Holding Trump accountable for his promises

[Paine]

This is what young progressives refuse to hear despite its unquestionable truth.

Part of the problem is the way history is taught in college. Academic historians give far more attention to obscure socialists or social movements or temporary flowerings of leftism in certain areas than to electoral history or the history of mainstream politics. At least that was the case when I was in grad school and I've not seen too much in recent years to cause we to revisit.

Electoral history and mainstream politics is taught in undergrad history classes, not grad level ones. Grad students tend to already know these things. That might be where you’re going wrong.

 

[farce©]

It’s really early, but it will be a challenge for Dems to re take the Senate in 2026.
The Dems will defend 5 states that were won with less than 10% of the vote:
Colorado
Ga
Mich
Minn
New Mexico

The Republicans only have to defend 3 states that were won with less than 10% of the vote:

Maine
NC
Texas

Maine and NC appear to be the best chances at this early date.

In two years people will be ready to build a guardrail against Trump’s excesses, so Dems will be in a different position. Republicans running for Senate in 2026 will have to defend Trump.

 

[ChapelHillSooner]

I guess I can’t be sure until we go in on the strategy. I just know that our current strategy has failed and the other options don’t gel with what I’ve seen on the ground and what I’ve seen in the data.

If your inclination is going this way, I think you should put some trust in that.

Our strategy didn't fail. Inflation, which was almost entirely out of our control, did us in. It is hard to message to normal people that inflation is back down when they are still seeing high prices.

People overreact to every lost election.

 

[superrific]

The response to socialism allegations is quite easy to parry if your message is sound: All Americans having healthcare is socialism? Americans being paid a decent wage is socialism?

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha. What's the thing people say on this board, sweet summer child?

You think you're the first person to think of that response? That's been the argument for a century. IT DOESN'T WORK. Americans freak out upon hearing the word socialism. Quite easy to parry? "Liberal" was hard to parry in the 1980s. Socialism? It's hilarious how you accuse me or others as being out of touch with working Americans when you are this clueless of reality.

We've already done this before. "All Americans having healthcare is socialism" was specifically the message that the insurance industry and the GOP used to defeat Hillarycare. Health insurance -- a major campaign point for Bill Clinton -- got jettisoned because Americans decided that they didn't want the socialism of managed care.

Put down the Jacobin and start reading back issues of the New York Times or any other newspaper from the 1980s and 1990s. You'll learn something.

 

[Paine]

Our strategy didn't fail. Inflation, which was almost entirely out of our control, did us in. It is hard to message to normal people that inflation is back down when they are still seeing high prices.

People overreact to every lost election.

I agree that inflation was the decider of the election, and I’ve said as much in the past. The strategy failure was Harris not distancing herself from Biden when he was the one who took the blame of voters for inflation. This was amplified by tying herself to a system that few Americans have trust in anymore.

 

[Paine]

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha. What's the thing people say on this board, sweet summer child?

You think you're the first person to think of that response? That's been the argument for a century. IT DOESN'T WORK. Americans freak out upon hearing the word socialism. Quite easy to parry? "Liberal" was hard to parry in the 1980s. Socialism? It's hilarious how you accuse me or others as being out of touch with working Americans when you are this clueless of reality.

We've already done this before. "All Americans having healthcare is socialism" was specifically the message that the insurance industry and the GOP used to defeat Hillarycare. Health insurance -- a major campaign point for Bill Clinton -- got jettisoned because Americans decided that they didn't want the socialism of managed care.

Put down the Jacobin and start reading back issues of the New York Times or any other newspaper from the 1980s and 1990s. You'll learn something.

I’m done responding to your arrogant ass posts.

 

[finesse]

I’m done responding to your arrogant ass posts.

I don't always love his tone but ,seriously, about the only place that word doesn't have a majority negative connotation is Vermont. He's right. Go look at how the concept is perceived. Then look at how well the media participates in fair play and nuance. I really am not against your ideas but they are a long way from a movement.

 

[Paine]

I don't always love his tone but ,seriously, about the only place that word doesn't have a majority negative connotation is Vermont. He's right. Go look at how the concept is perceived. Then look at how well the media participates in fair play and nuance. I really am not against your ideas but they are a long way from a movement.

