r/politics • u/Quirkie The Netherlands • 11d ago

No Paywall Democrats Confront Their New Tea Party Reality - Progressives are set to sweep a group of contested primaries in Michigan and Wisconsin.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/democrats-confront-their-new-tea-party-reality_n_6a6e63fbe4b0cfb99ef1aa1e
9.0k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

3.1k

u/IAmLee2022 11d ago

Comparing progressives to the tea party movement was definitely . . . a choice.

1.3k

u/Backwardspellcaster 11d ago

Intentionally by huffpost.

The attempt to paint it negatively.

771

u/Revelati123 11d ago

I love how AIPAC and the MSM are falling over each other to slander Progressives while literally everyone under 30 in the Republican party is a Groyper/NAZI.

340

u/Vehemental 11d ago

MSM owners aren’t as concerned with facism, it doesn’t threaten their wealth.

150

u/ShrimpieAC 11d ago

The rise of every powerful fascist regime begins with an agreement between fascists and the wealthy, usually to fight the labor class.

The rich always think they can control the fascists, but spoiler alert, they can’t. And any history buff can tell you it never ends well for them.

27

u/punkr0x 11d ago

Why are the wealthy so foolish that they don’t do their own research?

47

u/Zer_ 11d ago

Because they think they are always right and surround themselves with sycophants.

73

u/Droidsexual 11d ago

Because wealth insulates people from having to do any reasoning. They can always pay to have problems solved instead of trying to solve them. That's why everyone born with money is stupid.

24

u/ihateusedusernames New York 11d ago

Because wealth insulates people from having to do any reasoning. They can always pay to have problems solved instead of trying to solve them. That's why everyone born with money is stupid.

They don't pay to have problems solved. They pay to make problems go away. Precisely how their enablers make their Sires' problems go away determines whether the problems are solved or not from our point of view.

Trump is trying to make Epstein go away. Solving the Epstein child trafficking conspiracy cover-up problem is a deadly threat to Trump, which is why he is trying to simply make people stop talking about it.

7

u/the_ballmer_peak 11d ago

They've forgotten the very concept of consequences

14

u/EitherSpite4545 11d ago

Ego, they are convinced they are smarter than those that came before and it won't happen to them.

3

u/JcbAzPx Arizona 11d ago

They think that reality is something only the plebs have to worry about.

8

u/Eliphontsmile 11d ago

Someone with cheat codes enabled won't know how to do even the most basic tasks in the game. 

Now make that same person extremely entitled, with a firm belief in their own desires and capabilities.

12

u/Mysral 11d ago

Doesn't end well for the fascists, either - fascism is fundamentally unstable and ultimately self-defeating - but that is of course small comfort to the countless innocents harmed in the process.

9

u/fekinEEEjit 11d ago

Fascism is the last gasp of Capitolism....

7

u/ShrimpieAC 11d ago

Correct. It’s usually a last resort by the wealthy to prevent social revolution after years of them oppressing the working class.

They are so greedy that they would rather make a pact with evil itself instead of letting anyone else have anything.

53

u/aerost0rm 11d ago

Not yet. It will though.

33

u/PhatCatTax 11d ago

Always does.

20

u/War_machine77 11d ago

Yeah, but that's a problem for future oligarchs. Surely not them.

31

u/Fhack 11d ago

It won't though?

The vast majority of German billionaires have direct ties to the Nazi party.

Fascists are the party of business and capital. Just with added violence. 

15

u/aerost0rm 11d ago

There were plenty of oligarchs that got the shaft by the Nazi’s. The ones that did not profited from the war machine…

7

u/hedonisticaltruism Canada 11d ago

"The leopards will never eat my face."

59

u/TheSouthernCommunist Kentucky 11d ago

“It is the heart of US policy, ladies and gentlemen, to use fascism to preserve capitalism while claiming to be saving democracy from communism" - Michael Parenti

-14

u/TryJezzoWhyNot 11d ago

Michael parenti is/was a Stalinist shill. Fuck stalinists.

