Gavin Newsom addresses the nation

  • Thread starter Thread starter dukeman92
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 1K
  • Views: 23K
  • Politics 
What Reagan did was build on that foundation and expand it into a national emotional narrative that fused coded racial grievance with themes of economic individualism, national decline, and patriotic renewal. That’s what made it so potent. It wasn’t just the dog whistles; it was the story.
Sounds like Gone With The Wind...

Speaking of that, this scene from Gone With the Wind popped in my mind the other day when you were talking about politicians needing to be able to at least seem sincere, and meet people "where they are" with material reality, or materiality. Something about material, anyway (I swear I tried but I just never could get into Marx)..

 
Lee Atwater said it best. By the 1980s, the coded language had become so abstract,”cutting taxes,” “small government,” “welfare reform,” that it didn’t just appeal to the South. It could sell in the Midwest, in the West, in the suburbs. And it brought in voters who didn’t think of themselves as racist, but who still responded emotionally to that broader narrative.
What was the broader narrative they were responding to? The abstract coded language about small government, etc., or the fusion of coded racial grievance with themes of economic individualism, national decline, and patriotic renewal? I'm trying to remember if I've ever thought of myself as responding to a broader narrative. I mean obviously that could be happening without one consciously realizing it. Interesting phrase, that. Responding to a broader narrative. Seems to pinpoint something in the program of most religions and cultures. Or families, for that matter...
 
Last edited:
And see, this is why I think Jon Stewart would be a good President. He sees Gavin for the fakey fake he is, too
He's onto somethihg there with people wanting their politicians to be charaters of some kind..
 
My issue with Newsom was the televised primetime address to the nation -- something that is the domain of presidents. I would have had no objection to Newsom making a speech at a rally or calling a press conference -- which are normal things for governors to do.
How many times do people have to tell you it was an address to Cali and not the Nation? That the national media after the fact picked it up and amplified it is predictable given the circumstances. And I’m sure he knew that could happen and glad it did. It was a great speech. If you read the transcript without knowing who delivered the speech you would love it. Your hatred of Newsom blinds your judgement
 
And see, this is why I think Jon Stewart would be a good President. He sees Gavin for the fakey fake he is, too


When Stewart is running as a candidate and actually offering a plan, I will consider his views until then he is just another clever comedian.

Newsom with a win in court by the way. He’s fighting.
 
I wasn’t trying to “educate” you, I was building on the example you raised to make a broader point about how the strategy evolved. I know you already know this stuff. So do I. I just thought it was worth unpacking for anyone else reading. No hard feelings.

To clarify, I’m not disputing that Reagan and figures like Helms used coded racial appeals, or that speeches at places like Bob Jones University or the Neshoba County Fair sent clear signals. I’m building on that by looking at how those signals evolved into something bigger: a national narrative that combined racial coding with themes of patriotic renewal, economic individualism, and national decline. That’s what made it more potent and more durable.

On the economic side: yes, jobs have always shifted, but they don’t just move like weather patterns. Political choices helped accelerate that movement.

The problem wasn’t just the economic transformation, it was the absence of a compelling political story from the left that explained it, validated people’s losses, and offered a path forward.
Appreciate your post.

I hate to say it…….you can’t tell a truthful, logical, rational story about jobs moving to cheaper locales without a Trump or Pat Buchanan screaming, “They stole yer jerbs!”

The jobs had left or were leaving before the trade agreement.

The mill workers or coal miners don’t want re-training. They want their old jobs…….which are GONE FOREVER.

Trump and the GOP will lie and say, “We’ll bring back yer jerbs.”

How does one campaign against that lie?

Also, “they” stole yer jerbs!

They equals them, immigrants, brown people, elites, commies, socialists, leftists, Democrats……….When you’re explaining, you’re losing.

Democrats and center/left Americans have an extraordinarily difficult row to hoe.
 
Totally agree it’s a tough road, and I appreciate your response(s) as well.

You’re absolutely right that we can’t lie and say the jobs are coming back exactly as they were. That ship has sailed. But we also can’t lead with a shrug and a training brochure. Like I said, people don’t just want a job; they want purpose, dignity, identity. If we don’t speak to that, someone else will.

The challenge for Democrats isn’t just to tell the truth. It’s to tell a truth that feels like it matters. One that names the forces that gutted these communities, validates the anger, and offers a real vision of shared renewal. That’s not easy. But “they stole your jobs” works emotionally because it tells a simple story of loss and betrayal. We need stories that can match that resonance without feeding the same scapegoats.

