Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, November 18, 2020

"Saying progressive policies held Democrats back from expanding their House majority/taking the Senate just doesn't hold water with data available so far."

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

This article is a continuation of a discussion I was having with Tony the other day when I was explained how Democrats, the DNC, need to start embracing progressives and liberalism.

Rather than fighting to cling onto moderates.

Shedding more light on a significant electoral trend that progressives have drawn attention to in the aftermath of the 2020 U.S. election, a new analysis by Earther found that of the 93 House co-sponsors of the Green New Deal resolution who ran for reelection this year, only one lost their congressional race.

"Simply put," wrote journalist Brian Kahn in Earther, "the Green New Deal is not a political loser," including for representatives in swing districts.


#1 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-18 02:47 PM | Reply

Brian Kahn
@blkahn

Let's also not forget one of the Green New Deal Senate co-sponsors is the vice president-elect! Saying progressive policies held Democrats back from expanding their House majority/taking the Senate just doesn't hold water with data available so far


#2 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-18 02:48 PM | Reply

It's almost as if liberal politicians from liberal oases can get away with spouting liberal talking points.

But sure, rail against the incumbent Dem reps who lost races in South Carolina, Florida, and Iowa for not being liberal enough. Also make sure to have future Dem candidates running in moderate districts tattoo "Defund the Police" on their foreheads, cause that will definitely bring in the swing votes.

News flash, half this country loves Trump and his policies, to the point they were willing to vote for him after he murdered 250,000 Americans with his namesake virus. Thinking that an embrace of liberal policies will win those people over is about as nonsensical as it gets.

#3 | Posted by censored at 2020-11-18 10:21 PM | Reply

It's almost as if liberal politicians from liberal oases can get away with spouting liberal talking points.

Perhaps instead of being so scared. Democrats should educate local moderates as to what liberals politics means. Doesn't seem like it should take too much convincing to explain to people it's better when their taxes are going to helping them and the local economy rather than funding the rich.

And that the rich can pay more taxes.

But sure, rail against the incumbent Dem reps who lost races in South Carolina, Florida, and Iowa for not being liberal enough.

Maybe if we just run Republicans as Democrats they can win there? Maybe if the Democratic became republicans we wouldn't ever need to worry.

One party. No worries.

running in moderate districts tattoo "Defund the Police" on their foreheads, cause that will definitely bring in the swing votes.

Liberals definitely have a problem with branding and messaging. Getting too caught up with catchy slogans.

Defund the police was taken out of context and vilified. When all it meant is perhaps instead of a militarized police force. We could deal with different social issues accordingly.

Again. That's more about correcting the narrative.

News flash, half this country loves Trump and his policies,

I'm not sure what they loved about him.

But regardless of whether Democrats run moderates or liberals.

The people who love and embrace Trump aren't going to be voting for them.

Thinking that an embrace of liberal policies will win those people over is about as nonsensical as it gets.
#3 | POSTED BY CENSORED

Thinking you're ever going to win over Trump voters is as nonsensical as it gets.

#4 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-19 01:55 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It will all depend on GA...
2 Senate seats will determine
if we make actual progress on
some of these issues, or if we
have to deal with McConnell's
ugly leer for another two years...

#5 | Posted by earthmuse at 2020-11-19 09:32 AM | Reply

"It will all depend on GA... 2 Senate seats will determine if we make actual progress on some of these issues, or if we have to deal with McConnell's ugly leer for another two years..."

It's important but as long as Manchin is around I'm not sure how much it will matter. He's the new Joe Lieberman.

#6 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2020-11-19 09:36 AM | Reply

"News flash, half this country loves Trump and his policies"

I'll go along with they love Trump but they don't even understand his policies which are all designed to benefit the 1% and to create racial animosity and division in the rest of the country. If we are hating on each other then we are distracted as the 1% pick our pockets.

#7 | Posted by danni at 2020-11-19 11:03 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I'm not sure what they loved about him."

He made racism ok again. They had to try and hide it before Trump openly expressed it.

#8 | Posted by danni at 2020-11-19 11:04 AM | Reply

Is this the thread us moderates get yelled at for building a coalition?

Yep it is.

I'm all for experimenting with progressive policies incrementally, but it is politically nave to think that wins Georgia, Arizona, or Iowa for that matter.

