What did Democrats do wrong?

[wareyin]

I think the last couple of pages of this thread has allowed me to figure out "What did Democrats do wrong".

The GOP has become tribal: "The worst Republican is better than the best Democrat" is something I've heard from them many times.

The "democrats" are not this way. In order for the Democratic Party to defeat the GOP they need to appeal to almost everyone else. Clearly thats impossible. The candidates that would appeal to me, (several members) here would turn their noses up at. TBF the opposite is also, quite true. I despise Trump/Vance so much that I'd vote for a ham sandwich over them. But, thats clearly not the case for millions of people.

Yeah, that has been the source of my frustration here. While I would have happily pulled the lever for AOC or Sanders or Mamdani against Trump, after the complaints about "vote blue no matter who" even in this thread and the 6 million or so drop in votes for the Democratic ticket in 2024, it is obvious that the feeling of "better by far than Trump so I better vote for them" is not shared.

I would have been the first person in line to chastise any "moderate" Democrat for refusing to vote for Sanders or any other progressive if they had been the nominee. The "my way or the highway" mentality is a recipe for disaster no matter who does it. However, the reality of the last few cycles shows that these fickle, conditional voters tend to reside on the far left much more often. When one side is tribal and the other side is looking for any excuse to stay home, the outcome is exactly what we are living through now.

And I have no idea how to convince those who stayed home and are seeing the results of that design play out live with horror that this was a bad choice and please put more thought into it next time.

 

[wareyin]

oh another tiny insult, great way to start.

Pointing out that you have repeatedly misunderstood things is not an insult. I'm very sorry that you feel that it is, but it's going to be tough to have a conversation with someone who has this attitude.

it’s my impression of how progressives feel about it and i think they have a point. how can you shift right to attract socially liberal fiscal conservative moderates without alienating progressives? kind of mutually exclusive on some things and i think that’s fair to say that

Politics is compromise. No one gets 100% of what they want.

oh donal said that? well that changes everything

If even progressives don't agree with your impression about what progressives feel...well I would suggest that you might be wrong but that would be taken as another insult.

 

[dirtywick]

Pointing out that you have repeatedly misunderstood things is not an insult. I'm very sorry that you feel that it is, but it's going to be tough to have a conversation with someone who has this attitude.

not even going to own what you were doing? lol

Politics is compromise. No one gets 100% of what they want.

If even progressives don't agree with your impression about what progressives feel...well I would suggest that you might be wrong but that would be taken as another insult.

donal, king of progressives, has decreed it. i submit i was wrong

 

[wareyin]

Can we at least agree that the people in leadership positions within the Democratic Party have more influence on the actions of the Democratic Party than random people on social media?

The "random people on social media" who link arms with MAGA in a concerted effort to make sure Democrats do not get elected seem to be having far more influence over the national political discourse than leadership positions within the party that they ensured has no power.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

The fact that I am not interested in your curated scavenger hunt does not mean your point is proven. It means your request is a distraction.

No, it doesn't mean that, either. I can think of any number of other reasons why you are uninterested in answering the question.

I also think you are mistaken about who needs to prove what.

Donal's initial request was in response to your insinuation that people on the far left of the Democratic Party needed to be told that:

"telling you how much he hates a certain part of his party. Someone who will take right-wing bait every. damn. time" was a poor campaign strategy.

Donal then very appropriately asked which people on the far left have actually campaigned on such a strategy, since otherwise the suggestion makes no sense. You have yet to name them, making your suggestion too vaguely addressed to have value at best, and unsubstantiated nonsense at worst.

 

[wareyin]

not even going to own what you were doing? lol




donal, king of progressives, has decreed it. i submit i was wrong

I'm very sorry that you feel any suggestion that you were wrong is an insult and will try to keep that in mind if I feel the need to reply again.

 

[wareyin]

No, it doesn't mean that, either. I can think of any number of other reasons why you are uninterested in answering the question.

Yes, it actually does mean that. I don't care why you think I won't play a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ game when I've explained to you that it's ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊.

I also think you are mistaken about who needs to prove what.

Donal's initial request was in response to your insinuation that people on the far left of the Democratic Party needed to be told that:

"telling you how much he hates a certain part of his party. Someone who will take right-wing bait every. damn. time" was a poor campaign strategy.
Donal then very appropriately asked which people on the far left have actually campaigned on such a strategy, since otherwise the suggestion makes no sense. You have yet to name them, making your suggestion too vaguely addressed to have value at best, and unsubstantiated nonsense at worst.

As for the rest, this "I'm just a guy on the internet" schtick falls flat. You know perfectly well that more than just elected officials have an effect on the outcome of elections. By running all over the internet voicing these complaints, you are actively trying to influence the discourse and the results. Quit with the "you have to be an elected official to matter" defense. It is just a way to avoid accountability for the noise you are making and the influence you are trying to exert.

 

[dirtywick]

I'm very sorry that you feel any suggestion that you were wrong is an insult and will try to keep that in mind if I feel the need to reply again.

lol ok thanks. but please stop replying

 

[lobosrul5]

Yeah, that has been the source of my frustration here. While I would have happily pulled the lever for AOC or Sanders or Mamdani against Trump, after the complaints about "vote blue no matter who" even in this thread and the 6 million or so drop in votes for the Democratic ticket in 2024, it is obvious that the feeling of "better by far than Trump so I better vote for them" is not shared.

