Infighting gifts the right another easy win

People always twist the DNC endorsements thing, so let me clear it up: the Democratic National Committee has an official policy not to endorse anyone during the primary season - they just wait and back whoever wins. So when people talk about the DNC “endorsing” Mamdani, it’s just the same basic playbook they use for any Democrat who wins their primary, nothing unique or shady there. Now, about Hogg and all that drama while he was vice chair: the whole time he held that position, all I ever heard from Democrats across the board was how much they wanted him out. The complaints were pretty much nonstop - he was out of touch with regular voters, not doing the job well, just not the leader they wanted. Even when I tried to defend the guy or say he brought some good ideas, people would pile on and argue he was actually making things worse. Hogg did officially step down on his own, but let’s be real - that only happened after he was almost forced out over some technical election rule, and honestly, most people in the party saw his leaving as this big unifying moment. He’s still active as an organizer, but most Dems just thought his leadership style and vision didn’t fit with the rest of the party, and I kinda get that, even though I agree with him on shaking up the establishment. What gets me is how Democrats are always so quick to turn their own figures into villains, inventing a new party boogeyman every year. And who does this constant infighting actually help? Definitely not Democrats. It just hands easy talking points to the GOP, MAGA crowd, or even outside players like Russia and China, who all benefit from the left being divided and distracted. The wildest part is that American Democrats only look “left” in the US context - compared to Europe or almost anywhere else, they’re barely center-right. So it’s extra wild how much they tear each other apart for not being radical enough, when the real opposition is just sitting back and watching the show.