Who should the dems blame?

[Kat Kid]

I'm curious where dems are pointing their fingers. I also am sad sys left here because now I have to try to read his twitter feed.

What is the theory?

[Sandstone Outcropping]

1. Sleepy Joe

[Stupid Fitz]

1. Sleepy Joe

This is probably the best answer. He originally said it would be one term and they should have stuck with it and made plans for someone else the whole time. They would have most likely messed it up regardless by anointing someone (prob KH) like they tend to do, but who knows. The only way back is for them to find someone that will resonate and bring people out to vote. They know how many votes they will need. I mean, we've seen that R's are going to show up and vote R no matter what.

[michigancat]

1. Sleepy Joe

yeah honestly he should have announced he wasn't running for reelection in 2022 or something to allow a true primary. I think you can start there.

I think Kamala's biggest mistake was making Liz Cheney the surrogate face of the campaign. It ended up alienating a ton of the left, made them look like bumbling fools from the right, and the result was fewer republicans voting for Harris than Biden.

Related to that, I think Bernie was spot on when he said Democrats have more or less abandoned the working class. Obviously Trump doesn't give a crap about the working class, but "no tax on tips" was rough ridin' brilliant in that it came from a waitress in Vegas, is catchy, and is like "oh yeah he is for working people". Harris didn't propose a single solitary thing that anyone can remember for working people.

Come to think of it, can anyone name a Harris policy position off the top of your head? I definitely remember Cheney being touted and "we're not going back". Maybe something about money for new homeowners? I don't know, which clearly means that her policy positions sucked.

[Stupid Fitz]

1. Sleepy Joe

yeah honestly he should have announced he wasn't running for reelection in 2022 or something to allow a true primary. I think you can start there.

I think Kamala's biggest mistake was making Liz Cheney the surrogate face of the campaign. It ended up alienating a ton of the left, made them look like bumbling fools from the right, and the result was fewer republicans voting for Harris than Biden.

Related to that, I think Bernie was spot on when he said Democrats have more or less abandoned the working class. Obviously Trump doesn't give a crap about the working class, but "no tax on tips" was rough ridin' brilliant in that it came from a waitress in Vegas, is catchy, and is like "oh yeah he is for working people". Harris didn't propose a single solitary thing that anyone can remember for working people.

Come to think of it, can anyone name a Harris policy position off the top of your head? I definitely remember Cheney being touted and "we're not going back". Maybe something about money for new homeowners? I don't know, which clearly means that her policy positions sucked.

Agree with all of this. The bold part is interesting to me though. The Rs haven't had a platform or plan in I don't know how long. They still get people out to vote. I was reading a lot yesterday about how effective the Rs were with the younger generation now which is bonkers to me. Apparently they did a great job with the "bros" by doing podcasts, etc. I'm not sure how big of a voting block that was, but it was interesting to read. The Ds just seem to be out of favor with many groups right now and need to figure it out. 

[cfbandyman]

1. Sleepy Joe

yeah honestly he should have announced he wasn't running for reelection in 2022 or something to allow a true primary. I think you can start there.

I think Kamala's biggest mistake was making Liz Cheney the surrogate face of the campaign. It ended up alienating a ton of the left, made them look like bumbling fools from the right, and the result was fewer republicans voting for Harris than Biden.

Related to that, I think Bernie was spot on when he said Democrats have more or less abandoned the working class. Obviously Trump doesn't give a crap about the working class, but "no tax on tips" was rough ridin' brilliant in that it came from a waitress in Vegas, is catchy, and is like "oh yeah he is for working people". Harris didn't propose a single solitary thing that anyone can remember for working people.

Come to think of it, can anyone name a Harris policy position off the top of your head? I definitely remember Cheney being touted and "we're not going back". Maybe something about money for new homeowners? I don't know, which clearly means that her policy positions sucked.

This is the biggest, and in general the key is blaming themselves. The blame is squarely on not getting people to show up. So that is the biggest.

1. Sleepy Joe

This is probably the best answer. He originally said it would be one term and they should have stuck with it and made plans for someone else the whole time. They would have most likely messed it up regardless by anointing someone (prob KH) like they tend to do, but who knows. The only way back is for them to find someone that will resonate and bring people out to vote. They know how many votes they will need. I mean, we've seen that R's are going to show up and vote R no matter what.

Agree this is the impetus of the lack of motivation. In general it wasn't looking good for Biden for a while, and had they done a primary it'd been a big chance to get new blood in. Heck even look at the support for Kamala like right after they got rid of Biden, and just how off kilter it made trump and co. They had their entire cannon fodder off on him. But once they were able to equate her with him, especially due to the non-primary way of doing it, and she didn't offer anything tangental as rusty said, it was kinda of game over.

People thirsted for a non don v Biden, and instead dems essentially gave it by proxy.

[michigancat]

1. Sleepy Joe

yeah honestly he should have announced he wasn't running for reelection in 2022 or something to allow a true primary. I think you can start there.

I think Kamala's biggest mistake was making Liz Cheney the surrogate face of the campaign. It ended up alienating a ton of the left, made them look like bumbling fools from the right, and the result was fewer republicans voting for Harris than Biden.

Related to that, I think Bernie was spot on when he said Democrats have more or less abandoned the working class. Obviously Trump doesn't give a crap about the working class, but "no tax on tips" was rough ridin' brilliant in that it came from a waitress in Vegas, is catchy, and is like "oh yeah he is for working people". Harris didn't propose a single solitary thing that anyone can remember for working people.

Come to think of it, can anyone name a Harris policy position off the top of your head? I definitely remember Cheney being touted and "we're not going back". Maybe something about money for new homeowners? I don't know, which clearly means that her policy positions sucked.

Agree with all of this. The bold part is interesting to me though. The Rs haven't had a platform or plan in I don't know how long. They still get people out to vote. I was reading a lot yesterday about how effective the Rs were with the younger generation now which is bonkers to me. Apparently they did a great job with the "bros" by doing podcasts, etc. I'm not sure how big of a voting block that was, but it was interesting to read. The Ds just seem to be out of favor with many groups right now and need to figure it out. 

"no tax on tips"

"build the wall"

"lock her up"

"mass deportation"

are all more memorable and concrete than anything Harris trotted out there (and stuck)

[Rage Against the McKee]

They lost on the economy, and there really isn't anything they could have done better to handle the economy. They could have done a much better job trying to educate the voters on exactly what caused the inflation and how the rate has been lowered and what that means, but the vast majority of people aren't intelligent enough to follow or even care about any of that. Trump's policies that he's spelled out are all highly inflationary. Maybe over-simplifying his tariff plan into a "national sales tax" was too disingenuous, but it's probably the best way to describe it that people can understand. At the end of the day, Trump has already been president and prices didn't skyrocket, so the attacks on him weren't effective. I don't think any candidate or policy positions would have made any difference.

I do think a whole lot of voters are going to regret their vote once these tariffs actually get implemented, though. If we actually have an election in 2028, the democrats should do pretty well.

[Stupid Fitz]

They lost on the economy, and there really isn't anything they could have done better to handle the economy. They could have done a much better job trying to educate the voters on exactly what caused the inflation and how the rate has been lowered and what that means, but the vast majority of people aren't intelligent enough to follow or even care about any of that. