She’s AIPACS tool. She calls herself a “nonjewish zionist”. They hate for no reason whatsoever, based on ethnicity.
The parties reaction to this will be telling. Anything less than expulsion from the party is unacceptable. Her being the neoliberal establishment pick, even if she was clearly defeated. Makes me wonder if they’re just going to try to burn it all down on the way out.
“Congresswoman Stevens is not a current member of the Michigan Democratic Party, nor will she be in the future,” Michigan Democratic Party Chair Curtis Hertel wrote on X Sunday.
Yes, I just read your post down below. Good news is so rare. This is something worth celebrating a little.
I’ve never heard of this woman. Is she still running to maintain her seat in this election?
Haley Stevens is in the House. She did not run for re-election, choosing instead to run for the MI senate seat. She lost that primary to El-Sayed.
She will still be in Congress from now until the new one is seated in January. After that, she has no known job and is not running for anything at the moment.
Thank God.
The bar is so low that I’m impressed Chuck even condemned it. I hope they at least censure her.
Wait, he did? That’s low key shocking! As someone who likes working with them, its shocking that he spoke out against supporting them. Low bar indeed, but damn.
I imagine that Schumer and Jeffries are upset because it puts the spotlight on them for being publicly disloyal to Democrats that are not owned by AIPAC.
Haley Stevens is too dumb and gave away the game just like the Democratic ghoul James Carville did.
Wait, she’s not Jewish??
I say this as a Jewish anti-zionist: what the actual fuck?? Like… I grew up indoctrinated into zionism and left when I got old enough to start paying attention to news. So… what’s her damage?
Maybe this sounds silly, but I have a lot of pity for Jewish liberal zionists. It’s a cult. And I’m familiar with Christian Nationalist zionists (also a cult, but different one). I feel sympathy for people operating on childhood brainwashing.
And I kind of get folks like Biden, who probably formed an opinion before '67.
But what’s her fucking deal? I can have grace for people who were born into this or are really old, but she just sounds like she learned that Israel is an apartheid state in college and said, ‘Neato!’
I am so much more disgusted with her now than I was when I assumed that she was a member of the tribe. ULGH.
Apparently her fiancé is Jewish.
The state party officials need to expel her from the party. Even if it would only have a symbolic effect they need to make clear that this is unacceptable for anyone who calls themselves a Democrat. If moderates ask progressives to “vote blue no matter who” and then turn around to endorse collaborators then they need to get the boot.
“Congresswoman Stevens is not a current member of the Michigan Democratic Party, nor will she be in the future,” Michigan Democratic Party Chair Curtis Hertel wrote on X Sunday.
“Senate Democrats are united in our support for Abdul El-Sayed, because we know he will fight for the economic interests of working families in Michigan, unlike Mike Rogers, who is a tool of Donald Trump and billionaire donors,” [Chuck Schumer] said.
For once Schumer is 100% right.
This coming from Schumer is honestly almost as shocking as Stevens choosing to completely burn her bridges with the Democratic Party.
Schumer says whatever toady thing he needs to to keep his job.
My Chinese room theory of politics: I don’t actually care whether anyone truly believes what they say. Words speak louder than thoughts and actions speak louder than words. As long as someone is useful as an implement to enacting progressive policy priorities, successful at shepherding legislation, and campaigns for the election of progressives, or can be strong-armed into doing the above three, I could not care less whether they actually believe in what they say.
At the margin, sincere belief is still better. Which is to say, Schumer should still be replaced with an actual progressive/leftist/socialist at the earliest opportunity, regardless of how he tries to pivot to act like one. I’ll appreciate the cynical pivot in the interim, but that’s as far as it goes.
As much as I don’t like Schumer he is as lukewarm as it gets which can be both good and bad. He does actually care about American interests for the most part.
Already removed her from the Michigan Democratic leader website, too.
If moderates ask progressives to “vote blue no matter who”
Worth saying that applies to the general only. I’m a progressive and I say: Vote progressive as far as you can. Always vote for the most progressive (or least regressive) candidate. In the general election, that’s gonna be blue over red. In the primary, that’s any progressive candidate. “Blue no matter who” is just expressing the pragmatic general rule of thumb. I haven’t seen any exceptions to that - I’ve never seen a Republican that wasn’t more regressive than an establishment Democrat option.
Thank you, I wish more people understood this.
Fun fact: in the US, political parties can’t expel anyone from their party. Anyone can choose to join any party at any time.
