If we agree on the issues, why are so many on the left fighting each other?

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Let me head this off right here. I don't take this as a bash Bernie Sanders article but in the interest of brevity and DU rules I can only post part of the article. I suggest everyone go to the link and read the whole thing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I noted last week, we are an ideologically cohesive party. We have near unanimous agreement in support of income equality, justice for all, a sane immigration policy, and respect for women. Yet we are riven by internal divisions. How can that be? And the answer is simple:

Priorities.
 
The hardcore Bernie Sanders dead-enders—the ones who insist on waging jihad against the party and its mainstream liberal adherents—are undying in their belief that income equality can solve all ills. Dubbed “alt-left” on Twitter (quickly replacing “Bernie Bro” as the preferred moniker), this crowd has resorted to using words like “identity politics” and “political correctness” to strike at their mainstream liberal detractors. Yup, they are adopting left-wing critiques right out of the conservative movement’s playbook. 

-snip-

Women don’t have their pussies grabbed by asshole men. Trump wasn’t going to the unemployment line to grab women’s pussies. And women in the workplace are literally dealing with sexual harassment, assault, and other forms of aggression. Income equality will not fix this. Period. 

Black kids aren’t being murdered by police, treated differently in courts. Sandra Bland had a good job when she was arrested and jailed (and murdered) for being black. Henry Louis Gates had a pretty decent job as a fucking Harvard professor when he was arrested for walking into his own goddam house in Cambridge. Racism cuts deeper than economics.

-snip-

Mostly white and male Christian or atheist progressives have no fucking idea what it’s like to live with this oppressive daily pressure. They might be a little out of sorts over Trump’s presidency, but they and the people they love will never be specifically targeted the way the groups above will. 

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/5/8/1660063/-If-we-agree-on-the-issues-why-are-so-many-on-the-Left-fighting-each-other

[Orsino]

1. Because we can't agree on which issues are most important...

...and because we feel that other people's favorite issues can be sacrificed in our quest to win elections.

[zipplewrath]

3. This

Priorities and the definition of "winning".

[bettyellen]

2. I had a friend defending all the Russian leaks when I asked if he felt screwed over by spreading

Guccifer stuff and he said "all fair and you want your team to win". I can't even repeat other parts of his reasoning. But he's really thinking Dems deserved all the dirty tricks.

[Snackshack]

54. Republicans...

Last edited Tue May 9, 2017, 01:22 AM - Edit history (1)

Conservatives, Right Wing outlets have been very effective for many years now in framing politics as if it were a sporting event, my side v. your side. This has led to the hyper-partisan politics/government we have now where nothing gets done. Reaching across the isle to compromise is now viewed in a very negative light and any politician that tries to compromise gets hammered from all sides even their own side. This has spilled over into each individual party and has created these enormous rifts and factions with-in each party, we see it here on DU all the time.

America became the power house nation it is/was because while ideological differences exists between party we understood that compromise between politicians/ voters/ parties was essential for progress. Unless and until we (Democrats mostly) grow up and realize we have to compromise with one another to advance (win back seats) we are going to remain in this political purgatory we are in. Republicans have already decided against compromise and go for straight domination and they have made great advances in that direction on the local, state and federal level. The only way Dems are going to stop them is by coming together.

[bettyellen]

69. he hates republicans but rarely talks about that. He's pretty lefty and

has had the good fortune of some good union jobs over the years. The ACA just saved his wives life and prevented them from losing their apartment which is worth about 850- 900k. (Typical around here) Our friend pointed out his owned apt value when he was said he was outraged such a huge percentage of congressmen are millionaires. It's tough when you see so many people as the enemy. We're friends for twenty five years and he was literally screaming at me over the arrogance of some Dems.

[Snackshack]

76. Yikes...

Yes, politics strikes a raw nerve with some and can bring out the worst in people. I have seen plenty of posts on FB and here over the last 1.5-2 years from people saying they just lost a long time friend because of a political view. Good friends are not easy to come by, losing one over politics is sad. I hope you two are able to set aside the politics and continue to be friends.



"Our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's future. And we are all mortal."

John F. Kennedy

[bettyellen]

77. We're still friends but both his wife and I worry about his endless spewing of conspiracy theories..

And the self righteous bullshit combined with the "alls fair" attitude is something I don't respect. He basically catapulted the propaganda himself and doesn't care if it was lies while arguing others should not be trusted.
It was quite confusing.

[SticksnStones]

63. I wonder if your friend has kids

would they instill that value into their children? Dirty tricks or whatever it takes to Win?

I'd like to think not...but then I wonder, where does the disconnect occur...you wouldn't raise your kids to behave like the politicians you revere..

Why is that...I wonder ~

[bettyellen]

78. there was some serious CDS going on- he couldnt stop talking about Bill instead of our candidate.

he didnt understand that she might be her own person. He didnt care about the lies about their chaity or the way Wiki framed thing dishonestly. At the time it was all useful to him, and now he makes excuses for it while holding everyone else up to a moral standard that is completely unattainable. I think he's allowing RWers to frame the arguements when it suits him. Calling pols "arrogant" means nothing to me, but everything to him. He's almost as nuts as Sarandon this point.

[rainy]

4. The problem is that wealthy donors

and corporations keep our elected democrats from doing what WE want but what the donors want. Points:
Healthcare, no single payer
Gun Control, nothing
Drilling
Pipelines
Clean energy
No wars for profit and resources
Trade agreements
Money in politics/leaders spend most of time begging for money

All of the above are the reasons progressives have abandoned the current Democratic Party!!!!

All the issues we really care about really don't get solved by corporate democrats.

We are so far right in this country and it is because corporate democrats don't fight the good fight anymore.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

5. Guess I must have missed all that in Hillary's platform

[rainy]

13. Saying you stand for something

doesn't mean you will.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

15. I guess you must have some fantastic insight that the rest of us don't

Why are you on a Democratic board if you want to bad mouth the Democratic party?

[rainy]

20. Being on a democratic board

doesn't mean you support everything every democrat does or says. If this is a board for yes men and women then I wouldn't want to be here.

[Cha]

46. We say Yes to Getting Good Democratic Leaders Elected.. We say

NO to pushing 3rd Party Bullshit.

[brer cat]

65. So you don't support the Democratic party

on healthcare, gun control, drilling, pipelines, clean energy, wars, trade agreements or money in politics. Can you point out where in the Democratic party platform you found all these policies you disagree with?

[Hortensis]

67. IMO, your "donors" post bashed the entire party, including me,

and, also imo, your posts reveal a tremendous lack of understanding of the party and its principles and goals. To put it mildly.

I could just blame the smog of anti-Democratic propaganda lies blanketing our nation for the dreary commonness of this stuff posted on DU, but then that would be to absolve the individual of responsibility for thinking and personal honesty.

I've been progressive my entire life, Rainy, and I have been a registered Democrat for decades. Progressive is not a synonym for being narrow minded and tunnel visioned, nor for mindless anti-mainstream hostility. A broad range of people believe in using our government to advance our wellbeing, not just a small, intolerant faction with a very undemocratic unwillingness to accept that choices of others can also be responsible, functional and honorable alternatives.

[Cha]

45. There's no "insight".. just pushing 3rd party LIAR stein and sarandon

crap on a Democratic board.

[Cha]

50. You calling Hillary and our Democratic Leaders Liars?

[GulfCoast66]

25. But here is the rub. I doubt you and I are in agreement on several of the issues you state

Last edited Mon May 8, 2017, 06:31 PM - Edit history (1)

Health care. I agree we all have a right to healthcare, not just access to it, but there is more than one way to skin a cat and I would support a system that leaves the hospitals and health system governed by the private sector. Perhaps even employer paid for a large part of the country.

Gun Control. I believe in common sense gun laws, but I also believe that the 2nd does provide individuals with a right to own a modern firearm.

Drilling. Case dependent for me. Not totally opposed.

Pipelines. Same answer as above.

Clean energy. I would guess we are in totally agreement here and I might be more radical. I live in Florida and if I were King of Florida no building over 1,500 square feet could get a building permit without solar panels. Which you might find too radical!

Nor wars for profit and resources. Would need to parse it out. Obviously things like Iraq are total cluster fucks that would result in prison. But no wars for resources? Would you be willing to go to war to protect global sea lanes. Like if Iran cut off the strait of Hormuz or China the South China Sea? Conditionally, I would. Only after every single diplomatic too in the book had been tried.

I support Trade Agreements and think that at the end of the day we(the nation, not just Democrats) will regret abandoning TTP. That has been the Democratic Party position forever. I mean back to FDR's days. Not Clintons.

Money in politics...I just have no answers considering the supreme court. But I know we have to fight on the battlefield we find.


I also notice issue that did not make your list. Racial healing and making up for 450 year of oppression. A woman's right to totally own her own body with no interference. Ending repression of the LGBT community. Now, I am not casting doubt on your support of these causes, just that they did not make your list. The one listing what you want. Not what we necessarily want.

My point is that if some progressives insist that the party support the causes you want without a willingness to compromise with other people on the left who have different priorities then we will never win another election.

The fact that we refer to ourselves in different terms is telling. I do not call myself a progressive. But a liberal. Or sometimes when talking to right winger I do call my self a social Democrat because the word social is close to socialist and that always makes them turn of their front brain, argue like a reptile and I win!

Have a nice evening.

[rainy]

29. I appreciate everything you said and thank you for having a legitimate discussion about the issues.

My basic problem with politics today is that people are not represented and we are under corporate rule. We are too far right because of money, banks, corporations being in control of our government, and writing laws that favor them to our detriment. Until we get money out, Democrats will have a hard time really representing us.

Our economic and global growth needed to support a global economy will destroy the planet. All growth all the time is unsustainable, and the democrats and republicans are not capable of doing a dang thing about that, so, I feel defeated and at a loss of where we should go.

I do vote for democrats, only, but I want to complain and push them constantly until things change and having legitimate criticism of todays democrats will do them good, not harm.

[GulfCoast66]

31. We're cool and I get where you are coming from

But another reason we are too far right is because, well, Americans are and always have been more rightist than other countries.

Here on DU and in Democratic society as a whole we rightfully look back on the FDR years with longing due to the liberal policies of that era. But it was not all that left and was fought hard from the beginning and chipped away at continually and not just by the rich. The Midwest was always a conservative place while the south(where I am from) racial policies always took, and take place of preference.

Something tells me that in the future it will not need to be the more progressive wing of the party that has to compromise but those like me who are more centrist. And compromise I will gladly do. I truly believe our goals are the same and we both want to end up at the same place, we just disagree on the tactics.

And please do not let yourself feel defeated. If nothing else, spend less time doing the politics thing and more time living the life thing.

You have a great evening.

[rainy]

36. You are awesome!!thanks😊

[delisen]

38. Trump came up with a radical agenda. Notice how much trouble he is having?

Drilling-I hate it. Fracking-I hate it. Gasoline engines-disgusting and polluting.

How about this: Group of progressives state that: The whole world can be powered by safe, healthful alternative energy. Here is where we are and this is how we can reach the goal.




I would have preferred single payer to the ACA but nowI have decided its passage has made the possibility of of getting a single payer much more possible.

In 2009 people desperate for coverage of pre-existing conditions were supplicants. Now that the see the change its made they are raging defenders.

There are corporations which would support single payer but I don't see many connections being made with them by people who consider themselves progressive. What I am hearing is "all corporations are evil." If so let's all dump our I-phones and fight Apple to the death.
Or we can say "some corporations are evil" and work with the ones that went medicare for all.

Clean energy is happening; the technology is moving fast,it could happen a lot faster if proponents would take charge and map out a path. Right now many individual Republicans are champions.

Gun control-how much is Vermont willing to do?

