Where do we go from here?

[gregh1]

Keep in mind that we are only talking about 3% of the voting population; it is not everyone.

Also, just because Trump ran on certain themes does not mean that is what moved that 3% to vote. I tend to think that the 3% -- especially the latino voters -- were almost exclusively inflation voters. Inflation hurt working class people the most. Americans typically vote their pocketbooks above all other issues. I think it was as simple as blaming Biden for inflation and remembering that inflation was low under Trump.

The border, crime, Ukraine, transgenderism -- all of those issues are effective with the base that was already going to vote for Trump. But when it comes right down to what motivated those 3% to vote for Trump rather than Harris, I think it is simply the economy, stupid.

Which means, if the economy goes gang busters the next four years, Republicans will stay in power. And if the economy goes in the toilet, Democrats will get in power.

I think it is as simple as that.

Agreed here, but a caveat, messaging and finger-pointing needs to be improved even IF the economy does tank quickly enough. Repubs will lie regarding economy and/or blame dems. (they'll also lie about crime, or dem stone-walling regarding immigration reform, healthcare reform, etc).

 

[Lando]

Bullshit.

Dems consistently lay out plans to help rural WWC people. Kamala talked about going after price gougers, had plans for $25k subsidies for first-time homebuyers and tax breaks for construction companies. Liz Warren had myriad plans. Hillary noted the need to fund re-training programs and vo-tech programs for those in rural/depressed areas.

No rural white folks gave a fuck about any of those plans.

That’s why your whole idea rings false. They’re not looking for real solutions. They’re not interested in policy positions and in government officials who provide well-researched and informed answers to difficult problems.

They’re motivated by hate and rage. Racial, socioeconomic, gender-based hate and rage. And Trump is the human manifestation of all of that rage.

There’s enough focus on the WWC and rural America that it hurts Democrats with the base. Trump unapologetically tries to help Republicans and only Republicans. With all the attention paid to understanding rural America and endless talk about the need for a strong Republican Party Democrats have convinced a portion of the base that Republicans fight harder for their people.

For all the talk of being in bubbles a number of people seem to think it’s 1996. The game is different, you can’t just craft a policy message that appeals to just the right portion of the political middle and win.

 

[Paine]

There’s enough focus on the WWC and rural America that it hurts Democrats with the base. Trump unapologetically tries to help Republicans and only Republicans. With all the attention paid to understanding rural America and endless talk about the need for a strong Republican Party Democrats have convinced a portion of the base that Republicans fight harder for their people.

For all the talk of being in bubbles a number of people seem to think it’s 1996. The game is different, you can’t just craft a policy message that appeals to just the right portion of the political middle and win.

The economic policies that help the WWC are the same policies that help the base. You’re conflating WWC with political middle. That’s not accurate.

 

[hedge]

God bless America and God Bless Donald Trump…

God bless Captain Vere!

 

[Icky Mettle]

I would like for you to tell me which of any of the things I listed spread by the liberal media as truth was actually true.

Won’t get into everything. Will just touch upon a few things.

We all have seen the things Trump has done and said. That’s all there for you to see and hear. You go ahead and spin why his rhetoric hasn’t been divisive, mean-spirited, violent, and dishonest.

When he won in 2016, Hillary conceded. I don’t recall her or Dems saying the election was stolen or trying to talk a Secretary of State into “finding” just enough votes to win a state or organizing a rally to attempt to stop the certification of votes or file multiple frivolous lawsuits challenging vote counts. The Russian interference did not mean the election was not legit; it was a national security concern. The Mueller report has information regarding the Trump campaign’s interactions with Russians Messi g up to the election. You can read it.

Jussie Smollett? Sorry, that wasn’t something Dems by and large were rallying around. He made a false claim that was reported. When it was first reported it wasn’t like most Dems were making a big deal out of it. The story really got “big” when it became obvious it was a false claim. Dems didn’t dispute that it was as false claim. It was right wingers who wanted to make a big deal about the whole thing when Dems were like, “Okay, that piece of shit lied. Who the fuck is that guy anyway and why did his claim become a story in the first place?”

Re: illegals crossing the border who was ready to sign a border bill to beef up border security? And who told republicans in Congress not to let it pass because it may look good for Biden and would take away a talking point for that person’s campaign. Tell me the specifics of Trump’s border policy vs. that of Biden. By the way do you know how border crossings/encounters are assessed?

And the folks who crossed the border and were flown to cities weren’t “illegals.” They were asylum seekers, which means they did not cross illegally.

And it’s not like it’s just Dems that have called Trump out for his shenanigans. Many of the people who have worked closest with him have, calling him a a threat to national security and incompetent. I’m sure you’ll counter that by saying that they had an axe to grind or they were incompetent or whatever. But, hypothetically, if that were the case, what it does it say about Trump if he surrounded himself with so many of those people?