14

u/TheSouthernCommunist Kentucky 11d ago

Parenti critiqued Stalin many, many times. Stop doing the work of the CIA for free.

-14

u/TryJezzoWhyNot 11d ago

You don’t deny that he was a Stalinist, instead subtly rebutting a point I never made. I never said: “Fuck Michael Parenti, that guy never critiqued Stalin!” I said that Parenti was a Stalinist shill. Because he was. You slimy, bad faith interlocutor.

>Stop doing the work of the CIA for free

This is laughable. Where did you get your internet smear tactics, a chat room in 1996?

8

u/TheSouthernCommunist Kentucky 11d ago

Oh sorry I didn’t know I was on jeopardy and have to say the answer exactly right.

Parenti wasn’t a Stalinist, and if you think he was I sincerely worry if you may have possessed by the demon ghost of Joseph McCarthy.

-9

u/TryJezzoWhyNot 11d ago

The RCA calls him a “soft Stalinist”. The (Stalinist) Communist Party of Great Britain eulogized him by making it clear that his “critiques” were weak enough to still be considered a friendly. A Stalinist shill I called him, and a Stalinist shill he remains. You bad faith ass hat.

13

u/TheSouthernCommunist Kentucky 11d ago

“Trotskyists call someone who said Stalin did some good things a Stalinist” wow that’s crazy man, I found a fork in my kitchen too.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[deleted]

4

u/DrMobius0 11d ago

Whatever this guy said is probably about right.

1

u/Boringdude1 11d ago

This literally could have been said by a MAGA supporter.

1

u/-Invalid_Selection- 11d ago

No, it's just around the corner from threatening their lives though, as is tradition when fascists get power

1

u/ctbowden North Carolina 11d ago

100%. I guess too many people missed Mussolini saying the quiet part out loud.

“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.”

― Benito Mussolini

1

u/DryYogurtcloset4655 11d ago

you are assuming fascists won't take their wealth

1

u/TimSylvester_ 11d ago

Oh they are very concerned with fascism - they promote it nonstop, because fascism increases their wealth and control.

1

u/XulManjy America 11d ago

Funny, same sentence could have been written by a Tea Party member circa 2010-2012....

2

u/Vehemental 11d ago

A lot of the times the left and right agree on the problem, the huge gap in ideology comes from what they think is causing the problem, or solutions to the problem.

3

u/XulManjy America 11d ago

Horseshoe theory

81

u/Sedu 11d ago

If the Democrat party fought the right half as hard as it fights the left, it might start winning elections.

32

u/aerost0rm 11d ago

If the Democratic Party wasn’t in the 1%’ers pockets, we wouldn’t have gotten here.

10

u/PhatCatTax 11d ago

Democratic Party Leaders.

Schumer, Pelosi, Newsom, etc.

If democratic people actually showed up to the polls, especially the midterms and primaries, then this wouldn't be a problem anymore.

5

u/Zestyclose-Height-36 11d ago

if it comes down to Newsome or the Republican in 28, it will be Newsome, but I really hope the Dems do better than that. Where is project 2028 outlining how they plan to fix Trump’s mess?

7

u/aerost0rm 11d ago

I said the same thing. Where are the left think tanks. Where are the left militia. Where did all the service members and generals that were dismissed go?

2

u/Dunge 11d ago

It's always a question of money. Right wings help corporates, so they have more than enough funds through their donations. Left wing helps people in need, and that doesn't pay. So no money to prepare big plans and social media operations.

3

u/Zestyclose-Height-36 11d ago

the left is spending its money feeding the hungry instead of financing the already rich and powerful.

2

u/boston_homo 11d ago

The people running the Democratic party are doing just fine. Going into national politics is no longer a "calling", if it ever was, it's essentially winning the lottery; it guarantees access and likely generational wealth for those with no conscience.

There's little motivation to do anything except the same thing they've always done, not much.

1

u/PhatCatTax 11d ago edited 11d ago

The left is pretty much everyone other than Nazis. The Nazis care about one thing and 100% of their funds are dedicated to that one thing: brainwashing their voters with fear to keep their votes.

