James Carville is speaking the hard truth

[Ferryboat]

After reading a couple of threads on the outrage over James I went looking for where this started.
[link:http://vox.com| "wokeness is a problem and we all know it". April 27

He makes very good points on the differences of how the Republicans and Democrats frame an issue. How the dems hand the gop a sledgehammer to be used against us. This is about framing the argument in language of everyday voters. Voters we have to persuade.

][link:http://chrisweigant.com| James Carville is right
April 27.
Good analysis of the the article.

Please take the time to read both.

[dixiechiken1]

1. Bookmarked to read later today.

Carville is a smart man and a brilliant strategist. He doesn't pull any punches. I look forward to reading this later. Thx!

[Ms. Toad]

2. This link takes you directly to the article

https://www.vox.com/22338417/james-carville-democratic-party-biden-100-days

[USAFRetired_Liberal]

3. I do agree with him that we need to change our language and messaging

But not to persuade this mythical “moderate”, independent or Republican voter....they are a lost cause and aren’t voting for Democrats anyway no matter how much we try......we need to stop trying to persuade this “everyday” voter (which is really code for working class whites), we need to change our language so that the non-voter has a reason to come out and vote for us

[StarfishSaver]

5. Exactly

And stop pretending that those "average" voters aren't voting Democratic because our messaging isn't getting through and if we just stop with all that civil rights and justice talk, they'll come flocking to us. They don't vote for us because they don't like what we STAND FOR, no matter how we try to wrap it up.

[BComplex]

34. I'd have to add that they don't really KNOW what we stand for; only what Fox propaganda

TELLS them to think what we stand for.

I'm glad Australia is taking steps to ban Fox from their own airwaves. I wish the USA would do the same.

[StarfishSaver]

39. I think they know what we stand for.

And they don't like it.

[Caliman73]

63. I think you are right.

Saying that they are ignorant (which is true in a different way) and that is the reason they don't vote for Democrats is giving cover to the very real, racial animosity.

If people look at history, they would realize that this has been used time and time again by wealthy people (usually White) to pit poor Whites against Black people, Indigenous people, Mexicans, etc...). You give poor White people a target that is more wretched and undeserving and you tell them that "those people" are what is causing their problems. Then the wealthy can continue to exploit everyone else.

Racial resentment and classification is deep rooted in American society. When LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act into law, he was correct, except his underestimated who he was "losing". It wasn't just the South (though that was the largest concentration). Democrats lost people who voted for FDR and Truman because of labor issues and economics, but who were also glad that those policies largely cut Black and Brown people out of the full benefits of the New Deal. I am sure they were also pissed at Truman for integrating the military too.

[brooklynite]

42. If you feel there are no moderate voters (I or R) to appeal to, we should give up...

We will not win national elections with only Democratic base voters.

[Make7]

4. How links work on DU:

The software will turn the text of a standard URL into a link automatically - no special code needed. If you want to make a word or phrase a link, you use the [link] tag.

Examples:

Text in message:
https://www.vox.com/22338417/james-carville-democratic-party-biden-100-days

Result:
https://www.vox.com/22338417/james-carville-democratic-party-biden-100-days

Text in message:
[link:http://www.chrisweigant.com/2021/04/27/james-carville-is-right/|James Carville is right]

Result:
James Carville is right

[Ninga]

6. Every word. Carville nails it and is spot on. Exactly what Thomas Frank wrote in 2004 in his book

What’s The Matter With Kansas.

Democrats have lost their edge in framing the debate. The GOP never talks about the GOP,, they always hammer Democrats, as Tim Scott did last night.

I’m so glad I took the time to read the entire article about Carville’s interview.
Thanks!

[Baitball Blogger]

7. James Carville's version of "It's the economy, stupid" had us jumping from one

bubble to the next. If Clinton hadn't raised taxes during that same period, the US would have come out of it dead broke.

[Demsrule86]

103. And when we lost in 2000 because for some reason...voting for a Democrat is hard for some

are supposedly on our side is difficult. W ran up the deficit and brought the economy to its knees. We need to win elections period. And Carville is correct.

[Baitball Blogger]

109. You know, I was around during the nineties.

You do realize why we lost the 2000 election? Right? You talk about Republicans finding an issue to exploit. Black Americans and minorities in general, just want to be treated on the same legal plane as white Americans. On the other hand, Clinton provided fodder to the Republicans because he couldn't keep his sexual proclivities secret. I'm not going to argue the point regarding consensual sex. The point is, which one do you want to defend? A president who used poor judgment with extramarital affairs? Or minorities who are fighting to keep their children, fathers, brothers and sons alive?

[StarfishSaver]

116. It's interesting that the 90s and 2000 have been brought up as examples

of how we need to pull out all the stops to reach out to these moderate white voters.

So, for more than 20 years, we've been chasing after these voters and are still being told "we just need to lay off all the identity politics talk until we win the next election. THEN we'll get to your issues." But guess what, just as I've been saying, there's always a next election and always more warnings that we need to be careful not to offend them by appearing too woke. It never ends.

And yet, during that time, we won a whole lot of elections, we even elected a Black man to two terms, a woman to the presidency (which was stolen from her) and a Black woman to the vice presidency, usually without many of those voters but with the fervent and dedicated support of Black and Brown voters who don't expect us to kiss their asses and never offend us and who move heaven and earth and overcome huge obstacles that would make many white voters just sit it out in order to vote for Demo rats election after election.