I don’t have your initial post that I responded to right in front of me, so I can’t remember every detail of your post that could warrant a response. Not that it matters anyway. I’m sure typing this was just a fool’s errand.

 

[gregh1]

I wonder who the right is going to blame when the price of everything we buy goes up 20% sending us straight into a depression. When they control congress and the White House how will it be the democrats fault?

They'll figure a way, and if Rogan and Elon and everyone else repeat the lie enough sheeple will believe it. Of course the "anybody but the incumbent" factor will help regardless of the lies... so the only hope is that people truly do just vote with their pocket-book. But in that case we're kinda assholes for hoping poor and middle-class feel pain.

 

[rodoheel]

Never any evidence attached to these claims. If you think Mondale is Sanders you’re delusional. It’s 2024.

What was the evidence attached to the claim that Sanders would have won this year? The idea that Joe Rogan endorsed him before so he would have enforced him this time and that would have been the difference?

No one has any evidence because what we're discussing is a counterfactual. The perfect debate because everyone is convinced they're right and no one can prove otherwise. I have no idea whether Bernie would have won this election in the alternate universe where he was the candidate, and anyone who says they do is a fool or has an agenda to push.

What I do know is that's is BS for Bernie, in the space of one day, to go from tweeting this:

"We know why Trump should NOT be president. Here’s why Kamala should be. She wants to:- Raise the min wage to $15 per hour- Cancel all medical debt- Help working parents by expanding the child tax credit- Expand Medicare to cover home health care, vision & hearing."

To tweeting a two-page screed where he accuses Democrats of abandoning the working class and failing to pass the progressive agenda with not one word to say about Trump or Republicans having obstructed and demonized that agenda at every turn.

I want progressives in the leftist coalition. I don't think liberals can win without leftists, and vice versa. But apparently progressives think they can win without leftists. Because Sanders and other prominent leftists have reacted to this devastating loss by immediately taking out the knives they had clearly been sharpening behind their backs for months or years. It may be true that liberals need to grow a spine and risk alienating wealthy donors by leaning in harder on overtly populist policies, but it's also true that leftists need to be realistic about where the overall electorate is on certain issues (like Gaza and Medicare for all) and stop acting like every leftist policy preference is so universally popular that adopting it is the easy button to victory.

 

[gregh1]

"Let it burn" is a feeling we have, but obviously a strategy people are pondering. But the Dems need to do something to capitalize on the conflagration. They need to make bold, loud predictions now that will stand time (and manipulation & spin) so they can hold the Repub's feet to the fire. Dems need to be able to says "we told you so", or else the gullible, tribal, confirmation-biased, misinformed people won't know who to blame.

It seems we're in a world of incumbents always losing, but if Trump's impact takes 7 yrs to finally be painful then it could be Dems as the incumbents in 7 yrs being blamed.

^That's my feelings regarding OP's #3

 

[Lando]

The economic policies that help the WWC are the same policies that help the base. You’re conflating WWC with political middle. That’s not accurate.

They aren’t the middle. They are Trump’s base. And so long as understanding them and winning them back remains at the center of Democratic discussion there will be parts of the base that feel betrayed, especially when the other side is giddy to govern in a nakedly partisan manner.

Crafting policy to appeal to / help 51% of the population doesn’t win elections right now.

 

[Paine]

They aren’t the middle. They are Trump’s base. And so long as understanding them and winning them back remains at the center of Democratic discussion there will be parts of the base that feel betrayed, especially when the other side is giddy to govern in a nakedly partisan manner.

Crafting policy to appeal to / help 51% of the population doesn’t win elections right now.

I really don’t know what point you’re trying to make.

 

[SnoopRob]

Bernie would have lost in Walter Mondale numbers.

Bernie is the backup QB who would lead his team to the state championship/national championship/Super Bowl win if only the coach would put him in.

 

[Zoo_View]

Never any evidence attached to these claims. If you think Mondale is Sanders you’re delusional. It’s 2024.

You don’t understand the visceral hatred of the word “socialist.”

The entire campaign - Bernie: “I’m a Democratic Socialist.” The opposition: “Even he says he’s a socialist.”

He’s a dead man walking as a general election candidate.

 

[Paine]

What was the evidence attached to the claim that Sanders would have won this year? The idea that Joe Rogan endorsed him before so he would have enforced him this time and that would have been the difference?

No one has any evidence because what we're discussing is a counterfactual. The perfect debate because everyone is convinced they're right and no one can prove otherwise. I have no idea whether Bernie would have won this election in the alternate universe where he was the candidate, and anyone who says they do is a fool or has an agenda to push.

