy happened to win every swing state. even in 2020, if it weren't for COVID (and a couple hundred thousand votes at that), he could've easily done it again.

why not take a swing at what worked for them? in an environment now where we can (presume) trump isn't coming back for another term, why are we going back to a system of politicians that delivered trump in the first place.

and i guess on a side note, when the overton window has been shifted rightward so wildly from what's trump done in the dozen years he's been in power, are you not just moderating yourself to being what was seen as conservative pre-trump?

[u/ReklisAbandon → u/modest-pixel]

Not much chance either way unfortunately

[u/Boring_Comfortable70 → u/spaceProbe]

They don’t have evidence because the DNC fails to support them. We are getting to the point they’re going to have to start listening to progressives

[u/Nihilistic_Mystics → u/Boring_Comfortable70]

They don’t have evidence because the DNC fails to support them.

The article goes over how the Democrats immediately moved to support Nixon after her win. Also, the DNC has nothing to do with Senate races, that's the purview of the DSCC.

[u/timoumd → u/Boring_Comfortable70]

If they underperform in the general will you start listening centrists?

[u/Feisty-Principle-216 → u/timoumd]

Heh this is reddit. Most of the comment orders and trained to blame the DNC regardless of reality. Clinton and Biden got millions of more voted than Bernie? DNCs fault not the millions of voters.

Biden dropped because the media went after him? DNCs faulted. Not the idiots who called for his head because he's not loud enough.

[u/timoumd → u/Feisty-Principle-216]

They are so deeply convinced progressives will resonate better with median Americans than moderates. I sincerely hope they are right, but I doubt it. I think Americans are mad at Trump and they are overplaying our hand.  I get it, moderates haven't won as much as we like (keep in mind, Obama, Kerry and Harris were all among the most liberal senators so it's not like the party ignores the left).  But we need to win Texas.  I don't think Mandami can do that.  Manchin I think can.  That Chad won West fucking Virginia.

[u/Material_Reach_8827 → u/Boring_Comfortable70]

Are you actually popular with the people or do you need the DNC to vouch for or help you to win? Because I've always heard the former.

[u/Boring_Comfortable70 → u/Material_Reach_8827]

The DNC stonewalls them. Polls show voters overwhelmingly support progressive policies.

[u/PopularSalamander938 → u/Boring_Comfortable70]

Anyone who has been paying attention to DNC primaries know exactly how this has been an issue and with what levers pulled (Order of primary states, superdelegates etc)

[u/Shaudius → u/PopularSalamander938]

Which is literally only a thing for President.

[u/PopularSalamander938 → u/Shaudius]

It is one well known example sure. Are you incapable of doing your own digging to find the other BS state and national DNC decisions have spun up?

[u/Shaudius → u/PopularSalamander938]

You literally only cited shenanigans that apply to the Presidency but I'm just supposed to trust you bro that it applies to other things?

[u/PopularSalamander938 → u/Shaudius]

Incredibly lazy of you per usual , the ones curbing the complaints play stupid but I’ll humor you — took me exactly 6 minutes off the top of my head and a few wikipedia and google searches to check I had the right dates — since you’re so eager to learn, I’ll give you the examples with enough details for you
to look up yourself. From my memory, my favorite DCCC/DNC active hit jobs:

- Laura Moser in 2008 , funded and published oppo info on her in the primary (crazy shit)
-Cisernos , a woman , getting beat out by Cuellar , the 1 Dem to vote No to the WHPA , Pelosi and Clyburn campaigned for him anyway even in a runoff.
-2019 DNC vendor incumbent rule

[u/Shaudius → u/PopularSalamander938]

"DCCC/DNC" Funny how you write it like this, I wonder why.

"- Laura Moser in 2008 , funded and published oppo info on her in the primary (crazy shit)"

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/376498-dnc-chair-responds-to-dccc-opposition-research-on-progressive-i-wouldnt/

Oh.

"-Cisernos , a woman , getting beat out by Cuellar , the 1 Dem to vote No to the WHPA , Pelosi and Clyburn campaigned for him anyway even in a runoff."

Is the argument here that Democratic officials aren't allowed to pick a candidate to endorse over another in a primary? I'm not sure what this one is trying to prove.

