Many Americans Say the Democratic Party Does Not Share Their Priorities

[UNCatTech]

I’m not saying Democrats need to hand out reading assignments to voters. People on this board who are actually interested in this need to read though. Not sure how you can argue otherwise.

Everyone needs to actually read.

I believe i was much more informed this election because I don't watch much regular TV and I dont watch commercials, so I had to actually find the information instead of trusting the advertisements.

 

[CFordUNC]

What i argue is that while you are well meaning and bring a lot to the board, you are actually far more isolated from what average Americans want in political leadership than most of us that you rail against. Your own ideas of governance, if championed, would be pilloried by the American populace. Thats my point about further reading and theory. It doesn't work for dealing with realities on the ground.

Democrats suck at personality. Much of rhat is because pushes at equality are almost always led by people who need to be told to shut the fuck up and sit down. We need Dems strong enough to do that while also pushing for the equality.

We don't need a change in direction of policy whole hog...we need a change in direction of personality and perception.

Agree with this wholeheartedly. Having known you personally for a long time, I think that you and I, as former Republicans and as people from rural, poorer backgrounds with large swaths of our family who still vote Republican, are very similar in our understanding of how Democrats should try to reach those kinds of folks. Yes, commitment to furthering equality is among the most noble of principles and one certainly worthy of undertaking, but it’s ultimately useless if you can’t get elected. And in our country right now, you cannot get elected if you are *perceived* as caring more about progressive social issues that sound like they come from the ivory tower or the faculty lounge instead of working to make life more affordable for the majority of Americans who aren’t wealthy, educated, or “elite.”

 

[Paine]

Everyone needs to actually read.

I believe i was much more informed this election because I don't watch much regular TV and I dont watch commercials, so I had to actually find the information instead of trusting the advertisements.

I wish the average voter read nearly as much as the average person on this board, we’d be much better off.

That being said, I think people sometimes mistake my penchant for political theory (combined with people knowing that I’m a socialist) for saying that Democrats need to become third-worldist Maoists or something, I really don’t know why.

I love to read because, it turns out, a lot of smart people have thought about the same things I think about and have written books about them lol.

 

[Paine]

Agree with this wholeheartedly. Having known you personally for a long time, I think that you and I, as former Republicans and as people from rural, poorer backgrounds with large swaths of our family who still vote Republican, are very similar in our understanding of how Democrats should try to reach those kinds of folks. Yes, commitment to furthering equality is among the most noble of principles and one certainly worthy of undertaking, but it’s ultimately useless if you can’t get elected. And in our country right now, you cannot get elected if you are *perceived* as caring more about progressive social issues that sound like they come from the ivory tower or the faculty lounge instead of working to make life more affordable for the majority of Americans who aren’t wealthy, educated, or “elite.”

I also come from a rural area and most of my family is Republicans, included all of my immediate family.

I agree with everything you say about needing to speak to average people and not like elites from the ivory tower or faculty lounge. That’s been something that I’ve said a ton. Please don’t confuse my personal politics with what I think the strategy for the Democratic Party should be. These things inform each other for me, but my criticisms of the Democratic Party fit perfectly alongside everything you and other conservatives on the board have laid out.

 

[CFordUNC]

I also come from a rural area and most of my family is Republicans, included all of my immediate family.

I agree with everything you say about needing to speak to average people and not like elites from the ivory tower or faculty lounge. That’s been something that I’ve said a ton. Please don’t confuse my personal politics with what I think the strategy for the Democratic Party should be. These things inform each other for me, but my criticism of the Democratic Party fit perfectly alongside everything you and other conservatives on the board have laid out.

Oh no, I completely understood and even agreed with where you were coming from. My post wasn’t intended to seem like it was directed at you. It was intended are more overarching critique of Democratic strategy.

 

[Paine]

Oh no, I completely understood and even agreed with where you were coming from. My post wasn’t intended to seem like it was directed at you. It was intended are more overarching critique of Democratic strategy.