In short I would like to hear more than slogans.

On jobs and trade I want to talk about automation-Let's draw up the list of automation -proof jobs and start planning how we want the future to look.

[rainy]

42. It's not that all corporations are bad

but corporations that own our politicians and help make rules and laws to favor them over people and planet and health that's the problem.

[Cha]

51. Mahalo for your Reality Based post, delisen..

We HAD a good foundation to single payer.. Obamacare. It was never meant to stay static.

But, those who instantly wanted "single payer" or bust.. stomped their little feet and made sure the repubs took over in 2010. ".. that will show them Dems"

They still stomped their feet and threw fits in 2014 and 2016 voting for 3rd party LIARS.. not giving a shite about the Planetary Climate Change Crises or SCOTUS.

It's all about them and what they see as not magically appearing.

The Democratic Platform was Excellent but there was so much hate and LIES spread.. the deadenders couldn't get outside their own little selfish bubble.

[Cha]

43. BULL.. as 3rd party Liar Elitist sarandon sits on her $50 Million Bucks

while the rest of Country and Planet get Fucked by trump.

They own a chunk of trump.

You can't magically have single payer.. you have to get Democrats in Congress to have worked on making Obamacare better. It was always just a start .. a foundation to evolve.. but the instant "single payer" or Nothing bunch.. ruined it for Everyone.

[George II]

52. You should do some research on the FEC regulations. "Wealthy donors" and corporations...

...are prohibited from contributing to candidates' campaigns.

Aside from that, are you insinuating that Democratic candidates "don't fight the good fight anymore"?

[rainy]

60. ALEC research it. While you are

at it look up citizens united and high paid lobbyists 😁

[rainy]

61. It's not that democrats don't want to

fight the good fight they just can't beat big pharma, the war machine, the giant polluters and so on.

[rainy]

71. So big corporations can't donate millions?

https://sierra.secure.force.com/actions/National?actionId=AR0077468&id=70131000001yNrVAAU&ddi=N17DSAFB45&utm_medium=cpc&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=emacq&utm_content=dowpest_v4

[George II]

73. Not to candidates. They can't donate a penny to candidates.

[rainy]

74. Seems they can and do all the time.

https://sierra.secure.force.com/actions/National?actionId=AR0077468&id=70131000001yNrVAAU&ddi=N17DSAFB45&utm_medium=cpc&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=emacq&utm_content=dowpest_v4

[George II]

75. No they can't and no they don't. That is a clear violation of Federal Law.....

I don't understand the relevance of that link to corporations donating to candidates.

[R B Garr]

6. Because it looks like the alt left wants their versions of reality to be about

only their talking points, i.e., working class, income inequality. It's a struggle for defining reality. Look how they completely discount any news about Russian interference in the 2016 election. It's bizarre at this point.

[uponit7771]

8. We should have a base line ... because some are willing to budge on issue A and B but not C & D etc

... we should have a baseline of what dem pols will stand for and not accept purity.

Its a give and take thing

[Demsrule86]

59. No we shouldn't. You can't have purity test and have any chance of winning.

This is a big tent party...and Either vote with us or don't ...you have a choice. The Democratic Party gave us every progressive piece of policy ever passed...and what did Sarandon, Stein and the faux as seen at JPR give us...(2008)the Gulf wars,United, economic ruin , (2016)Republican tax cuts for the super rich, Republican death care, Republican privatization of our infrastructure, Muslim ban, incarceration of immigrants in private prisons,new wars( possibly nuclear), executive orders allowing discrimination for LGBTQ and a push for a theocratic government. The people you seek to woo...never deliver in terms of votes. And the idea of a 'baseline' for those who are single issue voters in the age of Trump is a non-starter with me...I have no inclination to offer anything to people who would be willing to help Trump to a second term for any reason.

