The Way Forward
Related: About this forum
Democratic party is suffering from 'lack of integrity,' says DNC chair candidate - NBC News
Faiz Shakir, former campaign manager for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), joins Meet the Press NOW to discuss his bid to be the next Democratic party chair and his vision for the party after its 2024 election losses.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
LizBeth
(10,976 posts)
stopdiggin
(13,232 posts)- - - - - - -
- - - - 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
- - - -
I guess this might be big in Vermont ...
Evolve Dammit
(19,609 posts)
msongs
(70,467 posts)
comradebillyboy
(10,595 posts)
BOSSHOG
(40,786 posts)
JustAnotherGen
(34,144 posts)Not true, and not what good Americans want to hear right now.
Silent Type
(7,891 posts)And pick best way forward. I know, not so simple.
betsuni
(27,404 posts)Vote. Conspiracy theories about ancient centrist establishment neoliberal elites anointing, crowning, choosing, appointing, bribing, selecting, rigging, etc., because they despise progressives aren't going to work!
comradebillyboy
(10,595 posts)the evil DNC hand picks candidates as opposed to the Democratic primary voters who actually select the candidate.
SheltieLover
(61,310 posts)
Tetrachloride
(8,531 posts)to name 1.
Keepthesoulalive
(954 posts)Joe Biden kept the country safe and did so many things to help common folks.
Let’s discuss Joe Rogan and killer Mike and talk about integrity.
comradebillyboy
(10,595 posts)
Zackzzzz
(17 posts)Faiz Shakir is the wrong man for the job.
There is this blockhead hawking/barking from
the rooftops of NY and Florida, from rallies?,
24/7, for what seems 1/2 of my life.
And this all through President Biden term.
He totally overshadowed PRESIDENT BIDEN and more.
You can't see integrity in action because there is too much noise.
Bluetus
(480 posts)There is a lack of integrity, a lack of coherent messages, an inability to bring the public along, and a complete absence of big, bold ideas.
The last time we had big ideas from the top was in the 1960s with Apollo and the Great Society. Since then, there has been no real brand. When he says there is a lack of integrity, he is not saying personal integrity. He is talking about the integrity of the party in terms of having clear ideas, communicating them aggressively, and fighting like hell for them. That is the integrity that is missing.
Lack of integrity as in disintegrating into a bunch of people each with little ideas that they believe should dominate.
So I very much welcome this voice, but I fear the party can't handle what he is saying. They are much happier with it all being about process. The process is every candidate is a free agent, and if we just work the ground game we will get enough votes.
No, that thinking has caused a more-or-less linear decline in the past 50 years to where we have lost EVERYTHING. The white house, the Congress, the Supreme Court, the media. We have taken all of our strengths for granted and let them slip away year after year.
There is a way forward with bold ideas, a populist agenda, and forceful, persistent communication.
FSogol
(47,076 posts)You post is too big of a stretch in an attempt to protect Bernies guy.
Messaging isn't the same as having integrity. Obamacare and the Infrastructure bill were big ideas, especially in a climate where the opposition only cares about tax cuts for the rich and destruction.
Faiz Shakir just shot himself in the foot and ruins Sanders' chance to have an impact on the party moving forward.
stopdiggin
(13,232 posts)Bluetus
(480 posts)
Phoenix61
(17,820 posts)Integrity
1.
the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness.
Bluetus
(480 posts)2. the state of being whole and undivided.
I believe this was the context of the gentleman's comments. I believe most Democrats have very good intentions, which I share. But no intelligent person could ever all this "undivided". That's what the gentleman was talking about. There are some issues that mainstream America is very concerned about , which don't seem to make the Dems' top-5 list.
Trump was able to connect with these fears and points of anger and exploit them for his own purposes. We all know his solutions have nothing to do with the problems that weigh on the general public -- will actually make them all worse. But that doesn't matter to Trump. We had better learn how to speak with a clear voice and bold ideas to the majority of America.
