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

You’re asking for evidence, so let’s start there. When Americans are polled about what issues matter most to them, across race, class, and party lines, the answers are consistent: the economy, healthcare, housing, inflation, political corruption. Cultural issues like DEI, trans sports, or campus speech don’t rank high for most people. That’s not an opinion, it’s standard across Pew, Gallup, AP-NORC, and others.

Now, I know what you’re likely to say. Even if voters say they care about the economy, their actual votes, especially for Republicans pushing racist or regressive policies, reveal a deeper commitment to cultural identity. That’s the classic revealed preference argument.

But that interpretation assumes a kind of ideological coherence that doesn’t reflect how most people engage with politics. Voters aren’t wonks. They respond to emotion, tone, and trust. When someone says they care about wages or healthcare but votes Republican, it doesn’t mean they’re lying about their priorities. It often means they don’t believe Democrats will actually deliver. Or worse, that Democrats look down on people like them.

Republicans win not because they offer better material outcomes, but because they perform alignment with people’s anger and disillusionment. Democrats lose because they too often speak a language that feels foreign, managerial, or moralizing, especially to voters who are economically precarious and culturally defensive. That emotional mismatch is where trust breaks.

As for the Solid South, yes, race is foundational to American politics. But Alabama and Missouri don’t vote the way they do just because of race. These are regions marked by deep economic hardship, social conservatism, and distrust of elite institutions. The right exploits this through racialized grievance. But the left has failed to compete on the terrain of class and belonging. That’s the missed opportunity. And it’s a strategic failure, not just a moral one.

So no, I’m not saying voters are perfectly rational economic actors. I’m saying that ignoring economic frustration, or treating it as a mask for bigotry, is a mistake. It writes off winnable voters, inflates the liberal self-image, and guarantees political isolation.
I do think some of the open border stuff that Trump tapped into is xenophobia and racism but I honestly feel most of it is economic. People talk about Hispanics taking jobs that Americans don't want like picking produce or cleaning toilets but they are taking plenty of jobs in other industries that Americans do want like construction and meat packing.

I really think Democrats have continued to misidentify the real issue by telling everyone who will listen that the only reason someone could vote for Trump is racism when the issue is competition from immigrants for a large number of voters. Which is why you saw a lot of Hispanic men and to a lesser extent black men vote for Trump too. Those guys of all colors were citizens and had been here for a while and their wages are getting driven down on the construction site by people that showed up last month.
 
Last edited:
This week represents 10 years since Trump came down that escalator in NY to declare himself a candidate in 2015. The Democrats have basically run against Trump for that entire time, assuming that his negatives will give them victory.

But during that entire time their message became hijacked by the Progressive wing of their party. What do the Dems stand for other than opposing Trump? A porous border, trans women in sports, DEI? That's apparently what enough Americans thought about Dems to elect Trump again.

The Democratic candidate who can figure out what Americans want will helpfully lead us out of the huge mess Trump will create in the next 3.5 years.
While I agree and understand that the party has to appeal to people with better ideas to make everyone's life better. I'm still surprised that running against a piece of shit like trump wasn't enough. He's such a bad person that is hard to believe that people could put aside so many failures and so much unacceptable behavior and elect him.
 
I respectfully disagree with your FIFY nor do I agree with Super wanting to campaign on an explicit us/them theme.

History shows that Democrats have been the party that has improved the lives of working and middle class families. History has shown that Republicans have been the party that has eschewed improving the lives of working and middle class families in favor of improving the lives of upper middle class and upper class families.

Unfortunately for our country, republicans realized that they had been unable to capture working and middle class voters when it came to economic issues back in the day and decided to go after voters with manufactured racial/cultural issues.

I hate to admit it, but it has turned out to be a pretty good strategy over the last 60 years.


With respect to Super's dems for us/pubs for them campaign if explicit will be a loser

again issue #1 is to put forth how specifically Dems will improve the lives of working and middle class families

issue #2 capture and promote the historic memory of America
 
One the topic of trans issues and how Dems "lost" the country on that topic, the newest Ezra Klein show is a great deep-dive:

 
1. On the polls: I get the skepticism, but we’re not just talking about survey data. We’re talking about lived experience, including yours and mine. You know that voters talk about gas prices, medical bills, rent, job security, things that touch their everyday lives.
I try not to let my personal experience or that of my friends dictate my views of "voters." I'm not remotely typical. I have no idea what a construction worker and a PA couple talk about over the famed kitchen table
 
Well, you said candidates like, so I'm assuming you're excluding the actual Tim Walz who cannot be the candidate. Taking the VP candidate from a losing ticket is not the way to win. But yes, someone like Tim Walz.