Okay, got it. Just seemed like wmheel was unfairly saying that my reading political theory and asking others on the board to also seriously engage with it means that I approach politics by telling working class white guys to read Das Kapital.

 

[farce©]

of course they were all factors. every one of them. Additionally, the Dems have made a bunch of social policies more important than those policies the common workers values. That's what so frustrating. We could do so much better if we were smarter. But I don't think the Dem leadership, nor the cabal here even considers what the common voters cares about because "we" know better.

No, Republicans said Dems “made a bunch of social issues more important,” and that view was amplified by mainstream and right wing media. Go look st the ads Dems were running in the last election. Other than abortion, economic issues and Republican plans for Project 2025 were always at the forefront. Healthcare was one of the issues cited in the article as important to voters. Democrats were all over affordable healthcare for all and Republicans were still harping on “Obamacare.” This poll indicates the media coverage of the election was an amplification of GOP talking points and that’s what people remember.

 

[UNCatTech]

It is very interesting how many former conservatives, me included, are on this board.

I believe it makes a statement about the movement of that party.

 

[CFordUNC]

Ultimately, even though I do think that all of this is worthy of discussion and dissection and analysis, in the greater scheme of things, it’s kind of irrelevant for the moment in time. Republicans have complete and total control of the federal government. They’ve (and presumably many American voters) have got exactly what they say they want. Everything moving forward between now and when the next election occurs is owned by the Republican Party and their voters. In a way, it’s a blessing in disguise for the Democrats. The average everyday American fares worse economically under Republican administrations than they do under Democratic ones. There’s nothing controversial about that, and it’s not an opinion – it’s backed by data spanning many different administrations. This time will be no different, and in fact will likely be much, much worse. The Republicans are dismantling the economy and openly boasting about how it’s necessary for everyone to feel economic pain.

Give it six, nine, 12 months or whatever and there’s going to be a lot of people who figure out the hard way that perhaps dozens of transgender people playing sports somewhere out there isn’t more of an existential threat than their energy bills or their grocery store bills skyrocketing by 25% or more.

 

[BubbaOtis]

The "One Big Tent" approach bit the Dems in the ass in the last election. There are too many issues that, rightly or not, are perceived as zero sum games; a loser for every winner. Diversity hires are seen as taking jobs from better qualified candidates. The existence of Diversity $300k positions angers people.

LAFD’s $300K-per-year diversity chief sparks fury for defending DEI by blaming the victim: ‘He got himself in the wrong place’

Deputy Chief Kristine Larson — who heads the Equity and Human Resources Bureau — was addressing accusations that female firefighters aren’t strong enough carry a man out of a burn…

nypost.com

I totally get that how LA spends their money doesn't affect me but the public perception is unpopular.

Labor and immigration create a rub. Cheap immigrant labor depresses wages. Immigrants create a drain on the social welfare system. Progressive social issues don't sit well with some Christians, particularly African Americans. I tried to avoid political ads rolling up to the election, but the " taxpayer paid sex change operations for prisoners" ad and Harris's failure to walk back her comments were a tremendous blow to her chances, imo.

I doubt Dem leadership will change their approach, though.

 

[CFordUNC]

It is very interesting how many former conservatives, me included, are on this board.

I believe it makes a statement about the movement of that party.

Same here. It’s why I always laugh at the posters who whine and cry that board is such a left wing echo chamber and is so hostile to conservatives. No, it’s hostile to MAGA. There’s plenty of us here who are every bit conservative as we’ve always been in many respects. It’s just that the kind of conservatism to which I and many other now-Democratically-aligned posters adhere is completely antithetical to today’s Republican Party. You know, things like preservation of individual freedoms and personal liberties, commitment to free trade and free markets, belief in punishing violent criminals harshly, respect for military service and law-enforcement, defense of the U.S. Constitution, opposition to Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, and all other foreign states who stand diametrically opposed to our democratic ideals, etc.

 

[altmin]

FWIW Ken Martin wins election as the next chair of the Democratic National Committee

Ken Martin, the longtime leader of the state Democratic Party organization in Minnesota, will be the new Democratic National Committee chair after winning Saturday’s election, as his party looks to turn the page and recover from a dismal 2024.

Martin had been the front-runner from the beginning of the race, leveraging his relationships with the more than 400 voting members of the DNC that he forged over more than a decade of work inside the institutional Democratic Party. And those relationships proved essential, as he clinched a majority of the voting members on the first ballot, more than 100 votes above the second place finisher, Wisconsin Democratic Party chair Ben Wikler.


The race hinged more on the candidates’ organizing and fundraising resumes than on their postures regarding the ideological soul of the party, as it did in 2017, after President Donald Trump’s previous election win. Martin was the more experienced hand with deep party relationships, Wikler had been at the center of some of Democrats’ highest-profile races in recent years, and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley had unique electoral and government experience.

 

[Paine]

Ultimately, even though I do think that all of this is worthy of discussion and dissection and analysis, in the greater scheme of things, it’s kind of irrelevant for the moment in time. Republicans have complete and total control of the federal government. They’ve (and presumably many American voters) have got exactly what they say they want. Everything moving forward between now and when the next election occurs is owned by the Republican Party and their voters. In a way, it’s a blessing in disguise for the Democrats. The average everyday American fares worse economically under Republican administrations than they do under Democratic ones. There’s nothing controversial about that, and it’s not an opinion – it’s backed by data spanning many different administrations. This time will be no different, and in fact will likely be much, much worse. The Republicans are dismantling the economy and openly boasting about how it’s necessary for everyone to feel economic pain.

Give it six, nine, 12 months or whatever and there’s going to be a lot of people who figure out the hard way that perhaps dozens of transgender people playing sports somewhere out there isn’t more of an existential threat than their energy bills or their grocery store bills skyrocketing by 25% or more.

I think you’re largely right. What I would just add is that the Democratic Party needs some kind of principle to moor it. It feels rudderless because of a lack of leadership, I think. They need to pick a lane, even if it’s one I don’t like, I’d prefer if they pick a theme and stick with it.

Part of this issue is that there is a genuine ideological battle happening within the base of the party right now, so no one path has been able to win out.

My suggestion, which I think would appeal to liberals, socialists, and even many conservatives, is to try to forcefully reattach the brand and image of the party to one of universal human freedom and equality. This has been the basic commitment that has powered essentially every successful left-wing movement.

This has to be done not only through concerted messaging, but along with a platform that makes sense in light of the recommitment. Decommodification of the essentials of life: healthcare, childcare, education, housing.

Drop the individual identity focused messaging, which I think has already started happening, and lean into this core issue set. These rights should be for every American regardless of race, sex, gender, creed, religion, whatever. That’s how we advance justice for all.

 

[CFordUNC]

I doubt Dem leadership will change their approach, though.

I’m sure they will, as they want to win elections, but I’m not even have to change their approach in any major way. For the next 18 months, they simply need to sit back, sit idle, and let Republicans Republican. They’re well on their way to crashing the American economy

Or instead of endlessly chasing after Republicans, focus on fighting for Democrats. Narratives about focus on social issues work in part because Democrats aren't seen as fighting for anybody. Quit running around with Liz Cheney and pining after Republican votes. Republicans focus on their base. Democrats try to triangulate and as a result their base isn't as convinced they are fighting for them.

Those are all fantastic points, too. I don’t disagree. The Democrats have to stop trying to be all things to all people, and focus almost exclusively on doing things that get their base to actually turn out to vote. When Democrats vote, Republicans lose.

 

[WaynetheDrain]

No, Republicans said Dems “made a bunch ofsocial issues more important,” and that view was amplified by mainstream and right wing media. Go look st the ads Dems were running in the last election. Other than abortion, economic issues and Republican plans for Project 2025 were always at the forefront. Healthcare was one of the issues cited in the article as important to voters. Democrats were all over affordable healthcare for all and Republicans were still harping on “Obamacare.” This poll indicates the media coverage of the election was an amplification of GOP talking points and that’s what people remember.

