As a "progressive"---actually, I prefer "liberal"---, may I speak to my fellow progressives?

[Atticus]

GET OVER YOURSELF!

We did NOT "elect" Joe Biden and Kamala Harris; we HELPED elect them!

That means we have a place at the table and we have a right to expect SOME of "our" positions to be adopted.

Demand that the Biden/Harris team adopt the "most progressive" agenda ever is so embarrassingly naive as to be downright childish.

Suck it up and let's support OUR people.

'sall I got.

[Walleye]

1. Yeah, we worked long and hard on this. And won against all odds

Let’s try not to fuck it up right away.

[Eliot Rosewater]

2. That you have to say this at all, FUCKING AMAZING

But thanks for saying it...

[redstatebluegirl]

3. Thank you! Finally some common sense being spoken!

[Demsrule86]

4. +100000

We had a big tent election...all hands on deck. This is what unity looks like...WE WIN.

[wryter2000]

5. You're gonna get booted out of the club for that

Not pure enuf.

[Thekaspervote]

6. Well stated! Biden's agenda, if we secure the senate is one of the most progressive since FDR

[demmiblue]

7. I'm not seeing this "my way or the highway" talk that you are blathering on about.

This is really hyperbolic.

[KPN]

9. I agree.

[demmiblue]

16. Some people are prone to turning it up to 11.

Trashing the thread because I am not going to wallow in the drama of it all.

[Atticus]

10. SEE:-----

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100214570645

[demmiblue]

18. Not gonna bother clicking on that.

[Cha]

23. Yeah, why see what he's talking about..

Stay in denial.. that will help your case.

[Atticus]

25. I thought you trashed this thread. nt

[LanternWaste]

52. So in effect, you're saying "I'm not seeing what you refer to...

because I don't want to see it."

[KPN]

21. Why didn't you say JDs?!

[Voltaire2]

27. an argument made of straw

"Demand that the Biden/Harris team adopt the "most progressive" agenda ever is so embarrassingly naive as to be downright childish."

vs.

"A Joe Biden administration dominated by corporate-friendly insiders will not help usher in the most progressive Democratic administration in generations.

This move gives greater urgency for Joe Biden to create an Office of Climate Mobilization on Day 1 and appoint progressives."

What you have done is translate a demand that Biden create an Office of Climate Mobilization and appoint progressives to his administration into a demand that the Biden administration adopt the entire progressive agenda.

Sort of a inaccurate reframing.

[Atticus]

33. And, speaking of "inaccurate reframing---" read your own post. nt

[Laelth]

34. +1 That's nothing.

The Justice Democrats know that Biden is going to appoint A LOT of people and that not all of them will be their favorite choices.

This is just a reminder to the President-Elect that they are watching closely.

-Laelth

[Sherman A1]

12. Yup!

But, ya know when ya get on a roll.......

[Cha]

13. So why are you insulting the OP with "Blathering"?

Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it hasn't happened.'

Apparently the OP has.

[Voltaire2]

20. I'll translate: any progressive agenda item is one progressive agenda item too many.

[Atticus]

26. "Translating" what others say---or didn't---is so "Limbaughish". nt

[Voltaire2]

29. you appear to have deliberately misframed the JD tweet to match your argument.

So translation was necessary.

[Atticus]

39. Yup---that's just what he'd say. nt

[Voltaire2]

46. Has Limbaugh ever accused anyone of misframing an argument?

I’m no expert on that noxious idiot, but that just doesn’t seem to fit his style.

Anyway, as you are refusing to address the simple fact that your characterization of the JD tweet was grossly inaccurate, I’ll consider that tacit acceptance.

[Atticus]

49. Limbaugh has been notorious for "translating" or "interpreting" what some liberal said in order to

let his "Dittoheads" know "what they REALLY meant". Of course, his translation was never accurate, but it always served his purpose.

And, you have just done it again by equating my refusal to agree with you as "acceptance".

I believe we must surely agree on much more than might be apparent from this exchange. At any rate, I don't think further back and forth will be productive. Have the last word if you care to and enjoy your evening.

[LanternWaste]

53. You're confusing 'translate' and 'infer.' Again.

It may help if you print out and display both definitions and keep them nearby to avoid that inaccuracy... again.

