That might be possible, but I doubt rather a lot that the Dems will be able to bring it off.
Plus, they will then not be able to talk about the economy, which is doing well and most voters will not fall for the “who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes”, and also not about his major campaign promise, which was to build the wall. Because nobody in their right mind will believe a Democrat who tries to argue that failure to build the wall is Trump’s fault.
“Vote Democratic, because we will do better in fighting illegal immigration!” AKA “pull the other one, it’s got bells on it.”
Run on positive concepts that are agreed upon by most Democrats and most of the country, like even most leftists would agree that a “public option” alongside the current insurance system is better than what we have now. It may not be everything they want, but they’d vote for it. “Medicare option for all” in the limited polling we have on it vs “Medicare for all, private insurance for none”, suggests the former is broadly popular across the entire electorate, the latter is not. Run on that.
Clean air and water also poll very well, something like 90% of people have said they would be fine paying a higher utility bill for an improved environment. I think the Dems have “hidden” from making the environment a political issue for so long they don’t realize how broad-based support is for environmental causes.
I’m a conservative and it pains me, but when you want to go negative, go left-populist, it works. Talk about tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires while the middle class withers, promise middle class taxpayers will not pay higher taxes, but rich people will.
You beat your opponent not only by exploiting his weakness but also by neutralizing his strength. Democrats have to start looking and feeling more comfortable visiting Trump country, even if they know that 60-70% of the voters in some of these counties will vote Trump – it doesn’t matter. You visit these places because it reassures people, particularly in the middle, that you will be a president for everyone, not just your own base. I also think that presenting a contrast, not by being the Democratic version of Trump, but by being simply the polar opposite anti-Trump in terms of personal and political style is more likely to be effective because a lot of people, even some of those who don’t typically vote Democratic, are getting worn out by this president.
I am convinced that a lot of white voters who ended up voting for Obama were deeply skeptical and anxious about their vote when they cast their ballot, but as I’ve said before, Obama, through his words and actions, convinced people that even if he was Black and had a foreign sounding name and grew up in Hawaii and represented Chicago, while they still might not like his policies, they found it hard to dislike him on a personal level. Similarly, I am convinced that some of the others who just wanted to wait 4 to 8 years to vote for a “real” conservative did so because they didn’t fear Obama would turn the nation upside down. I’m obviously not talking about the 30-35% of the country that hates liberals of all stripe, but I’m talking about the independents and some of the Wall Street republican types.
I voted “other” because, while I feel the Dems should focus on the positive benefits of their proposals, I don’t agree that the proposals in the poll are the ones Dem candidates should push. I think we should focus on less disruptive, more mainstream solutions* to what most Americans can agree are problems – and at the same time point out how Trump and the GOP have failed to improve them. For example:
[ul]
[li]Here’s how we’ll improve access to healthcare and control costs – which Trump and the GOP have failed to do.[/li][li]Here’s how we’ll make immigration more fair and more helpful to the economy – which Trump and the GOP have failed to do.[/li][li]Here’s how we’ll revive our manufacturing base for a more renewable, more international future – which Trump and the GOP have failed to do.[/li][li]Etc.[/li][/ul]
*Okay, also more vague and promise-y. Don’t get into Medicare-and-no-private-insurance, just talk about expanded Medicare.
You really need to bury the progressive crap. That plays right into Trump’s “Dems are Socialists/Commies” wheel house. If you go there, buckle in for four more years of Trump.
Trump bashing is already old, really don’t want to hear another year and change of it.
I think the way to go is to find yourselves a squeaky-clean candidate, and then make the election about character. Maybe a veteran–but check them out thoroughly. No suprises.
If you think of the last three Democrats to win the presidency, there are unique ingredients from all three that can be merged into one for 2020.
You take the Carter blend of restoring honesty and decency back after scandals and lies of the recent years. For that you need to spend time on the ground, talking to the people on the ground, get to know their hopes and their fears and understand the human element of policy decisions more than staying rigid to what the political operatives think or what the polls suggest you ought to do. You make a large cornerstone of the campaign about a message of character - personal character and political courage to not be subservient to what is politically the safe route.
You take the Clinton blend of being able to orientate between politics and policy. Whether you like him or not he was (and maybe still is) a political genius because he could emphasise and show that human element of policy with his charisma and charm and then use it to his political gain. Take that famous clip from the 92’ debate when a lady asked how Clinton and Bush were affected by the national debt. Bush gave a typical politician answer talking in broad and vague terms. Clinton answered specifically to his state, to the workers in his state, to the people who he saw suffer and why they did, to the people who told him they were hurt and how, and once he got the upper hand of having a connection to people because his response was one that resonates, then and only then he could outline what plan he had or what solutions he has to offer.
You take the Obama blend of mobilising a new generation through your conduct, your ideas, offering something new, something different. You try and encompass the best of America and remind people what America and Americans can be, at a time when we are exhausted at the tired and confusing image of what we are.