This is 100% correct.

There is this stupid misconception that Democrats care more for social issues than the common plight of the American worker, yet the two opposing campaigns tell a completely different story during the election. While Harris was campaigning on the bringing down costs on groceries and prescription drugs, healthcare and affordable housing, and protecting unions, Trump's campaign was villainizing immigrants and complaining about trans rights.

Yet, America's low-information, low attention span citizens decided that the Republicans were the ones carrying the message for the common people.

 

[altmin]

This is 100% correct.

There is this stupid misconception that Democrats care more for social issues than the common plight of the American worker, yet the two opposing campaigns tell a completely different story during the election. While Harris was campaigning on the bringing down costs on groceries and prescription drugs, healthcare and affordable housing, and protecting unions, Trump's campaign was villainizing immigrants and complaining about trans rights.

Yet, America's low-information, low attention span citizens decided that the Republicans were the ones carrying the message for the common people.

Same myth that Republicans are more fiscally responsible, more business friendly etc...

In the post-truth world, it is very easy to feel like nothing matters.

 

[CFordUNC]

It’s going to get real difficult for a lot of folks to act like they are so inconvenienced by the mere existence of transgender people when they have to work an extra 10 years because their party decimated the economy and laughed in their faces about it.

 

[BlueSmoke]

Do Democrats have a leaky tire or a full fledged blowout with respect to what voters think of them? Recent polling by Quinnipiac confirms the latter.

I remember talking to people I know before the election, who in normal times would go no where near Trump, and the answer I always got as to why they were going to hold their nose and vote for him was because they saw the Democrats as so much worse.

The warning I have, is that its tempting for Democrats to believe the next election will be about how bad Trump and MAGA world is (as proved by performance) and simply coast into a win. Which has been the strategy for the last 12 years.

if that happens to lead to a win, then what good does that do over the long run? Not much. Might be a good idea to get on with the business of changing the tire. Or the Party makeover in the minds of voters.

 

[farce©]

Do Democrats have a leaky tire or a full fledged blowout with respect to what voters think of them? Recent polling by Quinnipiac confirms the latter.

I remember talking to people I know before the election, who in normal times would go no where near Trump, and the answer I always got as to why they were going to hold their nose and vote for him was because they saw the Democrats as so much worse.

The warning I have, is that its tempting for Democrats to believe the next election will be about how bad Trump and MAGA world is (as proved by performance) and simply coast into a win. Which has been the strategy for the last 12 years.

if that happens to lead to a win, then what good does that do over the long run? Not much. Might be a good idea to get on with the business of changing the tire. Or the Party makeover in the minds of voters.

How do you suggest Dems do that?

 

[CFordUNC]

Do Democrats have a leaky tire or a full fledged blowout with respect to what voters think of them? Recent polling by Quinnipiac confirms the latter.

I remember talking to people I know before the election, who in normal times would go no where near Trump, and the answer I always got as to why they were going to hold their nose and vote for him was because they saw the Democrats as so much worse.

The warning I have, is that its tempting for Democrats to believe the next election will be about how bad Trump and MAGA world is (as proved by performance) and simply coast into a win. Which has been the strategy for the last 12 years.

if that happens to lead to a win, then what good does that do over the long run? Not much. Might be a good idea to get on with the business of changing the tire. Or the Party makeover in the minds of voters.

Definitely think all of what you say above has a lot of merit, and I definitely believe that the Democratic Party needs a sweeping change in leadership and strategy. But my belief that 2026 will go well for Democrats has almost zero to do with anything that the Democratic Party may or may not do, and everything to do with the fact that the American electorate generally hates the incumbent above all else. When you add in the fact that we are quite likely going to experience major economic recession in the next 18 months, and given the historic propensity for the in-power party to get waxed in the midterms, it’s not far fetched at all to think that the Democrats can and should have very good midterm results.