If they are the difference between majority and minority, you play footsy and mollify them to the extent you feel you can tolerate. See for instance Manchin and Sinema who were both critical to the very important task of getting new justices approved by the Biden administration, a job they performed adequately. If they are extraneous, you isolate and ignore them. Politics 101.
There are really no better options in the U.S. system, because basically office holders > parties. The capacity of either the Republicans or Democrats as political parties to reign in rogue members is very, very limited. You can do something like deny them committee seats, national campaign funds and…that’s about it, short of impeachment. Which is a difficult to pull off nuclear option.
I do think those sort of straddle-the-line politicians are very likely to become more rare going forward. Ironically as an outgrowth of a negative in American society - increased polarization. Manchin for example was catered to because he was the lone Democrat able to get elected in a now deeply red state. But those sort of folks are disappearing. In the future fewer and fewer crossover candidates will be able to win national-level seats.
You can’t tell the difference between a decent man doing the best he can with the cards he was delt. A patriot that has served the country for decades
-and-
A known liar, rapist and overall fraud. A convicted felon that doesn’t give a shit about anyone but himself. Oh, and let’s not forget that Trump is a moron. I could go on, and on and on here.
If you only had character to base your choice, you can’t decide who to pick to run the country based on the above?
…I’m answering this specifically to give full context here, not intending to hijack this thread. But I consider Biden to be complicit in a genocide, so no, I do not believe him to be decent at all. If you want more details, I’m happy to give them to you in a relevant thread, but I will not address anything further here.
As I said, I couldn’t and wouldn’t vote for either.
For some, principles are more important than actual human suffering. Sure, Palestinians (and many others) would suffer even more were Trump president, but how can reducing/preventing actual human suffering hope to stand up against such strong and powerful principles?
This thread has opened my eyes a bit about what we are up against.
I’m thinking that there is no strategy to combat people (MAGA’s) that refuse to look at facts, and mostly place their vote based on hate and bigotry and complete ignorance.
The strategy HAS to be that we all need to vote, and remove the pestilence that is Donald Trump.
…this isn’t fair. Because this is about actual human suffering. And if you are going to campaign on character, which I’m arguing you shouldn’t be doing in this particular race, then there are plenty of people who don’t think Biden’s character holds up. Independents oppose the President’s policy here, and Democrats overwhelmingly disapprove. Reversing course here could make a massive difference to the next election. So could a realistic pathway to abortion rights.
Obviously not for you (if you were an actual voter). When you loudly proclaim that you’d never vote for Biden, even against Trump, then your advice on how to campaign for him doesn’t mean anything at all. If it wouldn’t work for you, why would it work for anyone else?
As far as human suffering, I plan to vote for the candidate whose policies will reduce/prevent/minimize human suffering compared to their opponent. In this case that will be the Democratic candidate, Biden or otherwise. That’s what my principles tell me to do, but YMMV.
…as it is right now, I’d vote for neither. If they either got rid of Biden, or changed course on certain policy platforms, then I’d vote for the Democrats. And I’d be out on the streets campaigning for the Dems to change policy.
And it doesn’t matter how much anyone tries to shame you. Because behind closed doors, thousands of people are making these very same calculations. If you ignore them: you risk losing everything.
I’m not telling you this to be righteous. I’m telling you now because there is still enough time to make a difference. If you want the Democrats to win the next election, you can’t just pretend that these people don’t exist.
Naah, you, and people like you, have made up their minds and have profoundly different values than anything I can comprehend. Maybe someone could craft such a message, but I certainly couldn’t, nor do I understand it. To me, voting is about real-world concerns, including things like human suffering – if one candidate would obviously increase human suffering by much, much more than their opponent, then I must necessarily vote for the opponent. I have such little in common with you and folks like you, who obviously see the world (and things like human suffering) so differently that I have no hope in communicating with you/them.
The decision not to vote for Biden is about real-world concerns. Its literally about the things he is doing in office, and the things he will continue to do if voted in again.
There is a person in Michigan who has had 25 members of his families killed due in part to policy decisions made by the Biden administration. Can you look him in the face and tell him to ignore his human suffering and vote for Biden?
And this isn’t a strategy for winning votes.
This is what this thread is about, is it not?
What you chose to do is largely irrelevant. Its a discussion about democratic strategy. And I think it’s a poor decision to focus on character when many people think his character isn’t great. And I’m using myself as an example to explain why.
And this is why the Democrats are likely to lose the next election. You’ve got to figure this out real quick.
I think there are very few people who follow the news and care much about politics, who consequently are aware of and understanding of the threats, who have not made up their minds about who they will vote for, if they vote.
More who don’t follow much and who don’t like either and have yet to decide who they dislike more, and then if they will vote.
It would. As a matter of practical politics a reverse would have huge negative impacts. (Which does not preclude ratcheting up pressure on the current Israeli government, as has been done, and on Hamas, to complete the deal on the table.)
It is highly unlikely to flip a single voter from Trump to Biden. A handful of single issue strong Israel support folk, I know a handful, would flip to Trump, reluctantly.
And those staying home out of a lack of enthusiasm for either who believe you do are not going to suddenly become enthusiastic enough to vote based on it. (You wouldn’t.) Some who are unenthusiastic or uninformed who lean Trump OTOH (a bigger number) may see it as enough to bother to vote against Biden.
As an election issue (the only issue relevant in this thread) the single best approach is to use all his diplomatic tools to get that ceasefire across the line, with a path to more discussions on a more lasting solution.
And to focus the conversation on two or three items of critical importance to our futures as Americans. Not name calling but the threat of an unrestrained imperial presidency, reproductive rights, and climate change maybe.
Do not dis his supporters, driving up their turnout.
…but we aren’t talking about flipping Trump voters for Biden.
We are talking about formerly Biden voters who are deciding not to vote.
It’s not a “lack of enthusiasm.”
He doesn’t want a ceasefire. He hasn’t made any serious effort towards a ceasefire, or to hold the party he has an influence on back. But again: that’s a subject for another thread, and I will no longer talk about this.
That isn’t how democracy works. If people want to “dis his supporters” they are welcome to do so. You can’t control it. And more importantly: this isn’t an actionable strategy. If you are relying on this to win the next election: it isn’t going to work.
If you think dissing Biden voters is a losing strategy, imagine what dissing people struggling to vote for him will do.
“Establishment candidate” is a meaningless criticism. Of course the Democrats are running an establishment candidate. It can’t be otherwise. If we were running someone else instead, then that person would be the “establishment candidate”.
…Not quite; if someone like Bernie or AOC were the nominee, they’d be quite different than that. They’d be regarded as the more outsider/anti-establishment type.
You misunderstand much of what I said. Maybe it wasn’t clear. Possible.
To the last bit only and then I’ll decline talking past each other: Biden (or Harris if that happens) should avoid disrespecting Trump supporters, as HRC had on multiple occasions. They may include a basket of deplorables but saying that is a bad idea. Disrespect Trump, not his voters.
We can’t hammer Trump on his policies. If he really has any. Other than revenge I suppose. MAGAs love the revenge idea though.
I guess his other policy would to be friendly towards Russia, and give up on Ukraine. And then NATO of course, leaving our (soon to be former) allies on their own. I, myself, like a free Europe.