Again, I’m not advocating that we start calling ourselves the Democratic Socialist Communist Marxist Party.

I identify as a socialist, those are my politics and my ideology. I don’t expect the Democratic Party to share my ideology or even run on it.

I simply think that there is a broad set of progressive policy solutions that the majority of Americans support, some of which even a majority of Republicans support. We need to run on these policies instead of running away from them. That’s it.

 

[tallheel95]

I see your points Paine and I'm getting on board. I think that, if done right, there is an opportunity here to get ahead of the game. It's rebranding some of these policies with a new name (besides socialism, which will never fly) and pushing the ideas out WELL ahead of a significant election. It's all about marketing and laying the groundwork. You guys who love Jeff Jackson? Yes, he's a very good politician, because he is VERY good at marketing. He runs a social media game and people like him because they think they know him and that he's speaking to them personally with some sort of truth and transparency. I'm not saying he's a bad guy, in fact I do think he's generally got his heart in the right place, but it's marketing. In terms of policies, there have to be catchy ideas with catchy slogans that can be marketed to low information voters. Then they might actually vote in their self-interest.

 

[Healing]

I don't always love his tone but ,seriously, about the only place that word doesn't have a majority negative connotation is Vermont. He's right. Go look at how the concept is perceived. Then look at how well the media participates in fair play and nuance. I really am not against your ideas but they are a long way from a movement.

Modest Declines in Positive Views of ‘Socialism’ and ‘Capitalism’ in U.S.

Americans see capitalism as giving people more opportunity and more freedom than socialism, while they see socialism as more likely to meet people’s basic needs, though these perceptions differ significantly by party. Many Democrats say socialism meets people’s basic needs; Republicans say it...

www.pewresearch.org

Republicans have won elections on the backs of disingenuous framing of buzzwords, for decades. Yeah, perception of capitalism is going down too, but that's not enough when the favorability of socialism is 14pts underwater and trending down. What did ttump call Harris? Comrade Kamala.

Why 'Comrade Kamala' memes are taking off among Latino exiles

The Democratic presidential nominee has been the target of misinformation portraying her as a communist.

www.bbc.com

 

[Paine]

Modest Declines in Positive Views of ‘Socialism’ and ‘Capitalism’ in U.S.

Americans see capitalism as giving people more opportunity and more freedom than socialism, while they see socialism as more likely to meet people’s basic needs, though these perceptions differ significantly by party. Many Democrats say socialism meets people’s basic needs; Republicans say it...

www.pewresearch.org

Republicans have won elections on the backs of disingenuous framing of buzzwords, for decades. Yeah, perception of capitalism is going down too, but that's not enough when the favorability of socialism is 14pts underwater and trending down. What did ttump call Harris? Comrade Kamala.

Why 'Comrade Kamala' memes are taking off among Latino exiles

The Democratic presidential nominee has been the target of misinformation portraying her as a communist.

www.bbc.com

It’s messaging. Democrats have been awful at it for a while. Republicans are pretty damn good at it.

Perceptions of capitalism will continue to fall. Seems like a good opportunity for Democrats to lean into this criticisms by tarring the Republican Party with being full of crony capitalists. Emphasize their business and billionaire ties. Emphasize how they aren’t working for average people.

Democrats have been fundamentally unable to do this because the party has been captured by a consultant political class that is very, very friendly to business interests.

 

[Healing]

I see your points Paine and I'm getting on board. I think that, if done right, there is an opportunity here to get ahead of the game. It's rebranding some of these policies with a new name (besides socialism, which will never fly) and pushing the ideas out WELL ahead of a significant election. It's all about marketing and laying the groundwork. You guys who love Jeff Jackson? Yes, he's a very good politician, because he is VERY good at marketing. He runs a social media game and people like him because they think they know him and that he's speaking to them personally with some sort of truth and transparency. I'm not saying he's a bad guy, in fact I do think he's generally got his heart in the right place, but it's marketing. In terms of policies, there have to be catchy ideas with catchy slogans that can be marketed to low information voters. Then they might actually vote in their self-interest.