But we still have to put up with being told we're scaring off white voters so we should pipe down.

[Baitball Blogger]

117. You know, you who are against the Woke phenomenon have a short memory.

You keep forgetting many important factors.

1) The demographics of this country has changed. You are using a strategy that worked back when there were more white anglo Americans, than any other culture. Those moderate voters were necessary because the Republican strategy relied on pushing out eligible black voters, There was excessive felony charges, police killings and voter suppression. Now, it's going to be harder to pull off because we are woke.

2) We won with Obama BECAUSE he was black, and that alone brought out the black vote. On edit: And btw, the Asian-American vote.

3) You rely on the moderate white voters at your own expense. Hillary Clinton, could have won despite the tom-dickery from Jim Comey IF she had been more attuned to the needs of black Americans. She selected a bland white man to run as VP. Tim Kaine? Who is he to the minority community? Hillary Clinton took a chance trying to gain votes among those white moderate voters, and lost. We lost the black votes that came out for Obama. That was a lesson that Biden learned and improved on.

[StarfishSaver]

121. Did you intend to direct this to me?

[Baitball Blogger]

123. In retrospect, no. It certainly doesn't apply to what you posted.

I was in the process of writing a response to another poster and my computer was going through an upgrade that required a reboot. My guess is that I came back and attached my comment to the wrong post.

[CrispyQ]

8. He took some heat for saying dems are too woke, but overall, he made some spot on observations, IMO.

From the original Vox article:

https://www.vox.com/22338417/james-carville-democratic-party-biden-100-days

Take someone like Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She’s obviously very bright. She knows how to draw a headline. In my opinion, some of her political aspirations are impractical and probably not going to happen. But that’s probably the worst thing that you can say about her.

Now take someone like Marjorie Taylor Greene, the new Republican congresswoman from Georgia. She’s absolutely loonier than a tune. We all know it. And yet, for some reason, the Democrats pay a bigger political price for AOC than Republicans pay for Greene. That’s the problem in a nutshell. And it’s ridiculous because AOC and Greene are not comparable in any way.

Look at Florida. You now have Democrats saying Florida is a lost cause. Really? In 2018 in Florida, giving felons the right to vote got 64 percent. In 2020, a $15 minimum wage, which we have no chance of passing [federally], got 67 percent. Has anyone in the Democratic Party said maybe there’s nothing wrong with the state of Florida? Maybe the problem is the kind of campaigns we’re running?

We won the White House against a world-historical buffoon. And we came within 42,000 votes of losing. We lost congressional seats. We didn’t pick up state legislatures. So let’s not have an argument about whether or not we’re off-key in our messaging. We are. And we’re off because there’s too much jargon and there’s too much esoterica and it turns people off.

The repubs have more successfully defined our party than we have. I agree that we have a big messaging problem.

We need a marketing department—stat!

[Eyeball_Kid]

26. This argument about self-branding may already be obsolete. Recall Biden's speech last night.

Biden really did a number on GOP's narratives. First, Biden talked about climate change in brilliant strategic terms. He ASSUMED that there is no climate change debate; instead, he went right into the actions via policy that must be taken on a national and world-wide scale. He gave no quarter to climate change deniers. Second, he summarily dismissed trickle-down economics as hokum. That has NEVER BEEN DONE BEFORE. And in a few sentences, Biden rhetorically obliterated the GOP's signature policy statement of the past 50 years. For some reason yet explained, the Dems have never taken on trickle-down economics with such precision and strength. Biden DID. And his words were refreshing and quite possibly game-changing.

[cinematicdiversions]

84. We lost the Florida governorship last time by the slimmest of margins.

And we were running a guy who ended up unconscious from a drug overdose with a male prostitute a few months later.

Democrats can easily win Florida. Unfortunately, there seems to be no functioning democratic party throughout much of the state. Which is an honest mystery to me.

If we ran actual candidates that appealed to homeowners and the employed in all districts and focused on local races for the statehouse, we would be much better off. Honestly, the Republicans make it easy by running Karens who oppose vaccines and Floride in the water and they run unopposed because the democrats can't be bothered.

[StarfishSaver]

89. How odd that you would bring up something that happened two years AFTER the election

as if there's something about Andrew Gillum that made him unappealing to voters in 2018.

Gillum lost by a slim margin - most likely because deSantis cheated.

What about him in 2018 made him unappealing "to homeowners and the employed"? What exactly does that mean anyway? Please explain.

[cinematicdiversions]

92. Gilliam wasn't unappealing. That is why he almost won.

(Despite little support from the national party in relation to the importance of the race)

And here we are three years later calling the state a lost cause.

We can easily win Florida. Just appeal to the people that live here and run candidates and compete in local elections. Too many Floridians can only vote for Republicans because the Democrates refuse to run a viable candidate.

I brought the other thing up because honestly, it still blows my mind. You almost won the governorship and a year later you are face down in the gutter.

[Demsrule86]

104. Honestly, Gwen Graham would have won most likely.

And that sort of makes Carville's point.

[brush]

9. The problem is he's accepting the republican spin on what "wokeness" is.

It's slang that originated in the Black community and all it is is an updated version of what we used to call being aware—aware of political realities, how they affect the Black community and being in the fight to help change inequities.

It's not a negative but Carville, who used to be astute enough to know better, has taken the bait on the republican evilization of the word.