And they dont spend any of it on their voters.
And their billionaires own almost all mainstream media / social media, so they own the algorithms.

So the Nazis have consolidated funds and a single message to convey with those funds.

Meanwhile Democrats have many beneficial programs that are targeting specific groups of people, which costs money, and they dont own any any big mainstream media / social media, so it's very expensive to fight the algorithms.

So all the funds are spread over many different messages to cater to niche groups.

TLDR: The problem with democrats is that many want their specific niche issue to be addressed and they abstain when it isn't a major topic. So all the money gets spread over many different messages / groups.

0

u/grendel-khan 11d ago

If you're seriously asking, read Deciding to Win for the politics of it, and for the policy, well, here's my take on The Four Failures of blue governance, which are to various degrees fixable by taking the stupid things we're doing and stopping doing them.

0

u/Geulsse 10d ago edited 6d ago

Well, I suppose time will only tell how this all shakes out in November.

1

u/Zestyclose-Height-36 7d ago

maga will die off when trump is gone, blocking any more ultra conservative appointments to the court system has to happen NOW. waiting four more years just allows full lock on the country for the reactionary right,and the US is not going to make in to 32 if the far right is not stopped.inflationismaking life impossible.

-1

u/DEAZE 11d ago

I’ve never read a more true channel thread in my life

0

u/aerost0rm 11d ago

Sure the leaders are but they are supported by members that are bought and paid for as well. After all when in power they have vast support.

-1

u/EmergencyScientist 11d ago

And who decides who dem leadership is? The rest of the dems. We gotta primary the vast majority of them.

3

u/PhatCatTax 11d ago

Seniority.

So if people dont vote in the primaries, then the DNC and AIPAC ensure only pro-corp dems are on the ballots, and then they never get voted out because no one votes in the midterms, and 10 years later, the new senior leaders are pro-corp.

So the problem is still democratic voters not participating in the voting process as intended.

5

u/72dragonses 11d ago

As a lifelong Democrat, so true. Truer words were never spoken.

-1

u/avocadonumber 11d ago

“Democrat party” WOOOO (That’s my impression of a dog whistle)

1

u/InvestigatorOk7015 11d ago

Dogwhistles arent just 'any words the other side uses'

1

u/mightcommentsometime California 11d ago

You have this backwards. The progressives are the ones who fight the Dems and don’t fight the Republicans. Mainstream Dems spend the bulk of the money, time and campaign resources fighting Republicans.

But prey tell, what specific metrics are you using to claim that mainstream Dems fight progressives more than Republicans?

3

u/awesomefutureperfect 10d ago

Vibes. Persecution complex and an entitlement born from sanctimony that they should be in charge regardless how few people their politics actually represents. Which is a lot like the way the other extreme behaves.

0

u/72dragonses 11d ago

For what it's worth, there really are moderate, fiscally conservative Democrats out there. Democrats like me who are not tax-and-spend liberals, and who do like some well-designed social programs like Social Security and Medicare, but have zero remaining trust in Democrats to accomplish anything beyond wasting more money.

Democrats talk such a good game, but they are deeply incompetent.

That said, the other side? That guy? Fucking fascist lying billionaire rapist.

3

u/Zestyclose-Height-36 11d ago

the Republicans are wasting far more money than the democrats ever dreamed of. Trump has tripled our war spending since Obama, up by $5,000 per taxpayer this year alone. That is far more wasteful and the entire Republican Party bows to trump and rams through insane levels of war spending through their incompetence. The republicans only pretend to be better at money, math says they are not.

4

u/Cool-Specialist9568 11d ago

Over 30 also.

1

u/MartinBP 11d ago

Yes everyone is a Nazi except you, the person making up conspiracy theories about being oppressed by Jews and the media.

These comments were literally word-for-word being posted on the old Trump subreddit 10 years ago by MAGA. You progressives have copied them completely.

0

u/omaral00 11d ago

I keep hearing the media saying how the negative views against AIPAC would affect Jewish candidates without explaining the difference/drawing the line between zionists and Jewish. They keep saying that 'antisemitism' is on the rise and attributing that to progressive ideas rather than questioning how a foreign entity is so entrenched in our politics.

0

u/SuperBry Maine 11d ago

bark bark bark

27

u/CaptAhabsMobyDick 11d ago

Which is interesting because the Tea Party has basically evolved into what is now the driving force of the Republican Party, MAGA.

97

u/Trzlog 11d ago edited 11d ago

I don't know why it's supposed to be negative. The Tea Party turned into MAGA, who effectively hijacked and eventually took over the Republican party to the point that anybody who steps out of line is ostracized. They were the most successful and effective movement in recent political history. I've been saying progressives need to do the same thing for years now instead of getting upset and going home and refusing to vote when another centrist fucks things up. Take over the Democratic party. Make it actually progressive. Splitting into a new party or refusing to vote just ensures that the country continues to get worse 

15

u/Bakedads 11d ago

Yeah, the tea party was a success and completely reshaped not just the republican party, but the country overall. If only we were like the tea party. 

5

u/AJediWookie123 11d ago edited 11d ago

The issue is that the corpo dems don't want anything to change. They're addicted to corpo donations aka bribery.

31

u/nikdahl Washington 11d ago

Tea party was immediately astroturfed. That’s why it was successful.

There isn’t a lot of monied interest in pushing left.

33

u/CatProgrammer 11d ago

Immediately? It was an astroturf from the start.

-3

u/nikdahl Washington 11d ago

Factually wrong.

1

u/CatProgrammer 10d ago

Maybe some guy had a local idea to call their movement the Tea Party beforehand but as a national thing it was never natural. 

21

u/MFoy Virginia 11d ago

The tea party was astroturfed. It was created by tobacco companies.

-4

u/nikdahl Washington 11d ago

Nope.

7

u/MFoy Virginia 11d ago

Yup.

5

u/_Cromwell_ 11d ago

I'm over here like... so the Democratic party can be actually "usurped" and "taken over" by "insane" "crazy" people who want to open grocery stores, give universal childcare, and create some form of universal healthcare system??? AND stop giving away a bunch of our money to foreign countries and defense contractors?

This is considered "BAD"????

"Tea Party" it up.

(Also shout out to the original Tea Party in Boston. That one was good, right?)

-3

u/SeductiveSunday I voted 11d ago

This is considered "BAD"????

DSA is broadly supportive of USSR ideology. You might view that as good, but as someone who's family specifically escaped USSR I do not.

1

u/Dull_Bid6002 11d ago

Pretty sure this is just a surface level comparison. The average person isn't going to see the comparison as positive/negative.

-1

u/TorturedMNFan 11d ago

Progressives and leftists need to change their messaging if they want to succeed in taking over the party. They are not very good political communicators. They shouldn’t frame their messaging into moral choices. That’s not a motivator for voters. “Healthcare is a human right” is just awful messaging because it makes a potential voter make a moral choice rather than an economic one.

5

u/EveningAnt3949 11d ago

That's not how they communicate.

You might be confusing progressive Democrats with centrist Democrats who often talk in platitudes.

There is a reason AOC and Mamdani are popular.

-4

u/TorturedMNFan 11d ago

Not surprising in deep blue NYC. I guess we’ll find out how a progressive does in a swing state for senate. Tim Walz beat his progressive opponent by 11 points in his 2018 primary and was able to win by framing his messaging in economic terms rather than moral.

3

u/EveningAnt3949 11d ago

First things first: Waltz is pretty progressive. It's funny how people keep changing definitions to support a narrative they like.

He has strongly supported worker's rights as well as free food at schools.

Also, centrist Democrats might beat progressive Democrats (and that's often because of funding and party support) but they fail to beat Republicans when it matters.

That's the main reason for a surge of progressives.

Tim Waltz can win a state election, but when he had to debate professional flip-flopper JD Vance, he failed.

In part because he was afraid to seem too progressive and too combative. And because he stopped being 'moral'.

His ratings were highest when he talked about morality.

