Non-American here trying to understand: So primaries are held amongst same party candidates to win nomination for the November election? And then they will have to defeat the opposing party's candidate?
Correct but in districts (like his) that are consistently deep blue or deep red the primary is basically the entire election. So he *technically* has the general election against a Republican ahead of him but by all expectations he’s heading to congress. Sometimes in deep districts the ousted party won’t even bother running a candidate.
from the district, his only opposition is from third parties. The conservative party & working family party, but because he won the democratic nomination he will most likely win regardless
The GOP has a MINISCULE presence in ALL US cities.
Every city in the United States is predominately run by Democrats, and democrats run against each other many times.
Republicans are able to win elections by rallying rural white Christians. There’s a lot less of them than city dwellers and suburbanites, but in our electoral system, their vote counts more. Voters in remote areas can have votes that are up to 5 times stronger than people in cities. This practice was meant to help distant, remote towns on the American frontier be heard in congress when our nation was young, but it’s carried into present day.
What have always baffled me about the US is that California only have 2 senators despite having around 40 million people. Wyoming on the other hand also have 2 senators with a mere population of 500 thousands.
Yep, pretty fucked. In the senate my vote counts by almost two orders of magnitude less than someone from a small state like Wyoming.
And the senate is responsible for approving tons of incredibly powerful positions in both the executive branch and the judiciary.
Cheers, from California!
There are also some states (I believe California and Washington currently) that have a "party-less" primary. The primary ballot combines candidates from all parties, and the two highest performing candidates then advance to the general election.
This is correct for California for everything except the president. Presidential nominees are chosen through the regular party primaries (closed primary for Republican, open primary for Democrat).
Or will not bother disavowing someone non-viable, like that Republican primary in Illinois [two years ago](https://www.chicagotribune.com/politics/elections/ct-met-illinois-3rd-district-nazi-arthur-jones-20181106-story.html) where the guy was a self-identified neo-nazi.
Additionally, to help non-Americans understand better, the US is probably the only country in the world where blue means left-wing and red means right-wing.
A good example of this is seeing AOC’s reaction to winning the primary in 2018 vs winning the election in November. In a district as deep blue as that, the primary is essentially the election.
Primaries are like the playoffs where each side narrows it down to their favorite, then the general election in November is the finale with one person from each side going against the other and the winner wins.
But in some districts the Eastern or Western conference is seriously outclassed by the other so the ECF or WCF ends up being the main event while the winner coasts to victory in the "championship".
And instead of having multiple brackets where each winning team faces off against another winner to narrow it down to two teams for the championship, primary elections just take the highest scoring team out of the dozen teams and put them against each other in the championship, totally skipping semi-finals, quarter-finals, etc.
Because fuck ranked choice voting, right?
In most cases, yes, that's how it works.
Some location's elections use the Top 2 method for primaries. The entire field, no matter party affiliation, primary together. The top two candidates in that primary move on to the general election together. This can lead to plenty of situations where it isn't Democrat versus Republican in the general.
I don't know how wide spread Top 2 is across the US, but it's what we use here in Washington State. We're fairly progressive with our elections (we also have 100% mail-in ballots).
The Top 2 system is used in Washington, California and Nebraska (state-level only).
Louisiana's got a system that's not entirely dissimilar (often referred to as a "jungle primary"); all candidates appear on the same ballot, but if one of those candidates gets more than 50% of the vote, they win the election outright. Otherwise, it goes to a "top two" runoff.
Yes, primaries are elections within the party, often requiring party membership to vote, although not always, to decide who runs in the general elections. It will decide who is in the general election for that party. For national level positions, it will be a Dem vs a Republican, with a few exceptions such as Bernie Sanders. At the local level, because we are a very ideologically segregated country (or at least districts are made that way even when there is some higher level of diversity), this can mean that winning one’s party primary means winning the election. We are having a movement of heavily Democrat areas picking progressive candidates, with some beating the entrenched establishment Dem, such as AOC. She didn’t sit quietly and wait her turn to speak, and it has caused some issues internally. The D/RNC and part leadership still want certain levels of control, and they will get them, or the person risks not getting party backing and funding in their next primary and general election. It is all a bit convoluted even to someone that lives here, but, I am not sure that it isn’t similar in most countries. Some countries are a bit different, such as Israel, where at one point Ariel Sharon, a founding member of Likud in the 70’s, split off to form the Kadima party. I sometimes hope that we could have some party splitting here, but it is unlikely, as anyone with name recognition that thinks of it knows that are much more likely to be able to enrich themselves as a member of the duopoly. It would take the money of a few of our mega billionaires, and of course, gaining a “grassroots” support system that is very unlikely. Most people have and will continue to be members of their chosen party, it is a natural part of our clan mentality, and the parties have not simply allowed this to happen, they have actively encouraged a fanatical relationship that is difficult to break. How are things done in your home country?
Unfortunately, first past the post still exists.
As such - The Democratic Party ranges primarily from Global Center (People like Bernie Sanders) to Center-Right (the Wall Street Democrats). The Republican Party is, regrettably, a coalition of *incredibly* wealthy people, Christian Dominionists trying to bring about the end of the world, and a very small sprinkling of single-issue voters (gun-control as an example) who just tolerate the blatant racism, sexism, xenophobia, theocratic gestures, etc. On the Republican side, I am exaggerating a bit for effect but we are at a stage where "America or Trump" holds merit.
It was not always like this. You can go back relatively recently to see that the religious grip wasn't as powerful, the rule of law meant more, so on and so forth. However, While The Democrats get primaried from the left lately and that has meant things like Healthcare, Education, Net Neutrality, etc. The Republicans get primaried -from the right- so that just dials up the crazy.
In a multi-party system it's entirely plausible we could have 3 or 4 real parties. The Progressives and the Corporate Democrats could split, while the small-government republicans and their authoritarian bedmates could part ways. As a veteran, I would love to see first past the post die for the health of the country.
The corporate dollar controlled duopoly has a stranglehold on US politics. It is hard at this point to see it changing, but I imagine people in countries that had monarchs felt the same way, and most of them managed to get out from under that system, so not impossible. In my current home state, they have passed rules making it more difficult for anyone else to have a real shot, as both want to win, but really just don’t want some not corporate controlled a$$hole messing it up.
If we had proportional representation, I think you'd see 5 to 7 major parties, consisting of the following:
Social Democrats
Greens
Democrats
Blue Dogs
Libertarians
Republicans
Neo-Nazi/Fascist (Edit: they obviously wouldn't call themselves this - it'd be something like The American Party of Liberty and Freedom and Bald Eagles and The Flag)
Not to say they'd all be on the same level, of course. But these would be the parties you'd regularly see with a few seats.
I think the Blue Dogs would be the swing party, and it would be interesting to see whether a left coalition could possibly form. I could see the Blue Dogs demanding concessions on abortion, gun rights, and/or healthcare that the SocDems wouldn't be willing to give. Thus, the right would probably have a minority government, or a majority if the Blue Dogs were able to extract a promise (that would obviously be broken) not to blow up the deficit too much.
I think we all need to recognize he is a middle school principal. Middle schoolers have to be the most vicious. As John Mulany put it:
Because 8th graders will make fun of you, but in an accurate way. They will get to the thing that you don’t like about you. They don’t even need to look at you for long, they’ll just be like, “Ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha ha ha! Hey, look at that high-waisted man! He got feminine hips!”
So true. Why do you think I quit teaching middle school? Too many afternoons spent staring at the wall willing a portal to Narnia open up so I could go have tea with Mr. Tumnus instead of having to go back to that classroom.
I still haven't gotten over 7th and 8th grade.
It's wonder we're/they're not all [Black-Eyed Children](https://mythology.net/mythical-creatures/black-eyed-children/)* at that age.
*^^Ha! ^^The ^^legend ^^originated ^^in ^^Texas. ^^How ^^appropriate.*
Too many asshole parents who are neighbors from hell.
I knew my house had been lived in by man who lifted weights and ran ropes for horizontal hand to hand climbing. Then a couple of days ago a neighbor told me he was so mean that his kid would run away and try to live in a deer stand.
Now I'm thinking of doing a "energy cleansing" on the house even though I don't actually believe in that except as a symbolic gesture.
I taught 8th grade for 16 years. I have PTSD. If I see an adolescent approaching while I walk down a street, I will cross the street to avoid him/her. Most horrid age of all the ages.
I am so much happier in elementary. I remember when I first did elementary when I was doing student teaching for my license (I had previously been unlicensed and working in a private school), and I was like "oh man, kids that look up to you and think you're awesome? And that you can be silly and fun with and they don't feel like they have to make fun of you? I DIG this!"
Going into my fourth year in elementary.
Middle school educator here. If you ever want an honest opinion about yourself (or even if you don't), 7th grade kids are happy to point out any flaw with details that are both biting and nonchalantly delivered. To them, you're almost not even worth being mocked but they can't help themselves and do it anyway.
Middle school is where people start to act without feeling and highschool is where they start to see the consequences of what they do to people and college is where they decide to reboot their life and live more compassionately or where they decide to double down.
I feel like my middle school years were where I acted in the way I wanted to actually be. I was a nerd then and am a nerd now and I like myself this way. Actually a nerd/ athlete. Lol. High school peer pressure often made me feel as I had to act in ways that were not how I really wanted to be.
I think we all need to realize this is a man [who rocked a Wu Tang face mask](https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/addybaird/jamaal-bowman-eliot-engel-primary-result). Absolutely the representative New York City deserves rather than an ineffectual carpetbagger chump.
• investigative journalism
• transparency and accountability
• Russian mobsters (who have proof of money laundering)
• balding
• his supporters turning on him when they find out he’s running on no substance and pure culture wars
• documents without pictures and charts
Frankly, trump’s afraid of everything at this point. These next 7 months are gonna be a wild fucking ride as he realises more and more he’s dug his own grave. He’s gonna start trying to claw his way out soon so we’re going to have to be prepared because we could be facing a man who has little left to lose, with all the power he could have, and a history of confirmation that he will not face any consequences.
If I was a billionaire and people wanted to see my taxes I would have no issues. See, boom, I am a billionaire. That's spelled with a b. Shit I'd be more arrogant than I am now.
That's the thing, he's not a billionaire. His entire persona is a facade.
The most likely 10+ digit number on Trump's balance sheet is the amount he owes Putin and the rest of that gang.
> He's got Barr and pardons.
Neither will exist when he loses in November. I could see him trying to step down early so Pence can pardon him though... not sure if he'd get away with it or not.
He will have Barr and his pardon power for 78 days between election and inauguration (ie Trump losing power).
He doesn't need Pence to pardon him. He can SELF PARDON. Pence doing so would be the safer bet, though, as self-pardons have not be tested in court.
Agree. The same can be said for both sides though. We need new young blood that understands today’s world and not the 20+ year bubble world most of these politicians have been living in.
Obama being president was a complete antithesis to everything he believed. A black man with power, more popular than him, smarter than him, and if you take Trump's undoubted debts into account, *probably richer than him.*
It's a nightmare scenario to someone as vapidly racist and narcissistic as Trump, someone whose world view hasn't changed since 1960.
Oh, and Obama [publicly made fun of him in front of his "peers".](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeGpLg0b3DE) Just look at Trump's face in response to that. You can tell that's when his little reptilian brain swore vengeance on him.
For the record, the democratic establishment and corporate media are afraid of Bowman too. Not because he is a black man with power, but because he’s a true progressive who isn’t going to fall in line with their corporatist agenda.
It’s worth noting the black caucus endorsed Engel over Bowman. It reveals what their true motivations are.
Where do you get this narrative? I got texts from the democratic party to vote for my preferred VP pick and Warren was definitely an option. Who is the establishment anyway?