Too bad, and as with any slang term, when the mainstream culture gets a hold of it and starts slinging it around as if they know what's up, it's time to discard it and move on.

Carville's take on Rep.Talib has some merit though. Re-imagining and holding abusive/killer cops accountable is key but the defund/eliminate the police-type rhetoric she continues to expouse loses votes.

[Sugarcoated]

41. His point is, we make it easy for the Repubs to do that

"Defund the police" is the most obvious example

[CrackityJones75]

62. yeah right.

Because what? We are going to craft the perfect message that republicans can’t twist and lie and turn into some crazy conspiracy theory? I am tired of worrying about our message. And complaining about our message. And funny the more inclusive as better for everyone it gets we are supposed to pump the brakes and stop because that will be too ash for republicans to do what they always do?

Screw that full steam ahead with equality and everyone doing better. I am over worrying about what republicans might say. Anyone paying attention can see that THEIR messaging sucks. And what they mostly have left is the shitty people that support trump and their hopeless red states will be mired in that until THEY decide to listen and change.

[uponit7771]

82. +1, own our positions and attack republicans for not being American enough to accept them !!!

We can theme that like Obama did rMoney in 2012 and win !!!

We need to be with the theme first !! DTP can't "lose down ballot races" if we were already attacking with our theme and positions first or if someone never ascribed to the slogan counter attacked with their position on the issue and made the republican candidate the villian for not living up to American ideals.

Accepting winger framing gets us screwed EVERY SINGLE TIME

[brush]

97. Good stuff. Agreed.

[Demsrule86]

106. Yes we need to craft a message that is a winning message....defund the police was never going to

be a winning message nor is being 'woke'. It is ammo for the GOP to us against us.

[CrackityJones75]

118. I don't know that was an official message

in the moment of crisis things get said. Again that is the republicans taking something and spinning it into what they want to do.

I don’t know if “defund the police” was an official platform talking point of Democrats. I know a lot of people that used that term might not necessarily identify as strictly democrats. Some even are at ofds with democrats sometime. But again even if it were democrats it wpuldn’t matter what we called it. The result is the same. Democrats are anti-cop.

But that is one slogan. What others do we have to flog ourselves over? Green New Deal?

[uponit7771]

81. Like "Biden hates meat" ? ... thx in advance

[StarfishSaver]

88. "Wokeness" is a mindset. "Defund the Police" is a slogan

Two completely different things. If he doesn't like the slogan, fine. Urge people to change it.

But he's attacking the mindset as if being aware of systemic racism and open to doing something about it is a bad thing - or, at least a "nice to do" that can be subordinated to other priorities if it gets too uncomfortable.

[uponit7771]

80. +1,

[gulliver]

10. See, the average fish eater would choose an orange roughy over a slimehead.

But it's the same fish. And it has zero to do with whether the average fish eater is in any human category other than "English understanding human."

[pandr32]

38. That's exactly why the GOP are so skilled at framing issues

They use negative attributions to describe our perfectly good efforts and goals. And they lie with wanton abandon. They also get their framing out their fast and through channels they have ready access to. By the time they're done we are on defense.

[CrackityJones75]

64. 85%-15% was the favorability breakdown

85%-15% was the favorability breakdown of Bidens speech last night.

It isn’t about painting things negatively to draw against the other side.

Recognize there is a large amount of shitty people here in the world. we won’t EVER get them to vote for us. Others will and that is who needs to here our completely appropriate and important message.

[uponit7771]

74. +1, "They also get their framing out their fast " & they have feedback thats even faster. They lurk

... mixed aisle forums for feed back like its crack and can form an lizard brain message before we could think of any kind of return within days.

The best defense for this is to ... ALWAYS ... be on offense with a theme using a similar feedback loop and tons of back up truth to establish a theme

[EarlG]

11. In all the time I've been following politics

Democrats have never not had a messaging problem (I'll say with the exception of Barack Obama in 2008).

It seems to me that that's because Republican voters simply do not care when their elected officials lie to them -- in fact, they find it comforting. So a Republican voter can be sold on any bullshit message that their politicians want to sell. Al Gore invented the Internet! ​John Kerry abandoned his swift boat colleagues! Hillary Clinton something something email server and kidnapping children!

Democratic voters don't like to be lied to by their leaders, and won't buy into a campaign built on lies. So right there, the GOP has an advantage, because as the old saying goes, "A lie can travel around the world and back again while the truth is lacing up its boots."

Any discussion of messaging and how Democrats are bad at it needs to start with the understanding that we're already fighting with one hand tied behind our backs.

That said, I like Carville, but the fact is that by complaining about "wokeness" he himself is buying into GOP framing. Older Democrats will hear what he's saying and think, "Carville is right, I don't know what this wokeness stuff is all about but it sure seems like something the Republicans are making fun of a lot." Younger Democrats -- who understand in their guts that "wokeness" is just another word for "empathy" -- will read it and wonder why some old has-been is telling them what language to use. All this discussion does is drive further inter-party division.

So what bothers me a bit about pieces like this is that Carville should be using his time to knock down these BS Republican talking points, not reinforce them. It should be easy enough for a poltical maven like him to flip this argument around and talk about how Republicans have no empathy. But he didn't do that.

In fact, I did find it rather ironic that in an interview in which he complains about Democrats' failure to frame things properly, he says his colleagues won't speak up, "because they’ll get clobbered or canceled." Note how he just casually uses another piece of Republican framing ( "canceled" ) without even thinking about it.