58Sunliner
(5,144 posts)But please proceed. I love how the spotlight has to have the spoils that b bros posit exist in their absence.
Bluetus
(480 posts)But he is 100% right. The Dem party has turned int a grab bag of special interests that can only complain about things they don't like and offer no positive, constructive, bold ideas that can animate the average American.
Perhaps "integrity" was a poor choice of words. That isn't my word, so don't blame me. I'm just trying to explain that the context he used that word is not the way you are reacting to it. The word I would use is more like "consistency" or "relevance", or "vitality".
In any case, if we bring in another process goof who doesn't begin with the understanding that we have not been connecting with the average American, we are going to keep losing.
CrispyQ
(38,877 posts)I appreciated your interpretation & if that's what he meant then I totally agree. We've sucked at messaging since Reagan. It's like we don't believe in marketing. George Lakoff once wrote that dems think people vote on logic when for most people there's a lot of emotion involved, too. (And for the cult that's all it is.) We think people will go to our platform page to read what we stand for & read about our accomplishments, when in reality you have to pound people over the head with it again & again & again.
I read that one of Biden's regrets was that he didn't put his name on the Covid checks that went out after he was prez, cuz people associated those checks with Trump cuz Trump's name was on the first ones.
58Sunliner
(5,144 posts)Anytime someone tries to place the dems at core of all faults when there are other issues that are grossly affecting our electorate and the process, I have to truly question their judgment or motivation. You have refused imo, to acknowledge the reality of the utter lack of integrity the republican party has demonstrated in this country. I'm done here. Nothing to see.
burrowowl
(18,087 posts)Bluetus
(480 posts)Being Republican-lite is foolish. If a person wants what the Republicans are selling, they won't buy the partial version.
We need to provide a real alternative based on bold ideas, clearly stated, and repeated consistently.
littlemissmartypants
(26,369 posts)In the middle of the road are the growing numbers of unaffiliated/independent voters.
Like the ones that helped elect President Psychopath AND Democrats in North Carolina and elsewhere.
North Carolina recognizes eight political parties:
The Constitution Party
The Democratic Party
The Green Party
The Justice For All Party
The Libertarian Party
The No Labels Party
The Republican Party
The We The People Party
https://www.ncsbe.gov/registering/choosing-your-party-affiliation
Bluetus
(480 posts)Nobody who voted for Trump is in " the middle of the road". Trump's ideas were all extreme. People choose the candidate with the big bag of extreme ideas over the candidate that said "no" to all of those ideas but never offered much of bold, positive ideas of her own. Hell, Dems can barely get "tax the billionaires" across their lips without apologizing and adding 50 disclaimers.
Terrible ideas beat no ideas every day of the week.
littlemissmartypants
(26,369 posts)At our own peril. They now outnumber Democrats and Republicans. They represent a huge wildcard.
There isn't a middle of the road.
Bluetus
(480 posts)Last edited Sat Jan 25, 2025, 04:11 PM - Edit history (1)
We must connect with the unaffiliated. But we cannot do that by being the least principled or least challenging or least animated. The unaffiliated voters tend to not follow civics very closely. They absolutely are not looking for somebody who masters the art of dividing every issue right down the middle. If they were, then Trump wouldn't not have gotten more than 40M votes.
The unaffiliated don't do a deep dive into public policy. They can spend 30 hours working on their fantasy football team, but get nauseous if exposed to even 15 minutes of public policy.
They like simple answers, and especially ones that get right to the point. So much the better if the point can be linked to a plausible bogeyman. They judge ideas more by the enthusiasm or swagger than by the validity of the reasoning. This is the reality. If we can't present our ideas and our agenda in that framework, then we will keep losing, simple as that. Occasionally we will have charismatic leaders like Bill Clinton and Obama who break through (without saying much), but that is the exception, not the rule. We really need to begin with big, bold ideas and then fight like hell to keep it simple and repetitious.
PortTack
(35,111 posts)They voted, or didn’t vote because they did want a woman president, let alone a WOC!
Your post talks out of both sides of your mouth…pure gobltygook!
Bluetus
(480 posts)Last edited Fri Jan 24, 2025, 08:13 PM - Edit history (1)
150 million eligible voters NEVER vote. Why not?
It isn't because Kamala was black or a woman. These people didn't vote when Gore was running, Kerry, Hillary, and not even Obama for the most part.
Some are just dumb asses that care more about football or soccer than their kids' health, education or their own retirement security. We can't do too much about that.
But there are 50 million out there who don't vote because they simply don't believe it will make a difference. Democrats have the "college debate team" disease with a few exceptions (Warren, AOC, and , well Katie is out of Congress, so that's about the complete list.) There are plenty of great Dems who have the best of intentions, but they can't get through a 30-second elevator pitch in 90 minutes.
And if they ever get to the point, they can't seem to put in terms that most Americans can understand.
Example: Putin has invaded Ukraine. OK, so what? How does that affect me personally? Why should I care?
If you can't answer that question in 25 words or fewer, you have lost the audience. Some won't vote at all. Others will vote for Trump when he says, "I'm going to deport all the brown people and that will keep you safe from murderers and rapists." That took 19 words and 6 seconds. OK it had some lies. We can use the other 9 seconds to tell the truth. But if you can't get attention in 15 seconds, you lose.
For decades, Dems have groused about how the media gave more airtime to crazy Republicans. But they kept the audiences awake. The networks just couldn't package a Democrat basically reading a white paper in monotone, and their audiences didn't respond to that.
This part of the DU is called "The Way Forward". Let me plant an idea you can stick a pin in, so to speak. If we keep trotting out Beltway creatures to run for high office, we will lose. A name to watch is Mark Cuban. I am not necessarily a fan, but I believe he is seriously thinking of getting onto the political stage to try to fill the void left by generations of Dems who spend 10% of their time saying nothing and the other 90% apologizing for being too forceful. I'm not saying a Cuban candidacy would be a good or a bad thing, but it would certainly cause some people to pay attention, for a change.
There is no natural law that says leaders have to be lawyers and must be steeped and aged for many years in the "Beltway way of doing things." In the first half of this country's history, it was common for Presidents to never have attended law school. Now it seems almost mandatory for a Presidential candidate to be a lawyer. And I'd argue that is a big part of why we can't communicate with average people and why Trump can. I would also point out that Ronald Reagan and Volodymyr Zelenskyy came from an entertainment background. So, think about Cuban. It is not as far-fetched as it may sound.
RandySF
(71,567 posts)Cirsium
(1,503 posts)He did not say the "Democratic party is suffering from 'lack of integrity.'" He mentioned that he is glad that people are talking about the Democratic party as the party of the working class, asked "but what does that mean?" and then said "there is a suffering of a lack of integrity around the brand of the Democratic party, it feels like to many working class people: I don't know if I trust you."
He is right, of course. The party's brand as the party of the working class is in trouble and that is a problem. That is pretty obvious, and should not be the basis for any controversy. Yes, a lot of that is caused by misrepresentations from the media and right wog propaganda. That does not make it any less true.
He did not say that the party, the Democratic voters, nor the politicians lack integrity.
This is just an excuse for a bash fest against the progressive wing, and is obvious and destructive.
If you are serious about taking the fight to the right wing, stop attacking the progressive wing of the party.
betsuni
(27,404 posts)For example?
Fix The Stupid
(972 posts)Repubs took the Presidency, House and Senate...
Is there any BETTER example?
But, keep on keeping on...this place is awesome for a chuckle.
betsuni
(27,404 posts)Republicans vote because of culture wars, not economic policy.
Anybody? What examples that Democrats ignore the working class? Nothing?
littlemissmartypants
(26,369 posts)Perception by voters has changed.
People are sick of all of the focus on "culture wars" and feel disenfranchised.
Our messaging sucks. It's too complicated and broad.
Time for us to adapt. We need a KISS* makeover.
❤️
*Keep it simple...