#9 | Posted by bocaink at 2020-11-19 12:50 PM | Reply

It's almost as if liberal politicians from liberal oases can get away with spouting liberal talking points.

Gotta agree with you there. These districts would likely elect any Democrat so it's not necessarily a winning formula for someone running in a swing district. That said, I do think that overall the Democratic Party needs to stop ignoring its base. Republicans have virtually abandoned the center and it seems to be working well for them.

#10 | Posted by JOE at 2020-11-19 12:51 PM | Reply

Let's also not forget one of the Green New Deal Senate co-sponsors is the vice president-elect! Saying progressive policies held Democrats back from expanding their House majority/taking the Senate just doesn't hold water with data available so far

#2 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK AT 2020-11-18 02:48 PM | FLAG:

It's completely supported in the data. First, Harris was confronted by green groups demanding full support. Her response to that on CNN was to specifically use an indefinite article to describe her support for it and has avoided policy talk on it like the plague. Second, left wing candidates winning in gerrymandered, deeply blue districts doesn't mean the data supports progressive policies win in the aggregate. Progressive policies lost around the country in referendums, particularly in blue states. Democrats tied to left wing policies lost ground in the House to the extent it almost went to Republicans, while winning the Presidency. That's unprecedented. You can keep telling yourself it is a marketing problem. It's not.

#11 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-11-19 12:53 PM | Reply

"News flash, half this country loves Trump and his policies....
#3 | POSTED BY CENSORED"

I generally agree with your point, but you gotta ditch this "half" --------. Pretending that X+6M = X-6M just plays right into the ignorant rights' hands.

#12 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2020-11-19 01:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It's bad enough the Republicans vilify everything to the left of Reagan as socialism. When moderate Democrats are doing it too, progress on the most serious issues of climate and healthcare have absolutely no chance at getting solved.

Instead of cowering from these issues, Democrats/liberals/progressives need to sell America on why it is so critical to find solutions. It solves nothing to simply hold a majority and not be able to work at fixing anything.

We are FAR closer to plutocracy and fascism than socialism in this country. Yet Republicans and even moderate Democrats would have us believe that this nation is on the precipice of communism. The main reason for this is the lack of courage, or perhaps laziness, by liberals at actually educating the populous and selling ideas.

#13 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2020-11-19 01:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Thinking you're ever going to win over Trump voters is as nonsensical as it gets."

Really?

Many of them had been reliable rust-belt democrats up until 2016. And had a Romney or a Cruz been then 2020 candidate, Republicans would have likely taken the rust belt again.

You don't win votes by telling millions of people that you're going to put them out of a job in the name of some ideological goal. And that's what the GND would do for millions of people. And it would have a significant impact on tens of millions more. All you're doing is sending those votes to the Republicans.

If I were a republican strategist, I would be hoping that proponents of the GND were as successful as possible in getting their message out there.

#14 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-19 01:47 PM | Reply

"The main reason for this is the lack of courage, or perhaps laziness, by liberals at actually educating the populous and selling ideas."

Liberals don't really get it either. The GND offered the world, yet provided no way to pay for it, other than a carbon tax.

Once you explain to them what it's going to cost, then they can make an informed decision on whether or not the cost is worth it.

#15 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-19 01:51 PM | Reply

"I'm not sure what they loved about him."

Maybe that he wasn't trying to eliminate their jobs in pursuit of an ideological dream. The rust belt has always been reliably democratic. Why do you think they may have broken for Trump in 2016?

When Biden makes comments about ending fracking, what do you think that does to those who work in the oil industry?

#16 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-19 01:53 PM | Reply

"I generally agree with your point, but you gotta ditch this "half" --------. Pretending that X+6M = X-6M just plays right into the ignorant rights' hands. #12 | Posted by mOntecOre"

OK, I was approximating. At last count it was 51% to 47.2%, Biden. Not exactly an overwhelming mandate for socialist revolution.

Being a majority party calls for the Dems to erect a big tent. For example, and for those who don't remember, Al Gore was pro-life in order to get elected in Tennessee. That's the sort of thing many Dems will have to do in order to represent conservative regions.