[uponit7771]

62. we agree we can't have purity test

[Demsrule86]

79. I always have...I voted for Tim Ryan in Ohio when he was anti-choice.

I always vote Democratic. I am going to vote for the person that best represents me in a primary...my values and beliefs...but win or lose I always support the Democrat during the election...and if you are referring to Mello in Nebraska or Perriello in VA...I would vote for either candidate rather than vote for a Republican during the election...but anti-choice Democrats with with a history of votes against choice should never be endorsed by progressive leaders.

[Jakes Progress]

9. We either get this or we will get beat again and again.

Kudos to the OP and to KOS. Read the whole article. it is the essence of why the party will keep losing and the reason why we need to be able to discuss the election.

[Initech]

10. Easy answer: We don't have anything in common anymore.

Our commonality if we want to stop Trump and white nationalism from taking over is that we need to be the opposite of them. That's the common ground all democrats and liberals. We're not white nationalism. We're not Donald Trump. We're not Alex Jones. We're not Sean Hannity. I want to think we're better than that. And if we want to prove it, we have to find what makes us not them. 2018 may not be the shoo-in everyone thinks it's going to be. It may be worse than 2016. We need to get working to find what unites us with people and ideas. If we don't, expect same shit, different day.

[rainy]

70. Money out of politics should unite

all of us and will not require a purity test. I think everything else might fall in place if Koch brothers and their like could not buy elections.

Campaign Finance Reform #1 issue.

[Initech]

72. And we have to stop Trump from taking away the Johnson Amendment.

No Johnson Amendment + Citizens United means that churches could start running the most lunatic fringe, extreme far right candidates they want, funnel unlimited amounts of tax free money, run ads 24/7, and there would be nothing to stop them. It would cement the US as a totalitarian theocracy. And that is something I would absolutely fight to stop from happening.

[Iggo]

11. Cults of personality more important than doing the right thing.

It's my guy or nothing!!!

GRRRR.

[Warpy]

12. Don't forget the hardcore Hillary dead enders in 2009. They picked up their marbles

and marched off to join the Republican Party. Remember that, kiddies? I certainly do.

At least most of the Sanders dead enders are kids. We can count on most of them to grow up. Some will undoubtedly be top-down thinkers and join the GOP. Others will sigh and join the rest of us muddling through life as Democrats.

And no, male progressives have no earthly clue how the other half of the human race lives, how could they? Some of them do listen to the women in their lives and manage to wrap their heads around part of it and those are the ones we treasure. The rest just listen to their bros and think they have a clue about women and how we need to stop agitating for things like Planned Parenthood and keeping abortion clinics open because there are more important issues to be decided first. Yeah, guys, now go away and mow a lawn or burn a steak or something suitably macho for you. The most basic civil right for half the population IS the issue unless you guys want to risk a brave new world of being factory farmed to provide spare parts for the rich.

Kos is right, some things are simply not up for negotiation, no matter how many recovering Republicans want them to be. We stand together with basic civil and economic rights for all of us, or we might as well just bend over because we know what's coming.

The door is that way, to the right.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

16. Such as?

Have anyone in particular in mind or are you making things up.

[Warpy]

32. You should know better than that

There were. sadly, personal acquaintances. Most reregistered Independent. A very few went Republican. All voted against Obama, either third party or for Gramps McCain.

There is also this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/they-were-hillary-clintons-die-hard-loyalists-heres-where-they-are-now/2015/05/02/82025cf2-e92a-11e4-aae1-d642717d8afa_story.html?utm_term=.ac3bc27f8efc

And http://www.salon.com/2008/06/23/pumas/

Please read these articles and understand just how furious these hardcore supporters were. The largely fictional "alt-left" pales in comparison.

This is a more polite response than you deserve.

[KTM]

33. +1

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

37. So they weren't Democrats in the first place

Just like most of the BoBs

[Warpy]

40. Posts that begin with "so" are invariably straw men and your is definitely that

The ones I knew were Democrats. I can't vouch for the 16% who changed their voting patterns according to the WaPo.

Or are you basing this on the "no true Scotsman" fallacy?

In either case,

?quality=85&strip=info&w=962

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

41. No

It's more or less your argument comes down to "the ones I knew were Democrats".