[Hekate]

36. Tsk. Nothing hyperbolic about the OP...

The usual suspects here, old and new, are demanding (demanding, I tells you!) that Joe and Kamala must (must!) acknowledge that The Progressives Turned Out and Created Victory.

Mind you, none of the others tens of millions of Democratic voters were important to that victory, and their opinions are not important. The only thing that matters is that Joe and Kamala throw down the gauntlet on Day One — indeed, that they begin throwing down the gauntlet RFN via their Progressive appointments.

I see it every day. Sorry you missed it, but don’t worry, another train will be along soon.

[mvd]

8. True

As much as I like Bernie, we did not elect him. I don’t expect Biden to be Bernie. I am proud of how fellow progressives did our part. And we do deserve a place at the table, as well as the opportunity to voice our concerns. But the way Justice Democrats does things isn’t productive.

[Sherman A1]

11. Thanks for the lecture

I am perfectly capable of developing my own opinions based upon my own understanding of the world.

[Atticus]

22. Sorry I got your nose out of joint. Of course you are capable of developing your own opinions.

You also have the right to post those opinions, which is what I did,

[Sherman A1]

30. My nose is not out of joint

I grow weary of the numerous lectures of what "WE" should do to be good proper Democrats in the view of the particular OPs.

[Atticus]

40. Just who was it that presumed to say what a "good and proper Democrat" should do? nt

[lunasun]

14. You wrote :" Demand that the Biden/Harris team adopt the "most progressive" agenda ever"

Do you have names of groups doing that or individuals ?
Or just “progressives”?

[Atticus]

17. Justice Democrats. See # 10 above. nt

[Voltaire2]

32. except of course that was not the demand.

[Hekate]

37. I've seen that demand repeatedly

[Voltaire2]

47. Ok then post a link to a demand that

Biden adopt the entire progressive agenda.

[Hekate]

48. I think that falls within the TOS violations, so I'll let you do your own research

[Voltaire2]

56. Lulzd.

it was this close to an actual discussion.

[efhmc]

15. Just not having DJT around is already pretty darn progressive to me.

[zeusdogmom]

19. Amen!

[unblock]

24. clearly i'm missing context here because without background, this is a very bizarre, naive post.

we just won an election.

what on earth would you expect any part of the coalition that elected our guy to do?

every part of the coalition is now clamoring for their people to be appointed to key positions, for their policies to be made the highest priorities, etc.

then it's biden's job to weigh all the input and balance it with his perception of political reality to arrive at the best team and the best agenda possible. but everyone tries to bend this process to their own preferred outcomes. that's the nature of politics.

so is there something i'm missing, something unique about what progressives or liberals are doing that's different from what everyone else is doing, or what everyone else has done in previous pressuring of new administrations?

[Doremus]

28. Well said.

From my perspective, the problem isn't that there are factions clamoring for their agendas to gain traction, it's that progressives are doing it. Which is a general no-no on this board.

[Atticus]

38. I can't see how you can conclude that I have a problem with "progressives" since my OP begins with

stating that I AM one. In fact, as I stated, I prefer to name myself a "liberal". For years, I considered progressives to be simply liberals who did not want to own the label after the RWNJs had used it as a perjorative. I wore a "LIBERAL" tee to DC, Indianapolis, Madison and Selma when doing so could single you out for "special attention" from some in the crowd.

If you believe i have posted "no-no", hit your alert button and stste your reason.

[Doremus]

45. I dislike all the drama, so I'll take a pass on your challenge, thanks just the same.

I stand behind what I said. Many people here have a big problem when it comes to "progressives," for reasons you so ably pointed out. My personal reason for disliking labels is that no one is using the same definition. For many the word is synonymous with socialism, Marxism and other such boogymen. I think there are also quite a few at DU who think of progressives as spoiled and wanting 'ponies'.

Neither is true. Progressives deserve respect and a proportionate share of seats at the table. Without the gargantuan effort liberals poured into the election, moderates wouldn't be in a position to gripe about anything but how they lost yet another one.

