# I realize it's early, but how should Democrats approach 2020? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [March 9, 2017, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800 "2017-03-09T21:29:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2017, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/1 "2017-03-09T21:29:02Z")
Should they just nominate whoever the base likes best, or try really hard to appeal to moderate and conservative voters who don’t like Trump? As most of you probably know, I did not vote for Trump. I voted for Clinton, because I felt she was competent and would work well with Republicans. But if I see a race between say, Liz Warren and Trump in 2020, I’m voting third party. The Third party vote in 2016 on the right was pretty high. Clearly there are some voters to be won there. So, is it better for Democrats to try to please voters like me, or try to motivate the base? I say please voters like me. Not so much because it’s objectively the better strategy, but because it’s easier to implement. Identifying a centrist candidate is easy. Everyone knows who the centrist candidate is in any given race. finding a candidate who will increase base turnout is a lot harder. Progressives may be ultra enthused about candidates like Bernie Sanders and Liz Warren, but it doesn’t matter whether progressives are enthused or not. What matters is whether youth and minority voters are. Sanders failed for the most part to appeal to minority voters, and I see no evidence that Liz Warren would have any more success in that regard. Cory Booker on the other hand, has a much more moderate record but could recreate the Obama coalition. Or maybe not. It’s hard to know in advance. So just pick the candidate I tell you to pick and everything will go great. I promise.😃 ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2017, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/2 "2017-03-09T21:39:58Z")
If Trump is running again I guess it might be worth going centrist(if you are willing to call the New Democrats that name) to get voters like you, as long as (s)he’s populist enough to frigging carry the rust belt. If Trump declines a second term there’s no point as you’ll vote Republican if it’s not Trump. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2017, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/3 "2017-03-09T22:24:19Z")
Not necessarily. There are more bad Republicans than just Trump. But yes, I would vote for most of the current top contenders(Rubio, Pence, Ryan). Ted Cruz though, that would be a hard sell for me. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/4 "2017-03-10T00:51:11Z")
Ideally, someone who the base feels is progressive but is unknown enough to the general public that it wouldn’t turn people off who are more centrist. I’m not sure who that’d be though. Sanders and Warren are both well known at this point. It depends on how the economy does under Trump. If it does poorly, I don’t think it matters who the democrats run as the dems will have an advantage. If it does well, then I think you’d need to run someone with as broad an appeal as possible, especially with high school educated whites (who are what gave Trump the election). ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/5 "2017-03-10T00:54:41Z")
I doubt it’ll actually matter that much who the Democrats run, because the economy will likely have a significant downturn before 2020. The Trumpists are going to overheat the economy, inflation is going to soar, the Fed will aggressively raise interest rates, consumer spending will contract, businesses will lay off, and the Republicans, divided between conservatives and Trumpists, will fail to do enough to help the middle class. Democrats will be able to elect anyone to the right of Trotsky. In the short-term (that is, 2020), Democrats will be very tempted to nominate someone like Sanders. They’ll win that election because of the damage caused by Trumpists. And they’ll fix most of the damage, too, because Democrats are competent. They’ll likely win reelection in 2024, too. In the long-term, if the Democrats choose a “leftist”, they will over-reach. And the Republicans (after purging all the Trumpists) will be competent and competitive again. But I think that if Democrats choose a “centrist”, they will be able to hold onto power for longer. Now maybe it doesn’t matter that much. Democrats tend to put practicality ahead of ideology, so even an extreme leftist in the presidency will be limited by centrist Democrats. And maybe doing too much in one or two terms and then fighting the reactions works just as well as incremental change over three or four terms. I’m not a Democrat, so it’s their call, not mine. For myself, as a RINO, my litmus tests are 1) pro free trade, 2) pro diversity, and 3) pro corporation. Obama and the Clintons were perfect candidates for me. I hope that Democrats pick someone in their mold, but I’m not hopeful. ---
