No, I’m not going to come on. They are insurgents; that’s a good thing; I don’t believe NBC News is using that accurate descriptor to editorialize; and if they are: good, fucking let them. If they want to make the DSA candidates look like they’re bringing radical change against the party by force: good, fucking let them. People are clearly sick and fucking tired of the “well it’s this or fascism I guess” wing of the Democratic Party.
In the absolute worst case where NBC News is editorializing using the word “insurgent”, I can about guarantee you that’ll appeal to more people than it turns away. In 2026, the establishment of the Democratic Party is a toxic brand.
Hard disagree, look at all the videos where Republicans agree with policies if they think they are from their party but not the other way around. Some people are not capable of critical thinking and need to be guided to the right answer and avoid “scary” words.
I almost can’t believe you’re citing Republicans, the most obvious counterexample to what you’re claiming imaginable. Donald Trump was the insurgent candidate in 2016, and every candidate in the 2016 primary and even a sizable part of right-wing media was calling him every name in the book. His current VP compared him to Hitler. It worked because Republicans wanted to feel like they were going against the party establishment, not in spite of it.
Thank you for practically making my argument for me.
Edit: Since apparently Lemmy didn’t live through the same 2016 everyone else did, let’s review:
Overwhelming force can turn unwieldy, and Clinton’s aides have struggled for a year to battle insurgent foes Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, who operate out of makeshift offices built less around corporate flow plans than a never-ending focus on letting the candidates do exactly what they want.
No, I’m not going to come on. They are insurgents; that’s a good thing; I don’t believe NBC News is using that accurate descriptor to editorialize; and if they are: good, fucking let them. If they want to make the DSA candidates look like they’re bringing radical change against the party by force: good, fucking let them. People are clearly sick and fucking tired of the “well it’s this or fascism I guess” wing of the Democratic Party.
It’s using oppressor verbage to steer folk away from voting for them.
In the absolute worst case where NBC News is editorializing using the word “insurgent”, I can about guarantee you that’ll appeal to more people than it turns away. In 2026, the establishment of the Democratic Party is a toxic brand.
Hard disagree, look at all the videos where Republicans agree with policies if they think they are from their party but not the other way around. Some people are not capable of critical thinking and need to be guided to the right answer and avoid “scary” words.
I almost can’t believe you’re citing Republicans, the most obvious counterexample to what you’re claiming imaginable. Donald Trump was the insurgent candidate in 2016, and every candidate in the 2016 primary and even a sizable part of right-wing media was calling him every name in the book. His current VP compared him to Hitler. It worked because Republicans wanted to feel like they were going against the party establishment, not in spite of it.
Thank you for practically making my argument for me.
Edit: Since apparently Lemmy didn’t live through the same 2016 everyone else did, let’s review:
Time:
NBC News:
The Economist
And it is my absolute displeasure to link to fucking Breitbart:
I can keep going.
Agree to disagree ¯\(ツ)/¯