General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
kcr
(15,522 posts)I think the contention that "squishy moderates" lost their seats because they didn't support ACA is incorrect. It isn't playing footsies with the right to acknowledge that progressive Dems have a harder time in swing states. It irritates me when they ignore the fact they sit in safe seats when analyzing the success and failure of other Dems. To be clear, I'm not endorsing pandering to the right. I just feel that, given how our political system works, it only helps the GOP when we bash Dems in precarious political situations.
wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)This "blame the left" trend is like a football coach only relying on passes the entire game, loses the game, then blaming the running backs.
Establishment Democrats ran a pointedly moderate campaign, and they still lost downballot. Now they are analyzing over-and-underperformances of Democrats who did win, but somehow still lost in their eyes.
In other words, squishy centrism can never fail, it can only BE failed.
kcr
(15,522 posts)But that still doesn't make them right when they say that Dems in swing states hurt themselves by not supporting progressive ideals. We will never get any progress as long as the GOP runs the show. That is simply a fact. I think a big reason for the disparity of down-state results is enough conservatives had it with Trump, but still retain their conservative ideals. They were ok with a centrist Dem taking the presidency, but not okay with him gaining complete control.
Cha
(319,079 posts)..there goes your argument. . and still going with that "establishment" meme.. that is so not working.
muriel_volestrangler
(106,212 posts)This thread is about "downballot losses". Here's the relevant map for the house:
https://cookpolitical.com/2020-house-vote-tracker?
They don't seem to have produced something similar for the Senate.
George II
(67,782 posts)
empedocles
(15,751 posts)Defund hurt the Dems in November. November is won in the middle by flipping red seats in Congress. Clyburn, Spanberger, etc., know what it takes to win in November - and they have been clear what hurts. This is a problem that has it roots in 'kill the pigs' from 1968 that still 'resonates' to Dem detriments.
Not in the bluest Dem squad districts.
Bettie
(19,704 posts)SO, maybe the DNC should have been on the air countering that message with "Demilitarize the Police!" or "Community Policing Works" or any of a dozen different ways to rephrase the idea.
Maybe our side needs to advertise year round in terms of messaging instead of only in the last two weeks before an election. Put out ads about good things that have happened and point out that they are courtesy of the Democratic Party. You want to reach rural voters? Put those messages on during the local news or the network evening news. That's what old rural people generally watch.
All of the ads here against our congresswoman were "Nancy Pelosi this, Nancy Pelosi that". She ran an aggressively conservative/moderate campaign, but given a choice between her and "Tea Party Barbie", they chose Barbie even with the fact that she's not smart, she's owned by special interests and she's been caught out plagiarizing things several times.
It didn't matter at all that our former congresswoman is rather conservative, because people don't recognize what the Democrats have done for them, all they see is a "D" and have it in their minds that a "D" is bad.
Demsrule86
(71,542 posts)I copied this from the website. This sort of thing may have hurt us even in New York
https://www.ocasiocortez.com/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-04/three-incumbent-n-y-democrats-in-danger-of-losing-house-seats
I like AOC and don't blame anyone really. But some who run in deep blue districts need to understand that many are not running in such districts but competitive districts.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)That and "socialism" are GE losers. It's like we keep ramming our heads against the wall. Winning messaging should be a priority. The slogan "squishy moderates" sounds like something that was cooked up by an unnamed talk radio host.
Demsrule86
(71,542 posts)
Crunchy Frog
(28,280 posts)And all the people who defended it just made me shake my head.
Pretty much anyone who disagreed got practically shouted off the board, so I don't think I said much.
That and defending looting because "lives are more important than property" as if it were either one or the other.
In any event, the Rs grabbed that kind of thing and ran with it, and the Dems had no meaningful countermessage.
wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)during the election. If Spanberger knew how to win elections, why did she almost lose her seat?
The problem is messaging: goops smearmonger and dems refuse to smearmonger back. If dems would just learn to scaremonger, they'd win more elections
Demsrule86
(71,542 posts)I copied this from AOC's website.
https://www.ocasiocortez.com/
Cha
(319,079 posts)it now.
TY Dems!
empedocles
(15,751 posts)[For 5 years the left has been in denial about 'socialism', etc.]
Demsrule86
(71,542 posts)this is the road map to winning elections in the future. His message was moderate and inclusive.
Cha
(319,079 posts)Demsrule86
(71,542 posts)
Tarheel_Dem
(31,454 posts)that this sort of messaging hurts Democrats across the board. There has never been a time when local & national politics were so intertwined. Refusal to acknowledge this is to our own detriment.
Cha
(319,079 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)H.R.5070 - A Just Society: The Mercy In Re-entry Act;
H.Res. 702 - The People’s Justice Guarantee;
Defunding police and investing in healthcare, housing, education and other services;
Ending qualified immunity for police and making police misconduct records public;
The use of clemency and emergency powers to reduce vulnerable populations and limit the spread of the Coronavirus in prison;
The release of individuals over the age of 50 currently serving a sentence of one year or less or serving time for a parole violation at Rikers Island.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Had she run to the left of what she did, she likely would have lost the seat.
Facts matter.
Caliman73
(11,767 posts)They were told that Democrats want to abolish police and let criminals run wild.
The actual goals of "defunding police" were to take money that is overwhelmingly given to police to put more bodies and guns on the street, and to build more jails; and to redistribute that money to efforts and organizations that actually have a proven record in reducing crime.
Problems with homeless people loitering, begging, and stealing? Provide them with homes and services to help them get jobs. Proven in Portugal and other countries including here in the US, to reduce crime.
Problems with drugs? The answer is not more police and jails, it is treating it as a public health issue. Legalize and tax drugs and put that and police money into treatment programs and community enhancement programs. When people are treated, and have a positive environment to return to, they can stay off of drugs and away from the crimes associated with drugs.
When you repurpose the police away from being social workers, emergency responders, domestic abuse counselors, and most of the other jobs they are not trained for yet expected to do and give actual money to the professionals who are trained to to those jobs, then you have better outcomes.
We can have a paired down, but much more effective police force to actually respond to law enforcement needs.
Spanberger I will give you. She squeaked by in 2018 and 2020 in a relatively evenly split district, however, she stands on straight up Democratic/progressive platform policies. Clyburn? Has had no substantive Republican competition in 15 years. He is in an almost completely safe seat.
empedocles
(15,751 posts)Caliman73
(11,767 posts)Spinning involves misrepresentation of a point to advance a point. I said that Defund the Police was not a good slogan.
Site some actual peer reviewed studies that show that the slogan cost significant votes, and I will certainly concede the point.
Snake Plissken
(4,103 posts)We should continue ignoring reality and pretend everything is just fine with losing elections we could have easily won if Democratic politicians just learned to STFU about social issues until after they won the election just like Republicans do.
brush
(61,033 posts)and when we win, then we install progressive policies.
It's not rocket science.
Budi
(15,325 posts)THIS is the bs that's fueling the toxic divisiin.
By design.
GFC.
Its more a populist method of messaging than anything else.
brush
(61,033 posts)Prominent Dems associated with socialism and defund the police give repugs damaging and effective messaging that wins elections.
We have to solve that problem. Once we win we negotiate in-house as to what policies we present. In-house, please. None of this Dems are split stuff needs to get out. Some reps still need to learn that.
"Prominent Dems associated with socialism and defund the police give repugs damaging and effective messaging"
So it's the Dems fault that dems said it??
This is getting a little stretched.... someone said it & now doesn't want to own the shtshow it created.
Let's just blame the (ahem) "Prominent Dems!"
The squishy ones? or ...all Dems? Some Dems? Moderate Dems?
How bout just Own It.
brush
(61,033 posts)bit of sloganeering ever? And Dems being associated with socialism for sure hurt us in Florida.
We've got to be smarter.
