What’s a time in the past 30 years where the economy was great for the “average person”?
1 Like
Never, of course it coincides with the height of the D march to the right. I’ll leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine whether or not that just happens to be an improbable coincidence or not.
Again with this shit
She is a grown ass fucking woman. She made the decision to try to both sides it, and it didn’t work out for her. If the Anti-Israel votes were really that powerful, maybe she should have tried to appeal to them. And if they weren’t that powerful that they were worth courting, then why do people keep bringing this lazy bullshit up
1 Like
Your quote specifically says it wasn’t the only reason she lost ffs. Read the quote.
Anyone who didn’t vote for Harris because of Israel is a fucking moron. Sorry. That’s still true
2 Likes
We’ve gone from providing weapons to killing people on Israel’s behalf directly.
It’s because it takes all agency away from Kamala. Its the most common example of doing exactly what the tweeter is talking about–“we didn’t fail, the voters did”.
1 Like
It does not take any agency away from Kamala. It states a simple fact. Anyone who cared about Palestine but didn’t vote for Harris is a fucking moron. That is 100% obviously true. The rest is you either reflexively defending people you’re sympathetic to or reading extra into something that specifically told you it wasn’t what lost Harris the election at all.
3 Likes
It’s possible for
(1) she was stupid for not courting those people better and
(2) those people were stupid for voting (or not voting) the way they did
to be true at the same time.
5 Likes
good iron post alert
3 Likes
They were actually the smart ones. By voting for someone even more in favor of Israel hurting people, they achieved a situation in which Israel is even more unpopular. Only took a wee bit of sacrifice.
Democrats were considerably more conservative in the 70s and 80s and 90s than today.
2 Likes
About social issues, absolutely.
About economic issues, absolutely not.
2 Likes
Wah? Biden was far to the left of the 90’s-era New Dems.
3 Likes
This is the ad: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/VVU7pYq3WHw
I actually had this in mind when I wrote my post. It’s worth watching to see how this works. There’s definitely some unsubtle anti-trans bigotry (see the image at 0:24), but it’s implicit. They definitely want to fire up people who just hate trans folks, but they are trying to appeal to a broader audience. There are two messages that they would like to make, but aren’t persuasive:
- (Least persuasive) “Trans people suck, cis people are great, GOP is the party of anti-trans, so let’s go oppress them!” This more or less worked with race in the old south, but most persuadable voters don’t want to harm minorities, they just don’t care about them or find them weird and icky.
- (Better, but still weak) “The GOP cares about cis people! We’re focused on cis issues!” This facially sounds like a positive agenda, but if you think about it for two seconds, wtf is a cis issue? 99% of people are cis, their issues are just issues. There’s no content you can run to drive the message.
What really work is if your opponent says something that you can find an issue that pits the minority against the majority (or sounds like it) and find your opponent saying something you can twist into making it sound like all the Democrats care about is minority issues, while the Republicans care about hard-working middle-class people. It works because it’s the Democrats who have cast themselves (or can be made to sound like they are) as a party that’s only for a specific group of people.
All of the issues that Republicans love to talk about have this general shape. Rush Limbaugh would go nuts every time someone vaguely newsworthy said anything about reparations for slavery, because it lets him paint the Democrats as a party that’s exclusively for black people. Discussions about trans athletes activate similar reactions.
1 Like
Yes. It’s Nixon’s southern strategy played out over generations and expanded into new minority groups.
A solution that works is to have a laser like focus on economics in your messaging: “The Republicans want to talk about everything except that they’re in bed with the billionaires and the huge corporations who have rigged the economy against you.”
The problem for most Democrats is they are in that same bed!
They’ve had nothing to offer people for generations now except more enlightened views on issues that are (whether D like it or not) secondary to most voters.
While Kamala’s campaign was likely doomed for many reasons, not the least of which is that she’s not much of a candidate, she was doing okay with her initial, more populist economic messaging.
But then her team took over. Her “team was built around a core group of former Uber executives and corporate PR managers.” Their pivot away from populist economic messaging tanked any small chance she had.
So yeah. It’s bad that Rs do this. But there is a huge opening for Ds to fight back. But most won’t bc they agree with R on the issue that is easily the most important to voters.
1 Like
you can’t fight this current MAGA movement by arguing matters of degree. no one is rallying behind “we’re not quite as corrupt as trump!” messaging. but that’s all the current dems seem to have stomach for. “we’re slightly better than those guys! sure we insider trade and are fully owned by the corporations also but we dont say mean things out loud!”
That was under the advice of her husband. It was very bad advice.
I remember early in the 2020 primary season receiving emails from her and Beto. Both asked what was important to me. I wrote both campaigns back saying what’s important to me does not matter. I wanted to know what was most important to them. That’s what causes me to vote for someone. I need to know what you believe not what a bunch of focus groups tell you to think. Both had no chance of my primary vote after that.
It’s a big reason I voted for Warren. Her priorities were clear and aligned with the seriousness of the moment. Bernie had good overall priorities but none of his campaign was about the seriousness of the moment and he was against getting rid of the filibuster.
1 Like
I like Elizabeth Warren a lot. I would’ve been thrilled to vote for her for president. I voted Bernie on the primary but she was easily 2nd. Unfortunately, it dropped off pretty quick from there.
1 Like
Same just in reverse for me
red 100
remember they came out swinging, walz was posterizing JD with the weird stuff, people were going wild for coconuts, and then the consultants were like “whoa there, too much enthusiasm, let’s go for a very milquetoast centrist vibe” and the numbers immediately cratered
6 Likes