My experience was quite different.

I couldn't get past the paywall on the WaPo article BTW.

[Cha]

47. You're Projecting A-gain.

[Cha]

48. LOL.. according to that poster.. you start a sentence with "So" and they

get to post a stupid elephant. Why do I get the sense that any word you started the sentence with.. out would come the elephant?

[librechik]

14. it's the same old issue

some in the democratic field either don't realize or refuse to accept/discuss their obvious racism/misogyny/other bigotry. At least that's the way it is in my purple state.

If any of the rest of us observe this and point it out, a big fight happens and good people are driven away.

To be a big tent and a strong party, we must embrace everybody in the tent, and sincerely, not with a smirk.

I can't see how that's ever going to happen.

[trueblue2007]

17. Bernies ...... income equality thingy is NOT the only thing i care about !!!

infact i think other problems we have is more important.

[trueblue2007]

18. infact being a woman, i can think of some things that pertain to me

are more important.

[mvd]

19. I don't think we can have real social justice without economic justice

More income equality means a more prosperous populace - and this doesn't mean being pro-choice, being for LGBT rights, and being compassionate on immigration aren't equally important. I feel they are all tied together.

[Jno_Gilmor_]

21. They are linked. Carrying about income inequality and gay and women's rights are in no way mutually

exclusive. Benjamin Dixon makes a good point about how the two are linked.

He basically says identity politics alone means its not the economic system that is broken, its just not enough women and people of color are at the top. Economics without identity politics fails to take into account the systemic racism, sexism, etc. that contributes to economic inequality. He says it better than me, but hopefully you can get the idea.

You must have both critiques, one without the other is like a one winged bird.

[mvd]

22. Well said!

Thanks.

[Jno_Gilmor_]

23. Thanks!

[Nevernose]

24. A couple of points:

One: it's not about young, white, male progressives selling out other groups. Remember that while Clinton got the primary support of PoC rather overwhelmingly, Sanders got the under-30 PoC vote by a huge 75% or so. So maybe something for Dem pollsters and statisticians to look at is age and generation. I don't think we look at that nearly enough, and obviously that's the future of our party.

Secondly, I don't think most liberals are willing to sell out other groups purely for economic issues. I think what irks some people about so-called "identity politics" is when it appears to stop being about civil rights and starts being about pure pandering. Here's a thing for middle class whites, here's a thing for Blacks, here's a thing for Latinos, here's a thing for women. As if those are all monolithic groups who all have the same internal needs (e.g. "Talk about immigration to get the Latino vote&quot that just doesn't have the same realities in 2017 as we did in 1997. We've got different information, different approaches, etc.

Thirdly, most of us can multitask. I can care about economic justice and environmental justice and racial justice and all kinds of other things. Especially now that Americans are beginning to see that these things all intersect. Politicians need to focus on a few core messages, but demanding economic justice for all (for instance) doesn't take anything away from Black Lives Matter.

Finally, I remain convinced at this point that most of the remaining Clinton-Sanders vitriol is bullshit stirred up by trolls and opposition, here at DU and all over the Internet.

[NCTraveler]

27. "Sanders got the under-30 PoC vote by a huge 75% or so."

Do you have a reference for that?

[Nevernose]

34. Going totally by memory

And that's the honest truth. I think I'm correct, but I'm also not one of those under-30 people with the good memories.

[NCTraveler]

35. "And that's the honest truth."

[ms liberty]

28. Well said, Nevernose. n/t

[NCTraveler]

26. The debate for the most part is about the use of our resources....

And how to acquire more resources. The only group outside of that is the group that believes we are to a point where the resources available won't do it therefore the village must be burned down and built again.

[JNelson6563]

30. Ok there are two kinds of political folks.

The kind who consider "activism" to be arguing and soap-boxing on the tubes and people who actually do stuff. I'm out here in the doing stuff world and they don't seem too interested in finding out each other's differences. Too fucking busy.

join us.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

39. Yes I've noticed that too

Good for you for being out in the trenches.

