Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Funny how everyone pushes their pet issue after a loss.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NYT: Democrats: Our Brand Is Worse Than Trump
- Thread starter Saucycarpdog
- Start date
Funny how everyone pushes their pet issue after a loss.
Dems should have honestly been looking for their next obama for awhile. I"m talking like before his 2nd term. Party desperately needed a new face for awhile and it's honestly scary they let it get to this. Peloski is a good anchor right now in terms of old guards but that won't last forever.
They need to get this shit together and have a unified platform before the end of the year tho. GOP is already gearing up to make Kamela Harris into a boogyman so they need to be ready for that.
They need to get this shit together and have a unified platform before the end of the year tho. GOP is already gearing up to make Kamela Harris into a boogyman so they need to be ready for that.
mercenar1e
Member
She didnt convince blue dog Democrats back in 2008. Don't hold your breathe.
Aaronrules380
Member
There is no such thing as one universal message that appeals to everyone
Frozenprince
Banned
I swear they're only happy when the Dems lose.
She got the Public Option in, and Reid/Obama not killing the fillibuster is why we don't have one today.
Electoral reform is too complicated to fit into a soundbite.
balladofwindfishes
Member
She actually did! It was the senate where it died, the House passed it
Autodidact
Banned
She got the public option that the Blue Dog Senate later killed.
The House, by virtue of its structure, tends to see far more extreme partisan swings. When Democrats control, it's more liberal than the Senate; when Republicans control, it's more conservative than the Senate.
Uh, she did. The Senate was where the public option failed.
Shit like this suggests a lot of the hatred of Pelosi isn't based in reality.
Frozenprince
Banned
It's a fucking joke that election day isn't a national holiday. It really is.
NervousXtian
Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
..and the majority of Americans voted for Hillary Clinton.
If you want to win elections, you have to do something to cater to the people you need to win.
Gun control is a losing strategy.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
If what you say is true, then the Democrats will never win. If you add up every non-white, every non-straight, every non-cissexual, every immigrant, and every woman who is predominantly concerned with women's rights, you don't have a majority of the electorate. You barely even break 30%. So if the other 70% will never support the Democrats, we may as well all go home and watch Trump rule for a thousand years.
Instead, sometimes, Democrats manage to persuade a large enough number of white people not to either a) not hate black people (rare) or b) put aside their racism towards black people for some other issue. Clinton failed to do that, because she didn't have any other issue. She had nothing to say to these people. (Well, that's perhaps a little unfair. She had a few things to say, but she rarely said them, rarely explained, rarely made them feel relevant to those communities).
You don't have to get these people to stop being racist. That's an incredibly slow process that will take generations. You just have to persuade them that, okay, there's something in this for them too. Tell them about their prospects and why you'll improve them. Tell them about the opportunities they'll have for the children. Tell them how you're going to make America great again.
She said those words more or less, but devoid of context they lose all meaning. And she wasn't talking about the complexity of the bill. She was talking about the misinformation campaign surrounding it. The fact that no one remembers that is fairly telling given this topic.
They couldn't defeat Obama himself electorally but they certainly damaged him.
If Joe Kennedy were named House Minority Leader tomorrow his unfavorables would spike by next week.
mashoutposse
Ante Up
Am I off base with the layman perception that the Democrats are simply hoping the Republicans self-destruct versus going on offense with a compelling agenda/message?
If you're not party leadership, you can hang around forever. Incumbency rates are sky-high because any halfway competent pol does a good job at gladhanding in their home district. Nancy Pelosi is beloved in San Francisco, she's just either distrusted or hated everywhere else.
Same with Paul Ryan. Southeast Wisconsin loves him but other conservatives mistrust him and liberals hate him.
Basically it's nationally relevant politicians who have a shelf life, because attack ads work over the long term even if you don't think they do.
GoldenEye 007
Member
Do you know how governments works? It was in the House bill. She got it done in the House.
