It’s not about finding a ‘perfect’ individual; it’s about the documented institutional effort to crush the progressive wing regardless of the candidate.
If you want examples of who the party fights, look at the 2024 and 2026 primary cycles. The establishment (via groups like AIPAC and the Democratic Majority for Israel) spent over $100 million,the most in U.S. history, specifically to unseat progressives like Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush. In the 2026 special election in New Jersey, they even turned on a former moderate like Tom Malinowski the second he suggested conditioning aid to Israel.
This isn’t about Hasan, it’s about the fact that the DNC recently voted down a resolution to limit the influence of dark money and corporate PACs in Democratic primaries. They are effectively keeping the door open for Republican billionaire mega-donors (like Miriam Adelson) to fund ‘Democratic’ primary campaigns against progressives.
When the party leadership chooses to protect that dark money pipeline instead of their own base, they aren’t dropping the ball, they are protecting their donors.
My point stands: the establishment perceives a loss to a Republican as a manageable setback, but they perceive a progressive takeover of the party as an existential threat. The spending records prove it.
he is facing attacks from the democrat party, because he represents a progressive shift. and the democrats are doing so because they see progressive movement as a larger threat then the republican party.
this is consistent to my whole argument, and why i said that.
It’s not about finding a ‘perfect’ individual; it’s about the documented institutional effort to crush the progressive wing regardless of the candidate.
If you want examples of who the party fights, look at the 2024 and 2026 primary cycles. The establishment (via groups like AIPAC and the Democratic Majority for Israel) spent over $100 million,the most in U.S. history, specifically to unseat progressives like Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush. In the 2026 special election in New Jersey, they even turned on a former moderate like Tom Malinowski the second he suggested conditioning aid to Israel.
This isn’t about Hasan, it’s about the fact that the DNC recently voted down a resolution to limit the influence of dark money and corporate PACs in Democratic primaries. They are effectively keeping the door open for Republican billionaire mega-donors (like Miriam Adelson) to fund ‘Democratic’ primary campaigns against progressives.
When the party leadership chooses to protect that dark money pipeline instead of their own base, they aren’t dropping the ball, they are protecting their donors.
My point stands: the establishment perceives a loss to a Republican as a manageable setback, but they perceive a progressive takeover of the party as an existential threat. The spending records prove it.
So then we agree that this comment was either nonsense or bait.
NO,
he is facing attacks from the democrat party, because he represents a progressive shift. and the democrats are doing so because they see progressive movement as a larger threat then the republican party.
this is consistent to my whole argument, and why i said that.
What’s your strongest example of a Democrat attacking Hasan for his progressive views?