Edit: I'm going to add to this post because I also want to propose a solution. The solution is simple: Counterattack, Counterattack, Counterattack.

You don't fight this:

REPUBLICANS: "Wokeness is a problem! Cancel culture is a problem! Political correctness is a problem!"

With this:

CARVILLE: "Wokeness is a problem. Cancel culture is a problem. Political correctness is a problem."

And again, a maven like Carville should know this. He could have easily sidestepped these questions, and come back to trash the GOP up and down for their racism, hatred, and general lack of empathy. Instead, he decided that he wanted to use this platform to publicly ponder the merits of the GOP approach and how we Democrats are failing to tailor our response to better meet their needs. Which to be honest doesn't seem a million miles away from the "Faculty lounge politics" he's also complaining about.

[ibegurpard]

14. Well-said

N/t

[abqtommy]

15. Thanks for your much-appreciated insight.

[gratuitous]

18. Agree

I'll chip in with just one further observation. Carville says that Democrats keep handing sledgehammers to the Republicans with their "poor" messaging. As if the Republicans wouldn't make up stuff even if the Democrats' messaging was letter perfect.

[StarfishSaver]

20. IKR?

[StarfishSaver]

19. Perfectly said. Thank you!

[LizBeth]

23. +1

[cynical_idealist]

28. I agree with your synopsis

[Eyeball_Kid]

29. You're on the mark. But already,

Biden's speech last night shows that both he and his speechwriters already got the message. As I mentioned in an earlier post on this thread, Biden's speech was a strategic and messaging coup. He did exactly what Carville was trying to explain. Biden substantially dismissed two GOP narratives in short order: their climate change denials were put to rest by DEFINING climate change as an assumed fact while proposing actions on a national and global scale.

Second, Biden bludgeoned the GOP with a frontal attack on "trickle-down" economics that was blunt, forceful, and very effective.

And Biden did both of these things WITHOUT the use of GOP narrative terms like "woke" and "cancel." He did it HIS way.

We can see how Biden has surrounded himself with bright and strategy-minded staff well-versed in communications theory and neuro-linguistic programming. It all bodes well for the Dems and their political future.

[StarfishSaver]

32. He didn't do anything Carville called for. He did just the opposite

He was the epitome of woke and laid it all out there. He got in their faces and told them that this country is plagued by institutional racism and he's doing something about it. The difference is that people hear it differently when an old white man says it than when a young - or even not so young - person of color says the same thing.

If Barack Obama had ever said half of what Biden said last night, people would be losing their damned minds. And Carville's head would have exploded.

Carville's problem isn't anyone says the word "woke." He said we need to stop BEING so woke. And he definitely doesn't have any problem with the term cancel culture, since he's used it himself when attacking people for being too woke.

[uponit7771]

59. +1, people are bending over backwards to relate to Carville no matter how wrong he is ...

... I'm starting to think dems horrid messaging infrastructure is built off a horrible teaching when it comes to arguing a point effectively.

[Whiskeytide]

77. Carville has never really been a good democrat. At times, however, he ...

... has been a pretty damn good political strategist, and that’s where he’s coming from on this issue. And, he’s headline grabbing to a great extent.

But he’s NOT talking about changing ideology. He’s talking about messaging only.

“Defund the police” is a great example. It’s a poorly worded slogan that, despite reasonable intentions, has been used to paint democrats as supporting lawlessness. It’s a turd, but some democrats continue to use it to this day. That’s not strategically wise.

That’s all Carville is actually saying if you carve through his folksy, “aw shucks” demeanor.

[uponit7771]

78. Could you show me any poll were dtp lost anyone any race? EarlG just responded in a post to this

... very thing is to NEVER EVER accept the framing of an attack by the opposition and not responding (countering) or attacking via theme ... IS ... accepting the framing of an attack by the opposition.

P.S. There is NOT ONE POLL showing dtp lost anyone any races and has been used as a scape goat for bad countering campaigning. I respect the people who said it did but they're giving opinion and not fact on this issue.

If they're right and dtp lost races for people who never ascribed to the sentiment then that's bad campaigning on their part not to counter a framing or be on primary attack with a theme.

We need to know how to run better campaigns ... no really, I'm shocked at the lack of adherence to human behavior science when it comes to talking to crowds or hordes of humans.

[Whiskeytide]

98. I don't disagree with anything you've said. But ...

... you’re approaching a slogan like DTP from a MUCH more educated and informed perspective than 70% of the US electorate.

You and I both understand that DTP means putting financial resources into better community support programs instead of more cops, more guns, more military equipment, etc. We both understand that this would likely make our communities safer, and would certainly make our interactions with government responders safer.

But to the majority of Americans - those who don’t strive to understand anything beyond a catch-phrase, DTP means no more law enforcement. Period. It literally means to deprive law enforcement of the funds necessary to do the job of law enforcement - as that job is currently done - which is EXACTLY what it means.

But these people will consider the situation where someone is breaking into their home and threatening their family, and think - “there would be no one to call for help. My family and I would die because liberals did away with the police”. They will NEVER think of it any more critically than that.

It may be a great idea, but it is a terrible slogan. I suspect it will go down in history books as one of the worst social change slogans ever conceived. I don’t have polls. Sorry. But I live in a very red area. When I have a political discussion about DTP, I have to spend 30 minutes explaining what it really means. I’m not making much headway when I have to do that.

[utopian]

30. Absolutely

[wryter2000]

31. Thank you

Plus, critics generally don't propose any solutions except learn how to talk to Trump voters. We spent four years having to listen to idiocy coming out of Midwestern diners. I don't want to be a member of the idiocy party.

[uponit7771]

83. +1, there are easier votes to get among the suppressed and disengaged than the middle. That doesn't

... mean we should stop talking to the middle but don't frame campaigns around them any longer ... they're are voters that don't take up so many resources to see our way

[uponit7771]

57. OP WORTHY !!!!!!

[OneGrassRoot]

65. Definitely need this as an OP! n/t

[DallasNE]

75. One Other Thing To Consider

MSM always wants a horserace because of the impact on the bottom line. That means they slant the news in a way that generates a horserace. Never lose sight of that. It is not the messaging as much as it is the reporting on the messaging where things get twisted. Think not? Here is the internet definition of wokeness.

Wokeness encompasses the need to search for more knowledge, understanding and truth in order to challenge injustice. The actor and the politician met in a display of mutual wokeness. Wokeness has to be about more than just saying the right thing.

Wokeness is not the problem. The big lie is the problem. And MSM exhorting the big lie in order to get their precious horserace is the problem. Getting to the bottom of something and then taking action is not the problem Nor is keeping your eye on the ball. Same thing with "cancel culture". Republicans practice what they call cancel culture as much as Democrats so why isn't the hypocrisy called out? It is not Democratic messaging that is the problem. It is MSM messaging that is the problem because of how they slant the issue generally in favor of Republicans.

Republicans have lost the popular vote in 7 of the last 8 Presidential races. That shows that they need all of the help they can get from the media in order to keep from becoming irrelevant. Don't overlook the slanting performed by MSM because to them it is all about the money.

[demmiblue]

86. +1

[Cha]

102. Yes "Counterattack"! No reason to go

on the defensive when all the Magats do is Gaslight & Lie.

And, speaking of former Pres Obama.. he stated that "defund the police" is a bad slogan.

Link to tweet

What works in a super Blue District does not work in a swing district.

Link to tweet

Reform the Police.. that's what Pres Biden is advocating.

[Politicub]

12. Those kids and their rock-and-roll devil music. This is what

Carville’s scold about the word woke sounds like.

[Demsrule86]

107. It sounds like good advice from an experienced campaign guy to me.

[Politicub]

124. There is a point when even experienced people become

out of touch.

We are at an inflection point in politics. I don’t believe Biden is misreading the room based on his approval numbers.

Carville’s triangulation Strategy is offputting for upcoming generations.

[ibegurpard]

13. Carville lives with a woman who voted for Trump twice

That's who he's trying to convince. I think we all know how that's worked out.

Defund the police is really stupid messaging for smart policy.

Adopting the "anti-woke" stance of the alt-right and anti-feminist YouTubers is a non-starter for me.

[Demsrule86]

108. There is not need to advance the word 'woke' ....civil rights works for me.

[joetheman]

16. Sorry, the people who really know and who are voting don't care to have their issues re-framed to

make white, petty, un-American, anti-democracy, greedy, power hungry, racist more comfortable. They are going to vote the way they wanted to vote regardless to how the opposition frames their position. If, "grab 'em by the pussy" didn't make a difference no words like "woke" are going to matter. We have allowed the RW noise-makers frame our positions for fart too long to little avail.

That's just my opinion. And I intend to stay WOKE!

[Demsrule86]

110. And if they could win elections all by themselves...it wouldn't matter but the house was won by

moderates as was the Senate.

[johnp3907]

17. No he isn't.

It’s neither hard nor the truth.

[Me.]

21. Not For Tender Ears

+1

[uponit7771]

22. We're not going to stop using a 100 yr term because unaware white people want us to, that's stupid.

[Demsrule86]

111. Well if the term causes election losses...what have you gained? And it might. I hope not.

If Carville is concerned then I am concerned.

[uponit7771]

114. If you have polling proof, not just claims of people we respect, that a slogan was the reason ...

... a democrat lost an election please give it.

You understand I've asked this question a multitude of times and got nothing but anecdotes because the polling proof that these terms or slogans lost democrats elections doesn't exist.

I like Carville too, his ability to be reductive is worth some the shit he kicks up but this issue he's technically wrong on the sentiment.

Ingroups should never tell an outgroup to stop using words that the ingroup changes the meaning of because of they don't want their desperate treatment to be called out.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

24. Rev Al agrees

Link to tweet

[LeftInTX]

43. Yes, please stop using Latinx in campaigns!

The term Latinx is really only accepted by hipster, millennial LGBT community who eat nothing but avocado toast!

You wanna insult a 50 year old Latino who drives a truck? Call him Latin-X
It a horrible corruption of Spanish and nobody knows what it is. X at the end of the word, sounds like "ex"...as in "ex-wife"...

It is also like infamous "x" in Mexico. The "x" exists in many words because Spaniards did not have letters for some indigenous sounds, so they just put an "silent x" in there!

[LetMyPeopleVote]

68. I have lived in Texas all of my life and I had never heard this term

[LeftInTX]

73. Here:

https://www.motherjones.com/media/2019/06/digging-into-the-messy-history-of-latinx-helped-me-embrace-my-complex-identity/

[Cha]

101. Rt TY!

[Cuthbert Allgood]

25. White guy tells marginalized groups how they should talk.

Yeah, I see nothing gross and out of place with that. Nope. Sounds about white.

[KG]

33. word.

[demmiblue]

85. +1

[Wounded Bear]

27. Carville might be speaking a 1990's "truth"...

but in 2021, we're witnessing the awakening of that center of the country that is tired of the rightward thrust of the country under Repubs and desperately wants and needs some progressive movement. Biden got the largest turnout and greatest number of votes in history. Fact. He doesn't need a lot of advice from someone who engineered a 45% plurality win 30 years ago.

[Demsrule86]

112. A 1990's truth...and have we made progress since then. Have we moved the country to the left?

No, we haven't. Look at the governorships, the legislatures, the Senate, and the House. I don't see much difference. We are further ahead on human rights, but if we don't win the next couple of elections, we will lose those gains. And if you think about it, if we lose the next presidential election...there may never be another election. The Republicans tried to overthrow the Republic in 20. Think about that. It is worse than the '90s.

[KG]

35. Carville 's wrong and he's been wrong for a long time.

[Demsrule86]

113. He is not wrong actually. He is sounding a warning and we should listen.

[Celerity]

36. No, he is pumping up RW framing and attacking his own (supposed) party.

He is well past his expiry date as proven by ludricous statements like 'I don't know any blacks who ever use the term people of colour.'

His wife is a reactionary Rethug Trump voter and RW hack, and the old 'swamp rat sage' Carville has breathed in far too many of her putrid fumes over the years.

[BobTheSubgenius]

37. I'll put a pin in it for now.

I'm out the door for a medical appt...because that's my reality.

[Hortensis]

40. I haven't bothered to check out what he said. I know the kind of

person he is in general and don't worry about what side he's on. I worry about the people who attack their own out of misdirected anger. Understandable if spitting at Carville seems easier than taking these people on, but neither brave nor smart.

[StarfishSaver]

44. Maybe you should educate yourself on what he said before complaining about

how people he is a victim of "people attacking heir own out of misplaced anger." Especially since it's the "Raging Cajun" - whose while schtick is built on being angry - who is attacking his own.

[Hortensis]

51. No, he's not. Touchy sorts have taken offense at his

suggestions that their own behavior could lose us the house and senate, and state governments, next year. And others are offended for them.

Yet these behaviors, most of which were NOT by Democrats, were weaponized against Democrats and almost cost us our house majority last fall.

What would happen to AA if the insurrectionists had taken control of the federal government by electoral fiat and given Trump the power to rule by decree? A mandate to do their worst.

Btw, what would you do for a living if your license wasn't renewed, maybe delayed (permanently) while some undisclosed ethical question was "investigated"?

WE are not your enemies, StarfishSaver.

[StarfishSaver]

52. Being accused of being touchy is pretty rich

coming a moment after someone on this board accused me of calling Carville a "closet racist" and That meant accusing everyone who defended him of also being a racist and therefore this particular poster decided that meant I was accusing him personally of being a racist.

"Touchiness" abounds here, but it's coming from inside the house...

[czarjak]

45. Frame The Party of the Rich as The Party of the Rich. Period.

[Pinback]

46. OMG!!1! Let's not frighten the scared old white people who'll never vote for us anyway!

Carville says, "The Democratic Party can’t be more liberal than Sen. Joe Manchin. That’s the fact. We don’t have the votes."


Then in the same paragraph, he mentions Rev. Warnock and Jon Ossoff winning the two Georgia senate seats -- two new U.S. Senators who are both more liberal than Joe Manchin. Elected by Georgia voters.

I agree completely with EarlG's post in this thread. The Republicans frame Bill and Hillary Clinton as communists, for God's sake. So I hardly think we need to cater to their framing.

Biden is on the right track. Stay focused on policies that benefit the majority of Americans across the board, and let the Republicans fume about Dr. Seuss and "limousine liberals."

[johnp3907]

54. You and EarlG are spot on.

[jalan48]

47. The 2022 Midterms should give us a good idea how the woke strategy is working for us and whether

or not Carville is right.

[Lonestarblue]

48. The difference between Republican messaging and Democratic messaging usually seems to be

a matter of Republicans using accusations and lies (Democrats kill babies!) while Democrats talk about reproductive choice, which is the accurate term. Republicans use dog whistles and hyperbole to scare voters, while Democrats use facts to convince them. One is emotional, the other is not. I don’t believe we should go the Republican route, but we could look at how to appeal to the emotions as well.

One of the worst examples of recent messaging that I believe did cost Democrats was the term “Defund the police.” Without reading about what the term really meant, voters would fear exactly what Republicans told them—that Democrats wanted to eliminate all police departments and turn the country over to the criminals.

[LeftInTX]

49. We could work on simpler messaging

I felt like the Democratic convention was missing this...

We need to get to the point...

I create my own flyers and I try to use as few as words as possible.
VOTE: When, Where, Who
I use as few sentences as possible. I stick to single words (Maybe it's the old nurse in me....LOL)

and:
"Voting rights are under attack! Vote in every election"

[StarfishSaver]

56. This is true

It it's completely separate from "wokeness."

Carville should never have even brought it up, and he definitely should never have called for Democrats to abandon it, which goes far beyond reshaping a message and instead says we must abandon an important principle because some white people don't like it.

