this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2025
671 points (94.8% liked)

politics

19378 readers
4109 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Vincent Oriedo, a biotechnology scientist, had just such a question. What lessons have been learned, he asked, from Harris’s defeat in this vital swing county in a crucial battleground state that voted for Joe Biden four years ago, and how are the Democrats applying them?

“They did not answer the question,” he said.

“It tells me that they haven’t learned the lessons and they have their inner state of denial. I’ve been paying careful attention to the influencers within the Democratic party. Their discussions have centred around, ‘If only we messaged better, if only we had a better candidate, if only we did all these superficial things.’ There is really a lack of understanding that they are losing their base, losing constituencies they are taking for granted.”

“We have set ourselves up for generational loss because we keep promoting from within leaders that that do not criticise the moneyed interests. They refuse to take a hard look at what Americans actually believe and meet those needs.”

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 111 points 2 days ago (3 children)

People want real fucking change. One man stood up against a massive evil health insurance company and regular people from all sides of the political spectrum support him.

Dems could have won if they were willing to do the same and no one would even need to be hurt to do it.

Naturally, there are a host of other problems mentioned in this thread. The trouble is that there is too much free $peech from the ruling class in politics.

[–] [email protected] 56 points 2 days ago (8 children)

I think for people like me, the biggest fuck you was from Obama. He ran on hope and change. He ran on at least a public option. And he went into the office and literally shut down the ground operation that swept him into his position and then basically spent 8 years appeasing Republicans despite the fact that people wanted transformational change. That's why they picked him over Clinton. He delivered Romneycare, bank bailouts, and drone wars.

[–] [email protected] 53 points 2 days ago (5 children)

And when people wonder why it’s so hard to get out the vote, I think this is a key reason why. I’m old enough to have gone to Obama’s rallies, knock on doors for his campaign as a volunteer, vote for him and watch with joy as he won.

Hope and change. After the George W Bush presidency and the war on terror, it finally seemed like it was time for the pendulum to swing back.

And then every issue they came to the table with a position already in the center in hopes of appealing to the republicans who would then hold their breath and kick their feet and then it would slide further and further to the right until they were holding up romneycare as a progressive victory while also getting completely destroyed in the court of public opinion for passing romneycare.

I knew a lot of people that were very excited for Obama the candidate and completely disillusioned by Obama the president.

And I await the apologists to come out and tell me how he had to do it this way, they only had a super majority for a few weeks. Sure if the republicans have the slimmest majority they rewrite the tax codes and give away trillions to the wealthiest, and if they are in the minority they still somehow get their policies passed. But when democrats have power, well you see, government takes time. They can’t possibly just have the bill ready and call for a vote, you see, that’s just not how it works.

You can only tell people so many times. Vote blue and we promise this time, this time, we will make it better. I know last time we didn’t, but it was because of the blue dogs, or Joe Lieberman, or Joe Manchin. Sure, we have no plan to get rid of those people or other spoilers and we will doggedly support them in every primary… but somehow this time will be different.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

I honestly wonder if at this point, candidates would be better off pursuing progressive legislation by running a Republicans.

Ideological purity doesn't matter worth a shit to Republicans. See Republican voters loving the ACA while hating Obamacare. The party that is supposedly pro free market now openly endorses tariffs and regulation on business to advance a host of culture war bugbears. Republicans are not libertarians; the base especially isn't ideologically opposed to government programs.

I could see a progressive running for the Republican nomination, a latter-day Teddy Roosevelt. And since the Republicans have become the party of the working class, while Democrats are the party of lawyers and big business, the attack lines write themselves. "Democrats are in bed with the insurance industry!" "Democrats want to pick your pocket instead of giving you healthcare!" "Democrats can't pass a health plan without lining the pockets of their donors!"

The Republican party has proven itself to be much more susceptible to disruption from outside charismatic figures. The Republican base has far more control over the Republican party than the Democratic base does of the Democratic party. In 2016, the establishment Republicans tried to shoot Trump down, but their base overpowered them, and Trump took over the party. Bernie tried the same thing in 2016 and 2020, but the DNC was far more powerful and able to resist this outside takeover.

I really think that now may be the time for a return of progressive Republicans in the mold of Teddy Roosevelt. Promise to fix healthcare and break up big businesses left and right. Throw a bone to the right by promising to exclude illegal immigrants from the healthcare law (which they would never be eligible for anyway.) Hell, you could even write it so it didn't exclude coverage for abortion and trans healthcare. If someone points that out, just lie and say that your plan does include these exclusions. It's not like the truth on such things matters anymore. Sell it in simple terms the common man can understand.

I really do wonder if at this point, progressive candidates might gain more traction by running as Republicans. The Republican party is not ideologically libertarian, and it has proven far more receptive to outsiders and new ideas than the Democratic party.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 125 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (101 children)

While that's true, choosing to vote for Trump, a third-party, or not at all is like saying, "I don't like this ham sandwich and I don't like my sandwich choices... so I'm going to eat this dog-turds-and-radioactive-glass-shards sandwich instead!"

This country is fucked.

Edit: Rather than respond below to every comment, thought I'd clarify a few things here.

  1. I never said Democrats didn't fuck up. They certainly did.
  2. But - and this is important - we can't ignore the roles that racism, sexism, and above all misinformation played. To pretend there was none, and that vast swaths of the electorate didn't fall for it, would be disingenuous.

Democrats have moved to the right, and hurt themselves doing so. That is true. But they are still objectively superior to Republicans in every conceivable way. People who voted Republican voted for the Leopards Eating People's Faces party because they were angry about Democrats being imperfect, and their faces will be eaten.

load more comments (101 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

The only lesson to be learnt from this is that forgiving debts, pardoning marijuana offences, wanting fair elections, etc don't work.

The only lesson they could learn from this is that they weren't conservative enough.

Fuck that lesson.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

The only lesson they could learn from this is that they weren’t conservative enough.

I don't think this is even remotely the lesson.

The right wingers already go on social media spouting that "the libs" are socialist, sure, but that's just because it's what their media tells them.

The lesson should be that propaganda wins elections, not logical answers. You have to appeal to quick witty replies with even more quick witty replies. You have to use loads of smoke and mirrors to promise outcomes without any tangible methodologies.

The democrats should promise to fund the military... and then use the military funding for humanitarian ends like we did with covid vaccines. The line item looks great to dummy middle america voters to say "wow the democrats want a strong military" even though the spending really is to build homes for the poor or provide subsidized healthcare through federal military pop up hospitals (with contracted civilian doctors.)

You have to literally provide handouts about a year out from election time to subsidize a topic like gas prices leading up to the election. The day the elections are over you can remove all of those things and start replenishing it... so release that strategic reserve big time. Focus on extra subsidies in places where you can actually win the vote, so fuck deep red and deep blue. Hate to say it... the battleground is all that matters.

If you want to appeal to the common voter it can't be by pushing for educational values or refunds for people with degrees. It has to be refunds for people with high grocery bills, high utility costs. Hell, remove the SALT deduction entirely in the name of "small government" because that's one thing even lower class republicans think would be a bad move to raise... but this is still way too detailed for the ignorant voting masses to grasp... so you should probably say you are going to lower taxes rather than say you're upping it for billionaires. The latter is always assumed even though it never actually happens.

Bring out all the news about how republicans are actually raising taxes. How they actually result in higher gas costs, higher housing costs, higher grocery costs. Why the fuck "Tariffs" weren't brought out as MASSIVE tax increases for the common working person is bewildering to me! Dumpy loves tariffs but describe it in simple terms as a tax - IMPORT TAX - and suddenly it will be very unpopular. "Dumpy says tariffs are good!!!!" but the news is plastered with "import taxes called tariffs"... why are they raising taxes again? for common hard working people? "You mean i'm gonna have to pay more money at the grocery store AND the pump??!?!?!?"

Campaigning on city values isn't working because the battleground states aren't uber dense. You have to appeal to the rural people with promises that can be delivered in the short term and that will cost them in the long term, because they are HORRIBLE at gauging long term impact. They can only remember what just happened and what is happening now. Dumpy is promising that the future will be great, why are you promising that things are gonna be tough? Things are tough right now for most people, why are you saying that the economy is great? I know by many metrics we are succeeding but the complexity of economics goes over almost everyone's head. Instead you should have been campaigning on the fact that dumpy lowered taxes on the rich and that the rich didn't fulfill their end of the bargain and are stealing all the money from the hard working middle americans.

No die hard blue state is going to vote red so it's time to abandon intelligent values for dummy propaganda. Let's fucking go.

Oh and on the sidelines talk about the real policy you want to implement akin to project2025 which actually has the real DNC agenda, just like how P2025 is the GOP agenda.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (14 children)

They don't learn the lesson, because they don't want to. And your examples imo show the problem.

forgiving debts, pardoning marinuana offences

These are not solutions, they are bandaids that like a drug keep you dependent on politicians repeating them again and again. Which of course is nice when your only goal is to get relected, but longterm that magic wears off.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago

The majority of the US voting population ignores the long term.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (25 children)

“The things Harris said, like she was going to give $25,000 for people to buy their first home, there were a lot of people said she was giving their money away to people who didn’t deserve it. It cost her votes. We were trying to tell her that.”

What's the answer to that? On the face of it, this says that the electorate don't want public money spent on helping other people who need help. How do you achieve anything other than conservatism with such an electorate? The only thing I can think is that you have to promise to help more of the electorate, and that the money will be come from the very rich. In other words, the only counter to conservatism is a commitment to actual wealth redistribution, and to going up against the selfish interests of the super-rich. That's not yet even socialism, but it's still further to the left that the Democratic Party is willing to go. For now, its leadership would rather lose elections to fascists than challenge billionaires.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago

A few conservative pundits attacked it from the "undeserving" angle. The actual base didn't give a damn. The actual base thought it was a useless and tone-deaf figleaf of a policy. It was a wonkish policy only a milquetoast centrist could love - a market subsidy that had a long litany of provisos and qualifications. And one that economists stated would just serve to bid house prices up even higher.

The voters didn't reject progressive wealth redistribution. They rejected half-baked meaningless gestures.

load more comments (24 replies)
[–] [email protected] 51 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (12 children)

Honestly I think this article is completely wrong. I'm convinced modern elections are 100% based on vibes and so better messaging and a better candidate would have meant a great deal.

But to add to that - Trump and his idiot base had been messaging and memeing for four years starting with Covid and masks and then inflation and 'I did that' stickers of Biden at the gas pump. Biden had barely done any messaging even up until the point he dropped out which, in the social media era, should be obviously big fucking warning signs of a losing campaign.

EDIT - which is not to say I don't think the Dems need to change in other ways because they absolutely do.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

Well, I'm not in denial. This country is full of fucking idiots. The next Democratic presidential candidate should be a celebrity that promises to achieve world peace and full gay space communism. Apparently empty promises and celebrity are what win elections.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 days ago (6 children)

I think you may have missed the point a bit. It's exactly these 'empty promises' which have been the democrats issue over the past 30 years.

They get elected on messages like 'make the economy work work everyday americans' and then once in office they prioritize the status quo and making sure that nothing major changes. This benefits the wealth and damages everyday people, many of whom voted for them in the hopes that the democrats would improve their situation.

As awful as much of their platform is, the Republicans have proven that they aren't scared to break things and make big changes. This appeals to many voters who feel let down by empty promises.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›