I think the Democratic Party should tack left instead of right.

That's what Hillary tells us.

But yes, move to the left is desperately needed. Money is in our way at every turn.

They know who butters their bread and it's not the likes of us.

see her on TV.

out there, just wanting to be part of the Party. And then there is the illusion you're going to knock of a few Republican votes by being as messed up as they are.

I know which one I would choose. But the Democratic Party does seem to give a shit about its Left flank, nor do they see how many Americans are hungering for Left-leaning Populist ideas and policies.

If the Democrats don't do it, perhaps Donald Trump will, as a number of Republicans have done recently, using Populist positions in a positive way for votes.

Yes, lean left, heal the divides in that way, and we could all enjoy this Democratic Party again.

Today's Democratic party cares about one thing: money.

.

As you can see I'm online lol

There are two very different Wings of the party as far apart as Democrats and Republicons were 40 years ago.

Clinton will move her rhetoric left but not her ideology. Obama campaigned on the left but his true colors emerged one elected.

Today, not 40 years ago.

A handful of social issues separate Hillary and mainstream (i.e. non Tea Party) Republicans. Other than that, they're pretty much in lockstep. That's why one of the Koch brothers just said Hillary might make a better President than any of the current Republican options.

and now it would be in their best interest to support her.

Rush and Sean told them Obama was a socialist 8 years ago and most of them still believe it. I ask them to name one thing beyond the ACA that Obama has pushed for which would suggest he's a socialist and have yet to get an answer. I mention that the Obama administration did not prosecute one bankster after the economic collapse and the argument immediately changes from Obama is a socialist to all politicians are crooks.

Remember, 62% of potential voters didn't bother last time around. You don't have to motivate very many of them to tip the scales on most elections.

The country is so far right now and hurting after 40 years of ultraconservatism it's imperative. Especially because of what's ahead. Similar sentiment and activity exists in parts of Europe as well.

To steal a thought from Omar Bradley,

Sanders tries to steer by the stars, Clinton by the lights of each passing ship.

1. Elect neoliberal corporatists
2. ???
3. PROGRESSIVE GOVERNMENT!

Righties will vote for real Republicans, not faux Republicans.

Over and over I see them saying we need to capture the right-leaning indies and Trump-hating conservatives. That's about as useful a plan as appeasing the GOP Congress has been. See how cooperative they turned out to be.

which won't be popular here, but here it is.

First, I'll start by saying that moving the party to the left is the preferable path.

However, the party has erected huge institutional barriers to protect itself from leftist/populist influence, including and by no means limited to using superdelegates in the primary.

There are currently FAR more U.S. citizens who belong to neither corporate party, and have withdrawn from party politics, out of disgust for both parties. They self-identify as independents.

If we can't get the Democrats to move left and represent the people rather than the corporate interests, there's another way, which is to realign on a corporate/populist axis rather than on a left/right axis. By doing so, there would be a huge base instantly attuned to the new populist alignment.

The independents themselves are all over the left/right spectrum, and mostly agree that corporations have too much power in our lives and in our government, and that both major parties represent corporate interests more than they represent citizen interests.

There is a surprisingly large ideological intersection that such a realignment could draw from. I suspect that the independents would mostly agree on issues of getting corporate money out of our political system, rejecting fossil fuels and embarking on a massive conversion to save our planet, creating clean energy jobs in the process, reigning in Wall St., spending less taxpayer money on the most expensive military the world has ever seen which is mainly supporting resource extraction and exploitable labor pools, ending this nation's incarceration binge, ending the drug war, ending the push for globalization of business and labor, taking care of our citizen's survival needs (healthcare, living wages, possibly a guaranteed minimum income to offset the coming automation layoffs, secure retirement), and other things I'm not thinking of at the moment.

It requires getting cats to lie down with dogs, we have all been programmed to fight along the left/right battleground for a long time, but today, in my opinion, the more important battles are being fought along corporate/populist lines. Sadly, today's Democratic Party establishment is clearly on the wrong side of these lines.

We can move further left and try to take on the powers that be ourselves, starting with our own party, as you suggest. Then we'll need to win power over the oligarchs. I don't think we're that strong, frankly, I just don't see the left pulling that off by ourselves. Alternatively, we can realign and agree to disagree on certain left/right divisions while having each other's backs in a newly aligned populist movement.

It's certainly what the corporations fear most, and is why so many divisive issues get all of the airplay, while the larger issues we face are not even discussed in the corporate media.

I did a quick Google run for left/right alignment of the independents but finally tired of looking. If anyone knows the percentages, that would be interesting.

So what do you think, can the left actually do this, assuming we agree on what this is, or does it need the other side's help?

How about this, could there be a parent entity that would define itself around populist issues, that could then encompass, under its non-corporate ideology, different caucuses that would vary on the left/right spectrum? Are we the people capable of organizing in such a way? If so, I think we'll be able to get some critical things accomplished.

If anyone has an actual plan to get a functional Democratic Party again, that would be even better. I don't see us getting it out of the hands of the corporations. I'll keep working to do so, but it's time to look at whether that's a good use of energy, or whether it's going to take something else.

Even if we could do so, I think we'd still be thwarted by the right, just because. The independents might actually get on board if it was a larger entity that left the left/right issues to different factions within it. A populist Democratic Party could be a part of such a solution, but the current Democratic Party is decidedly on the side of the polluters/extractors/financiers/militarists.

and I'm not young.

It would be great, but increasingly, it looks like the carrot on the stick, we never get it.

I'm a patient person, but after awhile patience becomes insanity. The planet's cooking, the rich steal our lives, and we're spoon-fed drivel to distract and pacify us.

It's time. If the party fails us now, it's time for a new approach.

Obama is just an icon for Democratic leadership in this cartoon.

If she is the Nom she will take a huge jump to the Right in a failed attempt to get a few independents

She will lose.

The Dems have tacked so hard to the right that they are sialing directly into the wind now. And then trying to spit at the loonies in the GOP. With the predictable result.

and more representative of that wing of the party, when it inevitably splits off.

Getting too far to the right