Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Where do we go from here?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rodoheel
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 1K
  • Views: 24K
  • Politics 
stankeylegjones said:
There are certain feelings that come with struggling to make ends meet that those who've gone through it, or are going through it, can identify with. It is a common thread in their lives, and a thread that affects everyone who has had to struggle. This is not to say that previous admin haven't focused on race when trying to ease these struggles in certain groups. And, to be clear, that is not what I am saying, at all. Neither is that what folks who I tend to align with on this issue are calling for. I'm talking about symptoms here, not treatment. I understand that many want to simply chalk up the loss to racism and misogyny, probably because it's easier to believe in that as the cause instead of actually looking inwards and analyzing (mis)actions.

Maybe I'm completely missing the plot here, but it does seem that more folks are coming around to this. Maybe we are all just missing the plot.
Click to expand...
1. As someone who has been following the research about Trump and racism, I can tell you that it's not the easy way out. If it were about economic anxiety, then we'd have a better chance to make the problem go away. But that's not what it's about, and that's why the problem won't go away, and that's why we end up playing whack-a-mole.

2. Trump certainly isn't acting as if he thought economic anxiety or economic suffering was the key to his victory. Precisely zero of his transition team energy has been devoted to economic measures to help the working classes. What's going to happen, it appears, is that Trump is going to use tariffs on ordinary Americans to raise enough money to give Elon a huge tax break.

You know, the sort of obscene betrayal that would cause his economic anxiety supporters to flip out and abandon the GOP forever. Let's see if that happens.

3. Here are the actually unpleasant facts to deal with:

A. Trump probably would have won in 20 but for the pandemic dislocations. After all, the one thing Stop the Steal gets correctly is that Trump's 2020 vote total is, in fact, usually enough to win the election. Dems turned out for Biden in a way they didn't for either HRC or Kamala. 2020 is looking more anomalous than 2016.

B. Probably the only reason we held the Senate during this time was the GOP's nomination of bozos like Herschel Walker and Oz. Barring a complete collapse of the economy, it might be a long time until we hold it again. Things change, so this isn't a prediction so much as a dispiriting reality that we have to address.

C. The right-wing cult is so well established that it is virtually impenetrable. The mayor of Dearborn (or maybe it was a nearby town) said that he was worried about the Huckabee selection but was still trusting Trump to keep his word about protecting Gaza, because Trump is above all a man of his word. Like, wtf? I could have followed up that interview by saying 1+1=3 and I'd be less wrong.

D. Counting on the other side to continue to fuck everything up isn't a great strategy. Because sometimes things don't fuck up quite on schedule -- like Covid. More deaths occurred after election day 2020 than before, and then the inflation hit, and somehow it was all Biden's fault because Americans can't think beyond, "bad thing happened during a presidency = bad president = vote for the guy who caused it all"
 
CFordUNC said:
Yeah, you might be right. It might really be just that simple. Maddeningly so, in fact.
Click to expand...
You know all those lols you had about Trump supporters being humiliated by him riding around in a garbage truck and fellating microphones?

You weren't wrong, if we were talking about normal people. But MAGA didn't and doesn't care. You say, "I can't imagine having so little self-respect . . . " but it appears a lot of Americans do indeed have that amount of self-respect.
 
superrific said:
You know all those lols you had about Trump supporters being humiliated by him riding around in a garbage truck and fellating microphones?

You weren't wrong, if we were talking about normal people. But MAGA didn't and doesn't care. You say, "I can't imagine having so little self-respect . . . " but it appears a lot of Americans do indeed have that amount of self-respect.
Click to expand...
Yep. Totally right.
 
superrific said:
You know all those lols you had about Trump supporters being humiliated by him riding around in a garbage truck and fellating microphones?

You weren't wrong, if we were talking about normal people. But MAGA didn't and doesn't care. You say, "I can't imagine having so little self-respect . . . " but it appears a lot of Americans do indeed have that amount of self-respect.
Click to expand...
They hate your "woke ass" minority loving side lots more than they respect themselves. Pretty simple stuff no need for over analysis
 
It won’t matter. Once Trump’s mental state declines enough that it is clear he is no longer fit for office, Vance will come in and “save” America. He is going to cement himself as “the voice of reason in the room” in the coming months. And in four years pubs will have had it spun on social media to them enough that they will believe that they always supported him.

“The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.”
 
This is a good interview regarding what Trump/MAGA tapped in to and things the Democrats can do to reconnect with folks they are losing:
 
I have not posted in a while as I have been attempting to process what happened. I have been reading the analyses others have posted and what media figures have said.

I think the focus on the Dems being out of touch because they are too elite (whatever the hell that means) or too focused on fringe issues (trans rights) is treating symptoms.

There is much fretting about how the Democrats need to reach the white working class. Then there is also much fretting about how the Democrats lost so many Hispanic voters. Etc.

That's all well and good but too many of the media are wanting to play the "I told you so" game. "I told you focusing on fringe issues would hurt you..."

The Democrats are hurt by minutia. They are hurt by details. Voters respond to simple, clear ideas. They respond to simple slogans.

The first thing the Democrats need to do is to come up with simple core values. "We believe all people should be treated with respect..." for example (and that may not should be one, but it is just an example). You come up with something that simple and direct and then when others argue with you, you can play the fallacy game just like they do. "Oh, so you don't think people should be treated with respect? Wow, you really look down on people." Build your messaging around that.

