To some, acting to push the Democratic Party further to the left is "hijacking the party"

[Jim Lane]

157. You make several assumptions there.

It's a useful simplification to say that all policy preferences can be neatly aligned on a left-right spectrum, that each voter locates himself or herself somewhere on that spectrum, and that each voter then votes for the candidate who's nearer to his or her point.

That simplification can be useful for certain purposes but it's not the be-all and end-all.

One obvious point is that DU is atypical in terms of the emphasis that DU members put on ideology. Most of us voted for Clinton over Trump but we would have voted for Sanders over Fiorina. Among 130-million+ real-world voters, some would vote for either woman, so as to break the glass ceiling, and some would vote for either man because they don't think a woman can be President. That's just one of many examples that could be adduced.

Another point that my first paragraph doesn't cover is turnout. Turnout is historically lowest among people with the lowest incomes. It's not unreasonable for progressives to hope that moving the party to the left would help it mobilize people who, in a race between two comparatively centrist candidates, don't see enough of a difference to motivate them to register and vote. (Side note: Given the current atmosphere on DU, I feel compelled to waste a few pixels to point out that I am NOT supporting the "no difference between Democrats and Republicans" point of view. I'm merely reporting it. This would be obvious to anyone with minimal reading comprehension skills but such skills have been in regrettably short supply on DU of late.)

Of course, moving to the left isn't a cure-all. The people who would benefit most from progressive policies won't just automatically turn out because of a good platform. We'll have to establish credibility with them over time. There's a chicken-and-egg problem here. If Obama had signed a single-payer health care bill into law, its evident benefits would have helped elect progressives, but not enough progressives had been elected to get it passed and sent to his desk.

Nevertheless, moving to the right is also not a cure-all. Should we try to compromise with the Republicans on health care? Maybe a bill that throws only 11 million people off their coverage, instead of 22 million? Tax cuts for the rich that are somewhat smaller than what Ted Cruz wants? Even aside from such a move to the right being horrible public policy, it would be politically harmful rather than helpful.