Oscar-winning actor and progressive activist Susan Sarandon sparked a good deal of controversy during the primary stage of the presidential election when she expressed doubt to MSNBC’s Chris Hayes about whether she could bring herself to vote for Hillary Clinton in a “lesser-of-two-evils” situation. It was a common question at that time among
(
Read more... )
Comments 32
Reply
Reply
This, sfm.
Reply
As much as liberals and progressives (I count myself among them) may dream, we need centrist politicians to get anything done. Behold how a radical right Congress has ground governing to a halt. We need compromise. We need give and take. When we get one side that takes their Colonial LARPing too far, we end up with stagnation and dysfunction.
Do I wish the news had covered the DAPL protests more? You bet I do. There's a lot of things I wish the press covered more. I think the only good thing to come out of the clusterfuck that was Nov. 8 is that a lot of people (including the news) woke up. A lot of people checked in. A lot of people started to act. Nothing like a crisis to get the people's ass in gear.
Reply
However I disagree about needing centrist politicians! I posted 'Why Republicans are impressive' which talks about this, here are some select quotes:
The lesson is this: in modern American politics, having an ideologically coherent and disciplined party is an advantage, not a liability. This flies in the face of conventional wisdom: during the 2016 primary, many Democrats, especially those who supported Clinton, worried about the “purism” of the party’s younger and more progressive wing: would it force the party to confront a choice between nominating ideologically progressive candidates who would be unelectable and facing mass defections to its left? After all, it was widely understood that candidates needed to “pivot to the center” to win general elections. Clinton’s claim to be a “progressive who gets things done” was founded on this assumption: the notion was that Sanders’ policies, even if you found them ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Reply
[...] but if the end result is the same, and Trump actually inspires more counter-activism, which is really the better situation?
Wow.
Reply
However, this is also why I included a segment of the Tim Black show, he is a MOC and someone I consider progressive. In another post, I also included a small list of progressive WOC and MOC, who can talk about how privilege, race and class intersect in a more nuanced way.
Also, Nina Turner is a progressive democrat who I admire and respect, here are some videos I found insightful:
Reply
"Donald Trump has been a nightmare, but as yet he has not inflicted the death blow to America."
He's only been in office 4 freaking weeks--give hm time!
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
"Because despite what absolutist agitprop would have you believe, most of the "centrists" - including Hillary - do believe in an authentically progressive agenda; the difference is how they choose to try to get it implemented. And fer real, America is full of ugly Beltway sausage making regardless of who gets in."
I agree SO much. I got really sick of all the infighting among the different factions (centrist, hard left, etc) during the election, and when it got even worse for a while afterthe election, I literally wanted to scream on a daily basis. I'm still sick of that stuff, and even sicker of feeling like I'm being passive aggressively attacked every time I turn around, just because I'm evidently not quiteas far left as some people think I should be.
It's a lot better than it used to be, but every time an article is posted about how horrible Democrats are, or how shitty Hillary and her campaign supposedly were, or how neocons (whatever the hell that word even means, although I gather it includes me, since I voted for Hill twice ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment