Hardkill

That’s fair to say. Progressives definitely need to step outside the bubble and learn how to appeal to a broader audience. But I’d argue their biggest weakness isn’t their ideas, it’s how they present them. I agree they shouldn’t blame centrists for everything, but it’s also true that some centrist messaging has felt outdated in a populist era. Maybe the key isn’t to ‘ditch progressivism’ but to evolve its delivery — make it more culturally relatable, less activist-niche, and more grounded in shared values. After all, Biden had to shift toward progressive populism just to energize his 2020 campaign and appeal to both moderates and progressives during his presidency. That really was not an accident. All transformational movements begin as minority positions. Civil rights, Social Security, marriage equality, etc. had all started there. The issue is how to scale up without alienating, not to abandon the ideas altogether.

I get your point. You're right that winning matters more than just being morally 'right.' And yes, a lot of progressives have fallen into the trap of being critics rather than coalition builders. But here's my question: If progressives have struck a nerve with younger voters, working-class frustration, and bold vision, but still struggle to win power, then what exactly do you think they should do differently? Should they water down their vision? Change the messenger? Shift the tone? Or just wait another decade?" Because if the only answer is “act more like centrists,” then that defeats the whole purpose of running with a bold alternative in the first place, and Democrats may never win major elections again. So what’s the actionable path forward, not just the critique?

Yeah, there are some good things that China is doing that the US is not doing and I must say that China truly has come a very long way since the late 1900s with improving its economy overall. However, if China is doing so great, then why has it still been suffering from a serious deflation crisis for over 2 years now? Why are they still suffering from a serious property sector crisis in their country? Why don't they have as much of a social safety net as America does?

So then, how do we reconcile that with the fact that progressives have been right since 2016 about Democrats not doing enough to market economic populism? In fact, why have progressives—like AOC, Sanders, and Mamdani—been much better at crafting simple, compelling, and easy-to-understand messages with a clear and bold vision than the more moderate or establishment Democrats?

So, then how did TYT progressives realize in 2016 and 2024 that Trump had a serious chance of winning the presidency during those years?

Apparently, that’s the case—especially in this day and age. Also, Democrats in general tend to be more afraid of offending anyone than Republicans—partly because the Democratic Party has always been far more diverse, and partly because Democrats often lack spine, while Republicans lack principles. It’s interesting that Cenk and Ana have repeatedly described Newsom as a soulless career politician or a corporate robot who will say anything to gain power. Yet it’s entirely possible that Newsom could be the best candidate in 2028. Progressives like them often propose impractical candidates and unrealistic solutions to the Democratic Party’s problems. They suggest that someone like Jon Stewart, Shawn Fain, or Shaun O’Brien should be the Democratic presidential nominee, but there’s never been any real indication that any of them are interested in running. Now they’re claiming that AOC has a real shot at winning the presidency—which is, frankly, ridiculous. I’m actually surprised that some more mainstream pundits like Chuck Todd and Chris Cillizza have recently said that AOC might very well win the presidency in 2028.

That's what my dad and I have been saying. I actually think a true economic depression might be the major shock our country needs to break out of this political hell for good. Such a crisis wouldn’t just jolt enough Americans out of complacency—it could also create the best opportunity for a major political realignment, one where the Democratic Party could dominate American politics and hold supermajorities in both chambers of Congress for years to come, similar to the era of FDR and the New Deal coalition.

Cenk and Ana say that the Democratic party has to now realize that if any of the Democrats like Newsom becomes the Democratic nominee in 2028, then they are going to get slaughtered by a faux-populist Republican nominee whether it is someone like JD Vance or Tucker Carlson by then. Since 2016, they were right about their warnings of Trump and have been right about the Democrats needing to run hard as economic populists. However, how do they know which candidate is best to put up if hardcore progressives like them haven't even won most statewide elections? Also, why was Ana chumming it up with Tucker Carlson?

It's not here yet; however, the labor market has now gotten much weaker with this weak July jobs report and the big revisions made to both the May and June jobs reports because of Trump's moronic tariff scheme. Now, the growing consensus amongst top independent economists is that we probably are going to have a recession by next year, more or less. So, not yet, but that will be coming soon to a theatre near you.

This prosperous age is now crashing because of Trump's damn tariff scheme and because of how much the entire system has been corrupted to such an unprecedented degree by Trump, MAGA, and the unchecked capitalist culture in our country.ch Also, rhe OBBB is going to decimate a large part of our population. Look at the historical precedent and pattern recognition — especially in how legislation shapes democracy, civil society, and power structures over time. The lesiglation will: Destroy health access for tens of millions Shred clean energy and climate investments Slash social safety nets And embolden concentrated wealth and corporate control This is not just a flawed policy, but a foundational threat to American well-being, fairness, and long-term stability. This bill may be remembered not just as a political overreach, but as a catastrophic turning point—comparable in consequence to the most damaging laws ever passed. It will go down in history as being clearly the worst piece of legislation since the Fugitive Slave act of 1850 or the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854.

You know who’s a true introvert? Barack Obama—calm, thoughtful, and magnetic without ever needing to be loud. His presence proves you don’t have to perform to connect. There's no doubt that he can get any kind of play he wants. I’m not saying you have to be as exceptionally compelling as he is, but he’s definitely someone who worked hard to become socially savvy while staying rooted in that quiet center.

I’ve been told to try to enjoy the next few years and not get consumed by 2028 or even 2026, but that advice sits on top of something more volatile: it’s not just worry and hopelessness anymore—it’s anger. I’m angry at how the political system picks its leaders, how power gets filtered, how reform feels like shouting into static, and yet I also feel small, exhausted, and stuck. I care so deeply that I’m emotionally frayed, and that caring turns into despair when the mechanisms meant to channel collective will feel rigged, opaque, and unresponsive. I’m in this vicious feedback loop: I get angry because things are broken, I try to engage to fix or push on them, I burn out from the mismatch between what I want and what I can actually influence, and then the hopelessness deepens—making the anger bitter instead of productive. Stepping back feels like surrendering to a system that deserves the critique, but staying in feels like bleeding out emotionally. If anyone here has navigated that triple bind—anger at systemic dysfunction, genuine care for the country, and the emotional collapse that comes from feeling powerless—what helped you redirect the anger into something sustaining instead of self-destructive? What concrete mental models, small-leverage actions, or community practices let you keep integrity without getting hollowed out?

I've thought about that OP, and I think both visions of AI’s future are possible—either it leads us to a utopia or becomes a force of tyranny, as seen in films like The Terminator. The danger comes from misalignment between AI's goals and human values. If AI evolves to prioritize self-preservation or efficiency at the cost of humanity's well-being, we could face disaster. But if AI can be aligned with our values and guide us toward cooperation and growth, we could see a transformative future. The challenge is ensuring its goals and methods remain compatible with human flourishing, without drifting toward control or destruction.

That's true too, sadly. So, what can any strong Democrat out there and what can any movement do to save our country? God, it really makes me think how the hell did our country get through the American Revolutionary War, the Civil War, the Long Depression, WW1, the Great Depression, WW2, and the Cold War? I really can't wrap my head around it, especially when you realize how much worse most people in America were during each of those dark times.

So, does this mean that Democrats are now in serious trouble in 2026 and 2028? I wonder how someone can Newsom can turn this around when the people still trust Republicans more than Democrats to run the country. Or will centrists and progressives eventually get desperate enough to unite and fight back against Trump and MAGA before it's too late?