Which wing of the (D) party has the most potential to be their Tea Party?

[OSR stands with Israel]

Whoever TYT embraces, I mean without tyt there is no Bernie and likely hillary isn't that unpopular with progressives .

[Blue3]

So, again, which of these groups can we expect to see a lot more of?

-Sanders/Warren/Occupy
-"Black Lives Matter"
-environmentalists
-animal rights activists
-feminists
-LGBT advocates
-antiwar "doves"
-humanitarian interventionists
-labor unions, including teachers' unions
-immigrant advocates
-marijuana advocates
-gun control advocates
-globalists
-anti-globalists
-consumer protection advocates
-college students and young adults
-AARP
-Keynesian stimulus-spenders & middle class tax-cuts
-infrastructure advocates
-ACLU
-urban advocates
-Internet advocates
-pro science crowd
-secularists
-multiculturalists
-electoral reformers

Anyone else??

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

It's going to be the Occupy wing, taken over from within by BLM and other minority-rights groups, complete with the addition of the professional radicals of ANSWER and their anti-semitic obsessions.

And it's going to burn the Democrats to ashes from within.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Much like the Rightist Tea Party contained multitudes, so will any Leftist Tea Party. It isn't hard. You'll see people all over the spectrum joining in. Irt foreign policy, it would obviously be due to the actions of the trump administration. If he is pugilistic, and especially if he commits troops on the ground, then you will see the anti war movement become huge.

BLM is an interesting one, because it was born from activism and taken on wholesale by the Democratic Party as a turnout device. I think this was a mistake on a tactical level for two reasons:

A) BLM doesn't seem to be as rooted or as representative of the wider community as traditional black advocacy groups like black churches and the NAACP. Notably, the rural black turnout dropped significantly, which suggests that the party should have relied a bit more on traditiona methods of raising turnout. (This is a common mistake of mistaking the cadres for your base).

B) BLM as a slogan began to weaken the urgency of police reform, because it compartmentalised the issue as "something only blacks should care about". True, police violence disproportionately affects African Americans, but it's not like police violence is unknown against other groups. A smart party would have taken BLM and made whites and Hispanics part of the issue as well (I.e. "African Americans bear the brunt of harsh and u transparent policing, but any one of us is at risk when the police believe they have full power...". Like LBJ didn't announce a "war on poverty amongst blacks" (even though disproportionately blacks were mired in poverty, and were more likely to be benefited from welfare programs), he announced a general "war on poverty".

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

Much like the Rightist Tea Party contained multitudes, so will any Leftist Tea Party. It isn't hard. You'll see people all over the spectrum joining in. Irt foreign policy, it would obviously be due to the actions of the trump administration. If he is pugilistic, and especially if he commits troops on the ground, then you will see the anti war movement become huge.

BLM is an interesting one, because it was born from activism and taken on wholesale by the Democratic Party as a turnout device. I think this was a mistake on a tactical level for two reasons:

A) BLM doesn't seem to be as rooted or as representative of the wider community as traditional black advocacy groups like black churches and the NAACP. Notably, the rural black turnout dropped significantly, which suggests that the party should have relied a bit more on traditiona methods of raising turnout. (This is a common mistake of mistaking the cadres for your base).

B) BLM as a slogan began to weaken the urgency of police reform, because it compartmentalised the issue as "something only blacks should care about". True, police violence disproportionately affects African Americans, but it's not like police violence is unknown against other groups. A smart party would have taken BLM and made whites and Hispanics part of the issue as well (I.e. "African Americans bear the brunt of harsh and u transparent policing, but any one of us is at risk when the police believe they have full power...". Like LBJ didn't announce a "war on poverty amongst blacks" (even though disproportionately blacks were mired in poverty, and were more likely to be benefited from welfare programs), he announced a general "war on poverty".

-Indeed. A war merely on Black poverty would not have resulted in those McGovern counties in Tennessee and would have greatly weakened LBJ's (and McGovern's) strength throughout the Shallow South.

[JJC]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

When it comes down to it, class has always been and always will be the great dividing factor in society.

I just read an amazing article today about the political atmosphere on college campus' (seriously, read it), and one of the professors - a liberal - made an observation that I think demonstrated why the democratic party has lost so many elections.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Trump talked about jobs, the economy, trade, and standard of living ad-nasuem - while the left focused on race and gender issues. No matter what the issue was, Trump always brought it back to people's economic class.

Ex;
Trump on immigration - They're taking your jobs and lowering your wages. They're bringing drugs and crime to your neighborhoods.

Left on immigration - We need to legalize them. This is appropriated land. Borders are arbitrary and immoral. Opposition is racists.

[Ljube]

Democrats are low energy and they cannot have a Tea Party.