Given the structural bias of the Senate favoring conservative states, compromises will have to be made if the Dems want to control the legislature. The only way Dems can do that is by running more conservative candidates in conservative areas and by not parroting mottos that freak conservatives/moderates out and drive them to the polls to vote for the other party. Maybe that will change some day if Dem voters starting turning out consistently like Repub voters and demographics continue to shift, but absent some stellar results in Georgia this January, I'm afraid we'll be left waiting another decade or so dealing with the travesty that is the Republican party crippling our government.

#17 | Posted by censored at 2020-11-19 01:54 PM | Reply

"Being a majority party calls for the Dems to erect a big tent."

The Dems tent is already too big.

How do you appeal to the blue collar workers in mining and manufacturing while at the same time appealing to left-wing progressives who want to eliminate those jobs.

Nancy Pelosi should be sainted for how successful she's been at herding all those cats.

#18 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-19 02:12 PM | Reply

How do you appeal to the blue collar workers in mining and manufacturing while at the same time appealing to left-wing progressives who want to eliminate those jobs.

By creating better paying jobs related to renewable and energy-saving production - just like Biden's plans call for.

Nancy Pelosi should be sainted for how successful she's been at herding all those cats.

I don't even think that it's arguable that Nancy Pelosi has been America's most powerful, influential, and successful female politician ever up until now.

#19 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-11-19 02:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Is this the thread us moderates get yelled at for building a coalition?

Who's yelling at you? The voices in your head?

It's funny. Article shows progressives did really well. So of course moderates are unhappy.

By the way. A lot of America is progressive. Unfortunately Democrats are too scared to embrace progressives.

They just know they can't win.

So they run conservatives, pretending to be Democrats, and still lose.

#20 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-19 02:27 PM | Reply

Nancy Pelosi should...

...step down and let a progressive win her district.

#21 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-19 02:28 PM | Reply

For example, and for those who don't remember, Al Gore

Al Gore. Another loser Democrats championed.

At least he made some movies and raised awareness about global warming.

#22 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-19 02:30 PM | Reply

I don't even think that it's arguable that Nancy Pelosi has been America's most powerful, influential, and successful female politician ever up until now.

#19 | POSTED BY TONYROMA AT 2020-11-19 02:24 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

How come the ONLY time Pelosi went after Trump was when he went after Biden??? Why didn't she impeach him on other illegal dealings?? If she is so good she would have.

#23 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-11-19 02:31 PM | Reply

The main reason for this is the lack of courage, or perhaps laziness, by liberals at actually educating the populous and selling ideas.
#13 | POSTED BY WHATSLEFT

While I agree with your post.

The biggest problem liberals have is the lack of representation in the government.

The Democratic Party makes sure to screw us over every chance they get.

#24 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-19 02:33 PM | Reply

[Nancy Pelosi should...]...step down and let a progressive win her district.#21 | Posted by ClownShack

The fault lays with the anti-democratic Senate and the anti-democratic electoral college system.

Comparing what Pelosi's Dem House passed in the first two years of the Obama administration while Harry Reid and the Dem Senate were stymied by the Repub faux diplomacy of the filibuster, IMHO Pelosi did fine.

#25 | Posted by censored at 2020-11-19 02:36 PM | Reply

"Why didn't she impeach him on other illegal dealings??"

She didn't have support in the party for impeachment proceedings related to his crimes against the American people. It's only after he attacked one of their own that the Democratic establishment decided to take a stand. The swamp wasn't just on one side of the aisle.

#26 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2020-11-19 02:42 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

How come the ONLY time Pelosi went after Trump was when he went after Biden??? Why didn't she impeach him on other illegal dealings?? If she is so good she would have.

Posted by LauraMohr

McConnell only wants to convene the Senate long enough to confirm more unqualified federal judges.

#27 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2020-11-19 02:45 PM | Reply

The Democratic Party makes sure to screw us over every chance they get.

Get your own party then, the Democrats don't owe you anything that they haven't equally earned themselves.

I guess the fact that millions of former Democratic voters have now re-identified themselves as Trump Republicans doesn't resonate with you. You win with the electorate you have, not the one you wish that you had.

Driving moderates from the party will not increase its power, it will insure that they remain backbench losers. Far left progressive politics are popular in urban areas, not so much in rural areas. Unfortunately, a majority of states are dominated by rural politics, not urban - and the make up of the Senate will always disfavor Democrats until the political pendulum shifts rather dramatically.

So you either do what needs to be done to win where you are or you remain nationally impotent and irrelevant. Or you educate the electorate to your policies and ideas and win them over. But that takes years and years.

#28 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-11-19 02:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Driving moderates from the party will not increase its power, it will insure that they remain backbench losers. Far left progressive politics are popular in urban areas, not so much in rural areas. Unfortunately, a majority of states are dominated by rural politics, not urban - and the make up of the Senate will always disfavor Democrats until the political pendulum shifts rather dramatically.
So you either do what needs to be done to win where you are or you remain nationally impotent and irrelevant. Or you educate the electorate to your policies and ideas and win them over. But that takes years and years.

POSTED BY TONYROMA AT 2020-11-19 02:48 PM | REPLY

You're so God Damned worried about losing moderates that you kick progressives and liberals to the curb. The DNC establishment hates anyone that goes after their owners IE Corporate America. They have lost their way.

#29 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-11-19 02:57 PM | Reply

Democrats/liberals/progressives need to sell America on why it is so critical to find solutions.

You ever notice that all the best salesmen tend to be Republican/conservative/Libertarian (and maybe a little bit sociopathic)?

#30 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2020-11-19 03:01 PM | Reply

Tony, I empathize with you right now because of the absolute bone headed ------- you're dealing with.

You're right, the democratic party is screwed with out the moderates as there are moderate spots in America that can be represented by the democratic party. Moderates in the democratic party. Or they can be represented by a republican. Take your pick

#31 | Posted by eberly at 2020-11-19 03:03 PM | Reply

-You ever notice that all the best salesmen tend to be Republican/conservative/Libertarian (and maybe a little bit sociopathic)?

They tend to be....but some of us are great fence sitters as well.

#32 | Posted by eberly at 2020-11-19 03:07 PM | Reply

Moderates in the democratic party. Or they can be represented by a republican. Take your pick
#31 | POSTED BY EBERLY

If they vote with the republicans, what difference does it make? I think it was Truman who said "[paraphrasing] Given a choice between a Republican and a Democrat who votes like a Republican, people will choose the Republican."

If Democrats don't pursue a different vision than the Republicans, what's the point of having two parties?

#33 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2020-11-19 03:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

-If they vote with the republicans, what difference does it make?

On everything, you're right...what difference would it make.

But I doubt that's what a moderate democrat does.

#34 | Posted by eberly at 2020-11-19 03:15 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You're right, the democratic party is screwed with out the moderates as there are moderate spots in America that can be represented by the democratic party. Moderates in the democratic party. Or they can be represented by a republican. Take your pick

You're so God Damned worried about losing moderates that you kick progressives and liberals to the curb.

You're such a hard-headed douche sometimes Laura. Show me one time I advocated "kicking progressives and liberals to the curb." I never have because to do so would be to kick myself to the curb dumb butt.

This is all that I've ever been saying: Democrats have to win elections with the electorate each individual candidate faces, period. The issues that resonate in majority-minority districts are not the ones important in rural/white districts in general.

The reality is that almost any generic Republican can win in almost every non-urban district by championing the same cookie-cutter policies and issues that the national party trumpets ad nauseum. Democrats cannot win a majority in Congress by mainstreaming the most progressive policies that allow many urban Democrats to comfortably win in their districts. That isn't an indictment on the policies, it's a recognition that different blocks of voters exist in different places that do not coalesce around the most progressive stances that you and I might prefer.

I live in a red state and my efforts keep electing a nominally progressive Democrat as my congressperson - and he's a Muslim too - sitting in the middle of Indiana, so don't lecture me. The day you elect a Democrat in Kansas then you can start telling others how to do it. Until then, you have no meaningful representation for the types of policies you want to see enacted - yet you'd rather chastise those like me who actually elect Democrats who champion the very politics we believe in.

#35 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-11-19 03:16 PM | Reply

My other point is, given a level playing field democrats/progressives would win in most of the country. Only the emphasis on square footage in the Senate and EC (along with gerrymandering) allows Republicans to rule, even while being the minority. That bias is the result of compromising with the Southern states over slavery.

