What did Democrats do wrong?

[3point14]

You mentioned "well targeted propaganda" in reply to an excerpt of his writing.

That was a much more general comment regarding the effect. Sorry

 

[The Don]

Yea they needed more racism, that is the ticket to get elected in the US.

Certainly that's the tack Labour have taken after getting into power here in the UK.

 

[Donal]

You mentioned "well targeted propaganda" in reply to an excerpt of his writing.

You don't need to work at FOX to be well targeted propaganda. You could be a speaker at an event founded but the world's most famous junk bond salesman.

 

[d4m10n]

Guilt by association is a perfectly natural mode of thinking but not a particularly rational one.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Slightly different take:


Dems failed because they don't have a Military Wing of their Party.
Republicans have Proud Boys, Oathkeepers etc., plus the very vocal NRA crowd: not only do they keep Republicans in line, they also make voters and election workers scared of the consequences of looking like they oppose them.

the Worker Side of politics had their militants beaten and killed out of it through violent suppression of Worker Strikes, and arrests of anyone looking to think of Unions since the Red Scare.

This puts Democrats intrinsically in the weaker position, politically, and makes a gradual shift to the Far Right inevitable.

 

[Donal]

Guilt by association is a perfectly natural mode of thinking but not a particularly rational one.

This isn't just some dudes from the old neighborhood or family members. This is an organization he's not just freely associating with, but acting as a public face for.

But, let's cut the BS. What do you actually believe the Democrats did wrong? Something they did or didn't do. Not some vague assertion of what they were perceived to have done.

 

[Donal]

Slightly different take:


Dems failed because they don't have a Military Wing of their Party.
Republicans have Proud Boys, Oathkeepers etc., plus the very vocal NRA crowd: not only do they keep Republicans in line, they also make voters and election workers scared of the consequences of looking like they oppose them.

the Worker Side of politics had their militants beaten and killed out of it through violent suppression of Worker Strikes, and arrests of anyone looking to think of Unions since the Red Scare.

This puts Democrats intrinsically in the weaker position, politically, and makes a gradual shift to the Far Right inevitable.

I'm not sure armed enforcers are the direction they should go.

 

[dirtywick]

How is this remotely on topic? I'm pretty sure there are a dozen other threads to talk about the moral and pragmatic failures of the GOP.

i think it’s on topic and this is the best thread to discuss it

 

[The Great Zaganza]

I'm not sure armed enforcers are the direction they should go.

they should as long as the Republicans do it: for every right-wing guy intimidating voters, there needs to be a left-winger ready to stop him, with force if necessary.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. In fact, the best propaganda masquerades as journalism. Like Fox.

I think the fact that you use the word 'masquerades' implies that they are mutually exclusive.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Propaganda is just using marketing techniques in politics.

 

[dirtywick]

yeah it’s deception

 

[ponderingturtle]

yeah it’s deception

Sometimes, it is also shaping an argument and slogans to be effective and getting better uptake. Lots of ink spilled on how "defund the police" was a bad slogan for marketing purposes, but I don't see how it is deceptive.

 

[dirtywick]

alright fair enough

then i suppose i would disagree that propaganda is just marketing. there’s an implication that there’s something insidious and deceptive about propaganda that isn’t true with marketing. i suppose that would be the difference between the two.

 

[ponderingturtle]

alright fair enough

then i suppose i would disagree that propaganda is just marketing. there’s an implication that there’s something insidious and deceptive about propaganda that isn’t true with marketing. i suppose that would be the difference between the two.

It has taken on that connotation to many people yes. OF course there is plenty insidious and deceptive in basic advertising as well

 

[dirtywick]

It has taken on that connotation to many people yes. OF course there is plenty insidious and deceptive in basic advertising as well

i agree

 

[Puppycow]

There's a new book out called "Original Sin" by Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson. It's generating some stories.

There's an excerpt from the book in The New Yorker:

How Joe Biden Handed the Presidency to Donald Trump

At a fateful event last summer, Barack Obama, George Clooney, and others were stunned by Biden’s weakness and confusion. Why did he and his advisers decide to conceal his condition from the public and campaign for reëlection?

www.newyorker.com

President Joe Biden got out of bed the day after the 2024 election convinced that he had been wronged. The élites, the Democratic officials, the media, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama—they shouldn’t have pushed him out of the race. If he had stayed in, he would have beaten Donald Trump. That’s what the polls suggested, he would say again and again.

His pollsters told us that no such polls existed. There was no credible data, they said, to support the notion that he would have won. All unspun information suggested it would have been a loss, likely a spectacular one, far worse than that suffered by his replacement as the Democratic nominee, Vice-President Kamala Harris.

The disconnect between Biden’s optimism and the unhappy reality of poll results was a constant throughout his Administration. Many insiders sensed that his inner circle shielded him from bad news. It’s also true that, for Biden to absorb those poll results, he would have had to face the biggest issue driving them: the public had concluded—long before most Democratic officials, media, and other “élites” had—that he was far too old to do the job.

Among others, NPR has a story:

https://www.npr.org/2025/05/14/nx-s1-5397210/biden-trump-election-original-sin-book

A forthcoming book by two political reporters claims to reveal extensive details about the physical and cognitive decline of former President Joe Biden and what the authors describe as a concerted effort by his aides to keep it hidden from public view.

Original Sin: President Biden's Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again, by CNN's Jake Tapper and Axios reporter Alex Thompson, is set for release later this month. NPR's Morning Edition team has not obtained an advance copy of the book. But an excerpt published in The New Yorker describes several behind-the-scenes episodes, including a now-infamous California fundraiser in June 2024 where Biden appeared disoriented and reportedly didn't recognize actor George Clooney, a longtime supporter and friend.

 

[Donal]

Really glad they sat on this so they could publish a book.

 

[theprestige]

Really glad they sat on this so they could publish a book.

They didn't sit on it so they could publish a book. They sat on it to influence the election in favor of their preferred candidate. They would have continued to sit on it as long as that strategy continued to pay off. Publishing a book once the strategy failed is just finding a silver lining in the stormclouds.

 

[Donal]

No, it's become pretty common practice to sit on important information while you put a book together. Granted, they probably would have waited longer if Biden had won re-election.

See all the stuff that came out after Trump was forced out of office the first time. Bob Woodward's recordings of his conversations with Trump about the initial COVID response are insane. But, instead of going to the public i nearly 2020 with how much danger Trump was trying to cove rup, he held on to publish a book.