Is this why Dem’s Approval Rating Polls are so bad?

wmheel1287 said:
Yet I do not believe you would ever vote for Jeff Jackson for a national office. Correct me if im wrong, but would you vote for him for POTUS or US Senate?
Click to expand...
More likely would vote for him for POTUS than I would for US Senate, because POTUS has a lot more direct influence, whereas in the Senate you’re just a number for your party.

I really hope he is our governor one day, above all else. I happily voted for him for AG and would do the same for governor. The national offices are admittedly harder. And it would depend who he’s running against.
 
Calling for the six GOP nominated members of the United States Supreme Court to be murdered just might be one.

The completely unhinged anger and hatred toward dissenting opinions could be another.
 
LEO4Life said:
Calling for the six GOP nominated members of the United States Supreme Court to be murdered just might be one.

The completely unhinged anger and hatred toward dissenting opinions could be another.
Click to expand...
…and the horse you rode in on.
 
Zoo_View said:
This must be the latest username for our prolific right-wing poaster.
Click to expand...
No doubt. He's a persistent dude, I'll give him that. Hope he enjoys his short stay here before he's banned yet again and has to come up with yet a seventh or eighth poster name so he can return in a few days.
 
Mulberry Heel said:
No doubt. He's a persistent dude, I'll give him that. Hope he enjoys his short stay here before he's banned yet again and has to come up with yet a seventh or eighth poster name so he can return in a few days.
Click to expand...
7th or 8th?

It has to be 25+.
 
Zoo_View said:
Holy shit!

You regard Hillary as a “Reaganist?”

That’s a left-wing, far left, loony leftist opinion.

That’s loony as shit.
Click to expand...
I’ll do you one better: neither Bill nor her ever proposed taxing the wealthy as much as Nixon.

Yes, she’s a Reaganist. As the Democratic Party has largely been writ large since the so-called “Reagan Revolution.”
 
superrific said:
Oh they will. Just not now. The bill hasn't even been passed yet. Start hitting the Pubs with it after labor day in places like Virginia where there are state races. Then next year they will hammer it.

Winning news cycles in June 2025 means nothing.
Click to expand...
You really think this iteration of the Democratic Party will go as far as to say, “Trump and Republicans want to kill your grandma,” and hit it over-and-over?

I agree with you about the timing, to a degree, but you have far more faith in them than I do.

Democrats haven’t even hit Trump on backing out from Iran agreement that caused all this with Middle East in the first place.

I forget his name (UK, I think, journalist that got big during War on Terror. I want to think name Peter Berg or something similar but nothing coming up in my searches.) Anyhow, he was on CNN today. And said he couldn’t believe it hadn’t been brought up by anyone but only reason these events have happened was because of Trump backing out of that agreement.

Finally, Mark Kelly comes on tonight to say it.

But it won’t matter if that’s that. You have to think like a Republican. You have to turn it into an issue. One or two saying it won’t matter.
 
I like Leo. I think he’ll be a good Pope, like Francis. May he R.I.P.
Also, I married a Leo. She took me in off the streets of Europe where I was a busker. Made a respectable man outta me. A school teacher and a coach.

But this new poaster is a poser and a troll. Leo my arse.

Reported

Now, since I’m over the edge and Stephen Miller already has me by the short and curlies, I’ll finish with another round of Fuck Trump and Fuck all the motherfuckers who voted for him. My social media posting history be damned!
 

Democrats' 2024 Autopsy Is Described as Avoiding the Likeliest Cause of Death​

Original Story by

nytimes.png
The New York Times
·

July 19, 2025

·

News
Article Image

Context:​

The Democratic National Committee is conducting an after-action review of what went wrong in the 2024 election. The report is expected to focus on actions taken by allied groups and not on the decisions made by the Biden-turned-Harris campaign. New D.N.C. chairman Ken Martin promised a post-election review from his first day.


Dive Deeper:​

  • The Democratic National Committee (DNC) is conducting an 'after-action review' to analyze the failures of the 2024 election, focusing on the actions of allied groups rather than the Biden-Harris campaign decisions.
  • The review will not address whether President Biden should have run for re-election or whether Vice President Harris was the right pick to succeed him, steering clear of controversial campaign decisions.
  • Key campaign strategies, such as framing the election as a battle between democracy and fascism, will also not be revisited, despite criticism from within the party.
  • The DNC's review is described as looking at the 2024 election overall rather than specifically the presidential campaign, likening it to reviewing a meal while ignoring the main dish.
  • Conducting a critical review of the electoral defeat is politically sensitive, especially when it involves scrutinizing the judgment of prominent party leaders and strategists.
  • Ken Martin, the new DNC chairman, faces challenges in his role, including internal conflicts and financial issues, while still promising a thorough post-election review.
  • The focus of the review, according to party officials, is on understanding voter turnout for both Republicans and Democrats to improve future strategies rather than critiquing past campaign tactics.
 
BubbaOtis said:

Democrats' 2024 Autopsy Is Described as Avoiding the Likeliest Cause of Death​

Original Story by

nytimes.png
The New York Times
·

July 19, 2025

·

News
Article Image

Context:​

The Democratic National Committee is conducting an after-action review of what went wrong in the 2024 election. The report is expected to focus on actions taken by allied groups and not on the decisions made by the Biden-turned-Harris campaign. New D.N.C. chairman Ken Martin promised a post-election review from his first day.


Dive Deeper:​

  • The Democratic National Committee (DNC) is conducting an 'after-action review' to analyze the failures of the 2024 election, focusing on the actions of allied groups rather than the Biden-Harris campaign decisions.
  • The review will not address whether President Biden should have run for re-election or whether Vice President Harris was the right pick to succeed him, steering clear of controversial campaign decisions.
  • Key campaign strategies, such as framing the election as a battle between democracy and fascism, will also not be revisited, despite criticism from within the party.
  • The DNC's review is described as looking at the 2024 election overall rather than specifically the presidential campaign, likening it to reviewing a meal while ignoring the main dish.
  • Conducting a critical review of the electoral defeat is politically sensitive, especially when it involves scrutinizing the judgment of prominent party leaders and strategists.
  • Ken Martin, the new DNC chairman, faces challenges in his role, including internal conflicts and financial issues, while still promising a thorough post-election review.
  • The focus of the review, according to party officials, is on understanding voter turnout for both Republicans and Democrats to improve future strategies rather than critiquing past campaign tactics.
Click to expand...
As to the last point,
  • The focus of the review, according to party officials, is on understanding voter turnout for both Republicans and Democrats to improve future strategies rather than critiquing past campaign tactics.
I don’t see how you could possibly understand turnout (past, present, future) and improve strategies WITHOUT looking at, critiquing and even criticizing- with a discerning eye -the past tactics.

Look forward, move forward, yes… but don’t forget to study hard the past and review for mistakes that could have been avoided… and then continue forward.

This is why I’m skeptical of the Dems… as an Independent myself, perhaps it is easier for me to see the flaws - in both parties… and I’m not both-siding here. Other than to say the Dems are dumbarses and the Pubs are fucking crooks and bigots. Both have a long way to go, but the Pubs are GOING in the wrong direction and the Dems, perhaps, are LOOKING in the wrong direction.
 
While I certainly think it’s useful to analyze things like turn out amongst various demographics, I really think that the reason that the Democrats lost is as simple as 1 – 2–3 (in this order):

1. Inflation and high prices.
2. Worldwide trend of unseating incumbent administrations in 2022-2024 in the aftermath of the pandemic.
3. Kamala Harris was unpopular amongst pretty much every demographic except for staunch liberals.

There’s nothing they could have conceivably done to alleviate number one and number two, and once Joe Biden stepped down, there was nothing they could have realistically done besides run Harris. It was the right call, it just did not work out. It happens.

In 2026 and 2028, they need to drop all of the social stuff and focus almost entirely on 1. the rampant unaffordability of literally everything, but especially housing, and 2. cleaning up the corruption in Washington. They need somebody like Andy Beshear, who has been a very popular and exceptionally successful blue governor in a deep red state, at or near the top of the ticket.
 
Centerpiece said:
As to the last point,
  • The focus of the review, according to party officials, is on understanding voter turnout for both Republicans and Democrats to improve future strategies rather than critiquing past campaign tactics.
I don’t see how you could possibly understand turnout (past, present, future) and improve strategies WITHOUT looking at, critiquing and even criticizing- with a discerning eye -the past tactics.

Look forward, move forward, yes… but don’t forget to study hard the past and review for mistakes that could have been avoided… and then continue forward.

This is why I’m skeptical of the Dems… as an Independent myself, perhaps it is easier for me to see the flaws - in both parties… and I’m not both-siding here. Other than to say the Dems are dumbarses and the Pubs are fucking crooks and bigots. Both have a long way to go, but the Pubs are GOING in the wrong direction and the Dems, perhaps, are LOOKING in the wrong direction.
Click to expand...
I think the agenda outlined above is generally correct. I mean, obviously they aren't going to completely ignore salient facts, such as Biden's age.

But we shouldn't be focusing on that. Maybe Biden did screw us by trying to run when not ready, and maybe it didn't make that much difference. But answering that question is not helpful, in my view, and risks all sorts of party dissension. Biden is history. He's not going to be on the ballot in 2026 or 2028. It was a one-off event, not a pattern, and not something that we should worry about right now. It's also easy to avoid: don't nominate old people to be president. Usually the Dems have had no problems with candidates being too old.

I also think the focus on outside groups should be helpful, so long as it isn't exclusive. There's been a lot of chatter over the past year that the foundations have been hurting Dems. These are ownerless piles of money that have, in many cases, been taken over by leftists without supervision. If not leftists, liberals. And they generally have little experience in politics, but have outsized influence because they control huge amounts of $$.
 
superrific said:
I think the agenda outlined above is generally correct. I mean, obviously they aren't going to completely ignore salient facts, such as Biden's age.

But we shouldn't be focusing on that. Maybe Biden did screw us by trying to run when not ready, and maybe it didn't make that much difference. But answering that question is not helpful, in my view, and risks all sorts of party dissension. Biden is history. He's not going to be on the ballot in 2026 or 2028. It was a one-off event, not a pattern, and not something that we should worry about right now. It's also easy to avoid: don't nominate old people to be president. Usually the Dems have had no problems with candidates being too old.

I also think the focus on outside groups should be helpful, so long as it isn't exclusive. There's been a lot of chatter over the past year that the foundations have been hurting Dems. These are ownerless piles of money that have, in many cases, been taken over by leftists without supervision. If not leftists, liberals. And they generally have little experience in politics, but have outsized influence because they control huge amounts of $$.
Click to expand...
I agree with some of what’s laid out too… except the last point, the one I called out. Perhaps my criticism could be chalked up to semantics. Maybe I’m reading it wrong, and the Dems are indeed brilliant strategists.

And it’s not looking back on Biden, but more of looking back on the Harris campaign, the shortness of which notwithstanding, which may have been flawed. Take a quick look back and learn from mistakes - not to focus too much time on it and cause dissenttion in the ranks - but a quick discerning look back, then move forward just as quickly.
 
CFordUNC said:
While I certainly think it’s useful to analyze things like turn out amongst various demographics, I really think that the reason that the Democrats lost is as simple as 1 – 2–3 (in this order):

1. Inflation and high prices.
2. Worldwide trend of unseating incumbent administrations in 2022-2024 in the aftermath of the pandemic.
3. Kamala Harris was unpopular amongst pretty much every demographic except for staunch liberals.

There’s nothing they could have conceivably done to alleviate number one and number two, and once Joe Biden stepped down, there was nothing they could have realistically done besides run Harris. It was the right call, it just did not work out. It happens.

In 2026 and 2028, they need to drop all of the social stuff and focus almost entirely on 1. the rampant unaffordability of literally everything, but especially housing, and 2. cleaning up the corruption in Washington. They need somebody like Andy Beshear, who has been a very popular and exceptionally successful blue governor in a deep red state, at or near the top of the ticket.
Click to expand...
Agree 100%
 
Centerpiece said:
I agree with some of what’s laid out too… except the last point, the one I called out. Perhaps my criticism could be chalked up to semantics. Maybe I’m reading it wrong, and the Dems are indeed brilliant strategists.

And it’s not looking back on Biden, but more of looking back on the Harris campaign, the shortness of which notwithstanding, which may have been flawed. Take a quick look back and learn from mistakes - not to focus too much time on it and cause dissenttion in the ranks - but a quick discerning look back, then move forward just as quickly.
Click to expand...
I read that as "our turn out the vote operation failed this year, despite the millions of door knockers, because maybe doorknocking either never was or is no longer a reliable technique." Trump used a word-of-mouth strategy that worked much better, which is how he turned out the recalcitrant voters. Maybe.

And since this type of turn out the vote operation has been part of the standard playbook at least since Obama (and probably further back, depending on how strictly you want to define some of this stuff), it wouldn't make sense to try to pin it on the Harris campaign.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top