What I do know is that's is BS for Bernie, in the space of one day, to go from tweeting this:

"We know why Trump should NOT be president. Here’s why Kamala should be. She wants to:- Raise the min wage to $15 per hour- Cancel all medical debt- Help working parents by expanding the child tax credit- Expand Medicare to cover home health care, vision & hearing."

To tweeting a two-page screed where he accuses Democrats of abandoning the working class and failing to pass the progressive agenda with not one word to say about Trump or Republicans having obstructed and demonized that agenda at every turn.

I want progressives in the leftist coalition. I don't think liberals can win without leftists, and vice versa. But apparently progressives think they can win without leftists. Because Sanders and other prominent leftists have reacted to this devastating loss by immediately taking out the knives they had clearly been sharpening behind their backs for months or years. It may be true that liberals need to grow a spine and risk alienating wealthy donors by leaning in harder on overtly populist policies, but it's also true that leftists need to be realistic about where the overall electorate is on certain issues (like Gaza and Medicare for all) and stop acting like every leftist policy preference is so universally popular that adopting it is the easy button to victory.

Your characterization of people on the left sharpening knives behind their backs is juvenile. Everyone left of center wanted to win this election. Everyone is mad that we didn’t. Bernie Sanders has a right to blame whoever the hell he wants. He’s taken enough false blame for the outcome of 2016. There is blame being cast at everyone in the party right now.

If you’ve read any of my other posts today, my argument about why I think Bernie would’ve won is implicit. I’ve attached multiple articles that have laid out the case in more detail.

The point about Sanders losing Mondale style sounds like something Chris Matthew spewed out in 2015 and every MSNBC viewer ran with it.

What you’re saying is equivalent to Republicans not wanting Democrats to talk about gun control after a school shooting.

 

[Paine]

You don’t understand the visceral hatred of the word “socialist.”

The entire campaign - Bernie: “I’m a Democratic Socialist.” The opposition: “Even he says he’s a socialist.”

He’s a dead man walking as a general election candidate.

They say that about every fucking Democrat that runs. They called Kamala Harris a Marxist.

I don’t think Sanders was winning the Cuban vote whether he said he’s a socialist or not.

 

[Paine]

Bernie is the backup QB who would lead his team to the state championship/national championship/Super Bowl win if only the coach would put him in.

Not sure how you can have the opinions that you’ve posted numerous times today and not think Sanders would’ve beaten Trump in 2016.

 

[farce©]

Bernie Sanders was never ever never ever ever going to be the Democratic Presidential nominee because he is not a Democrat. Democrats nominate Democrats. Republicans nominate Republicans. That’s what political parties do. Bernie is an independent. If he wants to run for President as an Independent he should feel free to do so. But the Democrats will never nominate someone who isn’t a Democrat to be their Presidential nominee.

 

[Paine]

Bernie Sanders was never ever never ever ever going to be the Democratic Presidential nominee because he is not a Democrat. Democrats nominate Democrats. Republicans nominate Republicans. That’s what political parties do. Bernie is an independent. If he wants to run for President as an Independent he should feel free to do so. But the Democrats will never nominate someone who isn’t a Democrat to be their Presidential nominee.

He registered as a Democrat to run in the primary. Republicans just elected a man, for the second time, who wasn’t a Republican until fairly recently.

Reagan was famously a Democrat before his corporate turn.

Bernie’s policies represent the core of the Democratic Party’s ethos more than any Democratic candidate since Harry Truman.

 

[Lando]

I really don’t know what point you’re trying to make.

Publicly focusing on the wants and needs of the other party's base can make your party's base feel abandoned, especially when Republicans are openly governing only for their base. Believing that policy proposals that cover a large enough portion of the electorate is the path to victory is Third Way thinking, and I don't think that works in a world where a guy just won with a concept of a plan.

 

[Zoo_View]

He registered as a Democrat to run in the primary. Republicans just elected a man, for the second time, who wasn’t a Republican until fairly recently.

Reagan was famously a Democrat before his corporate turn.

Bernie’s policies represent the core of the Democratic Party’s ethos more than any Democratic candidate since Harry Truman.

Is Bernie a Democrat in the US Senate?

No. He’s an Independent.

If he wants to run for the Democratic nomination for a political office, he needs to be a Democrat.

 

[Paine]

Publicly focusing on the wants and needs of the other party's base can make your party's base feel abandoned, especially when Republicans are openly governing only for their base. Believing that policy proposals that cover a large enough portion of the electorate is the path to victory is Third Way thinking, and I don't think that works in a world where a guy just won with a concept of a plan.

Like I said: no one is suggesting that the Democratic Party suddenly become the party that aligns with every position white working class voters have.

This conversation has been focused on economic discussions. When I talk about appealing to the WWC, I’m talking about populist economics that benefit working class voters of all races.

The Democratic Party’s base benefits from the same economic policies that would be deployed to appeal to the WWC.