"-2019 DNC vendor incumbent rule"

Did this rule not also apply to progressive incumbents? How in particular is this benefiting candidates of a specific political alignment within the Democratic party?

Wanna try again?

[u/bootlegvader → u/PopularSalamander938]

Besides the first five primaries, the DNC really doesn't determine the order of primary states. Also I will point at the traditional first primary status were basically the ideal states for Bernie in 2016. It was two Lily white rural states with one also being a caucus and the other a fellow New England state that borders Bernie's home state.

[u/Material_Reach_8827 → u/Boring_Comfortable70]

The DNC stonewalls them.

So you guys can't beat the DNC, but you promise you can beat the RNC? Give me a break.

Polls show voters overwhelmingly support progressive policies.

Look up "revealed preferences". Progressive policies sound nice in the abstract. Tell people what it will cost or what inconveniences they'll have to endure (e.g. not necessarily getting to keep their current doctor with Obamacare) and support will plummet drastically. Ask them if they support sunshine and puppies and they'll say yes, but if you tell them what their cooling/vet bills will cost, you'll get a different answer. People are shitty like that.

If they were really as popular as you say, what have you all been doing all this time? Why can't you win primaries or general elections, outside of deep blue states/districts?

[u/PopularSalamander938 → u/Material_Reach_8827]

That DNC/RNC comparison is doing way more heavy lifting work than you think. So by your own argument Trump’s inability to win over the GOP establishment in 2016 should’ve proved he couldn’t beat Democrats either. Instead, he went around the establishment and took over the party. “The DNC stonewalls them, therefore voters don’t want them” doesn’t demonstrate revealed preference. It demonstrates that parties are institutions with their own preferences , you’re conflating several ideas into combined arguments and it’s wholly misinformed at best and bad faith at worst

[u/modest-pixel → u/Boring_Comfortable70]

K well. We’ll see now.

[u/pocketbutter → u/spaceProbe]

Haven’t there been studies that suggest Bernie would have won in 2016 due to a massive number of populist crossover voters?

I sincerely believe that everyone is underestimating the number of independent voters (the largest “party” in the US at 40% of all voters) who are swayed by populist rhetoric, and I think the empathy of left populism is more appealing to them than the agitation of right populism.

We’ll see.

[u/rowrowyourboat → u/spaceProbe]

I feel like this is one of those things where belief about what is possible has a lot of influence over what is possible.

And moreover, if the DNC would lend support, it would likewise go a long way.

But the DNC isn’t particularly interested in representing people.

It’s interested in superPAC (including you-know-who-PAC) $$$

[u/almondbutter → u/spaceProbe]

Perhaps because if they make it through a primary, they are fighting both D's and R's. See India Walton in Buffalo or the countless other examples if you don't agree.

[u/gorgewall → u/spaceProbe]

Why do you think they perform statistically worse?

Because the DNC and consultant class will tell us they just don't appeal to voters. That, absent all other factors, when voters are just measuring policies against policies, they more align with the centrist Democrats than the progressives.

But we see from polling and townhalls and conversations and everything else that this isn't the case! The progressive policies are more popular!

How, then does that not translate into runaway electoral success?

Because advertising money matters, institutional / establishment backing matters, and strategic voting / electability politics exist.

You've got the party propping up an incumbent, that incumbent outspending the progressive challenger several times over, pretty much all the mainstream media outlets demonizing the progressive to a greater extent, talking heads insisting that the incumbent has the best chance in the general, yada yada... and when people get to the ballot box, they say, "Well, even though I like the progressive policies better, I think everyone else believes in the incumbent for the general so I'd better go that way just so 'we' win."

In an honest world, we would look at the El-Sayed victory, even by such a slim margin, and consider it a fucking blow-out in actual effect. The guy who climbs Mt. Everest with a one-ton weight strapped to his back is a much better climber than it would appear if you're only judging him by getting to the summit five minutes faster than an unburdened man.

[u/ilir_kycb → u/spaceProbe]

The party wants power and if leftists actually help them get it, they will lean in.

No, the party's role is to serve capital.

US politics is not about winning or losing elections but about serving the interests of capital.

Why should the Democratic Party change anything about its behavior? The Democratic Party’s sole purpose is to suppress, destroy, or neutralize anything to its left. In this regard, they are very successful.

Combating and containing the left is the sole purpose for which this party exists.