When everybody votes, Republicans lose. That's why all their efforts are aimed at making sure people who don't vote for them don't get to vote at all.

#36 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2020-11-19 03:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

the make up of the Senate will always disfavor Democrats until the political pendulum shifts rather dramatically.
#28 | POSTED BY TONYROMA AT 2020-11-19 02:48 PM

This is true only because slim Democratic majorities in Congress tend not to have any balls. The Constitution provides Congress with a fairly unfettered right to admit new states. If Dems won the Georgia specials they'd have every right to admit DC and PR as states the next day, but ------- like Joe Manchin will never let it happen.

#37 | Posted by JOE at 2020-11-19 03:20 PM | Reply

"When everybody votes, Republicans lose."

And this is why you see their open disdain for democracy.

#38 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-19 03:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"By creating better paying jobs related to renewable and energy-saving production - just like Biden's plans call for."

Walk me through this.

Typically, employees are hired due to a demand for labor. Most often, in the private sector. Less occasionally, in government.

So I'm guessing these would be government jobs, right? Because there doesn't seem to be sufficient demand for these sorts of jobs in the private sector. Which means that they're going to be government employees, which means that they will be funded by taxpayers.

And that's ignoring the fact that all jobs aren't created equal. The market created the conditions where a low skilled worker can earn very high wages in mining or oil. More than many college graduates make. Is the government going to pay righand wages to workers who can no longer demand that level of income through their own skillsets or willingness to work?

#39 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-19 03:25 PM | Reply

When everybody votes, Republicans lose. That's why all their efforts are aimed at making sure people who don't vote for them don't get to vote at all.

That was the conventional wisdom up until 2 weeks ago. More Americans voted this year than ever yet Republicans picked up congressional seats and so far only lost one Senate seat.

No one saw 10 million more voters voting for Trump after 4 years of his BS and 9 months into his pathetic pandemic response, but 74 million said "I'm good, give me more."

I hope that Trump's allure will be hard to reproduce, but even though the Democratic nominee won over 15 million more votes than in 2016, the election still came down to around a couple 100,000s of votes in a handful of states as it regards the EC - and again, the GOP gained 10 million more.

As you noted, gerrymandering has a lot to do with the disparity, but the GOP gained a large percentage of congressional votes that they lost in 2018. A larger electorate is no longer a lead pipe cinch for Democrats.

#40 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-11-19 03:28 PM | Reply

So I'm guessing these would be government jobs, right? Because there doesn't seem to be sufficient demand for these sorts of jobs in the private sector. Which means that they're going to be government employees, which means that they will be funded by taxpayers.

You're a government employee. So clearly you must not think all government jobs are bad, which seems to be the underlying premise of your post.

Regardless of that, are you aware of the myriad ways that government can create demand for private sector employment?

#41 | Posted by JOE at 2020-11-19 03:28 PM | Reply

-You ever notice that all the best salesmen tend to be Republican/conservative/Libertarian (and maybe a little bit sociopathic)?

Let's just take a moment to appreciate the irony of the Libertatian, who believes in The Myth Of The Self-Made Man, in a career that acknowledges there is no such thing, or else no one would need to buy anything.

#42 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-19 03:31 PM | Reply

"You're so God Damned worried about losing moderates that you kick progressives and liberals to the curb."

Of course. Why wouldn't they.

If given the choice between a Rust-Belt democrat who is concerned about their job, or a progressive leftling concerned about ideological purity, the logical choice is the rust-belt democrat. They're the ones who could choose to vote Republican. The leftlings can vote Dem, or launch a protest vote for the socialists or Green Party, or whatever. But the leftlings will never constitute enough of a voting block for them to warrant ceding the middle, knowing it would mean defeat. And that' assuming that the Dems had no other interests other than winning. In that respect it's just math. And maybe you want to see the Dems run a progressive, and see the Repubs win a landslide victory. In all honesty, you and people like you are their most valuable allies.

#43 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-19 03:34 PM | Reply

So I'm guessing these would be government jobs, right? Because there doesn't seem to be sufficient demand for these sorts of jobs in the private sector. Which means that they're going to be government employees, which means that they will be funded by taxpayers.