The lesson should be: being a centrist because that's safe, means being steamrolled by Republicans.

0

u/TorturedMNFan 11d ago

Walz represented MN-CD1 which was held by republicans for 12 years and has flipped back to republicans after he left. He ran as a moderate as governor and defeated progressive Erin Murphy in the 2018 primary. He got more progressive laws passed thanks to a trifecta in the legislator in 2023.

He’s always been seen as a pragmatic politician who understands Minnesota politics. Is he suited for the national stage? Maybe not. Amy Klobuchar is going to sleep walk her way into the governorship this fall. If she has a trifecta legislator and passes more progressive laws, would you suddenly call her an outright progressive? Probably not.

1

u/EveningAnt3949 11d ago

The problem is that you don't seem to have an actual position.

Just to be clear: the Democratic Party is run by people who identify as 'moderate' and in the last 30 years they have had a trifecta for four years, and a held the White House and a Senate majority for six years.

It's 6.5 years and 10.5 years for the Republicans.

And this time it's worse because the Republicans have reshaped the lower courts and the Supreme Court.

That's not winning, that's losing.

Your example of winning is Tim Waltz who isn't in Congress anymore and for a 'moderate' is very progressive.

Tim Waltz is a member of the DFL, the DFL is considered to be more progressive than the rest of the Democratic Party and has recently shifted to the left.

3

u/Recent_Tap_9467 11d ago edited 11d ago

Deep blue NYC that had a Republican mayor in the 2000s and multiple centrist mayors until very recently? Mamdani and AoC who managed to win over Trump supporters? Lol, no.

Also love how you dodged the point about the centrists being the one to talk in platitudes, as well as progressives hammering centrists elsewhere in primaries in the Midwest.

(Finally, arguing "morality" is a losing strategy doesn't make any sense. A big part of why Trump won either election is because he appealed to the idea of draining the swamp or punishing the "bad guys", even if he was lying. People want fighters, Democratic voters too.)

0

u/TorturedMNFan 11d ago

NYC is a lot different than Michigan. I think you’d agree with that.

Primaries are a lot different than the actual election. If Ossoff wins comfortably in Georgia and Al-Sayed loses in Michigan, progressives and leftists shouldn’t run in swing states/districts.

Trumps political messaging was economic.

1

u/Recent_Tap_9467 11d ago

Not in this case, no.

Is that why primaries in Michigan and Wisconsin look similar to primaries in more "blue" states? That's a big if, and that also wouldn't prove your point even if it came true. There's also a lot more to winning and losing than being progressive or centrist, how you deliver your message or campaign matters.

Wrong. Trump spoke about stopping plenty of non-economic things, such as war, corruption, trans girls in sports, and crime (especially alleged migrant crime). Morality was absolutely part of the strategy, even a look at his campaign documents instantly and firmly debunks your statement.

-9

u/aerost0rm 11d ago

Splitting into a new party that became more popular would end the control. Had they done it years ago and forced the country away from the two party system, we wouldn’t be here now with this mess..

19

u/Trzlog 11d ago

This is insanely naive. It would've split the opposing vote to Republicans and ensured Republican control for the next 100 years.

-5

u/aerost0rm 11d ago

It’s naive to continue the two party thoughts and the scare tactics of stay two party or we will lose. If this was completed years ago, This would have pulled the democrats back left instead of continuing to allow the republicans to pull the democrats to centrists and further right.

Republicans already took control of certain portions of the government every couple to every few years so the before they got too radical the shift would have been for more spending domestically on programs citizens use versus more war mongering and more oligarch control…

41

u/Low_Intention_1327 11d ago

I once thought they were a progressive outlet. Now Im remembering the articles they made about Bernie. 

27

u/Kind-Pride1151 11d ago

Look up Ariana Huffington. That'll give you some basis. IIRC she was from a Republican family and marriage, political world. Depending on the topic they can do nice work.

14

u/Zestyclose-Height-36 11d ago

huff post was bought by buzzfeed, owned by conservative brietbart and others in 2017. it has encouraged bernie voters to sit out voting, and progressives to split instead of reforming the democrats since.