I would love president Warnock but dude, we cannot run another black candidate. The white folks are going to think we're completely sold out to the minorities.

I doubt Mark Kelly has the energy for a presidential campaign, but again you said like.
 
The GOP has never ever adhered to the former message. It's always the latter, except they invert it ever so slightly: YOU can't tell me shit because YOU are [insert superficial characteristic here]
The GOP won. The question isn't about them.
 
Sounds like a lot of my family as well. This is exactly the kind of thing I’ve been trying to get at. When someone like your mother-in-law is more animated by the trans issue than by the fact that her healthcare might get gutted, it’s not because she doesn’t care about healthcare. It’s because the trans issue has become a symbolic stand-in for everything she feels is going wrong: moral decline, loss of cultural familiarity, fear that the world is changing too fast and without her consent.

That symbolic resonance gives it emotional weight in a way that Democrats haven’t matched when talking about economics. When we talk about healthcare, it’s often abstract: “lower premiums,” “ACA subsidies,” “bending the cost curve.” There’s no story, no emotional hook, no sense that someone is fighting for her or understands what she’s scared of.

That’s what the right exploits. Not facts, but feeling. And until Democrats show up with the same level of emotional clarity, especially around the basics like wages, housing, and medical care, they’ll keep losing ground to cultural proxies that fill the vacuum of meaning.
So the meat and bones is the Dems went too far down the alphabet trail DEI, LGBTQ, + etc. and left out the real life issues which face most Americans. Let’s face it, the alphabet trail has a lot of letters, but it doesn’t encompass the majority of people.

Grandma won’t fight for her own healthcare but she’ll fight you tooth and nail about transgender. That is telling indeed.

Had the Dems left the alphabet trail on the periphery - instead of making it their centerpiece (pun intended) - and focused more on what Bernie was peddling… and had run better candidates… I’m sorry, all it took to beat a lousy candidate like Trump was a tired old white guy.

Hindsight is 20-20 but I said back in 2021 that Biden should have announced on day 101 (after his first 100 days of building back better) that he wouldn’t seek another term thereby allowing the jockeying for position of primary candidates.

When I said that in 2021 I was castigated on the old board because “doing that would automatically make Biden a “lame duck” too soon.

Now I say, the Dems need to ditch the alphabet trail and jump on the train of hard nosed issues.
 
This is exactly why Democrats lose trust. Not because voters are all bigots, but because voters can sense when their leaders don’t believe in anything beyond navigating perceptions.
Dont you think the entire Trump phenomenon undercuts this assertion?

Hell, I used to believe it too, but I sure don't anymore. It seems to me that Americans want to be told a fairy tale and whomever can be the most entertaining in telling that fairy tale will win most any election at this point.

I speak to people with genuine care and empathy. They would 100x rather hear Trump on those same issues. Oh and im quite literally a storyteller that can have any audience eating out of the palm of my hand...done it for decades. I just can't lie to people about things that matter.

When I teach large audiences of 1000+, ill always work hilarious stories into the class to make points about the material and make people laugh and connect. Some stretch 20 minutes or more. People are usually crying from laughing so hard. Inevitably, dozens will ask the same question afterward..."was that story really true?" My response is always the same..."does it really matter?" They laugh again and smile and leave happy.

That's your American voter at this point.
 
You’re saying people want a story: something emotional, moral, and bigger than themselves. I agree. That’s what Trump offers, even if it’s a destructive fantasy. He gives people the feeling that he sees them, that he’s in the fight, that he’s sticking it to the people they think have looked down on them. It’s theater, but it feels like truth. And in politics, feelings build loyalty more than facts.

That’s why Democrats need more than policy tweaks. They need someone who can tell a different kind of story rooted in dignity, work, and shared struggle. Not spectacle, but purpose.

Your story illustrates the point perfectly. People want to laugh, feel seen, feel understood. That emotional connection matters more than whether every fact checks out. It’s not about lying, it’s about recognition.

And yes, Trump offers that. But so could we. If we told stories grounded in real life—in labor, sacrifice, and community—we could meet that emotional need without surrendering to fantasy. It seems like you already know how to do that. The political left needs to catch up.
I think you missed rhe point that my stories are all 100% fabricated, embellished, and created entirely to suit the situation and audience. There isn't a shred of truth to them.
 
You’re getting close to what I’m saying, but I want to be precise here. It’s not that the “alphabet trail” topics should be banished to the periphery. It’s that Democrats let those topics become symbolic stand-ins for the whole of their moral identity without anchoring them in a bigger story about solidarity, dignity, and shared struggle.

The right exploits these issues to stoke fear. Too often, Democrats respond either defensively, or by treating symbolic representation as a substitute for actual transformation. That leaves everyone frustrated: both the people who feel culturally alienated and the marginalized communities who aren’t getting meaningful change either.

It’s not about dropping DEI or LGBTQ+ issues. It’s about connecting them to a politics that speaks to universal concerns: healthcare, wages, safety, fairness. When Bernie did that, it wasn’t because he ignored identity, it’s because he embedded it in a vision that felt collective, not siloed.

So yeah, grandma is angry about the trans issue. But that’s because the right gave her a story that felt urgent and moral. Democrats need to offer a better one; not just for her, but for everyone.
I think we may be of a mind. I'm not advocating dropping the alphabet completely - just simply putting it in it's place percentage-wise.
If the total population is only 10% - 20% marginalized via the alphabet, then the Dems should make their messaging and their campaigning reflect that. Quit with the 24-7, 365 pounding away at all of that "woke" stuff (as the right-wingers say).

However, if 99% of the populace is in need of hard rail issues (you know the ones: Childcare, Healthcare, Wages, Jobs, Education, etc. etc. - all the things the 1% doesn't give 2 shits about) then the Dems should make those things 80%-90% of their campaigning and messaging, and leave the other 10%-20% on the periphery.
 
I think we may be of a mind. I'm not advocating dropping the alphabet completely - just simply putting it in it's place percentage-wise.
If the total population is only 10% - 20% marginalized via the alphabet, then the Dems should make their messaging and their campaigning reflect that. Quit with the 24-7, 365 pounding away at all of that "woke" stuff (as the right-wingers say).

However, if 99% of the populace is in need of hard rail issues (you know the ones: Childcare, Healthcare, Wages, Jobs, Education, etc. etc. - all the things the 1% doesn't give 2 shits about) then the Dems should make those things 80%-90% of their campaigning and messaging, and leave the other 10%-20% on the periphery.
Need to stop all of it. Im gay and the fucking mess is tedious as hell. I don't need a month to be proud and I don't need a political party to cater to me. I need people to be reasonable and kind. That's fucking all.
 
Need to stop all of it. Im gay and the fucking mess is tedious as hell. I don't need a month to be proud and I don't need a political party to cater to me. I need people to be reasonable and kind. That's fucking all.
I hear you
At this point it is so complicated Dems almost have to scream about things ,because Pub Legisltures are in race to bottom in ways to make it point that group X,Y and X are subhuman .....
 
I didn’t miss that, your point actually reinforces mine. You’re showing how people respond to stories emotionally, not analytically. Whether the story is true or not doesn’t matter in the moment. What matters is that it feels real, lands emotionally, and creates a connection. That’s how humans process meaning, and that’s exactly the terrain we’re on politically.

But here’s where I think we diverge: I don’t think the only option in politics is to fabricate stories to reach people. There’s a middle ground: honest storytelling that’s emotionally resonant because it captures something real about people’s lives. It doesn’t need to be made up. Life already contains pain, humor, struggle, and grace. The challenge is telling those stories with heart.

Trump tells lies that feel true. We need to tell the truth in a way that feels as urgent and alive as those lies. If the emotional connection dimension of politics is inevitable, the only question is whether it gets used to manipulate people or to build something better.
Have you tried song-writing?
What you're describing is exactly what singer-songwriters strive for on the daily. John Prine. Bob Dylan. Gordon Lightfoot. Carol King. Joni Mitchell. James Taylor. John Lennon. The list is endless.
 