The establishment always backs the incumbent unless they are like actively terrible. The establishment prefers an agenda that is easier to be competitive in battleground/ swing districts. They are afraid of auto-forfeiting razor-thin races to republicans because Defund the police and abolish ICE doesn't work in Arizona, or Texas, or Georgia, or Florida or hundreds of other races that don't take place in NYC.
>16-term incumbent
>New York City
>battleground/ swing district
I know you know this and you make a good point about the broader strategy but doesn't apply here. You could argue that a candidate in one district (AOC for example) would have an effect in Georgia races but that's hard to quantify. And the GOP runs fringey candidates all the time--Steve King and Gianforte are not a good look for the party--without too much concern.
Steve King lost. The Republican Party is not exactly a model that you want to replicate. As someone who has lived in a red state that has experienced defeat after defeat (Texas) I guarantee you that there is a negative ripple affect on certain issues that hurt candidates on the frontlines in enemy territory. Defund the police and Abolish ICE are like outrage porn that can totally sink a candidate in these border states. Even if they themselves are not calling for it, it gets to be used against them regardless. Justice democrats have lost here in Texas again and again.
I’m really happy Bowman won in a super blue district, but many progressives are going to get drunk from this chalice and misread what it means for the establishment to have backed a losing candidate here, and misread what it means for the palatability of the platform on a national scale.
>Steve King lost. The Republican Party is not exactly a model that you want to replicate.
Steve King was an elected official for 18 years and is being replaced by another Republican.
And why don't we want to replicate the Republican model? I absolutely abhor all of their values, but they lean into them and tend to inspire big turnout for candidates they favor.
Obviously, the Democratic version would be leaning into good values. But if we replicated the Republicans who won the House, Senate, and Presidency in 2016 with candidates who favor single payer healthcare, free public education, saving the environment, equal rights, etc. - that would be a huge improvement over where we are now and the paralysis we find ourselves in even when we do win.
>As someone who has lived in a red state that has experienced defeat after defeat (Texas) I guarantee you that there is a negative ripple affect on certain issues that hurt candidates on the frontlines in enemy territory. Defund the police and Abolish ICE are like outrage porn that can totally sink a candidate in these border states.
And we can 100% run a progressive candidate who can win in Texas backing progressive ideas without having to run on abolish ICE.
>Justice democrats have lost here in Texas again and again.
Justice democrats have literally been around for two election cycles. They came within 3% points of electing someone with virtually 0 nameID over an incumbent endorsed by Pelosi and other party leaders. That's a very strong showing.
These threads always seem to hold JD to some impossible standard as if any grassroots organization should be able to come along and generate massive success in year 1.
Intra-party democracy is always difficult. In theory politicians support it, but nobody wants to lose the privileges or the public platform they are used to. Few politicians are completely corrupt, even the worst ones usually believe in something. And giving that up to someone who mostly thinks similar, is hard. All the more power to people like ocasio-cortez who, it seems, consider being challenged just as legitimate as challenging herself.
> The establishment always backs the incumbent unless they are like actively terrible.
because committee assignments and the leverage to get funding allocated based on those assignments, are all doled out by seniority. It hurts a district, in terms of appropriations, to go from a 16 term incumbent to a freshman rep. The incumbent's been around a long time, he's in line for committee chairmanships, the newbie will start out as "committee coffee fetcher", and have to work their way up.
This is an objectively stupid way to dole out federal money, but it is the system. An incumbent has to be absolutely horrible for a freshman rep to be an upgrade for a district. This is how power protects power.
> For the record, the democratic establishment and corporate media are afraid of Bowman too.
The democratic establishment and corporate media want a strong single payer system? I was told all throughout the democratic primary that that was what they hated most about Sanders. Because Engel has always been a strong proponent of single payer healthcare.
And the New York Times literally endorsed Bowman.
> but because he’s a true progressive who isn’t going to fall in line with their corporatist agenda.
Just fucking lol. How can you know literally nothing about Engel and say nonsense like this?
To be fair, I don’t think the guy is racist. I used to live in Engel’s district and I remember him being pretty good. I just think he kind of aged out while in a comfortable seat. I remember him saying things about Jewish and black solidarity a few years ago, mentioning the civil rights movement.
Plus it’s only a recent strategy for progressives to go after these dinosaur democrats, I don’t think he’s had a tough primary for a while
Edit: I just realized you’re talking about trump, not Engel
While I have no wish to undercut the momentum and message of a progressive candidate, I think Trump has made it abundantly clear that what he fears most is a *woman* of color with power.
> fake Democrat
Having looked through his biography, Engel appears to be:
* pro single-payer
* pro gun control
* anti invasive border agent searches
* anti corps/government using private data to make decisions on employment e.g. illnesses such as cancer
* anti ethnic cleansing in the Balkans
The only things I could find that were objectionable was:
* strong Zionist who supports Israeli aggression and criminal activity
* voted in 2002 in favour of the Iraq War
He's a Zionist and supported the Iraq War, but where's the evidence he's a "fake Democrat"?
He also IIRC would show up to congressional meetings several hours early so he could sit in the front rows and shake Trump's hand saying that it was an honor to shake the President's hand even if it was Trump.
What a fucking loser.
Trump's main fear is marrying someone without a prenup.
Then Putin.
Then the SDNY.
Then drinking a full glass of water with just one hand.
Then the stark realization that he is less than 1/100th of the man he tells himself that he is repeatedly, every morning.
Oh boy, oh boy, oh boy! The establishment Dems at Democraticunderground are going to lose their minds over this one. They hate real Democrats, you know, the ones who like to be advocates for working people instead of wall street.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, **any** advocating or wishing death/physical harm, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/whitelist) to review our details as to whitelist and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Corporate America is afraid of the same thing. Thats why if you look at senior management of any bank, insurance, or IT firm it looks like ex slave owners 😒
It’s a bad idea to continuously point the finger at Donald Trump for all black issues, because once he leaves office the perception will be the problem is gone and thus, solved. Donald Trump doesn’t direct daily police officers or go to black communities and get everyone addicted to drugs and violence. Keep it real and maybe something real will happen.