Budi
(15,325 posts)Socialism is the wedge Repubs used in every close seat we lost.
They're hammering that meme home hard & loud in Georgia against our Democrats, at this very moment.
I know who I'm going to point the finger of blame at if we fail to strip McConnell of his majority power.
brush
(61,033 posts)I myself think we can win Georgia despite the repugs hollering socialism at us. After all, we just turned Georgia blue thanks to Stacey Abrams, and she's still on the job there. Biden won it and Loeffler and Perdue are both insider trading crooks. We need to hammer that home as loud as they holler socialism at us.
Budi
(15,325 posts)Obama is another we need to tie the bow on McConnell's minority chair for him.
I have a feeling Obama will not let this opportunity for a trifecta to slip by.
Biden/Obama in Georgia...that could do it for us.
wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)And a certain strain of dems will continue to run away and lose seats.
Let's try another tactic, like standing strong for progressive values and smearing goops as the monsters they are. What about that?
brush
(61,033 posts)to move McTurtle out of majority leader seat.
Bettie
(19,704 posts)the scaremongering.
That's a huge problem.
They put out messages and we don't counter the arguments or we do it far too late for it to resonate or even make a dent.
Messaging is our side's weak spot and that is a thing that could change outcomes in a massive way.
Cha
(319,079 posts)Gee.. where did the "messaging" go so horribly wrong?
Bettie
(19,704 posts)saying "Progressives need to STFU!" and "They damaged us simply by existing"?
I don't know that we have a clear read on what really happened, because we have no idea how much was impacted by DeJoy's fuckery or other factors.
But, for those who think that X, Y, or Z message is what "sunk" us, well, messaging is something our party can work on. If it gets better, if we become faster and more nimble in terms of snapping back at untruthful messaging, all the better.
If we call a fascist a fascist, then even better.
ETA: Here in Iowa, no one pushed back at all. Not even our congresswoman, who is now our former congresswoman. She kept on with "I'll work with anyone"...and that was about it, never struck back on anything. Now, we've got MAGA Barbie.
Demsrule86
(71,542 posts)in a deep blue district costs us elections. Winning is the only way we accomplish anything.
Clyburn has said the police defunding stuff hurt us in this election...I respect his opinion.
Budi
(15,325 posts)Demsrule86
(71,542 posts) Gothmog
(179,869 posts)My congressional district was one of the districts targeted by the DCCC. The Democrat raised over $2 million and the GOP candidate only raise a couple of hundred thousand dollars. The gop won an open seat where the GOP candidate is a racist asshole who called President Obama some nasty names. This candidate relied on an ad done by a super pac that mentioned socialism, the Green New Deal, and defund the police in passing and then went on how expensive MFA and how taxes would have to double to pay for this program. Polling showed the Democrat up by 5% but he ended losing. These attacks work in the real world.
Kaleva
(40,365 posts)My congressional district is heavily Trump and is represented by a retired Marine General Republican. No Dem has a chance here.
SaintLouisBlues
(1,257 posts)will call it whatever they will.
After a summer of protest, Americans voted for policing and criminal justice reform
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/criminal-justice-election/2020/11/13/20186380-25d6-11eb-8672-c281c7a2c96e_story.html
Americans took to the streets for extended demonstrations this summer to protest police violence and racial injustice. Then, on Election Day, they took to the voting booth to endorse criminal justice and policing reforms.
With a wave of votes across the country, Americans backed a string of measures increasing police oversight, elected reform-minded prosecutors, loosened drug laws and passed other proposals rethinking key elements of law enforcement and justice in their communities.
These votes, taken together, signal that after a summer of protest brought renewed scrutiny to the justice system, many Americans were open to rethinking how it functions — particularly on the state and local level, where policies have a stark impact on how people interact with the justice system.
“It was a pretty good day for meaningful change in criminal justice reform,” said Ronald Wright, a law professor at Wake Forest University and a criminal justice expert. “The priorities I was watching didn’t win everywhere, but they won a lot more than they lost.”