MB, you really should read Biden's plans because your suppositions are wrong. Biden's BBB plan is based on funding private industry to produce the products and goods that America needs right now, and doing so by advocating unionization where applicable, and paying higher wages across the board. It's infrastructure spending based on refitting existing public buildings and making them energy efficient - windows, appliances, insulation, wind and solar capturing/distribution, upgrading our power grids, etc. It's ramping up domestic PPE production through the DPA, the purchasing of US-built green vehicles to replace aging government fleets, and on and on.

#44 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-11-19 03:35 PM | Reply

"My other point is, given a level playing field democrats/progressives would win in most of the country"

Yeah, so?

The field isn't level. I don't know when it ever will be.

#45 | Posted by eberly at 2020-11-19 03:38 PM | Reply

But the leftlings will never constitute enough of a voting block for them to warrant ceding the middle, knowing it would mean defeat.
#43 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER AT 2020-11-19 03:34 PM

I see this posted by many people. Nobody has ever explained to me how Republicans managed to succeed in 2016 when by any objective measure they "ceded the middle" by nominating an alt-right cryptonazi.

Democrats are always told they need to be careful not to be too aggressive, yet Republicans literally went to far edge of the ideological fringe of conservatism, and won.

#46 | Posted by JOE at 2020-11-19 03:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"You're so God Damned worried about losing moderates that you kick progressives and liberals to the curb."

GOP kicked out the moderates and it doesn't seem to have hurt them.

The GOP is currently orchestrating a coup. And there's no GOP moderates to stand up to them. Not even the Never Trumpers have a problem with it.

#47 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-19 03:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Nobody has ever explained to me how Republicans managed to succeed in 2016 when by any objective measure they "ceded the middle" by nominating an alt-right cryptonazi."

I can explain.

The middle is full of racists and misogynists.

#48 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-19 03:42 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"The field isn't level. I don't know when it ever will be."

Serious question, Eberly: Do you think the playing field should be level?

#49 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-19 03:45 PM | Reply

"Nobody has ever explained to me how Republicans managed to succeed in 2016 when by any objective measure they "ceded the middle" by nominating an alt-right cryptonazi."

Just so I understand you.....you're saying that because the republicans run to the right to win...why can't the democrats run the left and win in the same fashion?

I don't have an answer for that. Just that it's the reality. The dems are better off appealing to the middle whereas the GOP is better off running to the right.

#50 | Posted by eberly at 2020-11-19 03:47 PM | Reply

49

Yes, otherwise I wouldn't even accept the premise of a "level field" in the first place. I want a level field.

Who cares what I think anyway?

Tony appears to be arguing with lefties who want to take their ball and go home rather than accept what winning takes and what it looks like.

#51 | Posted by eberly at 2020-11-19 03:50 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"The middle is full of racists and misogynists."

They're everywhere

#52 | Posted by eberly at 2020-11-19 03:51 PM | Reply

To me, a level playing field means that congressional districts are drawn fairly through computer-assisted neutrality, not packing/cracking partisan machinations.

#53 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-11-19 03:52 PM | Reply

The dems are better off appealing to the middle whereas the GOP is better off running to the right.
#50 | POSTED BY EBERLY AT 2020-11-19 03:47 PM

I think it's a problem of messaging more than anything else.

A majority of Americans support most of the policies of Bernie Sanders, including Medicare for all, legalization of marijuana, free public college, a wealth tax, etc. In some cases it's a sizeable majority. And Democrats refuse to run on these popular agenda items, and cede them before they even walk into the room with Republicans.

#54 | Posted by JOE at 2020-11-19 03:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

-A majority of Americans support most of the policies of Bernie Sanders, including Medicare for all, legalization of marijuana, free public college, a wealth tax, etc. In some cases it's a sizeable majority.

How do you know that?

#55 | Posted by eberly at 2020-11-19 03:58 PM | Reply

By looking at the polling on those issues?

Was that a real question?

#56 | Posted by JOE at 2020-11-19 03:58 PM | Reply

A majority of Americans support most of the policies of Bernie Sanders, including Medicare for all, legalization of marijuana, free public college, a wealth tax, etc. In some cases it's a sizeable majority. And Democrats refuse to run on these popular agenda items, and cede them before they even walk into the room with Republicans.