As an aside because I'm from a caucus state I was a delegate for Hillary at the precinct level. While I disagreed with those Sanders supporters in my precinct it was all civil. Quite unlike the vitriol one experienced online.

[Nevernose]

49. I was actually at the state convention

In which the Sanders delegate threatened a Clinton delegate with a chair. I and my daughter were Sanders delegates; my wife and mother were Clinton delegates.

Even THAT was relatively tame, atmosphere-wise, than a lot of the vitriol I've seen online (not real life). I think the same anonymity online that gives Trump-trolls cover is the same anonymity that gives extremists of any stripe covet.

I believe this because the moment Trump was inaugurated our family started meeting with other families, and -- in various ways -- fighting back. It all involves people I met at the convention who were ready to throw things at each other. All that bullshit is gone, at least in real life. The divisions are artificial.

[Demsrule86]

57. The stuff the 'talkers' want and expect of the Party will never happen and would

doom our electoral chances ...can't afford to worry about these folks...have to hope that self interest will click in at some point. When one looks at the terrible things Trump is doing...how can it not? And privilege won't save you from Trump in the end...the crap coming our way is based on income mostly.

[nycbos]

53. There is battle between the...

... People's Front of Judea the the Judean People's Front

https://m.

[longship]

55. Because too many don't know what solidarity means.

Solidarity:

1. unity or agreement of feeling or action, especially among individuals with a common interest; mutual support within a group.

"factory workers voiced solidarity with the striking students"

synonyms: unanimity, unity, like-mindedness, agreement, accord, harmony, consensus, concurrence, cooperation, cohesion, fraternity, mutual support; formal concord

"our solidarity is what gives us the credibility and power to make changes"

The extent that you forget this is the extent that you lose. United we stand; divided we fall.

[redgreenandblue]

56. Read it. Seems like Kos has his head pretty far up his own ass.

He starts from the false premise that all supporters of Bernie Sanders are white males and dives straight into the toilet from there.

[Demsrule86]

58. Not all of Sen. Sander's supporter are white males...but I think there is a push

for a populist economics and...social justice issues are not part of the equation. Look at the disastrous Mello endorsement. And the idea that we need to reach out to the racist Trump supporters is disturbing to me...and a non-starter. Those Trump supporters who voted for economic reasons will see that Trump is a liar and a cheat...the rest are worthless.

[snooper2]

64. because their are Russian trolls and far left West "haters" who want to sow division still around

Don't look at the shiny Russian hearings!

Let's debate why Hillary LOST! Let's keep talking about BERNIE who will never run for President again!

Lets keep fighting like it's 2016!

[brer cat]

66. A lot less whitemalesplainin' would go a long way to healing divisions.

Many of you need to learn and shut up when people from marginalized communities are telling you the pain they are suffering, the fears they face, and the challenges that they must endure. And if you come from a privileged background, you need to take those words at heart, listen, consider, digest, and then figure out how you can constructively be part of that conversation and solution.

When the people who know the reality on the ground are dismissed as pushing "identity politics" the seeds of dissension are sown.

[NastyRiffraff]

68. Exactly. Thank you, brer cat

I'm sick of the whining, many times from those with privilege, about the "marginalized communities" that they "defend" while living in their cushy homes. I'm not saying that there aren't poor people in those communities that are in pain; I resent the implication that nobody else is important. Issues affecting women, minorities, LGBT, immigrants are too often dismissed as "identity politics" (which is, BTW, a right wing term)>

[Demsrule86]

80. The word identity politics annoys me when I hear the right use the term...

but when I hear progressives and worse progressive leaders using the term and advocating for ignoring social justice and throwing millions of loyal Democrats under the bus in order to woo Trump supporters, it make my blood boil...it really does. How dare they?

[JHan]

81. I never thought I'd see people calling themselves "Democrats" or "progressives"..

pushing the "identity politics" of the Right Wing narrative.

2016 was a revelation.

Good news is I now know who to ignore for my own fucking sanity.