**Author:** ![ckalli1998](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a3d4f5/32.png) [@ckalli1998](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ckalli1998)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/6 "2017-03-10T00:57:26Z")
I’m a conservative Republican, so obviously I hope the Democrats lose, but here’s my thoughts. They should just run as themselves. Elizabeth Warren has made herself the face of her party, and the Democrats wholeheartedly supported her during the Sessions episode, so if they back down from her brand of politics and try to appear moderate to appeal to Trump voters, they’ll probably see it for what it is: shameless politicians without principles trying to clumsily pander for their votes. I admire it when a politician, Republican or a Democrat, runs based on their own personal beliefs, not based on where the prevailing political winds of the public says their beliefs should be (even if they aren’t truly genuine). For example, although I oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership, I wasn’t impressed when Hillary changed her position on it and decided to oppose it; she didn’t do so out of a genuine change of heart (she previously called it the “gold standard of trade deals”), but did so when it was convenient for her in an effort to defeat the socialist Senator Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primaries, a man who, although I disagree with him on a lot, truly and genuinely opposed it from the start. That’s my advice, and good luck to you guys, although not too much luck! 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/7 "2017-03-10T01:05:40Z")
> [@ckalli1998](#): > > I’m a conservative Republican, so obviously I hope the Democrats lose, but here’s my thoughts. > > They should just run as themselves. Elizabeth Warren has made herself the face of her party, and the Democrats wholeheartedly supported her during the Sessions episode, so if they back down from her brand of politics and try to appear moderate to appeal to Trump voters, they’ll probably see it for what it is: shameless politicians without principles trying to clumsily pander for their votes. > > I admire it when a politician, Republican or a Democrat, runs based on their own personal beliefs, not based on where the prevailing political winds of the public says their beliefs should be (even if they aren’t truly genuine). > > For example, although I oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership, I wasn’t impressed when Hillary changed her position on it and decided to oppose it; she didn’t do so out of a genuine change of heart (she previously called it the “gold standard of trade deals”), but did so when it was convenient for her in an effort to defeat the socialist Senator Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primaries, a man who, although I disagree with him on a lot, truly and genuinely opposed it from the start. > > That’s my advice, and good luck to you guys, although not too much luck! 😉 I can see your point, but I’m starting to get really uncomfortable with populism and the desire to find someone with deep ideological values they will not waver from. I’m a leftist, but Venezuela is falling apart because they elected a populist leader who had no idea how to function in a global marketplace (people are eating zoo animals down there to avoid starving). The US just elected a populist leader who will likely put the US at a disadvantage relative to China and probably europe as well as harming many alliances. If the US emerges from Trump with our economy and reputation only somewhat damaged, I’d consider that the best case scenario. The idea of voting for someone just because they have convictions isn’t really that great if those convictions are terrible ideas. ISIS has convictions and will stand by them even when they are unpopular. I think the US is falling into a less serious version of what happened in China. They kept pursuing ideologically pure policy and big ideas/easy solutions under Mao which constantly screwed everything up. In the late 70s they said ‘alright, screw ideology. Lets just do what works’ and things have been improving ever since. I think/hope the US goes through something similar. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/8 "2017-03-10T03:13:22Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Should they just nominate whoever the base likes best, or try really hard to appeal to moderate and conservative voters who don’t like Trump? > > As most of you probably know, I did not vote for Trump. I voted for Clinton, because I felt she was competent and would work well with Republicans. But if I see a race between say, Liz Warren and Trump in 2020, I’m voting third party. Why? Do you hate America? Elon Musk could build a Satan-Bot, and get it on the ballot, and it would STILL be your patriotic duty to vote for it against Trump. Unless you DO hate America. ---
**Author:** ![ckalli1998](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a3d4f5/32.png) [@ckalli1998](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ckalli1998)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/9 "2017-03-10T03:19:48Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > Why? > > Do you hate America? > > Elon Musk could build a Satan-Bot, and get it on the ballot, and it would STILL be your patriotic duty to vote for it against Trump. > > Unless you DO hate America. I voted for Trump and I don’t hate America. Don’t psychoanalyze. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/10 "2017-03-10T03:22:57Z")
Missed the edit window. For clarity: A third-party vote, by definition, is not a vote against Trump. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/11 "2017-03-10T03:39:26Z")
> [@ckalli1998](#): > > I voted for Trump and I don’t hate America. Don’t psychoanalyze. Not psychoanalyzing, just pointing out facts.\* The Republican Party is no longer a conservative party; it is a party of radical reactionaries. And “radical” is pretty much the exact opposite of “conservative.” \*Okay, I’m also extrapolating, some. ---
**Author:** ![ckalli1998](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a3d4f5/32.png) [@ckalli1998](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ckalli1998)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/12 "2017-03-10T03:41:13Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > Not psychoanalyzing, just pointing out facts. The Republican Party is no longer a conservative party; it is a party of radical reactionaries. And “radical” is pretty much the exact opposite of “conservative.” The Republican Party is not “radical”, nor “reactionary”. It’s a conservative party, the alternative to the liberal party in America which is the Democratic Party. Also, you want to talk about radicals, look at the left-wing zealots on your side, Elizabeth Warren, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Sherrod Brown, Michael Moore, and so on. Still, you haven’t proved that because I voted for Trump that I hate America. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/13 "2017-03-10T03:53:42Z")
HAHAHAHAHAHA! Pull the other one; it’s got bells on. The Democratic Party has been center-right at least since Clinton42. ETA: Sorry for the hijack; carry on. ---
**Author:** ![Yersenia\_Pestis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/e495f1/32.png) [@Yersenia\_Pestis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yersenia_Pestis)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/14 "2017-03-10T04:01:00Z")
> [@ckalli1998](#): > > The Republican Party is not “radical”, nor “reactionary”. It’s a conservative party, the alternative to the liberal party in America which is the Democratic Party. > > Also, you want to talk about radicals, look at the left-wing zealots on your side, Elizabeth Warren, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Sherrod Brown, Michael Moore, and so on. > > Still, you haven’t proved that because I voted for Trump that I hate America. Have you seem his cabinet picks?? Holy crap, are you comfortable with Betsy devos?! Have you not been astonished at how unprepapered he is for his job?? Seriously, think about what an extraordinary shitty decision your vote was… ---
**Author:** ![ckalli1998](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a3d4f5/32.png) [@ckalli1998](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ckalli1998)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/15 "2017-03-10T04:16:25Z")
> [@](#): > > Have you seem his cabinet picks?? Holy crap, are you comfortable with Betsy devos?! Have you not been astonished at how unprepapered he is for his job?? Yeah, DeVos is a woman, not a man, yo. And she did stumble a little, but she ultimately corrected herself. I’ve thought about my decision a good deal, and I don’t regret it at all. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/16 "2017-03-10T04:19:43Z")
The Democrats are in an enviable situation heading into 2020. Trump and the GOP will be so deeply unpopular that Democratic victory will be almost guaranteed. But how the Dems play it, makes a big difference - they can only maximize at the POTUS or Congress positions, but likely not both: 1. \*\*Maximize at POTUS: \*\*“We’re almost certain to win the White House, so let’s get as far-left a president as possible.” But in return the Democrats might get only a slim majority in Congress, or even perhaps no majority. 2. \*\* Maximize at Congress: \*\*Nominate a more centrist president, who will have more coattails, and get more of a Congressional majority. ---
**Author:** ![Swithin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Swithin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Swithin)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 6:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/17 "2017-03-10T06:11:42Z")
I think the democrats should choose an amiable ideologue, someone in the vein of Joe Biden (Biden/Warren was my ideal ticket for 2016, Bernie was my runner-up.) Maybe Jeff Merkley, if he acquits himself well over the next two years. I see no advantage in choosing a centrist deal-maker, we all saw how well that worked with Hillary (the candidate, not the caricature.) We currently have two identifiable ideological camps with their own Overton Windows. In between reside the non-partisan, who can be swayed by personalities or the stray argument that resonates with their concerns. Trump proved that they can also be enticed by personal attacks and theatrical outrage. There are true policy debates within the left wing and within the right wing; showmanship wins the “center”. The republicans have claimed that space. My opinion: let them keep it. That’s not to say that messaging isn’t important - we’ve failed, and failed hard, on that front. We can and should improve, but not at the cost of a consistent core philosophy or the ability to provide good governance (is there any better example of the danger of succumbing to this temptation than the current GOP?) The goal shouldn’t be to snag an undecided voter or two in any given election cycle with jolly little nicknames for our opponents, but to contrast the steadfast and sometimes boring sensibleness of Obama’s Democratic party against the gaudiness and mercurialness of Trump’s GOP. Can you imagine if Biden were ten years younger right now? We don’t need someone lukewarm, with a 50% purity rating from every different policy group, but someone who can repeat the words “Empathy, Sanity, Rationality” loudly and clearly to usher that non-committal middle into our Overton Window. Given Trump’s approval ratings with independents, they seem fired up and ready to go. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/18 "2017-03-10T07:18:51Z")