You're right about the messaging aspect, but wrong on why it doesn't work. Take Obamacare versus the ACA - at first most of those on the right loathed the first while liking the individual components of the latter. The Dems didn't do a poor sales job, the Republicans just did a better demonization job - which is their whole side's superpower for which the Dems have no kryptonite.

Once the GOP has toxicified a policy, how can any Dem run on something the electorate believes is the government takeover of healthcare or giving tax dollars to illegals or reinstituting death taxes?

You and I understand this. The average lower information voter, not so much. And there is only a limited amount of time and money to be spent trying to break through the incessant lies and distortions coming from the right wing media.

Ask yourself this - even though we saw it coming, did we really think that Trump could sell that the election was fraudulently conducted, even after he ordered his troops into the streets and polling places to LOOK FOR shady voting/voters? Yet more than half of Republicans wrongly believe that Trump won the election but for coordinated Democratic "voter fraud" that none of them can explain and that no one yet can expose as being coordinated by any living person(s) in America.

Yet here we are.

#57 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-11-19 04:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Get your own party then, the Democrats don't owe you anything that they haven't equally earned themselves.

You mean vote 3rd party?

Then Democrats would never win again and people will cry about it.

Remember 2016?

People still can't believe Laura gave Trump the stare of Kansas.

Don't act so smugly. The Democrats would be nothing without liberals. Don't you forget that.

#58 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-19 04:05 PM | Reply

Don't act so smugly. The Democrats would be nothing without liberals. Don't you forget that.

Can you read Clowshack? What do these words mean to you?

Show me one time I advocated "kicking progressives and liberals to the curb." I never have because to do so would be to kick myself to the curb dumb butt.
I am a liberal progressive so why would I advocate downplaying my own wants and needs?

You simply don't get it and you simply won't. Hence you will never be a part of a winning coalition unless others deliver one for you.

#59 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-11-19 04:10 PM | Reply

I guess the fact that millions of former Democratic voters have now re-identified themselves as Trump Republicans doesn't resonate with you.

The DNC put up Hillary then Biden.

They are responsible for driving people out of the party.

#60 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-19 04:12 PM | Reply

Can you read Clowshack?

I read your first sentence and was upset by it.

So I responded without continuing to read the rest of what you posted.

#61 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-19 04:13 PM | Reply

I will read it all before respond to half posts.

I apologize.

#62 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-19 04:14 PM | Reply

It was a real question.

And thanks for answering candidly.

This has been my point all along...those "polls" like to you. They create the perception that people really support those things.

But if a sizable majority of people REALLY supported those things, then how did Trump get 10 million MORE votes than last time?

It's the difference between a poll and election day.

#63 | Posted by eberly at 2020-11-19 04:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

those "polls" lie to you.

#64 | Posted by eberly at 2020-11-19 04:21 PM | Reply

#62

No problem. I hope you understand that we both want the same things. The difference is that I've been in this fight for 60 years. That doesn't mean that I have all the answers, far from it. But I have seen the tides turn and the political winds shift. I work in and with many inside the party, and when you say DNC, there really isn't a monolithic DNC. All the DNC does is solicit and distribute money and hold a nominating convention every 4 years. People are the party, not the other way around.

All I'm saying is that the entity we call the Democratic Party is different depending upon where you're having the conversation at any given moment. In NYC or LA, the Party is quite liberal. In Boise, or Nashville not quite so much. While there are very liberal people living all over the US including in small towns and red states, there aren't enough in many places for them to win elections running on those progressive policies. That doesn't make them sell outs, it makes them rational.

We have to keep selling and reselling our progressivism for the betterment of all Americans - at least to the point we gain enough power to implement them to try and see if they work. But that isn't going to happen if purity tests become standard in areas that aren't inherently as progressive as others. We still have to support and stick with each other on the big issues even if we disagree on smaller ones - until a majority emerges that allows the more progressive policies to enacted.

#65 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-11-19 04:39 PM | Reply

"But if a sizable majority of people REALLY supported those things, then how did Trump get 10 million MORE votes than last time?"

Sounds to me like several million of them believe Trump, when he says he has a better plan than Obamacare.

Millions of people can want a better health care system, and still support Trump.

As for the rest of those millions, health care is a low priority issue for them.

