Should Democrats follow the DNC reform path or the DSA transformation path?

[SolitarySolace]

The Democratic Party currently contains a significant ideological divide between its mainstream establishment and the democratic-socialist left.

For this question, I’m interested in which overall direction people think Democrats should embrace—not simply cherry-picking one or two popular policies from each.

Mainstream/DNC direction: preserve the existing constitutional structure and market-based economy; regulate corporations; strengthen unions; expand healthcare coverage; lower healthcare costs; increase affordable housing; invest in clean energy; protect abortion rights; maintain federal immigration enforcement while reforming it; and use taxation, regulation, and government programs to address inequality and affordability.

DSA direction: move beyond capitalism toward democratic socialism; abolish ICE; establish Medicare for All; greatly expand social/public ownership and worker control; expand social housing; replace the two-party system with multiparty democracy; expand the House; institute proportional representation and ranked-choice voting; and abolish the Senate as part of a much broader restructuring of American political and economic institutions.

There is overlap on healthcare, labor, housing, abortion, climate policy, and inequality. The major disagreement is how far to go: reform the existing American system or fundamentally transform it.

So which overall direction should Democrats take?

If your answer is “a mixture,” list which side you choose on each genuine disagreement. We can total them. Whichever side receives more of your choices is the agenda your policy preferences more closely resemble. If it ends in a tie, additional DNC-vs.-DSA differences can break it.

[sage2021]

NOT THE DSA

What are they talking about MediCare for all? It's almost out of money now for the people who are on it.🙄

[NaultD]

Biden/harris was too much of a communist for maga and not enough socialist for anti maga voters. Sitting on the fence isn't an option anymore b

[strateguy632]

I don't see any split. Which democrats are actually saying do it different than the quad squad?

[SolitarySolace]

@strategy632 The split is not simply “the Squad versus every other Democrat.” It is an ongoing fight inside the Democratic coalition between the party establishment/moderate wing and a growing progressive/democratic-socialist wing.

AP is describing it right now as a Democratic “tug-of-war.” That fight is playing out in major 2026 primaries, including Michigan, where establishment Democrats are backing Haley Stevens while Bernie Sanders and AOC are backing progressive Abdul El-Sayed. AP also reports similar ideological contests in other important races.

And the disagreement is much larger than personality. The Democratic Party’s official agenda emphasizes lowering costs, expanding healthcare, creating jobs and protecting the existing democratic system. The DSA’s newly published program goes considerably further: it explicitly advocates democratic socialism, abolishing the Senate, replacing the two-party system with multiparty democracy, proportional representation, abolishing ICE, and other structural changes.

AP has specifically reported that this new DSA program is becoming a flashpoint in Democratic primaries, with moderate Democrats pushing back as DSA-aligned candidates gain influence.

So no, I am not claiming every Democrat secretly supports the DSA agenda. That is precisely my point. There are two substantially different directions competing for influence inside the same broader Democratic electoral coalition.

The question is whether Democrats continue trying to reform the existing American constitutional and market system, or whether the democratic-socialist wing eventually gains enough influence to move the party toward the much broader transformation the DSA openly says it wants.

[Dargil]

I want them to follow the DSA transformation path so they will also follow the Whig path.

[SolitarySolace]

@Dargil I understand the strategic argument: let Democrats embrace the DSA path, become too radical for the country, and potentially go the way of the Whigs.

My concern is that this is a double-edged sword. The Whigs really did collapse amid enormous internal divisions, but that does not mean a major party that moves sharply left will simply disappear on schedule. American major parties can also survive by transforming themselves.

Suppose Democrats increasingly embrace the DSA agenda and remain one of the country’s two major parties. Republicans might benefit electorally for a while—but American elections do not produce permanent one-party rule. Eventually Democrats would win again.

At that point we would no longer be dealing with the mainstream Democratic Party we know now. We could be dealing with a party whose governing faction wants to move beyond capitalism, abolish the Senate, replace the two-party system, expand public ownership, and restructure major constitutional institutions.

So I understand wanting Democrats punished electorally for moving toward the DSA. I just don’t think helping the DSA capture one of America’s two major parties is a harmless way to accomplish that.

[Dargil]

I'm MAGA, my father was a RINO but my grandfather was a Scoop Jackson Democrat

[Cidknee]

Its really how they feel. I think it's split with them.

[fishbone77]

The DSA direction is a guaranteed loser.

[SolitarySolace]

Agreed. And the DNC isn’t any better either.

[exitseven]

let them go full bore commie.

[SolitarySolace]

@exitseven That’s exactly the scenario that worries me. Letting Democrats “go full bore” democratic socialist might hurt them badly at first—but what happens if that transformed Democratic Party eventually wins again?

America’s political system has historically been dominated by two major parties, and control changes hands over time. A badly defeated party does not necessarily vanish; it can reorganize, change its coalition, and return to power.

So the question isn’t merely whether embracing the DSA could cost Democrats an election. It’s what kind of Democratic Party would eventually return to government.

The DSA’s actual program goes far beyond ordinary liberal policy: moving beyond capitalism, abolishing the Senate, replacing the two-party system with multiparty democracy, proportional representation, and major expansion of social/public ownership.

From my perspective, I’d rather see Democrats reject that transformation than gamble that becoming dramatically more socialist will permanently destroy the party. There is no guarantee they disappear; they could instead become the new Democratic Party and eventually govern with that agenda.

[exitseven]

they go full commie and nobody will touch them with ten foot pole.

[SolitarySolace]

I hope you’re right

[canamlusciouslad73]

The latter.