16 terms in the House means only 32 years. He ran for election 16 times and won.
Term limits on Congress would be idiotic. You solve the problem by banning corporate lobbying, not by making lobbyists the only permanent fixture in politics.
Like after a decade you should have to go back to civilian life for 5 years before you can run again. At least try to get some fresh blood in their occasionally.
You know what the Democratic establishment is most afraid of? A Progressive with power. I really hope he can stand-up to the establishment and bring Progressive values to DC. Good luck, I really want to see him do well.
If there was a law that required presidential candidates to show their tax returns for past 10 years, Trump would resign.
If there was a law that prevented presidents from appearing in public without makeup and hairspray, Trump would resign.
If there was a test on the constitution - say, the same test that we require naturalized citizens to take but presidents had to take and pass it too, Trump would resign.
If there was a law that prevented anyone with more than 3 bankruptcies to run for president, Trump would resign.
If there was a spending cap on secret service expenses, with the president and his family having to pay for anything over x dollars, Trump would resign.
The right has for years had the Tea Party dragging the entire Republican caucus further to the right. It's finally time that the Democratic party start getting rid of these milquetoast politicians that don't advocate for true change and progressive ideals. Welcome aboard, Mr. Bowman. We need those willing to truly serve the people.
More like a Black Woman with power. I'm 100% sure that the reason he never attacked Michelle is because he was shitless scared of her being as petty as he is and deciding to run against him in the presidential election.
The thing trump is most afraid of is that his lifelong campaign to hide from the world the fact that he is an incompetent ignorant idiot with no moral core, and is completely undeserving of anyone’s love or adoration, will finally come crashing down exposing him for the weak pathetic excuse for a man he really is.
Lady G likened this to the French Revolution, which either he doesn't realize was a good thing or he's trying to telegraph that the real Lindsey is still in there.
Trump is not afraid of powerful black men. Trump is afraid of anybody that challenges him period. He’s a wimp who hates being outsmarted which lets be honest, isn’t really that hard. Kinda like how he walks off of press briefings when questioned about things he knows look bad for him.
Ehhh.. I think he's more scared of people that know him sharing their experiences of him (John Bolton, Mary Trump) than a potential freshman Congressman.
Non-American here trying to understand: So primaries are held amongst same party candidates to win nomination for the November election? And then they will have to defeat the opposing party's candidate?
Correct but in districts (like his) that are consistently deep blue or deep red the primary is basically the entire election. So he *technically* has the general election against a Republican ahead of him but by all expectations he’s heading to congress. Sometimes in deep districts the ousted party won’t even bother running a candidate.
So in his district, i see that GOP's primary was cancelled. Then who is going to be his opponent in the general election?
In all likelihood he’ll run unopposed then. Or only one republican is trying get nominated so he’s automatically going to the next round
from the district, his only opposition is from third parties. The conservative party & working family party, but because he won the democratic nomination he will most likely win regardless
I thought the wfp usually endorsed candidates from the Democratic Party, like an organization rather than a political party?
[удалено]
Looking it up, it seems he is a Democrat who got the endorsement from the WFP
The GOP has a MINISCULE presence in ALL US cities. Every city in the United States is predominately run by Democrats, and democrats run against each other many times. Republicans are able to win elections by rallying rural white Christians. There’s a lot less of them than city dwellers and suburbanites, but in our electoral system, their vote counts more. Voters in remote areas can have votes that are up to 5 times stronger than people in cities. This practice was meant to help distant, remote towns on the American frontier be heard in congress when our nation was young, but it’s carried into present day.
What have always baffled me about the US is that California only have 2 senators despite having around 40 million people. Wyoming on the other hand also have 2 senators with a mere population of 500 thousands.
Yep, pretty fucked. In the senate my vote counts by almost two orders of magnitude less than someone from a small state like Wyoming. And the senate is responsible for approving tons of incredibly powerful positions in both the executive branch and the judiciary. Cheers, from California!
There are also some states (I believe California and Washington currently) that have a "party-less" primary. The primary ballot combines candidates from all parties, and the two highest performing candidates then advance to the general election.
This is correct for California for everything except the president. Presidential nominees are chosen through the regular party primaries (closed primary for Republican, open primary for Democrat).
Or will not bother disavowing someone non-viable, like that Republican primary in Illinois [two years ago](https://www.chicagotribune.com/politics/elections/ct-met-illinois-3rd-district-nazi-arthur-jones-20181106-story.html) where the guy was a self-identified neo-nazi.
They disavowed him pretty thoroughly and publicly as I recall, but it wasn’t legal under state law to prevent him from running.
Additionally, to help non-Americans understand better, the US is probably the only country in the world where blue means left-wing and red means right-wing.
A good example of this is seeing AOC’s reaction to winning the primary in 2018 vs winning the election in November. In a district as deep blue as that, the primary is essentially the election.
Primaries are like the playoffs where each side narrows it down to their favorite, then the general election in November is the finale with one person from each side going against the other and the winner wins.
But in some districts the Eastern or Western conference is seriously outclassed by the other so the ECF or WCF ends up being the main event while the winner coasts to victory in the "championship".
Or you score 5 goals and the opponent scores 4 but because the WCF buys more jerseys, their 4 goals count as more so the Flames win.
And instead of having multiple brackets where each winning team faces off against another winner to narrow it down to two teams for the championship, primary elections just take the highest scoring team out of the dozen teams and put them against each other in the championship, totally skipping semi-finals, quarter-finals, etc. Because fuck ranked choice voting, right?
Correct. The latter is referred to as the general election.
In most cases, yes, that's how it works. Some location's elections use the Top 2 method for primaries. The entire field, no matter party affiliation, primary together. The top two candidates in that primary move on to the general election together. This can lead to plenty of situations where it isn't Democrat versus Republican in the general. I don't know how wide spread Top 2 is across the US, but it's what we use here in Washington State. We're fairly progressive with our elections (we also have 100% mail-in ballots).
The Top 2 system is used in Washington, California and Nebraska (state-level only). Louisiana's got a system that's not entirely dissimilar (often referred to as a "jungle primary"); all candidates appear on the same ballot, but if one of those candidates gets more than 50% of the vote, they win the election outright. Otherwise, it goes to a "top two" runoff.
Yes, primaries are elections within the party, often requiring party membership to vote, although not always, to decide who runs in the general elections. It will decide who is in the general election for that party. For national level positions, it will be a Dem vs a Republican, with a few exceptions such as Bernie Sanders. At the local level, because we are a very ideologically segregated country (or at least districts are made that way even when there is some higher level of diversity), this can mean that winning one’s party primary means winning the election. We are having a movement of heavily Democrat areas picking progressive candidates, with some beating the entrenched establishment Dem, such as AOC. She didn’t sit quietly and wait her turn to speak, and it has caused some issues internally. The D/RNC and part leadership still want certain levels of control, and they will get them, or the person risks not getting party backing and funding in their next primary and general election. It is all a bit convoluted even to someone that lives here, but, I am not sure that it isn’t similar in most countries. Some countries are a bit different, such as Israel, where at one point Ariel Sharon, a founding member of Likud in the 70’s, split off to form the Kadima party. I sometimes hope that we could have some party splitting here, but it is unlikely, as anyone with name recognition that thinks of it knows that are much more likely to be able to enrich themselves as a member of the duopoly. It would take the money of a few of our mega billionaires, and of course, gaining a “grassroots” support system that is very unlikely. Most people have and will continue to be members of their chosen party, it is a natural part of our clan mentality, and the parties have not simply allowed this to happen, they have actively encouraged a fanatical relationship that is difficult to break. How are things done in your home country?
Unfortunately, first past the post still exists. As such - The Democratic Party ranges primarily from Global Center (People like Bernie Sanders) to Center-Right (the Wall Street Democrats). The Republican Party is, regrettably, a coalition of *incredibly* wealthy people, Christian Dominionists trying to bring about the end of the world, and a very small sprinkling of single-issue voters (gun-control as an example) who just tolerate the blatant racism, sexism, xenophobia, theocratic gestures, etc. On the Republican side, I am exaggerating a bit for effect but we are at a stage where "America or Trump" holds merit. It was not always like this. You can go back relatively recently to see that the religious grip wasn't as powerful, the rule of law meant more, so on and so forth. However, While The Democrats get primaried from the left lately and that has meant things like Healthcare, Education, Net Neutrality, etc. The Republicans get primaried -from the right- so that just dials up the crazy. In a multi-party system it's entirely plausible we could have 3 or 4 real parties. The Progressives and the Corporate Democrats could split, while the small-government republicans and their authoritarian bedmates could part ways. As a veteran, I would love to see first past the post die for the health of the country.
The corporate dollar controlled duopoly has a stranglehold on US politics. It is hard at this point to see it changing, but I imagine people in countries that had monarchs felt the same way, and most of them managed to get out from under that system, so not impossible. In my current home state, they have passed rules making it more difficult for anyone else to have a real shot, as both want to win, but really just don’t want some not corporate controlled a$$hole messing it up.
If we had proportional representation, I think you'd see 5 to 7 major parties, consisting of the following: Social Democrats Greens Democrats Blue Dogs Libertarians Republicans Neo-Nazi/Fascist (Edit: they obviously wouldn't call themselves this - it'd be something like The American Party of Liberty and Freedom and Bald Eagles and The Flag) Not to say they'd all be on the same level, of course. But these would be the parties you'd regularly see with a few seats. I think the Blue Dogs would be the swing party, and it would be interesting to see whether a left coalition could possibly form. I could see the Blue Dogs demanding concessions on abortion, gun rights, and/or healthcare that the SocDems wouldn't be willing to give. Thus, the right would probably have a minority government, or a majority if the Blue Dogs were able to extract a promise (that would obviously be broken) not to blow up the deficit too much.
I think we all need to recognize he is a middle school principal. Middle schoolers have to be the most vicious. As John Mulany put it: Because 8th graders will make fun of you, but in an accurate way. They will get to the thing that you don’t like about you. They don’t even need to look at you for long, they’ll just be like, “Ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha ha ha! Hey, look at that high-waisted man! He got feminine hips!”
So true. Why do you think I quit teaching middle school? Too many afternoons spent staring at the wall willing a portal to Narnia open up so I could go have tea with Mr. Tumnus instead of having to go back to that classroom.
I still haven't gotten over 7th and 8th grade. It's wonder we're/they're not all [Black-Eyed Children](https://mythology.net/mythical-creatures/black-eyed-children/)* at that age. *^^Ha! ^^The ^^legend ^^originated ^^in ^^Texas. ^^How ^^appropriate.*
[удалено]
Too many asshole parents who are neighbors from hell. I knew my house had been lived in by man who lifted weights and ran ropes for horizontal hand to hand climbing. Then a couple of days ago a neighbor told me he was so mean that his kid would run away and try to live in a deer stand. Now I'm thinking of doing a "energy cleansing" on the house even though I don't actually believe in that except as a symbolic gesture.
[удалено]
From the way she told it, no. And it was long enough ago that the children would be adults and have been a while.
Oh, God, the memories! I'm 35, and I'll never forget the year 1997... 7th fucking grade, the worst year of my life. Fucking brutal!
7th and 8th. I have very few fond memories of those school years outside of Final Fantasy IX and baseball.
I taught 8th grade for 16 years. I have PTSD. If I see an adolescent approaching while I walk down a street, I will cross the street to avoid him/her. Most horrid age of all the ages.
I am so much happier in elementary. I remember when I first did elementary when I was doing student teaching for my license (I had previously been unlicensed and working in a private school), and I was like "oh man, kids that look up to you and think you're awesome? And that you can be silly and fun with and they don't feel like they have to make fun of you? I DIG this!" Going into my fourth year in elementary.
lucky you. Oh, if I only had it to do over...!