The Senate is the body that failed. And like others posted, that's on Reid/Obama more. I'm not sure if I'll blame them for the filibuster issue. Hindsight is 20/20. Had they known them what is known now about the GOP, is hope they would have moved to nuke the filibuster.
GOP gives fuck all about it obviously.
BrutishMrFish
Member
Yeah.
This idea that we should focus on the economy because everyone will benefit makes me think the people who are pushing it think the people who are constantly being screwed over by the system have it good enough already.
Mahadev
Member
OK, see you guys in 2018 to tell you I told you so when the DNC loses again. The fact is that the DNC base feels betrayed by both corporate Democrats and the lord of savior of many in this forum, Obama.
The fact is that you'll never manage to pick up the pieces of the fractured DNC base until you have a populist leftist unite the party, a leftist that presents a clear and completely different path than the one the Republicans are offering. Just talking about "jobs" is the most boring and predictable strategy ever.
Frozenprince
Banned
Yep. Only happy when the Dems lose.
Historically that's what it's taken to get (brief) periods of Democratic rule post-LBJ, yes. Unfortunately.
Who do you think the base of the Dems is? Because it's not leftists.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Only happy making snarky remarks to people you need to vote for you.
Wanting Pelosi out means that Democrats have already lost, why even try? Republicans can be racist, homophobic, assholes all they want and it won't affect them. Democrats just mention important social issues that need focus and it affects them greatly, sad day for minorities in this country, our leadership won't do jackshit for us because it won't get them "votes" (meaning it upsets white people)
Autodidact
Banned
Obviously they deserve to lose for what they did to Bernie. Because he totally lost because of the DNC, not because the majority of primary voters didn't vote for him.
excelsiorlef
Member
So you don't even vote?
For someone who H8s memes you are really good at being one.
This is wishful thinking. You cannot hope to get a Barack Obama every single time there is a presidential election. A better way of going about it is educating and training voters to look beyond personality cults.
Isn't your point that you're all about policy, but you don't actually know anything about Pelosi, you don't actually know anything about policy, and you don't actually know what the positions or policy of Democrats are in general because you don't bother to research? Moreover, is it really the case that you are about policy, or are you more about trust than policy, because by now I think it is quite clear that Democrats and Republicans are not the same in policy prescriptions at all, but somehow, there is still a contingent of people like you claiming that Democrats are terrible?
If you personally cannot trust the Democrats, then say so, rather than pretend you are basing your assessments on policy, which you are not. I think it is rather obvious between Democrats and Republicans whose policies I would support.
Moreover, you are not about policy if you need elections to be exciting and unpredictable to motivate you to vote.
PlayALLtheGames
Banned
He was talking about strategy and that's what I responded to but I understand your point and you're right that nobody does. People need to be told, over and over again.
Frozenprince
Banned
Oh please. I've canvased and done campaign work every year for 12 years now.
Maybe the Dems should actually earn my vote for once instead of taking it for granted.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
Boom
excelsiorlef
Member
My fav is folks saying these loses are why the Dems need to change everything and learn from Corbyn you know the guy who also lost a much closer race than expected
Seeing some of the "hysterical" BS they throw at her on Fox News etc. pisses me off. Wish they could be sued for slander sometimes.
Our senator actually cares about doing her job, unlike half the R senators out there who just coast along, showing no spine whatsoever. I hope Harris ends up lasting as long as Mikulski, if she doesn't end up as president.
I'm really tired of male voters throwing women and other minorities off a cliff because they might actually have to sacrifice something in their lives to help others. Thank god my SO isn't one of them! (though he needs to stop slacking about voting in Germany)
Isaac Otherworld
Member
You know that thing Republicans do where they run on racial resentment while quietly pursuing their real objective is creating a Ruusian style oligarchy where a handful of megaweathy dictate all public policy? You do the opposite of that.