#66 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-19 06:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It's the difference between a poll and election day.
#63 | POSTED BY EBERLY

To be fair, taking further steps to ending the Drug War won on election day.

#67 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-11-19 09:20 PM | Reply

"The middle is full of racists and misogynists."

They'reeverywhere

#52 | POSTED BYEBERLY

Yes, exactly.

Things like racism and misogyny can operate in the realm of personal politics, even by people who politically disavow them.

Like when you write All Men Are Created Equal, while owning slaves.

#68 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-19 09:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"MB, you really should read Biden's plans because your suppositions are wrong."

I'll check it out. I think what I may have incorrectly implied is that Biden's plans were in accordance with the GND. The environmental part of the GND is the easy part. In some ways, it's taking care of itself. Energy efficiency is good from every angle, and my children's generation will almost certainly be the last to operate petroleum-powered vehicles unless they decide to fly airplanes or become long-haul truckers.

#69 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-20 12:44 AM | Reply

"Democrats are always told they need to be careful not to be too aggressive, yet Republicans literally went to far edge of the ideological fringe of conservatism, and won."

Yup.

That's because many of those rust-belt blue collar workers are also fringe conservatives. And many more broke for Trump because he was campaigning on protecting the industries they worked in, not eliminating them.

#70 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-20 12:46 AM | Reply

"GOP kicked out the moderates and it doesn't seem to have hurt them."

They lost the election, didn't they?

#71 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-20 12:47 AM | Reply

"A majority of Americans support most of the policies of Bernie Sanders, including Medicare for all, legalization of marijuana, free public college, a wealth tax, etc. In some cases it's a sizeable majority. And Democrats refuse to run on these popular agenda items, and cede them before they even walk into the room with Republicans."

It's easy to gain support for something when you're advertising it as being free. But what will that support look like when you attach the funding mechanism to it? Germany has a 19% VAT and kinda provides some of the stuff Bernie is looking to provide. How many people are going to want to their current healthcare banned, while paying far more for day to day goods and services.

You can only really say you want something when you're willing to pay for it.

#72 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-20 12:53 AM | Reply

What if I am willing to pay for it? Bring on the VAT, we should have had one a long time ago.

#73 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2020-11-20 03:22 AM | Reply

BURN THE MONEY WITCHES

#74 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2020-11-20 12:49 PM | Reply

They lost the election, didn't they?

Depends who you ask.

Democrats lost seats in local elections.

Lost seats in the HoR.

The senate is still up for grabs.

And Trump is insisting he won.

#75 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-20 02:14 PM | Reply

"They lost the election, didn't they?"

Not according to them.

#76 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-20 02:15 PM | Reply

"What if I am willing to pay for it? Bring on the VAT, we should have had one a long time ago."

I think you may be cut from a different bolt of cloth than many Americans. But I don't disagree with you.

I think that many Americans, left and right, would chafe under a western European style system. But from my vantage point they're not unfair systems. The rub would be that the services the government provides don't come for free. For everything they offer, they also expect the citizens to provide something in return.

#77 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-20 02:18 PM | Reply

Again.

The article proves liberal progressives will win.

If the theory is they can only win liberal districts. Then run more liberal progressives in those districts. And run moderate liberals in more moderate districts.

This nation has been on a slippery slope into fascism for too long.

Democrats need to stop being afraid of fighting for change.

#78 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-20 02:41 PM | Reply

"The article proves liberal progressives will win."

Like Jeremy Corbyn won in the UK?

#79 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-20 02:43 PM | Reply

Like Jeremy Corbyn won in the UK?

Thanks for the non sequitur.

You've proven yourself to be nothing more that a conspiracy theorist and a liar.

I couldn't care any less about the bullshht you post.

#80 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-20 02:47 PM | Reply

"You've proven yourself to be nothing more that a conspiracy theorist and a liar."

Fair enough.

Feel free to enlighten me on how the UK's version of Bernie Sanders swept the polls.

"I couldn't care any less about the bullshht you post."

Yeah. Because you're totally divorced from reality.

Is it fun?

#81 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-20 02:56 PM | Reply

Is ignorance really bliss?

I've never met someone as uniquely positioned as you are to answer that question.

#82 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-20 02:57 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort