this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2025
26 points (96.4% liked)
Politics
10870 readers
101 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Realistically, unless something dramatically changes, there's no way the DNC would allow her to get the nomination for either position during the primary process.
How realistic is a boring DNC candidate overcoming whatever this is. Perhaps it's time to part ways with the DNC & just make a new Dem party without them. Though admittedly ripping off the bandaid now could be catastrophic timing, I don't even know.
i think the “party with in a party” strategy is much more promising than outright 3rd party runs. As in using the Democratic ticket to make their candidates relevant, but not using the democrats electoral and fundraising infrastructure, instead developing parallel party infrastructure to campaign and mobilize voters.
The DSA (and WFP to a lesser extent) have been much more electorally successful, particularly at the local level, than organizations that just run third party outright. I don’t think the DSA will have much luck in suburban areas, but I think other coalitions with a similar strategy could be successful.