[Ford_Prefect]

50. Carville makes a point but he also misses 2 or 3.

He has never to my knowledge ever said anything about how much effect the vote rigging and voter denial has had on any election. It's as if that is a non-issue that will always account for a meaningless percentage of the difference. He is and has always been wrong about that.

For him it is always about the message and the substance is irrelevant. While the messaging is certainly an issue and one I see as a long term problem for our party. The substance of the differences between the factions of Democrats is real and represents real issues in the real world. Carville has pretended in the past that it doesn't matter and has alienated those he now brands as too woke on numerous occasions. At times I feel he is too rooted in the image he holds of the Democratic party of early 1990's. Making the deal work is how he sees it IMO: the fundamentals aren't as important as looking like you're in charge.

I agree with how that used to work when there were actually voters in the middle who were persuadable. That middle is gone. The pretense of we're going back to the "good ole days" is pointless.

I also have problems with some of the new "wokeness". I have seen it used as a reason to erase the struggles in our history as if it wasn't important enough compared to what we now face. I have seen my own past devalued in that process. That too is a mistake.

[Duppers]

53. It's about the vocab, imho.

It's not about what being "woke" mean but the vocabulary used in the messaging.

It helps to remember only one third of the U.S. population over 25yo has any college degree. (Far from necessary but only suggesting a degree increases the likelihood of understanding these terms.)

[StarfishSaver]

58. If it's about vocabulary, he shouldn't be telling us to "abandon wokeness"

That's like telling women to abandon "feminism" because some men were offended by signs they saw at the Women's March. Complete non sequiturs.

[Martin Eden]

55. Will read this later, n/t

[Dawson Leery]

60. The "Latin-X" fad needs to go away.

In Latin, the masculine inflection is used as the default.

To native Spanish speakers, the "X" suffix makes no sense whatsoever.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

87. From what I'm seeing, the "Latin" community is torn on this.

I'm going to take my lead from voices in that community. We don't need to default to the male anymore. There should be ways around it.

[CrackityJones75]

61. he may make some decent points. But he's wrong.

He is dead wrong about this new round of voter. And he is even more wrong about the ones coming to vote in 22 and 24.

[DallasNE]

66. Wokeness

This is a new term to me since January 20, 2021. I don't believe we have a common definition of the word yet. Here is the internet definition.

Wokeness encompasses the need to search for more knowledge, understanding and truth in order to challenge injustice. The actor and the politician met in a display of mutual wokeness. Wokeness has to be about more than just saying the right thing.

That sounds like a good thing to me so why is it getting bashed as though it is some evil thing. Getting to the bottom of something and then acting on the findings is exactly how we should be doing things. So why are all of these alarm bells ringing? Ignorance?

Oh, the actor/politician definition seems to fit the definition of "admiration" much better than "wokeness".

[StarfishSaver]

70. This term has been in use for more than 60 years and yes, there IS a common definition

Just because many white people never heard it doesn't mean it didn't exist and it also doesn't mean that now that many are now aware of it, we need to come to some common understanding of what it means. It means what it's always meant - the definition you found online is pretty accurate.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

72. It's the opposite of sleepness.

He is sleep, not woke.

[andym]

67. SF school district renaming schools commemorating Washington, Lincoln and Jefferson

is an example of what Carville is talking about. It is a bridge too far that many in the USA will never accept. Why? Because almost NO historical figure could meet the modern standards of "wokeness." Even Jesus would fall short. The standard should be: did the figure or literary work do more good than harm or not in influencing our world today. If more good than please let them be-- it does not mean that any of their historical actions that we find unacceptable should not be questioned, just that they should not be unfairly targeted.

The removal of Washington or Lincoln's names also trivializes removing or at least deemphasizing symbols of people who should be held up as examples of how not to behave having caused far more harm than good during their lifetimes. Overall it actually harms the real fight for social justice, which involves truly achieving equal rights for everyone and justice for the oppressed.

[StarfishSaver]

71. That's not "wokeness"

Carville has it twisted.

[Wingus Dingus]

76. Probably the most perfect example of what Carville was talking about.

[uponit7771]

79. False, this is an example of an ingroup (white people) taking the term of an outgroup (black..

... people) twisting its meaning to distract from the real issue of some kind of disparate treatment.

Woke has been used by black people for nearly 100 years and is not new to black community.

A ingroups of any allegiance telling people to stop using a term an outgroup appropriated generations ago is like the epidemy of privilege or grievance.

[andym]

126. Thanks for agreeing!

I was hoping more DUers would agree.

[StarfishSaver]

91. This sounds like FOX talking points

And the "actually harms the real fight for social justice" is such a worn-out tired lazy lecture. Changing the name of a school doesn't "harms the REAL fight for justice." It's just a convenient excuse for people to explain away why they're not interested in fighting for justice - and they would walk away from the fight anyway whether a school was renamed or not.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

93. We could stop putting dead white guys on a pedestal

when they did horrible things in the process of getting this country started on racist footings. Why is that a bad thing? Why not start recognizing the non-white figures that put in the work and were the foundation of making this country. It's kind of like saying that people shouldn't stop saying Elvis was the King of rock and roll and want to recognize Bill Broonzy just because Elvis did make some good music and didn't steal all of it.

And I won't even start on the "even Jesus" as if the Bible is some paragon of virtue.