[betsuni]

55. It's confusing when the word means different things.

As it's used by Justice Democrats, a Democrat can have the most progressive voting record in Congress and not be a progressive according to the new definition: a progressive is anti-establishment, the establishment is the Democratic Party (corporatists, centrists, having the same neoliberal economic policies as Republicans). Democrats are thought to be a greater roadblock to progress than Republicans because they could pass progressive policies if they wanted to but don't (ignore not having enough votes, no large majorities in Congress, dealing with a 100% obstructionist Republican Party).

Democrats "take" money from the donor class elites, lobbyists, corporations, big banks and are instantly, magically, corrupted -- Justice Democrats just receive donations (grassroots) and therefore are not corrupted and the only ones who can "take on" those things. Unless you support one particular version of health care policy (Medicare for All) you are not a progressive and do not believe health care is a right and not a privilege (insist everything is about policy when clearly it's more about moral purity). Democrats must be constantly insulted and threatened or they won't do anything progressive.

Use of the words "status quo" (money in politics) "establishment" and references to FDR are give-aways that one is a progressive in this sense of the word.

[mvd]

35. You make some good points

I too would rather not see Steve Ricchetti there. Hopefully that gets balanced out. And as a progressive myself, I want to have a voice here. But making threats like Justice Democrats do just won’t change minds.

[Hekate]

31. My profound thanks

[Faux pas]

41. Kickin' with gusto!

[AmericanCanuck]

42. You nailed it!

[JGladstone]

43. As a leftist, may I speak to my fellow leftists?

"It is said that our ideas are impractical. That is true. From the standpoint of old institutions, interests, and their beneficiaries; the new is always impractical. We also hear it said that our efforts are dangerous. Yes, gentle reader, our ideas, our principles and objectives are certainly dangerous and menacing, applied by a united working class would shake society and certainly those who are now on top sumptuously feeding upon the good things they have not produced would feel the shock. The working class and the employing class have nothing in common.”

--Joseph Ettor (labor organizer)

[Whiskeytide]

44. Democrats gonna democrat. It's how ...

... we roll. We all have our ideals about what a democratic administration’s priority list should look like, and we will complain loudly if it doesn’t fit our model.

I’m ok with that. As long as we sort of act like adults most of the time. We should all advocate for what we believe in, right?

It’s when I hear people start to say “I’m not voting for another democrat if I don’t get my way” that I start to lose my shit. People need to be smart enough to recognize progress before they should be able to call themselves a progressive.

[JonLP24]

50. I don't care about labels

I care about policies.

[Snarkoleptic]

51. "Go Out And Make Me Do It" - Barack Obama

Biden/Harris needs to hear from the left, in a constructive manner, AFTER inauguration.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/go-out-and-make-me-do-it_b_281631
(Article from 2009)

In his speech, Obama, the one-time community organizer, gave health care reform activists the signal to accelerate their grassroots organizing campaign to push for a bold plan that includes a public option and requires insurance companies to act more responsibly.

Over the summer, especially during the August Congressional recess, an unholy alliance of insurance industry muscle, conservative Democrats’ obfuscation, and right-wing mob tactics stole Obama’s thunder and put his health reform plan at risk. In his speech, Obama grabbed the initiative back. His fighting words changed the tone and shifted the momentum.

But he now understands that winning a victory on health care reform will require more than good ideas and inside-the-Beltway maneuvering with Congress. It will require a mass movement with a moral message, voter mobilization, marches, prayer vigils, stories of everyday people damaged by insurance industry practices, testimony by doctors and nurses frustrated by the insurance companies’ priorities of profits over patients, and media savvy.

Part of Obama’s speech was meant to reassure Americans that he did, in fact, have a real plan to fix the insurance mess. The President provided more specifics about his plan than he has in the past, explaining its key components, its benefits for people whose insurance policies cost too much or don’t provide the services they need, people who don’t have any insurance, and businesses for whom health insurance costs are a significant burden.

[sandensea]

54. Absolutely. In Unity There is Strength.

That might sound Orwellian - but the GOPee has long understood this (as have so many successful parties/movements around the world).

Many progressive/social democratic parties fall short because, being largely made up of thinking people as they are, they often fall victim to splitting hairs and analysis paralysis.

And who wins when that happens?