You’ll find it gets even more confusing. Our primary process differs from state to state. In some states you need to be a member of a party to vote on who gets to run for that party. Since many states are essentially one party, that process is where real democracy happens. In other states you can choose the day of to vote in one primary or another. In a general sense, the party itself has no say in who runs. They are able to play with funding and the conventions can have weird rules for things like presidents.

On election day, you of course vote for whoever you want.

Compared to the UK, our party leadership is very weak and driven by candidates and donors. Where you elect party leaders that then direct who gets to run, whoever we elect to run start to dictate how the party works. For the most part, short of directly volunteering, the vast majority don’t interact with the party itself at all.

“I do think people need hope, but it needs to be what I call ordinary hope, realistic hope,” - Starmer

The future is, uh, not looking good.

There’s literally privatization proponents in this new labour government.

To be sure, but with actual labour supporters looking at that and thinking “it’s because Tories didn’t actually keep their promises to stop immigration” and “let’s opress trans people too” I honestly don’t think the resulting government with a few more in opposition would’ve been worse than something where an actual left party might’ve succeeded. You know, one that provides a revolutionary vision of hope.

“I do think people need hope, but it needs to be what I call ordinary hope, realistic hope,” Starmer said.

https://inthesetimes.com/article/britain-keir-starmer-corbyn-election-serious

This government is doomed.

You listen to the liberals backing labor’s change they’ll say it’s because labor picked up Tory voters in key races while losing voters in “safe” races while cherry picking results to demonstrate.

I’ve yet to be convinced of that line of thinking though and I’m much of the same opinion as you. Nobody elects a status quo party when shit is going south like it is right now. The Tories lost because they couldn’t help but put up shit policies. The neo-blairites will lose because they kept those shit policies.

Depends on what you mean by funny. I think those guys wearing horse masks are out there.

I honestly don’t think it’ll work in the UK either. This election was a win against an undefended goal.

And while 34% is a few percentage points lower than other recent winners, the more centrist party, lib dems, got more votes than the previous election.

Sure, but Corbyn’s labour got 32.2 and 40.0 compared to this 33.7 “landslide.” And Corbyn won his seat even though he’s an independent. I don’t particularly find the centrist strategy to be a very compelling result compared to that.

It’s the same as a normal bishop. They use arch btw.

Now I understand this article is largely ragebait for this community, but I just wanted to point out that the incredible strength of this centrist approach resulted in one of the lowest turnout elections in 20 years with labour receiving about 34% of the popular vote.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for a consistently winning strategy.

Sure, but his main motivation isn’t to fuck over the poors as a mercenary for some other asshole’s wealth. It’s to fuck over the poors for his own interest.

Dude already was a Goldman Sachs banker. There’s not many depths he hasn’t already plumbed.

The FPTP system in the UK is what makes this incredibly likely. Yes labour won huge with their Tory lite platform, but turnout was shit and their huge majority win isn’t even 35 percent of the people who even bothered voting. That’s a very fragile landslide and it will turn around when these milquetoast liberals fail to change anything (because they don’t want to change anything).

24 is the maximum legally allowable. 20 really is a hell of a mutilation.

His victory ends a tradition of Islington North voting for Labour since a 1937 byelection.

Which is good, because voting for stealthy Tories disguised as Labour would’ve been bad.

Sunak has a net worth over 800 million. I doubt many can afford him as a clock puncher.

This guy’s weird. He’s been in coalition with Bibi, which is where he got defense minister, but he’s also hated Bibi enough to be in coalition with the United Arab list. Mostly he seems to despise haredi enough to stay in opposition, and they are lynchpins to Bibi’s current government.

bucks

Quid. We gotta be respectful.

Did you ever find your mind btw?

What point in history would you pin as American government being representative of it’s population. It was failed from the start.

They’re feasible with a voter mandate. You get that mandate by building it in your platform and getting elected on it with sufficient margins. The Democratic party, however, is not a revolutionary party but a status quo party and refuses to go that route because they’re afraid of losing. So they just lose by default.