General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDemocrats are engaged in a 'new politics of evasion' that could cost them in 2024, new study says
Washington PostNow the authors are back, with a fresh analysis of their party. This time it comes in the wake of President Bidens victory over former president Donald Trump in 2020, but it is an even starker warning about the future than the one they issued in 1989 after Michael Dukakiss landslide electoral college loss to George H. W. Bush.
A Democratic loss in the 2024 presidential election may well have catastrophic consequences for the country, they write, arguing that the Trump-led Republican Party presents the most serious threat to American democracy in modern times. The Democrats first duty, they argue, should be to protect democracy by winning in 2024; everything else should be subordinated to that objective.
But they argue that the Democrats are not positioned to achieve that objective, that, instead, the party is in the grip of myths that block progress toward victory and that too many Democrats are engaged in a new politics of evasion, the refusal to confront the unyielding arithmetic of electoral success.
Too many Democrats have evaded this truth and its implications for the partys agenda and strategy, the authors add. They have been led astray by three persistent myths: that people of color think and act in the same way; that economics always trumps culture; and that a progressive majority is emerging."
Progressive Policy Institute report
Someone will likely complain that PPI are "DINOs", but the reality is that votes for Trump by African Americans and Hispanics INCREASED in 2020, and that given a choice between Mainstream Democrats and Progressive Democrats in 2021 Municipal races, voters gravitate towards mainstream candidates.
bucolic_frolic
(43,148 posts)imploring, begging, for funds. I sense the connection, if any, between DNC fundraising and local or county politics is none too strong. We' doing all right here in PA ... the state party is alive and breathing, unlike year 2000, and county politics has actual energy, events, newsletters, and candidates for almost all offices, and is engaging on the school board front. This is spinning off onto additional activist efforts in alt newspapers, and committeemen who have been aroused from a Rip Van Winkle state. So it can be done.
Scrivener7
(50,949 posts)subject of the weekly chastisement by those who would like to outlaw "negativity."
Which, actually, is pretty much the idiotic mistake the article is talking about.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)... didn't happen this time either.
I don't see the authors position on that point looking at things historically
The rest I don't agree with and sounds like another "don't be so progressive" warning while the right has been a violent extremist now ... the problem ... IS ... the message mechanics.
There's no way a group of people get to plan the invasion of America to implement a coup and gets to keep power.
If we lose to that that's messaging
ck4829
(35,070 posts)Im to the left of Jon Tester but I admire the man because he holds people in power accountable, he doesnt speak out of both sides of his mouth, he doesnt act like his support is like Lucys football that he can jerk out from under Charlie at the last second.
Progressive
mainstream
we need less eeyores. We need less mealy-mouthed politicians who say we shouldnt even try. We need less politicians who think Trump-Republicans are doing politics in good faith.
Dr. Shepper
(3,014 posts)It doesnt matter what dems believe as long as they win so be as republican as possible. So, other peoples right to exist is on the table.
Scrivener7
(50,949 posts)JohnSJ
(92,187 posts)into the article, they portray Democrats as unaware that in certain rural areas of the country, Democrats don't realize that "cultural issues" trump economics.
What they portray as cultural issues, actually comes down to racism, sexism, and bigotry. To portray those "cultural" issues as immigration and religion concerns, is cloaking the reality of what really is behind this, racism, sexism, and bigotry, and there is no way we should compromise on that, because then we will lose any moral compass
Budi
(15,325 posts)maxrandb
(15,325 posts)If after 40+ years of trickle-down bullshit, the brazen packing of the Supreme Court and federal judgeships with fascist fucksticks, 4 years of a ridiculous pompadour Grand Wizard of the KKK, a return to bloody back alley abortions, a return to Jim Crow on steroids, the largest wealth gap since Midevil Feudal Society, and an armed insurrection to violently overthrow American Democracy....
If after all that, a majority of the American people vote for fascism, then this country is not worth saving
If there has ever been a "hold your nose and vote" time in America, this is it.
This only ends in one of two ways.
Voters reject fascism and send the Retrumplican Party to the ashheep of history and they reemerge as something more sane.
or,
Fascism, racism, hatred, misogyny and white supremacy wins, and this county is torn down to the studs.
It's no longer about doing a better job of defining the Retrumplicans by their extremes. The extremes are right out in front, leading the charge.
So, the next couple of elections are not going to be about Democratic messaging or cultural issues, or even economics.
If a majority of this country chooses what we have seen with our own eyes, there will be no one to blame but ourselves.
I come to this conclusion after witnessing the recent Virginia elections.
You could still smell the blood and teargas of January 6 from across the Potomac, and yet the VOTERS chose fascism.
You can write all the 5,000 world essays you want, but you will never convince me that the Democrats are too blame for that.
Dr. Shepper
(3,014 posts)If this is how this country ends, it is by choice. There is plenty of evidence in front of everyone what republicans want. I live in an ultra red state that may become even redder. This is by the choice of the people who live here.
msfiddlestix
(7,281 posts)Couldn't agree with your comments more. What you said is simply put, the reality full stop.
pundit class seems to be the ones with their heads up their collective arses, imo.
Budi
(15,325 posts)Celerity
(43,344 posts)by 2024, Millennials and Gen Z will equal the actual voting turnout (not just in terms of eligible voters, I mean actual votes) of Boomers and up (and pass them outright when you toss on Xennials, born 1977-1980), and then blow them away in subsequent elections.
The positings these centrists are advocating (whilst making sense to a point IF the electorate remained static, other than Blacks, Asians, and Hispanics becoming less and less likely to vote Dem atm, which most definitely IS happening) will simply not work with the younger age cohorts who are far less likely to buy into a retreat on social issues, etc. Biden and Dems are cratering badly with 44yo and unders. To dispute this in toto is to either whistle past the graveyard or engage in wilful denial. It is going to be very hard to square the the circle.
IF you combine a more centrist stance on social issues with a deemphasis on climate, educational debt load relief, and a failing to seriously deal with the extraordinary increase in housing costs (which benefits a huge chunk of older, equity-holding homeowners but crushes younger people just starting out, so there is yet another didactical tension area) etc etc, then you can likely kiss a large group of those 44yo and unders (especially 30-32yo and unders) good-bye to an extent that some do not realise or refuse to acknowledge (as it goes again their beliefs as to how things should work). The younger voters will simple not vote (there is almost zero chance they go Rethug to any large extent) in anywhere near enough numbers we need if their stances, desires, and needs are subject to sufficient enough diminution.
from the article:
Trumps appeals on cultural issues, and his anti-immigrant and nationalist posture moved voters in states with a higher-than-average percentage of White working-class voters, especially Ohio and Iowa, to the point that they are now difficult for Democrats to win presidentially. And it has made the upper Midwest fiercely competitive, a face-off that is likely to persist until the battle lines between the parties are redrawn, the study says.
Democrats, they argue, must balance appeals to their base voters with a message that also appeals to enough working-class voters to win elections. In 2020, Biden was able to do that, but Galston and Kamarck argue that success must not blind Democrats to the fact that these voters often have found Republicans cultural claims more persuasive than the Democrats economic arguments.
maxrandb
(15,325 posts)Let me ask the posters and the authors..."Just WTF do they think the 'Democratic Base' is, if it's not 'working class'"?
I am the Democratic Base, and I have worked my fucking class off!
It's fucking infuriating to start the premise of the argument with some bullshit that the Democratic Base and the "working class" are two fucking separate things!!
Your argument is flawed from the get-go when it starts with a fucking Retrumplican talking point.
Call me crazy, but how about we don't take fucking electoral advice from people that don't see the working class as part of the Democratic Base?!
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)NOT what both elections and polls of Democratic voter ideology show every time.
I imagine the study result described is largely valid in a number of ways, but they fail to point out that the "persistent myth" they decry is NOT from Democrats. It is a myth, all right, created and spread by the same hostile MSM (and other enemies) who turned Hillary into a corrupt evil witch to elect Republicans. They created fake "baggage" for Hillary and injected it into every story.
And they're continuing the same character assassination of the Democratic Party. Instead of a fake email scandal and all the rest, the MSM's main fake baggage this time is that an extremist-leaning far left minority is dominating our ideology, and messaging.
Again, Democratic voters election after election and poll after poll show this to be false. Even the shallowest study of why Bernie Sanders did as well as he did shows extensive dishonest lift given by the MSM and, in 2016 especially by Russia -- pushing the myth of "Progressive"/socialist myth as the "two" in their "one-two punch" to dismantle the Democratic Party's enormous lead through most of the campaign period.
And it continues. That "persistent myth" pushed by hostiles cost us most of our house majority in 2020 because Democratic voters, predictably, were alarmed by characterizations that Democrats wanted to "defund the police" and other "persistent-myth" noise. San Francisco voters, overwhelmingly liberal and Democratic, just recalled three "Progressive" school board members who thought renaming 44 schools WAS fixing the crisis in education in the midst of the pandemic.
Those are big clues. The problems they attribute to far-left ideology that voters won't support are real, but that this is the Democratic Party's message is NOT real.
Scrivener7
(50,949 posts)not overcoming the hostile and dishonest messaging that is being imposed on us, not just by the GQP, but by a much larger consortium of people who profit greatly when Democrats do not win.
They are very good at using social and mainstream media to distort our message. Up until now, we have simply not mounted an effective defense against this. I know that is not a popular thing to say here, but it is self-evident.
Budi
(15,325 posts)"Democeats NEED to..."
It's not the Democrats who need a self correction. We've remained true to our tenats.
brooklynite
(94,522 posts)The first PPI report came out in 1989.
In 1992, moderate Bill Clinton won 32 States + DC and 370 EVs.
Budi
(15,325 posts)brooklynite
(94,522 posts)1) We lost the House in 2010 (as well as most Governorships and State Legislative chambers)
2) We lost the Senate in 2014
3) We lost the White House in 2016 (don't tell me Hillary got more votes; the goal is to actually win the election).
4) We won back the House in 2018 on the backs of mainstream candidates in suburban districts)
5) We won the White House in 2020 on the back of a mainstream candidates, BUT lost seats in the House when our messages were seen as "Defund the Police" and "kids in cages".
Budi
(15,325 posts)AZProgressive
(29,322 posts)Trump is not mainstream.
brooklynite
(94,522 posts)...largely due to Trump's "don't trust elections" rants in Georgia.
AZProgressive
(29,322 posts)Who campaigned against AOC and the former mayor of NYC. A Peterson in Minnesota who said Ilhan Omar doesnt belong in the Democratic Party.
They still won more House seats than they did in 2016. Remember when it looked like Republicans would always control the House?
brooklynite
(94,522 posts)AZProgressive
(29,322 posts)For simply attending a BLM protest. Sounds like Republicans were running a smear campaign and there is also a white backlash that has been going on since Obama was elected.
Most of those who lost were inexperienced.
brooklynite
(94,522 posts)"If we are classifying Tuesday as a success from a congressional standpoint, we will get [expletive] torn apart in 2022," Spanberger said bluntly. "That's the reality."
...snip...
As Spanberger put it:
"The number one concern in things that people brought to me in my [district] that I barely re-won, was defunding the police. And I've heard from colleagues who have said 'Oh, it's the language of the streets. We should respect that.' We're in Congress. We are professionals. We are supposed to talk about things in the way where we mean what we're talking about. If we don't mean we should defund the police, we shouldn't say that."
...snip...
2) The talk of socialism
Again, Spanberger:
"We want to talk about funding social services, and ensuring good engagement in community policing, let's talk about what we are for. And we need to not ever use the words 'socialist' or 'socialism' ever again. Because while people think it doesn't matter, it does matter. And we lost good members because of it."
https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/06/politics/abigail-spanberger-house-democrats-2020-election/index.html
AZProgressive
(29,322 posts)I remember her saying we have a mandate.
Torchlight
(3,331 posts)Seems too easily forgotten in the face of crowd-pleasing finger pointing.
RANDYWILDMAN
(2,672 posts)D's at least try to do things to help most people.
Kid Berwyn
(14,897 posts)This "center-left" think tank was originally founded by the Democratic Leadership Council in 1989. This Institute aims to promote radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. It develops fresh proposals for stimulating U.S. economic
https://littlesis.org/org/35500-Progressive_Policy_Institute
While PPI sure sounds liberal organization, it seems to me that some of the people at PPI support charter schools, non-union jobs, and other illiberal ideas.