This is partially true. State Parties do own party affiliation on a ballot. Many states have codified party affiliations so you can only run as Hitler (D) if you have won the State Democratic Party Primary. But if you don’t win the Primary, you can still appear on the Ballot, you just have to run as your own party, or (I) or whatever. You can certainly still call yourself a Democrat, or a Republican, or whatever, but how you will appear on the ballot won’t be under the democrat ticket.
But if you don’t win the Primary, you can still appear on the Ballot
Yes, only one party member can proceed from the primary to the general. But that’s just the nature of the process. It doesn’t bestow the party any choice of candidates.
For the primary the Party can choose to disqualify a candidate from being able to run in the primary, but obviously that has to be done before the primary, once that happens it’s too late and there is no mechanism to remove a candidate once the general ballot has been certified.
Clearly the person we all knew she was.
also bodes well for El Seyed being the man we hope he is
So does the republican party have a load of sleeper agents in the democratic party that it activates when needed?
It’s not Republicans, it’s Israel and it’s both parties. Israel is worried because the progressive candidates have a real chance this election and are performing on not spending billions on Israel as well as health and wealth reform.
Is the Democratic Party fundamentally a right-wing party?
Yes. The original meaning of left wing and right wing were the radical and conservative wings of the French parliament; the former being for liberalism, the later for monarchism. It has since kept its same meaning, progression or regression.
The DNC’s official party stances are objectively regression. Progression, at this stage of socioeconomic development for the US, would be socialism. Actually it’d just be social capitalism since we have the worst social safety net of all advanced economies in world history, but given the party’s opposition to medicare for all, it cannot even manage that.
The left wing starts at anti-capitalism in all places with established capitalist markets.
Yes, but also there’s plenty of Democrat bigots. A lot of them are “centrist” and/or “moderate.”
deleted by creator
Yes. Tricia Cotham in NC. She got elected to state level seat as a Democrat and switched parties. And voted opposite what she promised. Then NC GOP gerrymandered again.
Judging by the number of times enough Dems voted with Republicans when they had a chance to actually accomplish something, it certainly seems so from outside the usa
No. It’s not that she was a “secret republican” it’s that there isn’t a difference when it comes to supporting Israel, or being owned by a Capitalist. Sure maybe she doesn’t think gay-people should be burned at the stake. But she is absolutely in support of public-private markets, which is the only thing that capitalists give a fuck about. No one is getting paid to be a bigot, but if they were, people like Steven’s would absolutely be trying to get in on that.
It is odd seeing someone do political self immolation for no reason at all. I’m starting to think Haley isn’t the brightest bulb in the pack.
The reason is obvious. She is falling on the sword to save Israel. The last 2 years may have done irreparable damage to my view on Israel. I don’t think I will ever vote for a candidate who takes aipac money or supports Israel for the rest of my life.
She appears to have united the party.
It’s either money or blackmail. That’s what it is for most of those out there making questionable decisions that go against what is right and good. There is lots of money and lots of blackmail currently floating around right now.
Do they have something on her? I’ve never seen something like this before.
She has an abusive husband who berated her in public for disappointing “them.”
Incredible. From what I understand, she’s only been with this “fiancee” for 7 months, and this makes him seem more like a Handler than a fiancee. Is this a Mossad Honeypot situation?
Yeah, definitely walks and talks like a handler. Honestly she looked under duress in that CNN interview.
Not husband, fiancee, and they’ve not been together a full year yet. He says he’s a democrat, but has donated to Republicans as well (Susan Collins just last year, to name one, and it was over 24k).
“everyone is disappointed in you” is very much a mossad move
How so?
She’s dumber than a 2nd coat of paint.
A perfect recruit for an AIPAC democrat.
No. She’s never been the sharpest bulb.
I like this. Sharpest tool. Brightest bulb.
I call myself a rocket surgeon. I neither work on rockets nor engage in neurosurgery.
(graphic stolen somewhere years ago.)
She’s gonna be an aipac lobbyist after this. These people don’t do a goddamn thing if there isn’t a lot of money coming there way
Fetterman 2.0 minus the stroke but double the Israel support.
At least she’s out of office in 3 months. We have Fetterman for 2 more years in PA.
Seems like a lot of people in power or seeking power are there to make sure Israel continues to get American taxpayer money, endless weapons, legal immunity and the willingness to go to send American troops to die for Israel.