[joshcryer]

69. Biden's election is proof.

Hard pill to swallow. But we are tetering on a knifes edge out here.

[bigtree]

90. only non-woke people think and speak like this

...do what you want, but people with needs aren't going to stifle themselves to satisfy Carville's or anyone else's political strategery.

Politicians can measure their words and actions, but it's political gamesmanship to trifle with the expectations of voters, and moderate because some republican demagogue might try and advantage their own from your activism.

If we shape our demands to meet politicians' expectations we'll have none but ourselves to blame when that's all they aspire to.

[StarfishSaver]

94. Funny when Black and Brown people speak our minds and a white person is offended, we need to shut up

because, you know, God forbid white people ever get offended by anything.

But when a white person speaks their mind and offends Black and Brown people, he's just "speaking hard truths" and we need to shut up and listen.

I'm starting to get the idea that the point is just for us to shut up, no matter what.

[bigtree]

95. it's insidious

...moderation is an impetus to essentially do less, to provide less, to aspire to less.

It doesn't take much imagination to suppose those folks advocating moderation already have what they need for their own health, safety, well-being, and recognition.

[Iggo]

96. He said something stupid and he's catching the right amount of shit for it.

Outrage, my ass.

[dixiechiken1]

99. Came back to read both articles and I gotta say, I agree with Carville.

Democrats have always gotten "out-messaged" by the Republicans, at least in my adult lifetime. Republicans are visceral and in politics, visceral works.

And I see a lot of us getting hung up on the "woke" aspect. IMO, that's exactly what he's talking about. Obama talked about the same thing...

“This idea of purity and you’re never compromised and you’re always politically ‘woke’ and all that stuff,” Mr. Obama said. “You should get over that quickly.”

...

Mr. Obama spoke repeatedly of the role of social media in activism specifically, including the idea of what’s become known as “cancel culture,” which is much remarked upon, but still nebulously defined. It tends to refer to behavior that mostly plays out on the internet when someone has said or done something to which others object. That person is then condemned in a flurry of social media posts. Such people are often referred to as “canceled,” a way of saying that many others (and perhaps the places at which they work) are fed up with them and will have no more to do with them.

“I do get a sense sometimes now among certain young people, and this is accelerated by social media, there is this sense sometimes of: ‘The way of me making change is to be as judgmental as possible about other people,’” he said, “and that’s enough.”

“Like, if I tweet or hashtag about how you didn’t do something right or used the wrong verb,” he said, “then I can sit back and feel pretty good about myself, cause, ‘Man, you see how woke I was, I called you out.’"

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/31/us/politics/obama-woke-cancel-culture.amp.html?0p19G=6214

[Voltaire2]

100. A thread for white people to vent.

That’s it. Get it all out.

Now let’s get back to doing the hard work of building a just society.

[StarfishSaver]

105. +1

An example of something a white person can say that a Black person could never get away with but needs to be said.

Thanks for saying it.

[Demsrule86]

115. Can you be more divisive? That is very disrespectful to those who don't agree with you.

'Just a bunch of White people sounding off' really. Here is something to consider...about 20,000 Paulding County mostly white Democrats voted for Joe Biden. The rest of the county voted overwhelmingly for Trump. Had those mostly White Democratic voters not gone for Biden, he would have lost Georgia. All voters are important and are needed with such close races.

[FlyingPiggy]

119. I'm not sure I agree w Carville. I don't agree that we need to go for the white

Rural voters. We stand for basic ideas and concepts and decent people will respond. Like someone pointed out, Biden’s congressional address polled @ an 83% approval. He spoke plainly and he spoke sincerely. And yes, I agree. It helps that he is an old white man. But he held onto core beliefs that are universal and SHOULD resonate w decent human beings. I think we should stick w that. And there’s no reason why we can’t talk about progressive ideas in the same manner and not get the same reception. It is way past time to push for our progressive ideals. If it needs to have an old white man saying it, then so be it. At least until we educate people better. Then maybe we can hope for a change. Until then, continue helping the middle class and doing what Biden’s doing bc if we do, we won’t have to be as liberal as Manchin. Our numbers will go up and people like Manchin will be irrelevant. I think we will do well. If anything, we need to do what they are doing: get our people in on the state level and fight gerrymandering.

[RegularJam]

120. I believe him to be an extremely smart yet simple man.

I don't use the word "simple" as a way to say his thoughts aren't complex. He simply stays grounded.

After reading and listening to him over the last couple of days I believe what he is saying boils down to this.

Nationally and often locally elected democrats are speaking to minority populations overall. He believes what they are saying and the legislation they are promoting to be just. He also believes what they are saying needs to change. The manner in which the conversation is being directed toward minority communities is leaving a broad brush message toward whites. He would like to see democrats start speaking more directly to whites and hone a message with them.

We are winning the long-term battle. Carville wants to win the next election.

Carville isn't wrong and he does not oppose the legislative priorities or their direction. In fact, he really likes that aspect.

He is simply talking messaging.

[dixiechiken1]

122. This ☝️☝️☝️

[StarfishSaver]

125. Why is that when Carville says something that offends lots of people - especially people of color

he's just "speaking hard truth," we need to listen to him and if we object, we are the problem

But when those Black and Brown people say something that some white people find offensive, we are the problem, and we need to tone it down?

What makes Carville's assessment "hard truth" that must be heard but our perspective is a divisive distraction that should be silenced?