Sailingfish
(47 posts)There was a time I used to get pretty angered by the type of commentary you're putting out there. Still do because it sounds like a defense of business as usual. Here's the thing though. The "pragmatic" positions you and many others stake out within the framework of the Democratic Party and capitalist society are not unrealistic. Several years ago at one of the leftist boards (leftist as in anti-capitalist) where discussions were raging on about "what is to be done" a poster made a comment that rings true and stuck in my mind. The gist of the comment was that the progressive or "left-wing" of the Democratic Party are more unrealistic than the the "pragmatic" defenders of business as usual. The point being was that the progressive wing are demanding things that capitalism can't give. I think that's correct as much as I wish it wasn't so. The best the progressive wing can hope for is the ghost of FDR and New Deal type policy returning. That was a long time ago, under circumstances that bear little resemblance to the late stage capitalism and globalization we see today. Even if some of that were possible, it still doesn't address the underlying foundations of the problem. In the long run, capitalism does not elevate the majority, it impoverishes the majority, and it can't work any other way, despite the best intentions of the reformists. Monopoly of wealth created by the many is not a bug. It's a feature of capitalist social relations and that will not change.
Now, the standard response to that is "well it's still better than anything else that's been tried." The anti-capitalist left has done a pretty good job of making that answer a reality. Many of us who fought in that realm sucked. We lost the plot and purpose in a sea of bitter sectarianism, authoritarianism, and totalitarian dictates. The authoritarian statists long ago won the battle within the anti-capitalist left to be the "vanguard" of saving the working class. Problem is they lost the overall war and were full of shit. In the name of being the "vanguard" of saving the working class they instead enslaved it in a different form. The monumental failures of the movement certainly enhanced the thought process of "capitalism as the end of history."
As is obvious, I have no answers to the wails and shrieks of "what is your plan then." Only observations of some of went wrong in freeing the working masses from their chains in what is now a global plantation of wealthy masters and impoverished slaves. The grip of the wealthy and powerful solidified to the point of what appears to be no return. Still, people of good will - who still believe in the cause of freedom, emancipation, and controlling one's own destiny - must fight back in the face of insurmountable odds. In the big picture, "the way forward", and "what is to be done", is a much larger fight than "the way forward" and "what is to be done" within the confines of the Democratic Party and the Overton window of "capitalism as the end of history."
For now, Lincoln's words - "Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration" - might be the rallying cry of any party claiming to represent the interests of the working class. Too often the reality is the exact opposite. Nothing done is in deference to the working class and labor as the first priority. It's done in deference to private capital first, while pretending the opposite is the reality. It isn't. Not even FDR and the New Deal addressed that problem. FDR and the New Deal was a program to save capitalism and to stop the masses from revolting. Labor and the working classes are "entitled" to all they create. Not a small minority of wealthy and powerful who think they are entitled to all of it.
Excuse the bad grammar and structure of my commentary. I'm not all that well educated in such matters.
Cirsium
(1,503 posts)Neither I nor the candidate said that the Democratic Party is not the party of the working class.
I said the OP and the thread is a hit job on the let wing of the party. However, I would be happy to discuss whether or not the party is the party of the working class if you are up for that. If by that you mean "compared to the Republicans" I wouldn't disagree, but that is a pretty low bar.
Nanjeanne
(5,488 posts)He goes on to say that people don’t trust that the DNC is an organization for the working man. He continues talking about how when Biden was standing at picket lines there wasn’t an organized effort by the DNC to mobilize that moment. That there was a reason why Bezos, Zuckerberg, Musk didn’t like Biden - and Harris - but that wasn’t made known to people who then didn’t recognize that the Democrats were fighting for working people not billionaires. And he talks about how the DNC has to be bold in standing up to the corporate interests and against money in politics and become a really strong grassroots movement.
It’s nothing about the DNC or Dems lacking integrity but that requires listening to the interview and not reading a NBC headline.
