For the time-pressed: The relevant "call to action" starts at about 2 mins. He's basically screaming a few minutes later. I don't think democrats are immune to this sort of thing, but I agree that this has really gone way too far at this point. Need to remind myself that this is Fox News - not some Peertube alt-right commentator. Quite scary.

Do you have any evidence that this madness can’t happen to “our side?

It should - madness worked.

Rail all you like about it, but the republicans under Trump had both houses, got two judges, defunded a vast number of programs, won multiple issues in their identity wars, and donald trump got more voters to come out and vote for him in the second election

He got more votes, despite having a 40-45(?) approval rating (what I remember from 538)

The only “mistake” was riling up democrats enough to make them come out and vote more.

What are the repercussions?

There will be political roadblocks to see how much damage can be offloaded or dumped into a heat sink.

The republicans will regroup and then prepare for the Biden presidency.

So yes, you are right - madness was/is the superior political tactic. The better tactic survives.

I don’t have any evidence, I have conclusions on behavioral patterns.

The Democrats lack physical presence. It’s been an ongoing issue for us for a very long time. We had extreme issues with getting our youth vote out, getting our minority votes out. It literally took a black President to get that demo to show up, and for some reason they stopped showing up right after he was gone (for Hilary). The kids don’t turn out at all for decades now. Many could argue if we didn’t literally send out mail in ballots, the turn out would have been lower. Republicans don’t have this problem, so no, I don’t think a warcry works on the Democrats because we have been very weak on physical presence for decades now.

But in terms of madness, of course, all mobs are susceptible to this. Virtual turn out on the left is disproportionately high. The #metoo and BLM movements are clear examples of this. But again, the physical presence is lacking. The riots last summer were a blip and not coordinated, and led to zero legislation. I’ll concede #metoo inevitably entered into madness territory.

The Republican tea-party people have been practicing for years protesting in DC, and they have their physical turnout covered in almost every election.

If anything, I envy the right-wing’s ability to rally, and do not fear rally-calls on the left because we can barely show up for an election.

Young people in general have not been a reliable demographic.

Also a quick google search showed that 75% of the Tea Party were 45 or older (back in 2012).

My take is that there’s a desperation behind the last 20 years or so.

Haven’t you wondered what would cause an entire segment of the population to take a deep dive with thinly-disguised racists and Russian trolls?

If you really think about it, then it feels like "the right" has been losing over the last 20 years. Topics such as religion, abortion, gay marriage, healthcare, marijuana legalization, and police reform have all been going in the favor of "the left". I can't really think of any big issue that "the right" has championed, that they've actually won. They've won political appointments, but not ideological positions.

Even having a balanced budget hasn't worked out for "the right". When they've been in power, the budget deficit hasn't really decreased.

Perhaps this has made "the right" more desperate? Maybe they need to rethink their principles instead?

(I use quotation marks for the sides, because these really aren't issues that fit on a one dimensional scale. A libertarian could fall on the right, but still support "the left" on most of the above issues. Also, this is mostly US specific.)

It has to play a part. Imagine using all your political capital championing those non-issues and not really getting anything tangible back in return. What a waste, it makes the Republicans look similar to the college racket, they sure took the votes (the same way college sure takes the money).

The Democratic establishment is in danger of this fate in the long term as well. They are sure taking the easy money from the progressive talk, but if they don’t deliver, it’s going to backfire in 2-3 elections from within.

You are downvoted, but it is often observed that rallying left leaning people behind a cause is much more difficult. Contrary to all the stickers we had the last years, it is indeed due to diverse opinions.

In my opinion that is a good property in general, just no for elections.

The video has been removed.

Not surprised, if you YouTube/google ‘life liberty levin’, he is having to walk back all the stuff he’s being spewing pre-riots.

The video's been removed by its uploader. What was it?

Evidence against the idea that the fringes are propagating revolt movements exclusively in alt media/networks like Parler. Foxnews has the same stuff, he was saying in no uncertain terms that the election was a fraud, and Democrats violated the constitution and that the people need to do something about it - no caveats.

Can someone explain why this is downvoted?

Not downvoting, just observing: Likely the opinionated and unprovable claim (that his can not happen to democrats), stated as an absolute fact.

It’s inferable if you look at micro-timeline of modern American history.

Sanders coalition is about the only grassroots group that came from the left and was swiftly rejected (twice).

The grass roots movements of the tea party took the Obama era super majority away, and fortified a Trump outsider run.

The boots on the ground every-man on the left is harder to rally, and thus far have not shown any ability to even dominate their own party (their platforms don’t even get taken up by the broader party, just parroted). Plus, if it were possible, there would be a voice in the mainstream media stoking this contingent (as in business has identified an obvious market).