Stevens voice Israel comes to me in my dreams!
deleted by creator
I don’t see any way this is a politically coherent move for her. She just burnt her bridges with Leftist Democrats and corporate Democrats. She doesn’t have the look to be a talking head on conservative media. Michigan has early voting and many have already voted. It’s not like Republicans will respect her, but they use her for the moment.
I’ve seen some mentions of her Republican fiance effecting her, but she is a congressmen and has agency and ownership of her own endorsements. I am wondering if her mental stability is all there because I’m confused by her lack of coherency.
Agreed.
Tactically, if she wanted him to lose she should’ve just stuck to what she was doing, which was supporting him in words while undermining and maintaining plausible deniability. Then if he loses, you can lament that there was just no saving a flawed candidate.
Now if he wins, she’s a loser twice over, and if he loses it’s a phyric victory: she’s the villain who lost Democrats the seat, and instead of proving his politics can’t win in a swing state, the story is just that he got stabbed in the back by an ally.
republicans masquerading as democrats. she isn’t the first.
I don’t see any way this is a politically coherent move for her.
By choosing to run for Senate, she isn’t running for re-election in the House. So she’s out in January either way. She’s taking the AIPAC money she’s been getting for years already, and almost surely a lobbying position in exchange for trying to sabotage El-Sayed.
I don’t see any way this is a politically coherent move for her.
The writing is on the wall. AIPAC is forever toxic for anyone with even a tiny amount of critical thinking skills. That only leaves the GOP and Zionist owned cable news shows as viable paid options.
Not corporate Dems. They will swing towards the money any which way it comes.
Schumer already said it was despicable. He is about as corporate dem as it gets. I would definitely say she burned those bridges.
He will bend back the AIPAC direction the moment people stop looking. Haley will be welcomed back as prodigal daughter the moment she is endorsed by them.
Nah, she is now too visisble a liability and would be a bigger problem than any benefit.
AIPAC will happily compensate her for her service, but will move on to less obviously controversial folks. They have no shortage of “cleaner” options, so they don’t have to be especially loyal to any particular Congress figure. She can be an example of being treated well on the way out.
I wonder what Jeffries thoughts are. Schumer has taken about 500k from aipac while Jeffries has taken over 1.5m. My guess is he won’t say the quiet part out loud but I’ve been surprised before.
Jeffries spoke out against her too.
I don’t trust corporate dems anymore. They will literally give a peer permission to tank mildly progressive efforts and then performatively pretend to be upset by it.
They are better than the fucking Nazis on the other side of the aisle but the Democratic leadership are showing themselves to be just as disingenuous.
Its the wrong move politically but the right move for AIPAC and that is all that matters for Mrs Israel comes with to me in my dreams.
I thought this felt familiar and now I remember why. In the NYC mayor race, one Democratic candidate, Jessica Ramos, had the endorsement of the Working Families Party, but since she was struggling to gain traction she ended up endorsing Cuomo with the hopes of gaining a role in his potential administration. Everyone was equally shocked then and WFP immediately revoked their endorsement of her.
Good on them for taking a stand and following their conscience here. Anyone still working for her should be black listed from future Democrat campaigns and positions.
Can’t believe Stevens decided she wanted to go down in history for people to point at when they say some Democrats would rather lose elections than win by having a leftist, anti-Zionist win. Absolutely crazy she just went full mask off there.
She does Democrat stuff in most of her policies, but she also has large donations from aipac, is converting to Judaism through marriage and she also lost to Abdul in 2019, I think.
She’s a grifter securing her new grift.
Fun fact: you can convert to Judaism without becoming a racist and supporting genocide and selling out your party and ideology.
Sure but if you are marrying a republican, it certainly helps.
Just painting a picture of her possible mineset
And I for one appreciate the insight.
If you’re ever in a leftist space and you hear: “Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds.”
This is what we mean.
That doesn’t make any sense though, because the vast majority of politicians condemning her are liberals.
deleted by creator
I don’t see how this URL is a response, but the site implies a conspiracy while also listing Democrats who “Rarely Rotate”, which seems to betray the whole premise of the conspiracy theory. Isn’t it a more likely explanation that some Democrats simply lean more conservative or vote based on their constituents? I mean, Marie Perez is literally a co-chair of the Blue Dog Coalition and competes in a district that went red in 2024.
The point is theres always just enough who vote with the obvious fascists so the agenda passes. Or just enough who go against the blue team so their agenda fails. Almost like it’s planned opposition. “Look guys, we tried to stop them, oopsies we’re so helpless! How could we know that exactly 3 people in our bloc from the safest blue districts would go against us?”