He really is so right about everything he said in the ACTUAL interview. But because people read a headline that leaves out the words “brand of” the DNC - it’s so much easier to write a post talking about something that didn’t actually get said and is completely outside the whole 7 minute interview. And of course…..Bernie Sanders.
tulipsandroses
(6,633 posts)The whole story here is quite different.
TBF
(34,974 posts)In my view we have been WAY too nice. Trump and his oligarchy think we are a joke. He just took this election (most likely illegally, based upon his comments insinuating that Elon rigged it), and he's doing his best to take us back to pre-civil war times as we speak.
We don't need more "integrity" - we need to scare the crap out of them with large scale strikes.
kerouac2
(873 posts)Maybe perceived lack of integrity, since we are considered godless, but actual lack of integrity?? STFU.
tulipsandroses
(6,633 posts)He seemed to be saying that there is a perception by the public that there is a lack of integrity - He went on to mention that billionaires did not like Joe Bide, he mentioned Biden Admin suing Facebook and why Bezos and Elon did not like Biden. He talked about Biden on the picket line and then said why didn't the public know more about that.
I don't know much about him, but based on this clip - I can't find anything wrong with what he is saying if you are not focusing on that one poorly worded line.
everyonematters
(3,625 posts)Some of the problem is Citizens United.
Keepthesoulalive
(954 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(157,118 posts)littlemissmartypants
(26,369 posts)integrity
Overview
Definitions from Oxford Languages ·
noun
1.
the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness.
"he is known to be a man of integrity"
Similar:
honesty
uprightness
probity
rectitude
honor
honorableness
upstandingness
good character
principle(s)
ethics
morals
righteousness
morality
nobility
high-mindedness
right-mindedness
noble-mindedness
virtue
decency
fairness
scrupulousness
sincerity
truthfulness
trustworthiness
Opposite:
dishonesty
2.
the state of being whole and undivided.
"upholding territorial integrity and national sovereignty"
Similar:
unity
unification
wholeness
Methinks word choice is interfering with message clarity here. Typical. It's a prime example of why we have a messaging problem.
❤️
Nanjeanne
(5,488 posts)is the only one that says it. He says the brand suffers a lack of integrity in that people don’t truly understand what the Democratic Party represents and that is absolutely true. This outrage over something that was never said is just ridiculous. Anyone listening to the interview will hear a discussion about getting the brand of the Democratic Party to be seen as the party that is not in support of billionaires but of the working people. And he discusses the positive working people things that Biden and Harris did that got lost in the election noise where the Party’s BRAND was misunderstood.
But this knee jerk reaction to something that never happened is exactly the problem with how people perceive things because some headline told them so. And it’s dangerous as hell.
There are good people running for DNC Chair. To read some of these posts only saddens me and makes me realize what a difficult road we have to cut through that noise —
Keepthesoulalive
(954 posts)But there is something wrong with our journalism. He said the craziest things and the media sane washed it and they are still doing it. Social media fell in line and gave him ungodly money and publicity. They were supposed to be the truth tellers instead they were the propaganda arm of the Republican Party. Every part of our foundation is rotten and I have no idea how to fix it.
Historic NY
(38,310 posts)the balls to fuck over FOX and Media and Republicans. Hit them below the belt
JohnSJ
(97,074 posts)
LakeArenal
(29,913 posts)Who exactly doesn’t have integrity?
Me? The millions of others like me?
Makes me wonder of this guy’s definition of integrity.
milestogo
(18,894 posts)I can't even read this. We are dealing with the most evil human being to inhabit the White House in the history of this country and we are the ones who lack integrity?
Wiz Imp
(3,123 posts)
alarimer
(16,754 posts)Stop taking money from them and, bingo, integrity is restored.
betsuni
(27,404 posts)every bad capitalist billionaire donor oligarch, immoral, ignore working class, establishment monsters). Gee wiz, demonizing Democrats has nothing to do with making people hate and distrust them? Shame that anybody listens to people like this.
Get rid of the Democratic Party so the alliance of the 99% (Rs and Ds and Independents) will come together against the 1% in glorious economic revolution. Being angry at capitalism and hating Democrats.