Both young and old Democrats rate figures like Zohran Mamdani and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez highly. But the young sharply criticize their party, driving defection from "establishment" picks
The Democratic Party, like the Whig Party, is nearing the end of its "natural" life, no longer able to meet the needs of the people or to adapt to the demands of the times. Just as the Republican Party of Lincoln emerged as the Whig Party lay dying under similar circumstances prior to the Civil War, so will a new party emerge some time over the next 10 years. Who knows? It may have already arrived in the form of the Democratic Socialist Party (not to be confused with the Socialist Party of the United States of America). The only question is whether our country's centuries' old frothing at the mouth at the word socialism shackles the party before it gains the strength the Republican party did. If that happens, another party will come forth to fight for what most Americans still hold dear despite the efforts of a dying MAGA movement to pervert them--opportunity, freedom, life, justice, equal opportunity, and the pursuit of happiness.
You can only keep the human spirit down so long in a country founded on those principles. Those ideals may be wounded, and there may be casualties among us, but despite what a social and mainstream media says everyday as they lead with what bleeds, it ain't over until it's over--at least not until folks like those in Minneapolis stop showing up, or candidates like James Talarico in Texas stop running to reclaim the soul of America, or all the judges across the land stop pushing back, or all the Grand Juries called by the DOJ lose their minds, or all the governors and attorney generals across all the states cave. We still have a lot of fight in us. Don't give it away.
I’m 75 and an old-school liberal; count me in among those that like the younger, lefty candidates just fine. I’m fed up with Schumer but willing to let Jeffries show me he knows how to fight.
The bottom line is that whoever runs for office while we're stuck with the monumentally corrupt and incompetent kakistocracy must DELIVER relief to the beleaguered middle class. Because Fatso will still be in office till 2028, the best Dems can do is to get the ball rolling for lowering prices (overturn the tariffs), affordability (renew ACA subsidies, reverse SNAP and Medicaid cuts, and start talking about Medicare for all), and reducing income inequality/budget deficits by removing the FICA cap and raising taxes on corporations and capital gains. If they could come up with a subsidy or tax credit for first-time home buyers, that would also raise chances of a Dem trifecta in 2028.
Meanwhile, Trump will veto all that legislation and billionaires will pour money into "anti-socialism" campaigns, so it will be a rough ride.
But Trump is so nakedly corrupt and out of touch with ordinary Americans' needs, that there is a good chance people will vote for politicians who deliver programs that help the middle- and working-class get their heads above water. And once any of these policies become permanent, they will become impossible to dislodge, just like Medicare and Social Security, which were decried as "socialism!!!" back in the day but now are deeply embedded in our culture as necessary entitlements.
A Democratic-controlled Congress, which means House and Senate, could assert its rights as a more than co-equal branch of government, which is what the Constitution states.
I only know that it takes 2/3 of BOTH House and Senate to overturn a presidential veto; while that may be marginally possible in the House, I seriously doubt the prostrate MAGA Senate would ever consider standing up to their lord and master.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought that Congress could bring legal action to force a president to abide by laws that are already in existence. They could also cut off his projects, whether a war or vanity projects in DC, by not funding them.
Here's what google says: "No, Congress cannot directly file a lawsuit in court to force a sitting president to obey a law. The courts generally rule that individual legislators or Congress as a body lack the legal right—known as "standing"—to sue the executive branch over general policy enforcement or statutory compliance." And we all know about the DOJ memo against indicting a sitting president. And then of course the Extreme Court also granted him broad immunity from being indicted for "official acts" while in office.
Taking the piggy bank away sounds great, and hopefully can be done on Day One in 2027.
Well, a Congressional representative who is on the Board of the Kennedy Center brought a lawsuit, with the help of Democracy Defenders, to get Trump's name off of the Kennedy Center. She was successful, although I'm sure Trump will go running to his buddies on the Supreme Court, who are going to get a bit tired of him.
It could be that citizens could bring lawsuits about laws not being followed.
If I have to, I'll settle for taking away the piggy bank, but I'm going to dream big.
*According to our survey, older Democrats rate Zohran Mamdani at about 72 on the 0-100 “feeling thermometer” scale.
Young Democrats are at 76 — a difference the poll can’t distinguish from zero.*
Is it possible this survey is reading a different sentiment; MAGA fatigue - a strong disgust of Trump and his blunders, stridency and constant bullshitting and lying? What worries me is we Democrats not only have to win in a backlash election, we also then have to govern successfully, to rehabilitate our brand with low propensity non-ideological voters.
I feel very unconvinced our Party, with an undisciplined and strident faction on the Progressive Left can gain the mainstream approval mandate to govern constructively and not be constantly defending some of the lunatic ideological positions DSA candidates have in their baggage.
reader who will soon move into the 65+ demographic. There has almost never been a time in my life where voting for a Democrat was a positive thing. it was almost always a lesser of 2 evils thing. the 2 exceptions were the 2016 primary, where I voted for Bernie. 1, he identified the cause of problems & proposed solutions, not the bandaid/weak dishwater proposals that Third Way/new Democrat/what is their 3rd name? Democrats from Bill Clinton forward propose & he harkens back to the New Deal & Great Society Democrats. 2) was 2020, when we HAD to vote for the pro-Democracy candidate. & even then I was ready to be plenty disappointed with Biden. I will say, I was pleasantly surprised by him. more progressive than I expected.
Why are young Democrats so,cold toward Ossoff?
How is it possible that young Dems see Buttigieg and Ossoff the same as Schumer and Jeffries?
That surprised me as well. I'd like to see Strength in Numbers dig deeper on it.
Really nice work this week, sir! I've learned a lot.
The Democratic Party, like the Whig Party, is nearing the end of its "natural" life, no longer able to meet the needs of the people or to adapt to the demands of the times. Just as the Republican Party of Lincoln emerged as the Whig Party lay dying under similar circumstances prior to the Civil War, so will a new party emerge some time over the next 10 years. Who knows? It may have already arrived in the form of the Democratic Socialist Party (not to be confused with the Socialist Party of the United States of America). The only question is whether our country's centuries' old frothing at the mouth at the word socialism shackles the party before it gains the strength the Republican party did. If that happens, another party will come forth to fight for what most Americans still hold dear despite the efforts of a dying MAGA movement to pervert them--opportunity, freedom, life, justice, equal opportunity, and the pursuit of happiness.
You can only keep the human spirit down so long in a country founded on those principles. Those ideals may be wounded, and there may be casualties among us, but despite what a social and mainstream media says everyday as they lead with what bleeds, it ain't over until it's over--at least not until folks like those in Minneapolis stop showing up, or candidates like James Talarico in Texas stop running to reclaim the soul of America, or all the judges across the land stop pushing back, or all the Grand Juries called by the DOJ lose their minds, or all the governors and attorney generals across all the states cave. We still have a lot of fight in us. Don't give it away.
I’m 75 and an old-school liberal; count me in among those that like the younger, lefty candidates just fine. I’m fed up with Schumer but willing to let Jeffries show me he knows how to fight.
The bottom line is that whoever runs for office while we're stuck with the monumentally corrupt and incompetent kakistocracy must DELIVER relief to the beleaguered middle class. Because Fatso will still be in office till 2028, the best Dems can do is to get the ball rolling for lowering prices (overturn the tariffs), affordability (renew ACA subsidies, reverse SNAP and Medicaid cuts, and start talking about Medicare for all), and reducing income inequality/budget deficits by removing the FICA cap and raising taxes on corporations and capital gains. If they could come up with a subsidy or tax credit for first-time home buyers, that would also raise chances of a Dem trifecta in 2028.
Meanwhile, Trump will veto all that legislation and billionaires will pour money into "anti-socialism" campaigns, so it will be a rough ride.
But Trump is so nakedly corrupt and out of touch with ordinary Americans' needs, that there is a good chance people will vote for politicians who deliver programs that help the middle- and working-class get their heads above water. And once any of these policies become permanent, they will become impossible to dislodge, just like Medicare and Social Security, which were decried as "socialism!!!" back in the day but now are deeply embedded in our culture as necessary entitlements.
Removing the FICA cap won’t do much to reduce income inequality and might even make matters worse.
A Democratic-controlled Congress, which means House and Senate, could assert its rights as a more than co-equal branch of government, which is what the Constitution states.
I only know that it takes 2/3 of BOTH House and Senate to overturn a presidential veto; while that may be marginally possible in the House, I seriously doubt the prostrate MAGA Senate would ever consider standing up to their lord and master.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought that Congress could bring legal action to force a president to abide by laws that are already in existence. They could also cut off his projects, whether a war or vanity projects in DC, by not funding them.
Boy, I wish!
Here's what google says: "No, Congress cannot directly file a lawsuit in court to force a sitting president to obey a law. The courts generally rule that individual legislators or Congress as a body lack the legal right—known as "standing"—to sue the executive branch over general policy enforcement or statutory compliance." And we all know about the DOJ memo against indicting a sitting president. And then of course the Extreme Court also granted him broad immunity from being indicted for "official acts" while in office.
Taking the piggy bank away sounds great, and hopefully can be done on Day One in 2027.
Well, a Congressional representative who is on the Board of the Kennedy Center brought a lawsuit, with the help of Democracy Defenders, to get Trump's name off of the Kennedy Center. She was successful, although I'm sure Trump will go running to his buddies on the Supreme Court, who are going to get a bit tired of him.
It could be that citizens could bring lawsuits about laws not being followed.
If I have to, I'll settle for taking away the piggy bank, but I'm going to dream big.
I'm still hoping for an imminent, natural, permanent expiration.
*According to our survey, older Democrats rate Zohran Mamdani at about 72 on the 0-100 “feeling thermometer” scale.
Young Democrats are at 76 — a difference the poll can’t distinguish from zero.*
Is it possible this survey is reading a different sentiment; MAGA fatigue - a strong disgust of Trump and his blunders, stridency and constant bullshitting and lying? What worries me is we Democrats not only have to win in a backlash election, we also then have to govern successfully, to rehabilitate our brand with low propensity non-ideological voters.
I feel very unconvinced our Party, with an undisciplined and strident faction on the Progressive Left can gain the mainstream approval mandate to govern constructively and not be constantly defending some of the lunatic ideological positions DSA candidates have in their baggage.
Subsequent to my comment, this today from Josh Barro is required reading for anyone who doubts the liability of the DSA and/or its Woke fellow travelers to rehabilitating our Democratic brand https://www.joshbarro.com/p/woke-1-was-anti-populist-and-not?utm_campaign=email-half-post&r=knd0a&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
reader who will soon move into the 65+ demographic. There has almost never been a time in my life where voting for a Democrat was a positive thing. it was almost always a lesser of 2 evils thing. the 2 exceptions were the 2016 primary, where I voted for Bernie. 1, he identified the cause of problems & proposed solutions, not the bandaid/weak dishwater proposals that Third Way/new Democrat/what is their 3rd name? Democrats from Bill Clinton forward propose & he harkens back to the New Deal & Great Society Democrats. 2) was 2020, when we HAD to vote for the pro-Democracy candidate. & even then I was ready to be plenty disappointed with Biden. I will say, I was pleasantly surprised by him. more progressive than I expected.