You speak to why I'm dead serious about Jon Stewart in 2028. I wish I knew of an analog 10 years younger, but within my scope of awareness Stewart has the positional, rhetorical, profile, don't-give-a-shit, and working class (see first responders work) cred to potentially roll (if elections are legitimate).

 

[Paine]

You speak to why I'm dead serious about Jon Stewart in 2028. I wish I knew of an analog 10 years younger, but within my scope of awareness Stewart has the positional, rhetorical, profile, don't-give-a-shit, and working class (see first responders work) cred to potentially roll (if elections are legitimate).

Jon Stewart’s politics are the exact kind of politics I’m pining for man! Where is our disagreement??

 

[superrific]

It’s messaging. Democrats have been awful at it for a while. Republicans are pretty damn good at it.

Perceptions of capitalism will continue to fall. Seems like a good opportunity for Democrats to lean into this criticisms by tarring the Republican Party with being full of crony capitalists. Emphasize their business and billionaire ties. Emphasize how they aren’t working for average people.

Democrats have been fundamentally unable to do this because the party has been captured by a consultant political class that is very, very friendly to business interests.

Literally Kamala's most run ad -- or certainly the one I saw the most -- was Trump is going to give tax breaks to his billionaire friends.

"Messaging" is the new magic asterisk. Sure, these ideas have zero track record of success and a long track record of failure, but you see, that's because we sucked at messaging. But now, our messaging will be good, because reasons.

This idea that the Dems have been captured by the consultant political class is the most toxic idea in politics and it has cost us elections in 2000 and 2016 and perhaps 2024. It's not at all true.

Did you know that white college-educated people are by far the most liberal sociological group in the country. That was the relevance of the article I linked a few days ago. Dem policy over the past four years has been developed by people just like you. It's people like you who have been staffing Democrats' legislative chambers, various agencies in the White House, and the think tanks and outside PACs who are part of the Dem coalition. That is just a fact.

It's not my position that the messaging has been terrible. But you're the one throwing shade when it's folks like you who have been running the messaging for quite some time. It sure as hell wasn't the corporate overlords talking about defunding the police. It sure as hell wasn't the corporate overlords who were responsible for the catastrophically bad progressive criminal justice "reforms" on the West Coast. Full disclosure: I wasn't wild about them but I generally supported them. So I was wrong. I'm trying to learn from mistakes instead of doubling down.

 

[Healing]

It’s messaging. Democrats have been awful at it for a while. Republicans are pretty damn good at it.

Perceptions of capitalism will continue to fall. Seems like a good opportunity for Democrats to lean into this criticisms by tarring the Republican Party with being full of crony capitalists. Emphasize their business and billionaire ties. Emphasize how they aren’t working for average people.

Democrats have been fundamentally unable to do this because the party has been captured by a consultant political class that is very, very friendly to business interests.

Grossly agree. But you need a new word. Socialism will not fly in this country as a political descriptor, for decades - likely many. The populous isn't invested enough in understanding what it means vs reacting to the inevitable slander adds featuring Castro, Mao, Stalin, et al. The amygdala and hypothalamus can easily enact hegemony over the frontal lobe.

 

[lawtig02]

Literally Kamala's most run ad -- or certainly the one I saw the most -- was Trump is going to give tax breaks to his billionaire friends.

"Messaging" is the new magic asterisk. Sure, these ideas have zero track record of success and a long track record of failure, but you see, that's because we sucked at messaging. But now, our messaging will be good, because reasons.

This idea that the Dems have been captured by the consultant political class is the most toxic idea in politics and it has cost us elections in 2000 and 2016 and perhaps 2024. It's not at all true.

Did you know that white college-educated people are by far the most liberal sociological group in the country. That was the relevance of the article I linked a few days ago. Dem policy over the past four years has been developed by people just like you. It's people like you who have been staffing Democrats' legislative chambers, various agencies in the White House, and the think tanks and outside PACs who are part of the Dem coalition. That is just a fact.