I’ve already outlined some steps in this regard: > [@Trump Won-Time for an Alt Left?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-won-time-for-an-alt-left/780815/1): > > That is where a new, “alternative left” that can face the potent nativist nationalism of the alternative right comes in. Broadly speaking an alternative left would seek to create a left populist opposition that would form a coalition of the multiracial middle and working-class. As many moderates have pointed out Democrats did make significant gains in diverse Sunbelt states such as Arizona and Texas, even winning my native Orange County for the first time in 80 years. Here we must distinguish between two potential elements of the coalition in these areas. Democrats should without reservation welcome the incorporation of Hispanic and Asian Americans into the body politic and seek to increase their turnout in future elections in these areas. While we should similarly not turn up our nose at upper middle-class voters in these areas who are turning to the Democratic Party, we must fight entryism that threatens to undermine a strong commitment to socioeconomic populism in favour of a bourgeois ideology of “fiscally conservative, socially liberal” that will only alienate the most loyal elements of the party. In turn, this commitment to the heritage of Jacksonian democracy, Bryanite populism, the New Deal, and the Great Society requires us to win back the white working-class. The white working-class is bearing the brunt of a systematic socioeconomic and psychological collapse in much of American society that in many ways parallels that of Russia’s in the 1990s. Most tellingly, mortality rates have increased and life expectancy has declined for white Americans without [college degrees](https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/us-life-expectancy-declines-for-the-first-time-since-1993/2016/12/07/7dcdc7b4-bc93-11e6-91ee-1adddfe36cbe_story.html?utm_term=.053297f3215a), primarily due to significant increases in incidences of drug/alcohol abuse as well as suicide. In turn, much of this is attritbutable to a wide array of factors including deindustrialization, wage stagnation, social atomization, and so forth. It was this pain which Trump (not entirely implausibly) blamed mass immigration and free trade for that produced Trump’s victory. To win again, especially given the presence of gerrymandering and laws hindering voting, Democrats must have a robust agenda. > > With some reservations, the [most plausible agenda I’ve found](http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.com/2016/09/a-proposal-for-alt-left-political.html) is outlined here. In broad terms I would advocate for: > > [1] Universal Welfare State-Americans dislike means-tested benefits programs that can be agitated against on the grounds of it going to “undeserving” people while social insurance programs such as Social Security that everyone pays into and everyone benefits from are strongly popular. Thus Democrats should advocate an increase in Social Security benefits by removing the income tax cap, propose universal paid leave, and possibly look seriously into a universal basic income. > > [2] Social Patriotism-For too many Americans, Democrats especially those of a more left-wing variety are seen as “un-American” if not “treasonous”. Democrats should counter this by adopting the language of patriotism and declare (quite correctly) that true patriotism is not to an abstract concept of a nation but to the people which compose a nation. It should be seen as a national disgrace that life expectancies for millions of Americans are declining, that many part of the country such as Indian reservations live in conditions nearing Third World poverty, that corporations can jack up prices for drugs, and so on. The poor and others in want should be seen as fellow citizens, not as objects of charity. > > [3] Populism-The strongest left-wing movements in both America and the rest of the world have been populist in character, by empowering the people themselves to undertake political action. After Trump, many liberals seem to think the opposite is the case and that the people cannot be trusted with political power despite the fact that _more Americans voted for Hillary Clinton_. Liberals must recognize that even “experts” have unconscious biases that lead them to favour their own personal interests when setting policy and that having a college degree in say 18th Century Chinese Literature or Molecular Biology might make them an expert in that given field but not give them any particular enlightenment in regards to government. In tandem with this, the left should favour radical democratization