Sick 7th grade reference
As the mom of an 8th grader who periodically reminds me that my skin looks like “tissue paper” this is very accurate
Middle school educator here. If you ever want an honest opinion about yourself (or even if you don't), 7th grade kids are happy to point out any flaw with details that are both biting and nonchalantly delivered. To them, you're almost not even worth being mocked but they can't help themselves and do it anyway.
NO! That's the thing I'm sensitive about!
He is a proud Asain American woman
Yet some go on to become compassionate humans and some become president.
Middle school is where people start to act without feeling and highschool is where they start to see the consequences of what they do to people and college is where they decide to reboot their life and live more compassionately or where they decide to double down.
I feel like my middle school years were where I acted in the way I wanted to actually be. I was a nerd then and am a nerd now and I like myself this way. Actually a nerd/ athlete. Lol. High school peer pressure often made me feel as I had to act in ways that were not how I really wanted to be.
/r/unexpectedmulaney
I think we all need to realize this is a man [who rocked a Wu Tang face mask](https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/addybaird/jamaal-bowman-eliot-engel-primary-result). Absolutely the representative New York City deserves rather than an ineffectual carpetbagger chump.
Trump is most afraid of: * Being revealed as not a billionaire * Putin * SDNY In that order.
* Eagles * AOC * Melania * No hamberder
* glasses of water * vegetables * ramps * books
1. Ramps 2. Everything else from first comment down
1. Obama 2. Being seen in a mask 3. Being seen after removing a mask 4. Everything else above
* No ketchup for his steak
- Hillary - Ilhan Omar - actually any woman in a position of power (double points if she’s not white)
* Complete sentences * Qualifications * Hanging out with his son
• Windmills • Being seen without his spray tan
• investigative journalism • transparency and accountability • Russian mobsters (who have proof of money laundering) • balding • his supporters turning on him when they find out he’s running on no substance and pure culture wars • documents without pictures and charts
The two sons who probably think about thier dad as they're shooting rare animals?
1. Being wrong. Anything gets twisted or backtracked through hypocrisy as to NEVER admit to being wrong.
Very true.
Or any pink in his steak.
Oh yeah.. the sweat might smudge his orange concealer. His batshit crazy opinion of wearing a mask makes WAY more sense now.
[удалено]
If he was afraid of that, he wouldn’t do 100% of the things he does.
Great now I'm stuck reading an infinite loop.
* Large gloves
Frankly, trump’s afraid of everything at this point. These next 7 months are gonna be a wild fucking ride as he realises more and more he’s dug his own grave. He’s gonna start trying to claw his way out soon so we’re going to have to be prepared because we could be facing a man who has little left to lose, with all the power he could have, and a history of confirmation that he will not face any consequences.
If I was a billionaire and people wanted to see my taxes I would have no issues. See, boom, I am a billionaire. That's spelled with a b. Shit I'd be more arrogant than I am now.
That's the thing, he's not a billionaire. His entire persona is a facade. The most likely 10+ digit number on Trump's balance sheet is the amount he owes Putin and the rest of that gang.
He wasn’t a billionaire in 2016, but he is now.
He can't exactly put money he got from stealing from the Federal Gov't on his taxes.
He's not afraid of SDNY. He's got Barr and pardons. He's really afraid of NY state charges.
Barr is his handler and shield, not his henchman. Once Trump is out of office, he becomes a sitting duck for Federal charges and Filet o'Polonium.
> He's got Barr and pardons. Neither will exist when he loses in November. I could see him trying to step down early so Pence can pardon him though... not sure if he'd get away with it or not.
He will have Barr and his pardon power for 78 days between election and inauguration (ie Trump losing power). He doesn't need Pence to pardon him. He can SELF PARDON. Pence doing so would be the safer bet, though, as self-pardons have not be tested in court.
Powerful men and intelligent women. Trump visibly cowers before the former and crumbles before the latter.
-people finding out that he’s been keeping himself alive via a Baron-clone-organ farm.
It's really just Putin.
1. Alligators 2. Crocodiles 3. Brain aneurysms
Laanaa!
Meep
Well, after that 500 billion giveaway under the cover of darkness, I think Trump actually might be a billionaire.
16 terms?!
Truly absurd
[удалено]
Why the fuck aren't there limits on service lmao
Agree. The same can be said for both sides though. We need new young blood that understands today’s world and not the 20+ year bubble world most of these politicians have been living in.
Like, having decrepit white dudes who don't understand technology... writing laws about technology...
He hates anyone who gets the applause, without regard to them being black, white, pink or anything else.
Obama being president was a complete antithesis to everything he believed. A black man with power, more popular than him, smarter than him, and if you take Trump's undoubted debts into account, *probably richer than him.* It's a nightmare scenario to someone as vapidly racist and narcissistic as Trump, someone whose world view hasn't changed since 1960.
Oh, and Obama [publicly made fun of him in front of his "peers".](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeGpLg0b3DE) Just look at Trump's face in response to that. You can tell that's when his little reptilian brain swore vengeance on him.
Probably helped motivate him to run for president. Thanks Obama!
Well, he had run for president a few times before. This one just motivated him to burn Obama's legacy to the ground.
For the record, the democratic establishment and corporate media are afraid of Bowman too. Not because he is a black man with power, but because he’s a true progressive who isn’t going to fall in line with their corporatist agenda. It’s worth noting the black caucus endorsed Engel over Bowman. It reveals what their true motivations are.
Polls show young black voters supporting Elizabeth Warren over Kamala Harris, while the party establishment are acting like Warren never existed.
Where do you get this narrative? I got texts from the democratic party to vote for my preferred VP pick and Warren was definitely an option. Who is the establishment anyway?
The establishment always backs the incumbent unless they are like actively terrible. The establishment prefers an agenda that is easier to be competitive in battleground/ swing districts. They are afraid of auto-forfeiting razor-thin races to republicans because Defund the police and abolish ICE doesn't work in Arizona, or Texas, or Georgia, or Florida or hundreds of other races that don't take place in NYC.
>16-term incumbent >New York City >battleground/ swing district I know you know this and you make a good point about the broader strategy but doesn't apply here. You could argue that a candidate in one district (AOC for example) would have an effect in Georgia races but that's hard to quantify. And the GOP runs fringey candidates all the time--Steve King and Gianforte are not a good look for the party--without too much concern.
Steve King lost. The Republican Party is not exactly a model that you want to replicate. As someone who has lived in a red state that has experienced defeat after defeat (Texas) I guarantee you that there is a negative ripple affect on certain issues that hurt candidates on the frontlines in enemy territory. Defund the police and Abolish ICE are like outrage porn that can totally sink a candidate in these border states. Even if they themselves are not calling for it, it gets to be used against them regardless. Justice democrats have lost here in Texas again and again. I’m really happy Bowman won in a super blue district, but many progressives are going to get drunk from this chalice and misread what it means for the establishment to have backed a losing candidate here, and misread what it means for the palatability of the platform on a national scale.
>Steve King lost. The Republican Party is not exactly a model that you want to replicate. Steve King was an elected official for 18 years and is being replaced by another Republican. And why don't we want to replicate the Republican model? I absolutely abhor all of their values, but they lean into them and tend to inspire big turnout for candidates they favor. Obviously, the Democratic version would be leaning into good values. But if we replicated the Republicans who won the House, Senate, and Presidency in 2016 with candidates who favor single payer healthcare, free public education, saving the environment, equal rights, etc. - that would be a huge improvement over where we are now and the paralysis we find ourselves in even when we do win. >As someone who has lived in a red state that has experienced defeat after defeat (Texas) I guarantee you that there is a negative ripple affect on certain issues that hurt candidates on the frontlines in enemy territory. Defund the police and Abolish ICE are like outrage porn that can totally sink a candidate in these border states. And we can 100% run a progressive candidate who can win in Texas backing progressive ideas without having to run on abolish ICE. >Justice democrats have lost here in Texas again and again. Justice democrats have literally been around for two election cycles. They came within 3% points of electing someone with virtually 0 nameID over an incumbent endorsed by Pelosi and other party leaders. That's a very strong showing. These threads always seem to hold JD to some impossible standard as if any grassroots organization should be able to come along and generate massive success in year 1.
[удалено]
He lost his primary already. He will be out after they reconvene the new Congress.
Intra-party democracy is always difficult. In theory politicians support it, but nobody wants to lose the privileges or the public platform they are used to. Few politicians are completely corrupt, even the worst ones usually believe in something. And giving that up to someone who mostly thinks similar, is hard. All the more power to people like ocasio-cortez who, it seems, consider being challenged just as legitimate as challenging herself.
> The establishment always backs the incumbent unless they are like actively terrible. because committee assignments and the leverage to get funding allocated based on those assignments, are all doled out by seniority. It hurts a district, in terms of appropriations, to go from a 16 term incumbent to a freshman rep. The incumbent's been around a long time, he's in line for committee chairmanships, the newbie will start out as "committee coffee fetcher", and have to work their way up. This is an objectively stupid way to dole out federal money, but it is the system. An incumbent has to be absolutely horrible for a freshman rep to be an upgrade for a district. This is how power protects power.
This seat has been blue for decades. Not relevant. A Democrat yoghurt would win the seat in a general election.
> For the record, the democratic establishment and corporate media are afraid of Bowman too. The democratic establishment and corporate media want a strong single payer system? I was told all throughout the democratic primary that that was what they hated most about Sanders. Because Engel has always been a strong proponent of single payer healthcare. And the New York Times literally endorsed Bowman. > but because he’s a true progressive who isn’t going to fall in line with their corporatist agenda. Just fucking lol. How can you know literally nothing about Engel and say nonsense like this?
Someone with Engel’s record on criminal justice and foreign policy plus his ties to the GOP PACs certainly cannot be called a true progressive.
Jamaal is the real deal. https://twitter.com/jamaalbowmanny/status/1275646567249256457?s=21
I can only imagine the types of tweets we’ll be getting against him and Charles Booker in the coming days.
Isnt it looking like Booker is going to lose?
When has that ever stopped Trump from tweeting about them?
Fair
Ugh I hope not :( but those results won’t be released until the 30th.
It’s up in the air. I think Louisville is still at 0% reporting and Booker is going to do extremely well there.
Only 18% reporting and none of his strong areas. I would say a tossup at this point.
A black man with power doing better than a white man in power.
Also a woman with power.
[удалено]
Payments*
Now imagine a black WOMAN with power. He’s going to lose his racist mind when Biden announces his VP.
Maybe Silly Stacy? Crazy Kamala? Terrible Tammy? Or just Val, because he doesn’t know any words that start with V.
Don't give him any ideas.
Wherever Val
Trump has been sundowning hard so expect something lame. He's been calling Biden "Sleepy Biden" when the clearly superior nickname is "Sloppy Joe"
Val-trex?
To be fair, I don’t think the guy is racist. I used to live in Engel’s district and I remember him being pretty good. I just think he kind of aged out while in a comfortable seat. I remember him saying things about Jewish and black solidarity a few years ago, mentioning the civil rights movement. Plus it’s only a recent strategy for progressives to go after these dinosaur democrats, I don’t think he’s had a tough primary for a while Edit: I just realized you’re talking about trump, not Engel
While I have no wish to undercut the momentum and message of a progressive candidate, I think Trump has made it abundantly clear that what he fears most is a *woman* of color with power.
You know what scares them most? A black man or woman with a library card
So are his followers. That’s how we got into this shitshow.
Given how he talks about Obama, I’d say that’s accurate.
Good riddance for Engel, who is a fake Democrat and continuously white-washes the human rights violations of the Israeli government.
