Politics in the US is mostly about identity politics. In-groups want to protect their status and privilege, and out groups want to create a more equal and inclusive society.
The in-groups and the people who identify with the in-groups are the slight majority of voters.
In theory, focusing on economic issues could help, but the democrats did accomplish some things under Biden and it didn’t matter.
The public want easily noticeable efforts to improve their standard of living. The democrats don’t offer that. The democrats offer policy positions that’ll improve things behind the scenes, but they don’t do anything truly public which is what the public want.
The changes we need wouldn’t be seen overnight, they’d take decades to ripple through the economy. An increase in housing supply, higher minimum wage, health care expansions, higher taxes on the wealthy, etc. But the democrats not only generally don’t want to do those things, they wouldn’t be noticeable for years and years if they did.
I really don’t know what the democrats can do to win. Democrats did almost win the house in 2024. They only lost the presidency by 2 million votes. But If 77 million people are willing to vote for a deranged felon like Trump, how many will vote for a competent fascist?
No. This is a common misunderstanding. Outgroups want to increase their own status and privilege, and they can be persuaded to work together with other outgroups to do so. But you can no more rely on them wanting an equal and inclusive society for everyone than you can rely on ingroups to do so.
Plus, when some outgroup does succeed in raising their status, they will feel more latitude to vote based on other issues they care about, like the economy - even if it harms other outgroups. So the coalition of outgroups can easily be destabilised by its own success.
As I understand it, the thing that takes so much time preparing a new Airforce one is that it has to be made into a flying central command. Safe from hacking and any other danger in war and peace time.
You can’t just take any plane and fly the Commander in Chief.
Fair enough. But this is what I meant by ‘The in-groups and the people who identify with the in-groups’.
White women and latinos for example would be out-groups who identify with the in-groups. White women enjoy the status and privilege they get from their race. Many latinos want to oppress women, gays, blacks, illegal immigrants, and other latinos.
But yes, the out-group coalition can easily fall apart. Historically latinos have voted 60-70% for the democrats, but in the 2024 election that fell apart and only about 53% of latinos voted democratic. I don’t know if that was a fluke, or if that is a long term change in how latinos vote because more of them feel like they are part of the in-group now.
If Trump wants to bomb Nuuk, he can wait until he gets to Mar-a-Lago to order it. And in this thread, we are talking about a good Democratic president. I do not see that person fighting a war from an airplane.
Getting even more serious, we have a fleet of nuclear missile submarines so that launching nuclear weapons should never be an emergency.
And if the president is already in the air when someone launches a nuclear attack against the United States? I’m pretty sure George Bush, Jr. was being constantly appraised as he returned to Washington on 9/11.
This seems to me a good example of Air Force One being useless, even during a crisis..
But I get that others will disagree.
One thing Trump understands: You cannot win elections if you fear alienating tiny parts of your constituency. And the number who would vote for Vance over Newsom, because Newsom planned to live more like a regular Joe, and less like an Emir, is low.
Not to derail the thread, but that’s exactly what the NAOC/NEACP E-4B Nightwatch airplane - and I’m sure, to a lesser extent, the VC-25 - is designed to do; serve as an airborne flying command platform that can keep refueling, limited only by the engine lubricant.
As Keir Starmer is finding out, it’s not so much policy positions that count (or even effective delivery of policy/plans), as narrative: what’s the overarching story, expressed as simply, directly and related to individual experience as possible.
Isn’t Magyar the Hungarian word for Hungarian? It’s like the next Democratic presidential nominee being Pete American! “You can’t get more American than Pete American for President!”