Yeah, I get it. I thought the convention was really good. I really like Harris. I took days off work and drove from out of state to NC to knock on doors for Harris and the entire Democratic ticket.
Running to the right certainly didn't help.
Who is advocating running to the right of Democratic incumbents?
Why did they lose?
That was the entire strategy of the 2024 campaign - to court disaffected Republicans by touting endorsements from Liz Cheney and Adam Kitzinger.
www.rollingstone.com
Bring disinfected Republicans in, but not by moving to the right. Cheney and Kinzinger didn't support Harris because she moved right. Democrats tried to win Republican votes by campaigning against trump's idiocracy, or at least that's how I remember it.That was the entire strategy of the 2024 campaign - to court disaffected Republicans by touting endorsements from Liz Cheney and Adam Kitzinger.
Harris Tried to Win Over Republicans. Democratic Support Collapsed Instead
Kamala Harris did not pull Republicans from Trump, and the percentage of voters identifying as Democrat declined, according to exit polls.
If inflation was a winning issue in 2024, why not use it in 2026 and 2028? trump's policies obviously haven't improved the situation. Eggs are not down 94%.
"That’s not likely to happen any time soon. The party expects Trump to draw out an announcement about his future as long as he can, according to a Republican who is close to possible 2028 candidates. The more Trump delays, the more he commands attention and averts the perception that he’s a lame duck."
www.nbcnews.com
Dems didn’t run on DEI. Nor did they run on trans girls/women in sports, nor having an open border. The Dems didn’t lose based on the policy positions they actually ran on, most of which the majority of Americans anpparently agree with. They lost because of inflation, the perception that the economy was in bad shape, and the belief that they were running on the positions that the Pubs said they were running that they actually weren’t (e.g. the trans stuff, the “woke” stuff, and the open borders stuff). But if you actually look at what they were running on on the federal level, it was none of that.
It's not only about positions. It is about people who can argue them with conviction because they actually believe them to their core. This insistence of appealing a little to a lot of people while making nobody mad is the real loser.
But did any of what they ran on matter?
Do you think appealing a lot to a few people while making a lot of people mad will be better?
Point taken. It wasn't the positions that they ran on as much as the issues that were most important to voters. And on those issues, the Democrats had better policies. trump's solutions to the problems that concerned voters were BS, but here we are. The economy, tariffs, and inflation are most important to voters now, and trump is badly under water on all of those. I know a lot can change in 18 months, but why not chain Republicans to trump and hammer him on those issues and nothing else?
Who are you talking to? Does anyone think that's a bad idea? I guess the nothing else is a little controversial
What policy positions should the Democrats have changed in 2024 or should they change in 2026 or 2028 to improve their election results?
They ran an incumbent (Covid supply chain inflation) woman of color. If Dems had run Andy Bashear or some other non-incumbent man, they would have won. The 81 million who voted for Biden didn’t show of for either Hillary or Kamala. Trump can only beat a woman.
Trump drove turnout to the right. Kamala didn't draw turnout from the left to counter it. The campaign banked on never-Trumpers and moderates and there just aren't enough to overcome Trump's populism.