It's not my position that the messaging has been terrible. But you're the one throwing shade when it's folks like you who have been running the messaging for quite some time. It sure as hell wasn't the corporate overlords talking about defunding the police. It sure as hell wasn't the corporate overlords who were responsible for the catastrophically bad progressive criminal justice "reforms" on the West Coast. Full disclosure: I wasn't wild about them but I generally supported them. So I was wrong. I'm trying to learn from mistakes instead of doubling down.

Messaging is largely irrelevant when the people you need to convince have zero interest in accessing any of the media you could use to deliver your message.

 

[Paine]

Grossly agree. But you need a new word. Socialism will not fly in this country as a political descriptor, for decades - likely many. The populous isn't invested enough in understanding what it means vs reacting to the inevitable slander adds featuring Castro, Mao, Stalin, et al. The amygdala and hypothalamus can easily enact hegemony over the frontal lobe.

Ok then good because I’ve never advocated for Democrats to come out and call themselves socialists.

 

[superrific]

I’m done responding to your arrogant ass posts.

Ah, arrogance. Here we go again. Two people talking:

A. "Here's the playbook we need to run. It holds the key to the future"
B. "Um, we ran that playbook. It was a spectacular failure"
A. "That's because the messaging was bad."
B. "What's your idea about messaging?"
A. "Well, I can't say right now, but I know Democrats suck at messaging but with people like me in charge, it will be great"
B. "What is your experience?"
A. "None, but you see, I'm in touch with working people."
B. "Do you describe yourself as a socialist?"
A. "Yes, and I realize that Americans hate that term and concept but with the right messaging they will love it."
B. "What's the messaging again?"
A. "It will the best messaging we've ever seen. We will message better than Dems ever have and thus make my dream a reality"
B. "The American working class sees you as the enemy. Young college educated radical with no real world experience."
A. "That's OK. Our messaging will be great."
B. "I don't think it's going to work."
A. "You're arrogant."

My position here is the same as it is with the Calla crowd. If your position is to disparage the work of thousands of really smart people over decades in favor of your own views which are charitably described as completely untested, then you're the one who is arrogant. Not me. Stop assuming you have the answers and anyone who disagrees is a sellout. Including, incidentally, Barack Obama.

 

[Paine]

Literally Kamala's most run ad -- or certainly the one I saw the most -- was Trump is going to give tax breaks to his billionaire friends.

"Messaging" is the new magic asterisk. Sure, these ideas have zero track record of success and a long track record of failure, but you see, that's because we sucked at messaging. But now, our messaging will be good, because reasons.

This idea that the Dems have been captured by the consultant political class is the most toxic idea in politics and it has cost us elections in 2000 and 2016 and perhaps 2024. It's not at all true.

Did you know that white college-educated people are by far the most liberal sociological group in the country. That was the relevance of the article I linked a few days ago. Dem policy over the past four years has been developed by people just like you. It's people like you who have been staffing Democrats' legislative chambers, various agencies in the White House, and the think tanks and outside PACs who are part of the Dem coalition. That is just a fact.

It's not my position that the messaging has been terrible. But you're the one throwing shade when it's folks like you who have been running the messaging for quite some time. It sure as hell wasn't the corporate overlords talking about defunding the police. It sure as hell wasn't the corporate overlords who were responsible for the catastrophically bad progressive criminal justice "reforms" on the West Coast. Full disclosure: I wasn't wild about them but I generally supported them. So I was wrong. I'm trying to learn from mistakes instead of doubling down.

Deliberately missing the point, as always.

Don’t assume you know jack shit about me, please. To say that because I’m a college educated white guy that “people like me” have been developing the Democratic message is indicative of how blind you are to a number of factors that influence how people see and interact with the world.

People like YOU have been driving and developing the message. Not me people like me.

Kamala’s messaging about Trump being tied to billionaires DOES NOT WORK WHEN SHE HERSELF IS TIED TO BILLIONAIRES.

 

[Healing]

Ok then good because I’ve never advocated for Democrats to come out and call themselves socialists.

That alone isn't enough. Policy standard bearers (at least those I think should be) need to completely divorce themselves from the perception of it, e.g. Bernie and his acolytes.

Also, I didn't claim you advocated for a name change - possibly a miscommunication in the individual vs collective use of "you".