Response to Post removed (Original post)
Post removed
Budi
(15,325 posts)" Those who lost seats were squishy moderates".
Wtf & blame works both ways.
Get it yet?
Cha
(319,079 posts)Victory in 2018.. they weren't so "squishy" then.. nor are they now. Some need to appreciate history and where we are today bc of it.
We Impeached trump and held Back the Fascist force Because of Moderates Taking back the House.
Cook Political Map shows a nearly universal swing to Dems in 2020
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=14558810
+
wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)Okay, let's not shift to the left. Forget about police reform, M4A or socialist student loan forgiveness.
How about we invest in a noise machine to smear the right and paint them as monsters that they are, so that we won't be vulnerable to idiotic rightwing smear campaigns ever again? Would you be on board with that?
Budi
(15,325 posts)It's been around for a long time. Policies put in place by ..(.say it)...Democrats, even the 'squishy ones'
intheflow
(30,179 posts)Why? First, there’s the fragility with which you responded to my message. Then I think you misunderstood my post because squishy moderates losing is exactly my point. But mostly it’s because you think it’s okay to tell traditionally oppressed people to suck it up and play nice with the barely literate, science-denying troglodytes, which is what they’ve been told for 400 years and gotten nothing in return. We’re facing literal global human annihilation between pandemics and climate change. We’ve been trying it your way and it hasn’t gone well for us. Hoping to recreate the status quo from pre-45 will recreate the same environment that gave rise to it. The time for moderation is passed.
Budi
(15,325 posts)Last edited Mon Nov 16, 2020, 03:06 AM - Edit history (2)
What the hell are you even talking about?
You do not know a thing about me to make this judgement of me.
GTFOH
You Said:
. I'm guessing you're white.
Why? First, there’s the fragility with which you responded to my message. Then I think you misunderstood my post because squishy moderates losing is exactly my point. But mostly it’s because you think it’s okay to tell traditionally oppressed people to suck it up and play nice with the barely literate, science-denying troglodytes, which is what they’ve been told for 400 years and gotten nothing in return. We’re facing literal global human annihilation between pandemics and climate change. We’ve been trying it your way and it hasn’t gone well for us. Hoping to recreate the status quo from pre-45 will recreate the same environment that gave rise to it. The time for moderation is passed.
Wth?
YOU GUESS I'M WHITE?
I'M NOT WHITE.
NEXT SMART ASS ANSWER???
**********
THIS is my post you replyed to:
Budi
13. And THIS is helping "come together?"
" Those who lost seats were squishy moderates".
Wtf & blame works both ways.
Get it yet?
***************
You made my post into a racial issue. You played the RACE CARD when you had nothing else to play regarding my post. You "GUESSED I WAS WHITE"...And that is what you ran with? MY RACE?
Says more about you than me.
No. "Status quo" 
Demsrule86
(71,542 posts)It isn't about white conservatives or the far left, it is about winning elections in purple or red areas. We lost states and state houses so you can expect more gerrymandering as well. I am sick and tired of hearing about this issue. You do what you must to win.
The only time we have been successful in years is when Howard Dean ran a fifty state strategy...we had a 60 vote margin in the Senate until Kennedy got sick. And we had the House. This allowed the ACA to pass and made people believe health care is a right.
And we took the House running on health care in 18 by winning moderate districts; we lose them and we lose the House. There are not enough deep blue districts to control the house and the Senate is impossible without blue or purple states and that is just a fact right now.
Aepps22
(383 posts)Roland Martin put it best when he said that as exhausting as it is to push back against the volume of Deplorable lies, if you don't push back they frame the issue for you and it becomes the truth for people.
wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)It's upon you to paint the other side as the monsters and criminals they are.
If you run an asymmetrical campaign where you try to meet the other side halfway while the other side paints you as a Stalinist, then you are going to lose.
Edit: I agree with your post, don't get me wrong.
MustLoveBeagles
(16,409 posts)Budi
(15,325 posts)Wtf.
Grow up
Response to Budi (Reply #12)
Post removed
Demsrule86
(71,542 posts)Budi
(15,325 posts)Not a challenge in sight.
Demsrule86
(71,542 posts)Thanks.
qazplm135
(7,654 posts)Well, that's balanced
Budi
(15,325 posts)
Gothmog
(179,869 posts)We cannot afford further losses
Budi
(15,325 posts)"Socilaism, MFA and Defund the Police .."
Thanks for nothing..
wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)
brush
(61,033 posts)It's that simple.
Demsrule86
(71,542 posts)with a public option but we need the two Georgia seats in order to do that.
brush
(61,033 posts)I agree that improving the ACA with the public option and other changes is more doable.
Demsrule86
(71,542 posts)they lose their work coverage. Now I think a public option will lead to universal coverage in the end.
Gothmog
(179,869 posts)I note that sanders never explained how he would pay for this program Warren tried to provide a funding mechanism and her campaign stalled immediately after she provided her plan to pay for this program. In my district, the only real ad used by the GOP mentioned socialism, defund the police and the Green New Deal in passing and then went into the claim that we would have to double taxes to pay for MFA
Until someone has a way to pay for this program in the real world, this concept is a good way to lose an election
brush
(61,033 posts)Last edited Mon Nov 16, 2020, 02:55 AM - Edit history (1)
not how to pay for it. It can be happen but it would take a dedicated task force to drill down and figure out how. Other western nations have their own version of single payer. We should be able to as well but it will take years of conditioning the voters to accept that taxes will go up, but most of the cost should come from taxing under taxed corporations, many which don't pay taxes.
I favor going with the ACA and the public option which can lead to single payer once voters get used having insurance from it instead of from their job.
Gothmog
(179,869 posts)No one has yet come up with a means to pay for this program. The GOP super pac ad was effective
Where's the Trillion$$$ M4A policy plan ready to replace ACA as soon as the Repubs demolish it?
It doesn't exist.
Cha
(319,079 posts)a Mandate with 78 Million and Counting VOTES.
That is what is NOT "Complicated".
lapucelle
(21,061 posts)
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)So there's that.
About that Hill Harris poll in the meme...
https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/494602-poll-69-percent-of-voters-support-medicare-for-all
The methodology indicates that the only participants were registered voters, and there were less than 1000 total.
It also stated that support for single payer had declined among republican voters, so the claims that republicans would jump on board with a candidate who promoted M4A is not accurate, according to that very poll.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)it becomes even less complicated. The Hill Harris Poll from the meme was from April. This is from just last month:
KFF polling finds more Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents would prefer voting for a candidate who wants to build on the ACA in order to expand coverage and reduce costs rather than replace the ACA with a national Medicare-for-all plan (Figure 12). Additionally, KFF polling has found broader public support for more incremental changes to expand the public health insurance program in this country including proposals that expand the role of public programs like Medicare and Medicaid (Figure 13).
Public Opinion on Single-Payer, National Health Plans, and Expanding Access to Medicare Coverage
Here is how the population of the KFF poll breaks down:
R B Garr
(17,984 posts)associated with them. Of course she was. I heard the ads from the rep in my area in So Cal and it was all about the radical lefties coming to get you. None of the squad or close to it were running, but they used the smears anyway. We need to stop that losing messaging.
stopdiggin
(15,463 posts)whatever your camp thinks it should mean. None of it's factual -- and none of it's very edifying. And we'll be back here spinning the same yarns in 22, and 24.
budkin
(6,849 posts)I’m tired of hearing it. The Trump effect screwed us, not “defund the police.”
DeminPennswoods
(17,506 posts)A good example is Sen Casey here in PA. We all know he is anti-abortion, but we also know this pro-life stance applies after a child is born, grows into adulthood and dies and everything in between. We know he opposes the death penalty. He doesn't pretend to believe something else for political convenience. Pennsylvanians respect that.