There needs to be a basic core, an easily explainable core, of this is who we are. Yes, personally, I believe that the core should be liberal, that's me. But regardless, without a clear, easily digestible core, the infinite minutia will take over.

Just some random thoughts of mine.
 
LeoBloom said:
I have not posted in a while as I have been attempting to process what happened. I have been reading the analyses others have posted and what media figures have said.

I think the focus on the Dems being out of touch because they are too elite (whatever the hell that means) or too focused on fringe issues (trans rights) is treating symptoms.

There is much fretting about how the Democrats need to reach the white working class. Then there is also much fretting about how the Democrats lost so many Hispanic voters. Etc.

That's all well and good but too many of the media are wanting to play the "I told you so" game. "I told you focusing on fringe issues would hurt you..."

The Democrats are hurt by minutia. They are hurt by details. Voters respond to simple, clear ideas. They respond to simple slogans.

The first thing the Democrats need to do is to come up with simple core values. "We believe all people should be treated with respect..." for example (and that may not should be one, but it is just an example). You come up with something that simple and direct and then when others argue with you, you can play the fallacy game just like they do. "Oh, so you don't think people should be treated with respect? Wow, you really look down on people." Build your messaging around that.

There needs to be a basic core, an easily explainable core, of this is who we are. Yes, personally, I believe that the core should be liberal, that's me. But regardless, without a clear, easily digestible core, the infinite minutia will take over.

Just some random thoughts of mine.
Click to expand...
I agree with you that Dem messaging has been too sophisticated for the average voter. Dems need to develop the skill of KISS( keep it simple stupid )

If you cannot explain how you are going to help the voters in one sentence and limit the number of issues to emphasize to three, then they will get lost in the details and tune you out
 
heelinhell said:
I agree with you that Dem messaging has been too sophisticated for the average voter. Dems need to develop the skill of KISS( keep it simple stupid )

If you cannot explain how you are going to help the voters in one sentence and limit the number of issues to emphasize to three, then they will get lost in the details and tune you out
Click to expand...
I was thinking a little about this last night, as well as super's thread from a few days ago about Dems reclaiming the religion high ground. I wonder if the "He Gets Us" campaign is a potential exemplar. I know the origins and funding of that organization are somewhat suspect, but the ads are really moving, and to your point, they're about as KISS as it can get.

I know a lot of people here will not want the Dems to center their messaging around religious concepts, but if the goal is to get some of the working class reinvested, that's probably going to be necessary.
 
Being Christian and being Liberal are not mutually exclusive. I don't know how the American Flag and Christianity became MAGAfied but if you want more of the simpletons to vote in their best interests, start there.
 
lawtig02 said:
I was thinking a little about this last night, as well as super's thread from a few days ago about Dems reclaiming the religion high ground. I wonder if the "He Gets Us" campaign is a potential exemplar. I know the origins and funding of that organization are somewhat suspect, but the ads are really moving, and to your point, they're about as KISS as it can get.

I know a lot of people here will not want the Dems to center their messaging around religious concepts, but if the goal is to get some of the working class reinvested, that's probably going to be necessary.
Click to expand...
My family was discussing this

The party needs to focus on getting elected. Once elected they can address any issue they need. If it means dropping some of the more fringe issues from the core beliefs, then so be it.
 
UNCatTech said:
My family was discussing this

The party needs to focus on getting elected. Once elected they can address any issue they need. If it means dropping some of the more fringe issues from the core beliefs, then so be it.
Click to expand...
Religious is fine but we really need to examine the favorability at all levels to Christians. They need to be treated as no more than equals. Society hasn't done that since 1800.
 
lawtig02 said:
I was thinking a little about this last night, as well as super's thread from a few days ago about Dems reclaiming the religion high ground. I wonder if the "He Gets Us" campaign is a potential exemplar. I know the origins and funding of that organization are somewhat suspect, but the ads are really moving, and to your point, they're about as KISS as it can get.

I know a lot of people here will not want the Dems to center their messaging around religious concepts, but if the goal is to get some of the working class reinvested, that's probably going to be necessary.
Click to expand...
The most successful social justice campaigns in history have been either explicitly religious (Gandhi, MLK) or religion-tinged (South Africa). That's likely because most modern religions put concepts of justice front and center. Indeed, concepts like Hell and undesirable reincarnation (e.g. in Hinduism, a person who acts badly in life will be reincarnated into something terrible) are essentially efforts to believe that there will be justice for evildoers in some capacity.

I don't want to scare away atheists. We want a big tent. But atheists and liberal Christians (or Jews or Muslims) need not be rivals. We just all need to realize that the world is complex because there are so many people and thus a diversity of views. Like, I think Dems should talk more about God. That shouldn't be a threat to atheists; it's not as if Dems are suddenly going to turn into Christian nationalists because we quote MLK or sing "Amazing Grace" at funerals. And it should be OK also to express our goals in terms of purely secular values too. Right now, I think the vast majority of committed atheists support Dems, so we don't need to firm up that side of our coalition.

There are some atheists, including atheists on this board, who basically freak out at any mention of religion. I don't know if that's why liberals don't talk about God too much any more. Guys, get over it. Religion is not in fact the worst thing in the world or the cause of our problems. You can live next to tolerant religious folks and your lives will not be worse for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top