It’s seemingly every damn time there is a major policy fight. What immediately comes to mind is the last shutdown. Performative at best. The Dems had public support, but then people in safe districts just gave in.
Yet when a progressive runs or has support then the party finds their spine to undermine them.
deleted by creator
Until they get scratched.
Oh OK.
I get the saying, but if you piss off anybody you disagree with enough, they’re gonna hate you. I had a discussion with a friend about this very saying the other day. It also reeks of No True Scotsman.
The problem with this idiom is that it essentially just says there’s no such thing as [liberals], and that everybody but [True Scotsmen] are [not fascists], which is just absolutely not true.
It essentially leaves zero space for anybody to disagree with you, ever. Since as soon as they do, they should be treated as fascists, which is implied to be the absolute evil.
Which, okay, if that’s how you really feel, then that’s great for you, but then anybody who feels even remotely different is gonna see how absolutely tyrannical you are and move away. This is the exact attitude why people feel communists are either fucking dumb and annoying, or are actively right wing agents acting as a smear campaign against communism and leftism in general.
So, to conclude:
A) it’s not true
B) it’s not effective
C) it’s problematic as hell
D) it’s often outright counterproductive
You could just easily say like “why the fuck are so many moderate dems so shitty when it comes down to it?” I know you want to differentiate yourself from them as much as possible. And realistically, a LOT of people know and agree with you. But this is still not the way.
I can concede the sentiment sure. I’m sure there are well meaning liberals but there is a certain point when pressed where they either move left to resist growing fascism, or they become Haley Stevens. Fence sitting only gets people so far.
For most people, they’re along for the ride, and out of fear or whatever reason, cannot act. Challenging them by equating them to fascists is such a risky strategy. It OFTEN goes the wrong way. I do not have a good solution, but I do know and am concerned over the risks.
Sure and to the average voter that statement doesn’t really apply the ‘average voter’ also isn’t going to find themselves on Lemmy. I imagine to be frank the “average voter” thinks libs and the left are the same thing. To liberal POLITICIANS - It absolutely does. As for why I bring it up here, Lemmy, yes even .world has a left bent, people will be exposed to the saying on Lemmy it’s important to call it out when it happens.
No you just don’t know how politics works. Liberals and Fascists are ideologically alligned on most things. Liberals are just more into trying to whitewash their atrocities and use legalism as a shield. Fascism is just the final form of liberalism once all the fake smiles are gone. There’s PLENTY of ideologies that aren’t fascist. Liberalism and Fascism both fall into the category of corporatocracy. Rule via Corporations. and the wider category of capitalism. They are both right wing ideologies. Both anti-communist. etc. They have a LOT in common.
Omg people using legalism as a shield is so dumb…
Okay so, I do understand how the values differ. But I also know how being a dick to people makes them feel. It basically never wins them over. People put up their walls super fast as soon as they sense an agenda or hate. And yes, people can intuit hate in text over the internet.
So like when you start off your response to my consideration of an idiom with “no you just don’t understand how politics works” you sound like a child. You’re also entirely missing my point. I KNOW that fascism and capitalism are neighbors. I know that VERY well. There’s literally no need to condescend at me over this. You’re wasting your energy trying to explain to me this stuff because you’re preaching to the choir.
Your goal is to convince those people to rethink what they’re doing. And what YOU’RE doing is basically going “i am so smart and you’re a fascist” and then attacking them. That’s stupid as hell, and if anyone, you are the one that doesn’t understand how people work in systems where they believe they are free. Your strategy works when people are afraid of disagreeing with authority - which “liberals” are very much not. Liberals are afraid of disagreeing with money since they put it on a pedestal. So if you want to win those hearts, you have to speak their language and explain to them why that philosophy is bad.
For example: “money isn’t everything, and morality is important” will get responded to with “but I have to pay the bills” which you could respond with “what about all the harm you’re doing by your inaction which results in the companies and rich growing in power by YOUR SUBMISSION and executing atrocities?” Which then gets the real conversation started.
Saying you are a fascist and telling people how close capitalists are to Nazis is a waste of time and everybody’s walls going up and nothing changing, it’s a literal losing strategy, no matter if it’s true or not.
aw, did i hurt your feelings?
… What? No? Not even remotely. Though your super hostile questioning of that is, in itself pretty worrying. I mean no offense and am literally trying to break bread with you. Though if you continue… whatever this is, this conversation may end.