My Rep Lamb tried hard to run away from most things in the Dem platform except for social security and medicare/healthcare. He could easily have run as an economic populist and appealed to all those residents of his district who have been left behind by the R policies. He chose to be milquetoast and struggled to a win, given to him by the very voters from whom he ran away.
wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)
Cha
(319,079 posts)approximately 10,000 Votes.. he doesn't deserve to be insulted.
DeminPennswoods
(17,506 posts)of Democrats, not Rs or independents. So be a real Democrat.
Gothmog
(179,869 posts)I am glad the Connor Lamb won
DeminPennswoods
(17,506 posts)nt
Cha
(319,079 posts)District 17, PA!
.
Cha
(319,079 posts)him by calling him "milquetoast".
Lamb Won by about 10,000 Votes!
Stop insulting Dems.
DeminPennswoods
(17,506 posts)nt
Demsrule86
(71,542 posts)popular Democrat. Lamb won in a year we almost lost the House...so I don't see your post as being relevant.
Gothmog
(179,869 posts)Lamb won which is a good thing. If he had embraced these issues he would have lost
DeminPennswoods
(17,506 posts)He won because he got nearly all his support from Dems despite trying to appeal to conservatives, Rs and INDs. PA-17 covers all of Beaver County and part of Butler and Allegheny counties. Beaver and Butler are conservative and red. He lost both of these areas by 16 pts even though these were the voters to whom his issue positions were designed to appeal! He was bailed out by the liberal Dem voters of Allegheny county. However, I'm under no illusion he will appreciate that fact.
Klaralven
(7,510 posts)Trump and the Squad were the paradigms that each party was running against at the national level. And this election was very much about what each party was against, not what each party was for.
Cha
(319,079 posts)was trying to Destroy. like Social Security & Health Care.
Klaralven
(7,510 posts)Most voters don't relate much to policies and abstract concepts. They relate to people. Therefore, a standard approach of the MSM or any PR campaign is to use individuals as proxies for the things voters like or don't like. This is why, for example, the president will have guests in the balcony at the state of the union address that are called upon to stand when specific issues are addressed.
Cha
(319,079 posts)Crunchy Frog
(28,280 posts)Cha
(319,079 posts)https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=14558810
In It to Win It
(12,651 posts)Like it or not, they are all bound together.
The moderates tend not to be as “loud” as the squad. The squad is all the media, and sometimes, not by their own choosing. They’ve become the right’s “boogie women”.
I think the moderates should do more outreach to their districts so that their districts know where they stand. The Squad will have the spotlight given to them by conservative media. It’s just a fact that a progressive Democrat won’t win in all places. The moderates have to take the bullhorn within their own districts as much as they can, which is already difficult when a presidential race is on the ballot.
In 2018, healthcare was the message... and there was also a big helping of “fuck Trump.” I would ask the moderates who won in 2018 “what did they come to Washington to do?” If the answer is “protect healthcare”, then I’d imagine that it wouldn’t be that big of a leap to campaign on expanding it. That could take the form of dropping barriers to insurance coverage or backing a universal healthcare plan.
Withywindle
(9,989 posts)I don't think we should join in on demonizing The Squad (who I tend to agree with on most issues) because buying into rightwing smears and giving them credence has never done us any good, and there is a BIG STEAMING HEAP of obvious misogyny and racism that fuels it. Don't give that any oxygen.
I do agree that a lot of their positions don't play well in more conservative districts, but that's a problem with convincing voters that the moderate Democrats ARE, in fact, moderate.
We NEED a strong left wing of the party to help keep the center from drifting right, as it tends to do when you give right-wing positions all the validation. It's like bargaining. You don't start out by asking for what you expect to get. You start out by asking for something you know you WON'T get, but then you can haggle back to a middle that's more advantageous to you, because you look reasonable by being willing to negotiate.
Gothmog
(179,869 posts)We lost races that we should not have lost. We need to figure out why.
empedocles
(15,751 posts)when trump and the huge anti-trump vote diminish. When trump is no longer the gigantic, priceless TARGET!
Tarheel_Dem
(31,454 posts)they are toxic to states like mine. The GOP ran very effective ads, tying "the squad" around the necks of every candidate here in NC, and it largely paid off for them. They are the reason I immediately switch the channel whenever their faces appear on my tv. They all supported one candidate and his ideas in the primary, and they and their ideas were soundly repudiated. I hope we're not in for 4 years of battling "the squad", with the slimmest majority ever in the House, and possible Senate control by the GOP.
This isn't merely a matter of "picking a side and sticking with it", it's knowing who your constituents are, and fighting for them.
JT45242
(4,043 posts)All members of the squad come from solidly democratic districts.
in Iowa, the spectre of hating powerful democratic women like AOC and Pelosi, as well as those policies were toxic and were all over the airwaves. They probably cost us a house seat and certainly helped re-elect Ernst over Greenfield.
Just because someone got re-elected is no justification that their policies are acceptable elsewhere. Steve King was virtually an open neo-Nazi and David Duke was a KKK leader and they got re-elected over and over.
AmericanCanuck
(1,102 posts)AmericanCanuck
(1,102 posts)to suit their point of view.
Blue Owl
(59,106 posts)
jcgoldie
(12,046 posts)...this thread is evidence that many Democrats are willing to do it for them.
Blasphemer
(3,623 posts)NO ONE has done a rigorous analysis of the election. They cannot have done so. It's too soon. Right now, all we have is anecdotal, feeling-based ideas about why people lost (i.e. the attack ads said X, so that's why I lost). Everyone is forgetting that in 2018, the story was winning back in the suburbs with moderate candidates. What we really need is an in-depth long-range analysis of the 2016, 2018, and 2020 elections that takes into account all factors. Perhaps a meta-analysis of survey data. 2 years after Trump won, Huff post wrote about a survey that showed it had nothing to do with economic anxiety (as claimed by Bernie supporters) and more to do with racism and loss of power in a diversifying world. I agree that some combination of identity and tolerance is likely the story for all of the last few elections. It's tricky to be the party of tolerance when many fear it. However, I am not interested in ANY post-mortem without solid data. Anyone can make up any story about why any election went one way or the other. But, where's the data to back it up?
Vivienne235729
(3,748 posts)But I completely disagree w AOC. That's not true. Mark Kelly resoundedly beat McSally and he ran on a moderate platform. It depends on where you are and who your constituents are. There would be no way in hell he would win pushing for medicare for all right now in this cycle. But one of these days, I hope AZ turns deep blue. Blue enough to support a universal health care system, free college for all, universal pension....
MineralMan
(151,269 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)....they were just outstanding Representatives? How many were in danger of losing their seats if they didn't endorse "Medicare for All"?
No, those nine did not lose their re-elections because they failed to cosponsor "Medicare for All".
People are acting like there was a red wave two weeks ago, but only nine incumbent Democrats lost their seats, and all of them were defeated for other reasons. More than 200 incumbents were re-elected. Of those only about 110 cosponsored "Medicare for All".
Finally, "Medicare for All" was introduced on February 27, 2019 - 22 months ago. Where does it stand in the House?
scipan
(3,041 posts)Taft explained that the great issue in this campaign is “creeping socialism.” Now that is the patented trademark of the special interest lobbies. Socialism is a scare word they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years.
Socialism is what they called public power.
Socialism is what they called social security.
Socialism is what they called farm price supports.
Socialism is what they called bank deposit insurance.
Socialism is what they called the growth of free and independent labor organizations.
Socialism is their name for almost anything that helps all the people.
When the Republican candidate inscribes the slogan “Down With Socialism” on the banner of his “great crusade,” that is really not what he means at all.
What he really means is, “Down with Progress — down with Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal,” and “down with Harry Truman’s fair Deal.” That is what he means.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/truman-socialism-scare-word/
Don't run away from it.