through automatic voter registration, abolishment of the Electoral College, reform of the US Senate, ending gerrymandering of the House of Representatives, and otherwise removing all archaic and reactionary barriers to the pure expression of the popular will. > > [4] Solidarity/Communitarianism-Americans have always been an individualistic people but simultaneously as observers from Tocqueville to Putnam have noted, they have often been equally devoted to the life of the community as well. In an era of social atomization and increasing isolation of individuals, Democrats should do everything to counteract such trends and strengthen civil and social institutions that serve as intermediaries between individuals and the State or the Market such as families, friendship ties, social clubs, churches, and the like. The left must appropriate the language of the right and declare that only an ideology that recognizes limits to the all-encompasing claims of the market even when it breaks town social ties can allow for humans to flourish as social beings. > > [5] Big Tent without Pandering-To get laws passed, Democrats must retake the House and state governments which are already biased in favour of rural Middle America. Thus to do so, Democrats should adopt a big tent towards particularly sensitive issues. Gun control in general should be dropped given that most plausible gun control measures yield little return in exchange for large-scale political losses while Democrats should be allowed to vote their conscience on the most contentious issue of abortion which unlike many other battles of the Culture War looks unlikely to go away even 40 years after Roe v. Wade. It’s clear that the extreme pro-abortion legalization approach adopted by Hillary Clinton last year which theoretically rejected limitations on abortion even after viability and supporting repealing the Hyde amendment alienated significant numbers of Catholic and evangelical voters, leading to the spectacle of Trump winning the highest percentage of the evangelical vote of any Republican candidate despite all his past history. While it’s unlikely a national Democratic candidate will be pro-life anytime soon, any pro-choice candidate would do better to emphasize reducing abortions through better availability of contraception and more robust social safety net for families. This does not mean Democrats should cede the ground on “Culture War” issues or “identity politics”-in particular Democrats should stand for the equal protection in terms of race, gender, sexual orientation, sexual identity, religion, and so forth. Indeed, Democrats should be taking leadership on certain cultural issues such as marijuana legalization and copyright reform where the public has moved ahead of them. TL;DR: Focus on bread and butter issues. Centre the common man and woman. Chase after natural Democrats (the working-class) not Republicans whose only liberal stances are abortion and gay marriage. ---
**Author:** ![emyjacob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7feea3/32.png) [@emyjacob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emyjacob)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 7:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/19 "2017-03-10T07:23:46Z")
I guess trump is in news for all wrong reasons these days. That makes things quite easy for their opposition ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2017, 11:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800/20 "2017-03-10T11:16:15Z")
> [@ckalli1998](#): > > Yeah, DeVos is a woman, not a man, yo. And she did stumble a little, but she ultimately corrected herself. I’m pretty sure the “he” above refers to Trump, not DeVos. And no, she didn’t correct herself; she resorted to repeating the meaningless phrase “I believe in accountability” in response to questioning. And her appointment was a perfect example of what is wrong with the current administration and Congressional Republicans’ willingness to support it no matter what. Back on topic: The problem that the Democrats face is that they haven’t focused on controlling the narrative, which is what wins elections. As recent events demonstrate, it doesn’t matter whether you lie or tell the truth or something in between as long as you tell a story that speaks to people. So people think the GOP are the party of the working class and that Clinton didn’t care about people’s jobs despite the fact that the GOP have a long history of screwing over the working class in order to benefit the rich and the topic Clinton spoke the most about during the campaign was jobs. The truth didn’t matter. The narrative did. Obama understood this, and gave us “Hope and Change”. It didn’t matter whether it meant anything or not; like “Make America Great Again” it was a theme that resonated and which allowed people to project their expectations on it. If the Democrats want to win, they need to find the right theme - in 2018 and in 2020 - that will resonate with what voters think they want. Having policies that will actually improve the lives of those voters is an obvious bonus but that’s not enough to win elections. A good story backed by lies will win over a weak story backed by substance every time. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-realize-its-early-but-how-should-democrats-approach-2020/781800.md?page=2)