:rolleyes:
Man, you really don’t want that progressive tax rate and not-for-profit healthcare, don’t you?
[quote=“Velocity, post:6, topic:837262”]
[ul]
[li]Try to reduce the visibility of AOC, Omar, Tlaib - ‘the Squad’ - as much as possible. [/ul][/li][/QUOTE]
I don’t see how that is possible. Trump is clearly going to run against ‘the Squad’ no matter who the actual nominee ends up being. The Nuremberg rally he held last night with the “send her back” chants will be the norm and main theme going forward.
Pretty much this, in particular the part I bolded.
The voter outreach and registration efforts need to happen particularly in the Rust Belt states Trump lost that previously went to Obama. Probably some of the other potential swing states like North Carolina, Iowa and Arizona as well but the focus should be on Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan. States that are solidly D like California, Illinois, New York and most of the Northeast will be good sources to raise money but I don’t see a reason the ultimate nominee needs to spend much in the way of resources in those states.
Put heavy pressure on the bottom 10 to 12 candidates that are running just to get free publicity for the lesser offices they actually intend to run for to sign a pledge that if they stay in they will not run for any other office when they finally quit the race.
Not once the Senate finds him “not guilty”.
I wonder what % of democrat voters would be turned off by their candidate reciting the Beatitudes from memory. I suspect it’s more than a few.
I think that the Democrats need to get a coherent message, and then debate about how they fit within it, and how they’re going to implement it. The Democrats can’t afford to have AOC doing loose-cannon stuff like the Green New Deal without official party sanction or official party disavowment. Otherwise you end up with a lot of uncertainty about just what the party DOES stand for. Do they want all that GND stuff? Do they want Biden’s less radical, but more workable stuff? Something in the middle?
That’s the #1 missing thing- they appear to be ideologically scattered, with just a vague direction of various liberal ideas. The fact that they’re not reining in AOC or Omar or openly championing her policies, and that they have dozens of candidates running makes the party look disorganized, weak and ineffectual as a party, and by extension, their candidates will appear to be tainted by the same stuff.
You spelled fascist wrong.
Who thought the fat orange racist was a neo-liberal centrist? The ones who claim to have voted for Obama and then decided to vote for the orange ass-clown? Studies I have read on the subject say the number of such claimants is greatly exaggerated with a variance of 35% because they all depend on self-reported data.
I don’t like it anymore than you do. Biden is not my first choice. But the Democrats can’t seem to get out of their own way. Even Obama thinks it’s a circular firing squad.
I like many/most of the progressive ideas and would want to see them implemented tomorrow. But if a centrist old school democrat like Biden stands the best chance of winning, I’d rather see him win rather than hold by breath like a petulant child until Bernie is nominated.
The guy who you say is too old and not invested enough is the one adult in the room that is saying what you want said and you’re dismissing him.
Look, I don’t think JB is progressive enough. I don’t. I think Liz and Pete would make a great team with Liz at the helm. But neither one is going to punch Trump in the mouth like Joe can: On 5th avenue in broad daylight and get away with it.
Yup yup yup.
For all the talk of the appeal of centrism, for the last two decades the more extreme candidate of the two has won (other than maybe 2004) and coalescing around am experienced moderate/centrist during the primaries has proven to be a mistake.
I don’t think it’s a coincidence. America is polarized, and the number of people in the middle who know they will vote but don’t know who they’ll choose pales in comparison to the number of people further along one end or another of the spectrum choosing between voting and staying home.
Les Wiz, I haven’t tended to agree with that point of view in the past, but you presented the evidence for it so succinctly and clearly, I’m moving toward your camp now. We must keep reminding ourselves that the person who received the most (non)votes in just about every national election has been “nobody.”
Democrats should argue for the **practical benefits **of their policies rather than try to tug at emotional heartstrings. If they point out that single-payer universal healthcare can save trillions of dollars in the long run, spare people from getting $50,000 hospital bills for a broken leg, etc. that can be a very winnable platform indeed.
If they try to argue for it on the basis of “those undocumented migrants NEED cheap healthcare!” it will crash and burn in the minds of many voters. Trying to invoke **compassion **often incites precisely the opposite sentiment. (not that it’s *right *for voters to have that mental backlash - but just saying that they often do)
Wait… you meant, HRC. :smack:
Just ignore that bit where I said everything.
Focus on turnout more than anything. If a relatively small fraction of those liberals and progressives who didn’t vote in 2016 vote in 2020, the Democrats will win the presidency and House and very possibly the senate.
Almost everything else is secondary to this. Excite liberals and progressives and we probably win.
The conditions in which the Dems win the presidency:
- They don’t nominate Hillary
- The Earth continues to revolve around the sun for ~550 more days.
I’m not talking about candidate preference, I’m talking about winning. Biden v. Trump is a rerun of a contest we already lost. Doing it again and thinking it’ll work this time is madness.
Maybe I’m completely out of touch but my sense is that people actually like Biden, where as too many merely tolerated HRC.
I know of no democrats pushing for universal healthcare using this reasoning.
I’d posit that democrats should not adjust their campaigns to pander to people who are never going to vote for them anyway. For example, no amount of talk about being a “lifelong hunter” is going to get the NRA’s endorsement, or the votes of the people who care about the NRA’s endorsement, so just skip all that. Effective pandering, or none at all.
I think Trump has everybody sufficiently excited and motivated.
That would ensure a trump re-election.