You run on the fact that the megawealthy are stealing wealth on masse from everyone else in the country while quietly making a more just and progressive society.
Democrats could absolutely win nationally with an economically populist message. But the party is run by the same people stealing wealth from the 99%. They care more about their fancy cocktail parties and their donors than protecting minority rights. They're happy going down with the titanic as long as they have first class seats.
People in this country are deservedly angry. It's about directing the anger in the right place rather than trying to ignore it.
Oddly enough, the district Ossif was running was probably the one district where running as a corporate democrat would be the better strategy.
SpartanN92
Banned
No they wouldn't. They might enjoy the look on her face but republicans laughed out loud the last time Pelosi was chosen House Minority leader. They prefer winning over the satisfaction they'd get from her career being over.
Dems biggest problem besides strong candidates for leadership is they need to stop freaking out so much on every loss, and keep pushing a message. Ossoff winning that election was a long shot, and the fact that he got as close as he did was a good sign. It's called progress, which is what they're supposed to be about.
But then when the whole party freaks out over it it makes them look weak as fuck and disorganized, and just looking for the next big "thing" or "message" that will give them the win, rather than just continuing to push and work their ass off every chance they can to build a stronger base.
It really makes them look lazy and that they want/expect something handed to them, which will just make the R's chokehold on them much strong and even push some of their own base away because it doesn't give them anything firm to believe in.
Say what you will about R ideals, but that party has certainly given their voters strong ideals that they will unshakably believe and vote for.
But then when the whole party freaks out over it it makes them look weak as fuck and disorganized, and just looking for the next big "thing" or "message" that will give them the win, rather than just continuing to push and work their ass off every chance they can to build a stronger base.
It really makes them look lazy and that they want/expect something handed to them, which will just make the R's chokehold on them much strong and even push some of their own base away because it doesn't give them anything firm to believe in.
Say what you will about R ideals, but that party has certainly given their voters strong ideals that they will unshakably believe and vote for.
This won't work. https://www.voterstudygroup.org/reports/2016-elections/political-divisions-in-2016-and-beyond
People voting because they're racist and scared aren't going to stop voting on those axes!
Ya, this is the real issue. It's a marketing problem more than anything else.
MHWilliams
Member
Did anyone actually look at Ossoff's ads and speeches, or did they just determine this was the problem?
Dr. Benton Quest
Banned
That's my entire point. It took her forever to spell out that the bill was too complex to refute every peice of misinformation around it before the vote. I encourage you to watch the video of it again.
They didn't damage Obama. He wrecked his opponents both times and would have won again if able. Are you joking about Kennedy? We need an unknown.
Just stop.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I mean, sure. They should earn your vote. They also need to earn the vote of the Obama -> Trump switcher as well. In fact, they need to win a majority of the vote - an electoral college majority of the vote! That's why we're in this thread. So please, do tell: how are we going to do that?
Pelosi is damaged goods in the sense she has underwent the same demonization the last 20 years that Hillary Clinton has. So while I am not saying she has to go I can certainly understand why people feel she needs to go.
Also people are crazy overreacting. Just because they say they need to talk economy and jobs more does not suddenly mean they are going to abandon their social policy stances. You can do both Economic and Social issues while predominately talking about the one that impacts the Majority of people.
Also people are crazy overreacting. Just because they say they need to talk economy and jobs more does not suddenly mean they are going to abandon their social policy stances. You can do both Economic and Social issues while predominately talking about the one that impacts the Majority of people.
Wasn't it screwed by one vote? Memory's hazy but I thought it was Lieberman.
Whompa02
Member
We're starting to get used to losing so what's so bad about giving him a shot at being on top.
It's much more nuanced than that. He got screwed over. He also got support from millions of people so maybe don't discount his ability to get a crowd of supporters together.
It was a few of them, IIRC. There were a lot of marginal senators screwing with the bill late in the process (Baucus, Lieberman, Nelson, etc.)