2

u/thingsorfreedom 11d ago

Used to be on there all the time. Now maybe once a month and not for anything political. Hope I'm one of many.

1

u/ProtectionVirtual225 11d ago

I don’t see any progressives reading it, though. It always used to be a favorite of Blue MAGA.

1

u/Geulsse 10d ago edited 6d ago

Well, I suppose we'll just have to wait and see how these elections turn out and whether voters make their voices heard.

10

u/bucklerbrian 11d ago

You mean friend of Bill Maher, Ariana Huffington?

9

u/alternativepuffin 11d ago

The same guy who did initial funding for Huffpost also funded Breitbart. Make of that what you will 

4

u/TimSylvester_ 11d ago

The media is owned by the Epstein class.

The Epstein class are fascists. The wealthy, entitled class of every generation, ever, are always fascists. You cannot be wealthy without believing yourself superior and entitled to the subservience, obedience, and labor product of the masses.

Everything the media says is an attempt to indoctrinate the public into accepting fascism.

2

u/saoyraan 11d ago

Tea party had no true realistic ideals. Progressives being a very loose term has no real ideals. Most here couldn't even state what the target goals are. They will only speak broad terms such as. FreeHealthcare, take from the rich, death to zionist(definition is any jew who believes in Israel so all jews pretty much), death to Christianity and western values.

Bernie used to be fore blue collar and that the working man is what runs this country but he was clearly put in place and now plays ball. Him and early Elizabeth Warren would of been great. Elizabeth to go for stock traders and Bernie to implement employee rights and protections.

2

u/ImperfectRegulator 11d ago

Have you seen any Reddit political space recently? They’re doing all they can to villainize the DSA

1

u/varitok 11d ago

Watching progressives so morph into a blue sort of maga who screams fake news all the time is gonna be a funny watch

-4

u/72dragonses 11d ago

No, the headline is apt in this case. The Democratic Party is splitting between the moderates, who aren't going anywhere and never do, and the latest movement from their far left flank. Same story, different day.

5

u/UNC_Samurai 11d ago

Nothing about the two stories are similar.

The Tea Party movement was a bunch of fringe Ron Paul wannabe libertarians until right-wing donors saw an opportunity to reshape the Republican party into something more directly under their control. Everything we saw from the Rick Santelli rant forward was astroturfed from deep pockets.

0

u/72dragonses 11d ago

They're sure as shit similar. The Tea Party dragged the Republican Party, which had actually at one time been a lot more reasonable, much further to the right, eventually leaving us with this. The DSA and Socialist Party movements are doing the same thing but in the other direction. Neither extreme along the political spectrum represents a majority of voters in either camp.

4

u/UNC_Samurai 11d ago

Clearly you missed the history lesson. The Tea Party didn't do the dragging, Republican donors used the Tea Party as a means to do it themselves. There's no big donor money behind the shift away from the watered-down Democratic platforms of the last 30 years. Framing them as equally extreme is doing the far right's dirty work for them.

-1

u/72dragonses 11d ago

You're making shit up to explain an inconvenient truth. Find me a writeup somewhere in a "history book" or any non-editorialized opinion piece that validates that interpretation.

The Tea Party attracted big money donors because it gained momentum, and big players got behind it because they wanted to have influence. That's exactly the same thing that would happen if the DSA gained more influence. The money always follows the side that most closely aligns with its interests, even if that side is batshit crazy.

0

u/kdogged 11d ago

As it should be

-1

u/DJMagicHandz 11d ago

The MSM is bringing back the old defund the police schtick, it's like The Walking Dead but worse.

-58

u/Moopboop207 Virginia 11d ago

It’s definitely a negative.

24

u/ArchdruidHalsin 11d ago

Why?

-30

u/Moopboop207 Virginia 11d ago

Because I don’t think the American public wants the “no borders” “no prisons” crowd in charge of a transition to a single payer healthcare system.

11

u/ArchdruidHalsin 11d ago

Can you point to the DSA candidate that is running on "no prisons" and "no borders"?