This unique mixture comprises the three factors of importance: integrity, connection and ideas.
If there is a candidate out there who can tick all three then I think 2020 is in the bag.
The problem is the candidate who comes closest to this in my opinion is polling low down - Beto O’Rourke. I hope his ground game is a lot better because if you look at some of the more progressive candidates - no doubting their motivation on their ideas but a lot of it is favourable among that base. Expand it to the wider electorate then you run into a problem. You cannot treat a national election as one size fits all. And then if you look at the man currently occupying that moderate lane and out in front of the pack, no doubting his motivation but he has a long record.
I read the article you linked. I don’t think it says what you are suggesting it says. Pathway to citizenship for asylum seekers and reforming ICE is not the same as flinging the doors wide open and as you said
In fact, it seems the part I bolded in the above quote is not actually based in fact or reality.
I understand cynicism when it comes to US politics but this takes it way too far. On a few of the issues you mention, the needle has moved drastically in the time period you list.
Homosexuals were just guaranteed equal protection in 2015! And they were because LGBT activists found court cases they could take to the supreme court, and 5 Supreme Court justices, 4 of whom were chosen by the party that has been advocating for LGBT rights for years and 2 of whom were appointed by the sitting democratic president, voted to grant them equal protection under the Constitution. You might disagree with this method of changing the law, but you can’t argue that Democratic promises to LGBT constituents were lies.
The ACA obviously failed to deliver on many of its promises, but disallowing insurance companies from discriminating based on preexisting conditions was a sea change in American healthcare, and generally. Healthcare is also an odd one, because most major healthcare policies were actually implemented the “right” way by passing a real law through congress and observing congressional norms.
As it relates to the message the Democrats should emphasize, I think if there’s a way to win over the American public by promising to restore norms, that way hasn’t been found yet. If it were, there would be more Romney-Clinton voters than Obama-Trump voters. In fact, Trump basically won by promising to trample over every norm in the book. There’s a reason we don’t end up with presidents like John Kasich.
I’m curious why you’re picking that one particular quote out as not based in reality, when his entire post was a masterclass in ignorant misrepresentation of one’s political opponents. Perhaps it was a joke or parody, as you suggested, but good god I hope that’s not the current state of conservative political humor.
Why in the poll is positive, “positive”? Universal Healthcare will bankrupt the country and will be totally unworkable. Universal Basic Income where everyone will be doled our money is insane. Why should I the taxpayer pay the tab for someone else’s student loans, and reparations? What? You forgot so called “climate change” to the list, where whole industries will have to be killed putting millions out of work and not allow the free markets and technologies work towards a solution.
On PredictIt, Trump went from 40% to 45% the night after the debates. He’s now at 47%. Because of ultra-progressive’s stupid fucking ideas (in the context on the current political climate), Trump now has a 7% better chance of winning based on the best indicators we have. How could anyone think abolishing private insurance wouldn’t scare the living fuck out of the middle class? Same for “giving free healthcare to undocumented immigrants.” Even if it’s the right thing to do (and cheaper than paying for ER visits) how do you think that plays with the average centrist in the Midwest? The far left are like a bunch of damn Veruca Salts. I want it NOW daddy! How about we put out the grease fire in the kitchen before we attempt to remodel it?
For once, I agree with Shodan. Trump and the GOP, by failing to meaningfully address (let alone solve) any of the real problems the country faces, have left the door wide open for the Dems to win 2020 with sensible, broad-appeal solutions. Instead, we’re pushing extreme left ideas that are not only a turn-off for many centrists but only add credibility to the GOP’s “becoming the next Venezuela” story.
Abolishing private health insurance, making college free for everyone and paying out reparations to the descendants of slaves? I get the appeal, but I’d rather see a Dem in the White House in 2021.
Edit: Didn’t see KC’s reply. He made my point better.
Think of it this way: Anyone who has health care now is paying for premiums, co-pays, deductibles, most are paying part of any coverage they get through their employer. That money adds up.
Do you know of anyone, friends, family, your Aunt’s second cousin who is having problems paying for medical care or have gone bankrupt because of medical bills or getting some catastrophic illness like cancer or needing a transplant?
What Medicare for all will do is take that money you’re paying to insurance companies and pay it to the government instead, who in turn will pay for all medical expenses for everybody. In most cases any tax for it will be less than what you’re paying to insurance companies now. The Koch Brothers funded a study that found Medicare for all will cost the country less than if we just continued on with our present system.
So in effect Medicare for all will cut out the middle man - Insurance companies - who are making a nice profit on people’s pain and suffering.
The plan is to phase it in over 4 years - lower the eligibility age from 65 to 55, the next year to 45, the next year to 35, and then everybody. This is a program that is already in place.
I’ve never heard of anybody who’s turning 65 say they’re afraid of going on Medicare.
Oh, yeah, undocumented immigrants: I don’t know of any hospital who turns away anyone who needs care, do you? Why would they exclude undocumented people? You want some immigrant with a contagious disease wandering around untreated?