I certainly don’t have all the answers, but I think something like this could be a powerful political message for the left:

“You didn’t fail, the people in power did. They made decisions that hollowed out your town, your industry, your future. They told you it was inevitable. But it wasn’t. And it still isn’t. We can build a country where working people matter again, where investment flows to our communities, where the work we do is respected, and where no one is disposable.”

That’s not a promise to turn back the clock, It’s a promise to fight like hell for a better deal going forward. People need to feel seen, not managed. They need someone who will say: your pain makes sense, and your life should be worth more than this.

Despite his flaws, Bernie Sanders came closer than anyone in recent memory to tapping into this. He talked about betrayal, not by immigrants or outsiders, but by billionaires and political elites. He connected Wall Street greed, corporate offshoring, and austerity politics into a coherent story. It resonated because it didn’t deny people’s pain or try to manage it with technocratic fixes; it honored it and named a villain.
Bernie didn’t come close to explaining how to fix things. The closest Bernie came to a fix was blaming free trade…….so, was Bernie’s fix tariffs?

Bernie was a new version of the angry vitriol of “They stole yer jerbs.”
 
Totally agree it’s a tough road, and I appreciate your response(s) as well.

You’re absolutely right that we can’t lie and say the jobs are coming back exactly as they were. That ship has sailed. But we also can’t lead with a shrug and a training brochure. Like I said, people don’t just want a job; they want purpose, dignity, identity. If we don’t speak to that, someone else will.

The challenge for Democrats isn’t just to tell the truth. It’s to tell a truth that feels like it matters. One that names the forces that gutted these communities, validates the anger, and offers a real vision of shared renewal. That’s not easy. But “they stole your jobs” works emotionally because it tells a simple story of loss and betrayal. We need stories that can match that resonance without feeding the same scapegoats.

I certainly don’t have all the answers, but I think something like this could be a powerful political message for the left:

“You didn’t fail, the people in power did. They made decisions that hollowed out your town, your industry, your future. They told you it was inevitable. But it wasn’t. And it still isn’t. We can build a country where working people matter again, where investment flows to our communities, where the work we do is respected, and where no one is disposable.”

That’s not a promise to turn back the clock, It’s a promise to fight like hell for a better deal going forward. People need to feel seen, not managed. They need someone who will say: your pain makes sense, and your life should be worth more than this.

Despite his flaws, Bernie Sanders came closer than anyone in recent memory to tapping into this. He talked about betrayal, not by immigrants or outsiders, but by billionaires and political elites. He connected Wall Street greed, corporate offshoring, and austerity politics into a coherent story. It resonated because it didn’t deny people’s pain or try to manage it with technocratic fixes; it honored it and named a villain.
Agreed. For this to happen we will need a 2008 sea change in politics. Saying that and making any substantive changes requires a compliant Congress. Without a super majority. The obstructionist Pubs will make that politician look like a liar, unfortunately
 
I certainly don’t have all the answers, but I think something like this could be a powerful political message for the left:

“You didn’t fail, the people in power did. They made decisions that hollowed out your town, your industry, your future. They told you it was inevitable. But it wasn’t. And it still isn’t. We can build a country where working people matter again, where investment flows to our communities, where the work we do is respected, and where no one is disposable.”
Dems say this all the time. Then Rs find a woman with testicles and the working class chooses to vote for the ruling class responsible for hollowing out their towns. Then you blame the Dems 🤷‍♂️
 
How many times do people have to tell you it was an address to Cali and not the Nation?
You are going to be really bummed when you learn the truth about the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus, too.

By the way, what is the title of this thread?
 
It’s in every milquetoast speech at every convention.

Harris consistently talked about how policies impacted working and middle class families. Maybe she didn’t mean it but you suggest that doesn’t matter. She conveyed that she cared. Why didn’t these mythical salt of the earth people yearning for meaning and belonging hear it? In your eyes it can’t be because they are stupid racist or misogynist, so what was it?
 
You are going to be really bummed when you learn the truth about the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus, too.

By the way, what is the title of this thread?
The address was to the state of California, the message was directed at anyone who would listen and very relevant. And for some inexplicable reason, this really bothers you. Most think it was the right thing to do. Obviously you do not, but that’s you.
 
Sure, Democrats say parts of that message at times. What they don’t do is lead with it. They don’t embody it, fight for it, or build a movement around it. And when someone like Bernie did try, many liberals dismissed him as unserious or too radical.

Let’s be real: Democrats don’t consistently say this kind of thing. Obama dabbled in it in 2008. Biden flirted with it in 2020. But Clinton? Harris? Most of the party establishment? They don’t talk like this at all.

Populism can’t just be a costume you put on in Scranton and take off in Georgetown. If you want to win people’s trust, you have to pick a side and stay on it.

If voters don’t believe you’ll fight for them, they’ll go with the person who at least acts like they give a damn, even if it’s a con. That’s not on the voters.
You’re assuming that Americans want leftist populism.

Do Americans?

Does leftist populism include LGBTQ rights? Abortion rights? Civil rights?
 
You’re still thinking about this in terms of surface-level messaging: “Did she say the words?” But emotional connection doesn’t work that way. It’s not about whether a candidate mentions working families, it’s about whether people feel that the message comes from a place of conviction, not calculation.

A convention speech isn’t enough. Most voters don’t even watch them. They build impressions over time through tone, body language, who you surround yourself with, and what fights you pick. Emotional connection is about resonance, not resume.

When Bernie said “the system is rigged,” it landed because people believed he believed it. It felt authentic. When most establishment Democrats say similar things, it feels like polling-driven ventriloquism. That doesn’t make them bad people, but it does mean the message doesn’t stick.

You’re asking: “Why didn’t these voters hear it?” The better question is: Why didn’t it land? The answer isn’t always prejudice. Sometimes people just don’t believe the messenger. That’s not their failure, it’s the political class’s failure to earn back trust.
The Dem "messenger" has always fallen short in bumper sticker rhetoric but delivered in governance that has improved the lives of working and middle class families.

Unfortunately, bumper sticker rhetoric seems to be trumping good governance when it comes to improving the lives of American families.

I have repeated here ad nauseum that Dems suck at messaging but are excellent at governing; and GQPers are very good at messaging but are incompetent when it comes to governing.

I wish Dems could be excellent at both, but if it comes down to a choice of the two, I choose aligning with good governance over good messaging... but that's just me
 
Gavin Newsom and his fake-centrist turn, and his fake Republican platforming podcast, and his fake central-casting looks, and his fake French Laundry-hypocritical ass can go straight to hell for all I care. If Democrats nominate this fake opportunist for President in 2028, we deserve the shellacking we rightfully will receive.
The fact that many on this board can't see him for what he is, doesn't bode well for the next potus election. He was weak during the fire in LA and he is weak regarding the rioting. The left wing of the dem party can't seem to come to grips with the fact that their stance on illegal immigration is unpopular and a losing issue for them.
 
You’re still thinking about this in terms of surface-level messaging: “Did she say the words?” But emotional connection doesn’t work that way. It’s not about whether a candidate mentions working families, it’s about whether people feel that the message comes from a place of conviction, not calculation.

A convention speech isn’t enough. Most voters don’t even watch them. They build impressions over time through tone, body language, who you surround yourself with, and what fights you pick. Emotional connection is about resonance, not resume.

When Bernie said “the system is rigged,” it landed because people believed he believed it. It felt authentic. When most establishment Democrats say similar things, it feels like polling-driven ventriloquism. That doesn’t make them bad people, but it does mean the message doesn’t stick.

You’re asking: “Why didn’t these voters hear it?” The better question is: Why didn’t it land? The answer isn’t always prejudice. Sometimes people just don’t believe the messenger. That’s not their failure, it’s the political class’s failure to earn back trust.
Bernie was and is an AGED US Senator from a TINY state who has become a millionaire as a Congressman and Senator. Has he authored or enacted any major legislation in his career?

I lived in Vermont when he was an impoverished mayor.

Amazing how rich he’s become.
 
Bernie was and is an AGED US Senator from a TINY state who has become a millionaire as a Congressman and Senator. Has he authored or enacted any major legislation in his career?

I lived in Vermont when he was an impoverished mayor.

Amazing how rich he’s become.
Oh, please. Of all the attacks on Bernie, this is the dumbest.
 
And yes, it absolutely includes LGBTQ rights, abortion rights, and civil rights. But it frames them as part of a broader fight for dignity, power, and respect for all people, especially those who’ve been screwed by the system, whether that’s because of their race, gender, orientation, or class.
We just watched Trump win with white working class voters with a message of "they/them." Every conservative on this site constantly wants to talk about trans issues instead of anything else. Politicians all over the county are demagoguing against the "gay agenda" or "woke agenda."

Organizing LGBTQ and working class Americans together is not going to work. It just isn't. One of those groups hates the other; and one is justifiably suspicious of the other.
 
Back
Top