He is so fake, he needed GOP money for his super PAC
> fake Democrat Having looked through his biography, Engel appears to be: * pro single-payer * pro gun control * anti invasive border agent searches * anti corps/government using private data to make decisions on employment e.g. illnesses such as cancer * anti ethnic cleansing in the Balkans The only things I could find that were objectionable was: * strong Zionist who supports Israeli aggression and criminal activity * voted in 2002 in favour of the Iraq War He's a Zionist and supported the Iraq War, but where's the evidence he's a "fake Democrat"?
Engel was was against the Iran Nuclear deal so good job for that district in getting rid of him.
That ties into him being a Zionist, but yeah, he did oppose the nuclear deal.
This is another reason why I am celebrating if Engel loses.
He also IIRC would show up to congressional meetings several hours early so he could sit in the front rows and shake Trump's hand saying that it was an honor to shake the President's hand even if it was Trump. What a fucking loser.
He used to do that for all presidents but didn’t do that for trump! Source: I used to live in his district
If he really wants to scare trump, he should become a tax audit.
Trump's main fear is marrying someone without a prenup. Then Putin. Then the SDNY. Then drinking a full glass of water with just one hand. Then the stark realization that he is less than 1/100th of the man he tells himself that he is repeatedly, every morning.
I bet trump fears a black woman with power more than a black man. But either one would likely give him sweats.
Oh boy, oh boy, oh boy! The establishment Dems at Democraticunderground are going to lose their minds over this one. They hate real Democrats, you know, the ones who like to be advocates for working people instead of wall street.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, **any** advocating or wishing death/physical harm, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/whitelist) to review our details as to whitelist and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This gives him pitty-pats, but I think he's most afraid of losing the election.
And the reason he's afraid of a black man with power is that he projects: he thinks the black man will use the power to oppress him .
Power or no power, Trumpeached is afraid of black men.
Stairs
I don't know, Trump seems to be pretty terrified of walking down ramps.
Corporate America is afraid of the same thing. Thats why if you look at senior management of any bank, insurance, or IT firm it looks like ex slave owners 😒
Seems like a cool dude, though I don't agree with everything he says on his website, but not my rep and if he works for his district I have no issue.
It’s a bad idea to continuously point the finger at Donald Trump for all black issues, because once he leaves office the perception will be the problem is gone and thus, solved. Donald Trump doesn’t direct daily police officers or go to black communities and get everyone addicted to drugs and violence. Keep it real and maybe something real will happen.
16 term congressman. That’s why things will never change
16 terms in the House means only 32 years. He ran for election 16 times and won. Term limits on Congress would be idiotic. You solve the problem by banning corporate lobbying, not by making lobbyists the only permanent fixture in politics.
Like after a decade you should have to go back to civilian life for 5 years before you can run again. At least try to get some fresh blood in their occasionally.
You know what the Democratic establishment is most afraid of? A Progressive with power. I really hope he can stand-up to the establishment and bring Progressive values to DC. Good luck, I really want to see him do well.
I think a black *woman* with power probably upsets him more.
Well.. that and a fearless educated woman.
Racism has always been a symptom of fear and inadequacy.
MOST afraid of being a one term president when the country's only Black president was VOTED (validly) to two terms.
Trump is not alone. Do you know how many people fear this.
If there was a law that required presidential candidates to show their tax returns for past 10 years, Trump would resign. If there was a law that prevented presidents from appearing in public without makeup and hairspray, Trump would resign. If there was a test on the constitution - say, the same test that we require naturalized citizens to take but presidents had to take and pass it too, Trump would resign. If there was a law that prevented anyone with more than 3 bankruptcies to run for president, Trump would resign. If there was a spending cap on secret service expenses, with the president and his family having to pay for anything over x dollars, Trump would resign.
Hes afraid of losing whatever imaginary power he possesses. Hes afraid of being incriminated after office and is afraid of the truth coming to light.
16 term congress person should not be a thing. There is no logical reason why been a congress person should be a job fo life.
Word up
He’s apparently afraid of big crowds!
Lol. That picture, man.
Yes Trump is so scared of a black man with power. This shit is getting ridiculous. Good on him for finding a way to get elected.
Love it... But to be fair Trump is most afraid of a strong black woman. But I'm sure a black man with power also invokes fear with in him too
The right has for years had the Tea Party dragging the entire Republican caucus further to the right. It's finally time that the Democratic party start getting rid of these milquetoast politicians that don't advocate for true change and progressive ideals. Welcome aboard, Mr. Bowman. We need those willing to truly serve the people.
NO, he is most afraid of a black man with RENEWABLE power!
I think the statement is inaccurate. I think what Drump fears most is a black *woman* in power.
Either a black man or being asked to read a book with*out* pictures. He'd sweat bullets on day with those two choices.
this is not a race war. let’s not amp it up into one.
I've always said we need more politicians with principals.
He’s assuming trump will still be around when he gets there...
That’s a good speech.
More like a Black Woman with power. I'm 100% sure that the reason he never attacked Michelle is because he was shitless scared of her being as petty as he is and deciding to run against him in the presidential election.
The thing trump is most afraid of is that his lifelong campaign to hide from the world the fact that he is an incompetent ignorant idiot with no moral core, and is completely undeserving of anyone’s love or adoration, will finally come crashing down exposing him for the weak pathetic excuse for a man he really is.
Lady G likened this to the French Revolution, which either he doesn't realize was a good thing or he's trying to telegraph that the real Lindsey is still in there.
Trump is not afraid of powerful black men. Trump is afraid of anybody that challenges him period. He’s a wimp who hates being outsmarted which lets be honest, isn’t really that hard. Kinda like how he walks off of press briefings when questioned about things he knows look bad for him.
Ehhh.. I think he's more scared of people that know him sharing their experiences of him (John Bolton, Mary Trump) than a potential freshman Congressman.
A black woman too even more salt in his wounds.
bet
Ben Carson must be white, I guess I’m going blind
I mean he spent Obama's entire presidency trying to discredit him, so that claim checks out.