I think we may be of a mind. I'm not advocating dropping the alphabet completely - just simply putting it in it's place percentage-wise.
If the total population is only 10% - 20% marginalized via the alphabet, then the Dems should make their messaging and their campaigning reflect that. Quit with the 24-7, 365 pounding away at all of that "woke" stuff (as the right-wingers say).

However, if 99% of the populace is in need of hard rail issues (you know the ones: Childcare, Healthcare, Wages, Jobs, Education, etc. etc. - all the things the 1% doesn't give 2 shits about) then the Dems should make those things 80%-90% of their campaigning and messaging, and leave the other 10%-20% on the periphery.
I don’t think that, by and large, Dems are the ones making political issues out of DEI, LGBTQ+, etc issues. Pubs are the ones doing that by focusing on their opposition to such people/actions. Dems largely discuss such issues in response to Pub accusations and fear-mongering and these issues are kept in the public eye by Pubs, not Dems.

If that is true, how do Dems only make it 10% of the political discussion when they aren’t the ones introducing it into the discussion?
 
I didn’t miss that, your point actually reinforces mine. You’re showing how people respond to stories emotionally, not analytically. Whether the story is true or not doesn’t matter in the moment. What matters is that it feels real, lands emotionally, and creates a connection. That’s how humans process meaning, and that’s exactly the terrain we’re on politically.

But here’s where I think we diverge: I don’t think the only option in politics is to fabricate stories to reach people. There’s a middle ground: honest storytelling that’s emotionally resonant because it captures something real about people’s lives. It doesn’t need to be made up. Life already contains pain, humor, struggle, and grace. The challenge is telling those stories with heart.

Trump tells lies that feel true. We need to tell the truth in a way that feels as urgent and alive as those lies. If the emotional connection dimension of politics is inevitable, the only question is whether it gets used to manipulate people or to build something better.
Yeah...i hope you're correct but I don't think so. I've very rarely seen anyone telling true stories and felt entertained or compelled. There's a reason everyone knows Mark Twain and nobody knows the truth tellers of his generation.
 
I'm so fucking tired of hearing about "woke." Yougov has a 5 point difference between GOP and Democratic Party favorability...that's nearly the margin of error. The issue of Democratic Party favorability is overblown and would not be an issue had the Democratic Party had a real Presidential primary and nominated a strong candidate who could connect with voters. Harris ran an admirable campaign but she was the wrong candidate for this election in nearly every sense.
Yeah this is pretty much where I land too. Don’t necessarily disagree with Paine about the Democratic Party missing the mark with its overall platform, letting down voters, etc. but I really think at the end of the day they simply didn’t run the correct candidate in 2016 and 2024. Maybe that’s partly a reflection of the average American voter’s ignorance or misogyny, but HRC and then Harris just didn’t resonate with enough people to cover the margins.
 
I am going to weigh in as a Republican, yet non MAGAt and 100% anti-Trump. Even as a Republican, I have always been more centrist or a little left of center on social issues. I was 100% in support of gay marriage from the beginning. I am also 100% for equal rights for trans people.

Take this as you will, I do not care. I'm just sharing some perspective to consider. Here's where the Dems totally fucked up and screwed the pooch.

MAGA made a huge issue out of Trans athletes competing in female sports. Is this a huge relevant issue? Hell no. But Dems didn't just stop there. They totally took the bait. They argued that biologically born males (as Trans) should be able to compete with females.

That is so very wrong on so many levels. First, it is very much like the NRA argument. ANY attempt to put limits on gun controls means you want to take all guns and deny 2nd Ammendment rights. What I mean is, Dems take the stance that anyone against biologically born males, and now Trans, competing in female sports, MUST be transphobic. Bullshit!

Secondly, Dems rightfully point out what a miniscule issue this is and how few actual Trans athletes there are competing in female sports. Completely true. Yet, they take the MAGA bait and protest furiously against banning Trans athletes from women's sports. If you point out how rare it is, and what a meaningless issue it is, why dig in so hard to protect it?

This is the stupidity of the Dem party that has hindered it forever.
 
Back
Top