I would have been the first person in line to chastise any "moderate" Democrat for refusing to vote for Sanders or any other progressive if they had been the nominee. The "my way or the highway" mentality is a recipe for disaster no matter who does it. However, the reality of the last few cycles shows that these fickle, conditional voters tend to reside on the far left much more often. When one side is tribal and the other side is looking for any excuse to stay home, the outcome is exactly what we are living through now.

And I have no idea how to convince those who stayed home and are seeing the results of that design play out live with horror that this was a bad choice and please put more thought into it next time.

To put it another way, in the USA we have a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ insane party that somehow appeals to around half of the people that vote. So the democratic party needs to pull in progressives, liberals, and sane conservatives to win.

ETA: the words censored are batguano and effing.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

Yes, it actually does mean that. I don't care why you think I won't play a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ game when I've explained to you that it's ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊.

As for the rest, this "I'm just a guy on the internet" schtick falls flat. You know perfectly well that more than just elected officials have an effect on the outcome of elections. By running all over the internet voicing these complaints, you are actively trying to influence the discourse and the results. Quit with the "you have to be an elected official to matter" defense. It is just a way to avoid accountability for the noise you are making and the influence you are trying to exert.

You made a suggestion concerning the campaign strategies of far-left candidates. I (along with Donal) have asked you which far-left candidates you think need to hear this advice. If you won't or can't answer that question, then we cannot implement your advice, not even with all the power of Big Random Internet Guy behind us.

 

[dirtywick]

To put it another way, in the USA we have a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ insane party that somehow appeals to around half of the people that vote. So the democratic party needs to pull in progressives, liberals, and sane conservatives to win.

ETA: the words censored are batguano and effing.

i put a large part of why that is to the extensive propaganda network conservatives have built. and they’ve since captured even more media

 

[Donal]

donal, king of progressives, has decreed it. i submit i was wrong

So it is tweeted, so it shall be done!

 

[Donal]

I just want to point out this latest round kicked off because I actually said something positive about a moderate Democrat.

 

[plague311]

Eh, the Democrats have always been a circus. they are big tent after all.

Seriously, this sort of quarrelling isn't new at all. Go back and loo kat what FDR had to do. History professor Kevin Kruse describes the history of American politics in the 20th Century really about the evolution of the Democratic Party. By the time WWI ended, the Republicans were just there to be opposition.

Which is the hardest thing about all of this because the conservatives don't have to appeal to ◊◊◊◊. We can see that right here on our own message board. Perfectly reasonable conservatives will throw everything out the window rather than admit their party has abandoned them. They just go further and further to the right. Meanwhile the Dems are trying to appeal to everyone and it ends up hurting them.

I think the thing they have to do first and foremost is stop this dumb ◊◊◊◊-ery of chasing conservative votes every election. ◊◊◊◊ those guys. Coalesce around a solid, progressive message and move forward. The same thing with the far-left. Stick around the AOC line, and the Dems will be fine.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

So it is tweeted, so it shall be done!

Putting the royal "we" in t"we"et

 

[Roger Ramjets]

I think the thing they have to do first and foremost is stop this dumb ◊◊◊◊-ery of chasing conservative votes every election. ◊◊◊◊ those guys. Coalesce around a solid, progressive message and move forward. The same thing with the far-left. Stick around the AOC line, and the Dems will be fine.

Yes yes, this is the answer for sure! The reason they lost last time was that too many progressives decided that Democrats weren't far enough left for them.

But if you got it wrong and there just aren't enough progressives to carry it by themselves, then ignoring moderate voters is a recipe for defeat. In the last election there was a significant shift towards the right as certain voters found Trump's policies more appealing, especially those related to the economy. Progressives won't woo these voters back with 'progressive' policies, they will do it by showing that they have better economic policies. This won't be easy because Republicans will pile on lies about how they improved the economy with their bold measures, while Democrats would destroy it. So Democrats have to get strong on the economy. It may be sad to think that most voters care more about their own pockets than anything else, but that's just reality.

Or perhaps I am wrong and deepening the divide is the best strategy. If so that's very sad, because the governing party should have the support of a wide range of voters. It's not a true democracy if only 33% wanted it. And if 'chasing conservative votes' loses votes then what does that say about those on the left? Not voting Democrat because the party isn't progressive enough for them is even sadder.

 

[dirtywick]

the economy is pretty likely to be in the toilet by 2028 imo guys like bessent are already doing damage control

 

[wareyin]

To put it another way, in the USA we have a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ insane party that somehow appeals to around half of the people that vote. So the democratic party needs to pull in progressives, liberals, and sane conservatives to win.

ETA: the words censored are batguano and effing.

Ain't that the truth. Unfortunately, "sane conservatives" seem to be quite rare, and the far left would rather watch it all burn than share a seat at the table with the moderates.

 

[wareyin]

You made a suggestion concerning the campaign strategies of far-left candidates. I (along with Donal) have asked you which far-left candidates you think need to hear this advice. If you won't or can't answer that question, then we cannot implement your advice, not even with all the power of Big Random Internet Guy behind us.

Sorry, I'm not bothering with your and Donal's feigned confusion here. I did not use the word "candidates" and rather pointedly and repeatedly explained that I was not talking about candidates, so your ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ game is going to sit on the table untouched.

 

[wareyin]

lol ok thanks. but please stop replying

Sure thing.