What a bizarre turn of attitude… maybe you think I’m acting out at you? If I’ve said something to offend you, I apologize, it wasn’t my intent. Though, maybe it wasn’t a turn of attitude at all?
But yeah, literally …Um, what? Maybe you’re trying to troll somebody else? Freudian mask slip? My feelings are not hurt, my day is not ruined, who are you, again?
You’re complaining about my tone and projecting your goals on to me. I am not trying to “convert” liberals. It’s annoying when you seem to think you know what I’m trying to do and tell me how I’m doing it wrong. When in reality we have entirely different goals. And we don’t agree on this stuff. Capitalism and fascism are not “neighbors” they’re the same fucking thing. That’s the entire point I was making earlier.
Your goal is to convince those people to rethink what they’re doing.
Not it isn’t. When I make a comment under someone I think is wrong I am not trying to change their mind. I am simply stating for anyone else who might also disagree with them that they are not alone in that. I have no interest in recruiting and allying with liberals. That’s just silly. Might as well try explaining to a Nazi why they shouldn’t be a Nazi.
I am literally telling liberals that I think they’re disgusting Nazi apologists. Why would I want to convert those people to my side?
So, I’ll admit maybe I was too dissmissive to you, and that I just sent that as a digital middle finger after reading you complaining about my tone without bothering to read the rest of what you said. I don’t agree with you though, and we don’t share the same goals or views. I’m not going to spend 2 hours laying out all the things I think but I can tell we’re quite different in how we see things. Like I said tho I’m not interested in changing your mind. So you keep on trying to make liberals see the light. As unfun as that sounds…
Your goal is to convince those people to rethink what they’re doing.
Not it isn’t. When I make a comment under someone I think is wrong I am not trying to change their mind. I am simply stating for anyone else who might also disagree with them that they are not alone in that. I have no interest in recruiting and allying with liberals
Have you considered that making them rethink what there are doing didn’t need to recruit them? In terms of strategy against the enemy, sowing seeds of doubt, mistrust, concern, alarm, is a time and battle tested strategy to weaken them.
The advice you are so against didn’t suggest you turn them into an ally, they can be tools to make it harder for the enemy to act in unison, which makes your true goals easier to achieve.
Seems like you are actively avoiding listening to a methodology that you would benefit from.
Just an opinion based on this exchange.
Lol, a smidge more complicated than that
Zionists are fascists, how is that more complicated?
Not sure how that disproves my point other than that she’s a Lib bought and paid for like Schumer, who then got scratched and went mask off.
What the hell do you think liberal means? Mist leftists are liberals.
Man, centrist Democrats and leadership showing when the chips are down, there’s progressives on the field, they cuddle up with Republicans.
Maybe you can’t read?
The entire story is “One asshole has been rebuked by the left and center of her party” and you somehow twisted that into “All democrats are bad?”
Either learn to read or stop posting.
They’re alluding to the fact that when it comes down to it, corporate dems would endorse and support republicans over progressives because they have the same backers. This isn’t one asshole, this is part of a larger trend. Historically. When the choice is between fascism and leftist/even just progressive politics, corporate “centrist” dems will get in bed with fascists before they will support real change. Because real change hurts the bottom line or the most powerful (read: rich).
Thank you.
I upvoted your gratitude comment, I’m not a huge commenter but I’ve done similar. There’s so much decisiveness and bickering from miscommunication and misunderstanding that it’s nice seeing when people support each other through it.
Be the change you’d like to see.
The entire Democratic party stood up and said NO here. IDK what the fuck you people expect, but you have no idea what the fuck you’re talking about.
deleted by creator
The same party that didn’t try to lay into Cuomo for running as a spoiler candidate, that didn’t back Madamni for a mayoral position of one of the biggest cities in the USA. The same that has also ran attack ads in this same race to just not vote at all despite blue no matter who. Man, the hypocrisy amongst the Democrat establishment and their supporters are striking and damning as hell.
We kicked her out of the party within a couple of hours.
And her name is Haley Stephens, since you guys are such fucking experts on everything.
This is after months of centrist dems participating in the Islamophobic attack against AES started by the Republicans.
Why are they shocked, she was always an Israeli slave
Man I wish I lived in MI just so I could have had the opportunity to vote against this nasty little gremlin in the primary.
She’s leaving her house of Rep seat in January and not going to be in office. Not sure what her next job will be.
I would say Fox News correspondent, but I don’t think she would last more than a month doing that.
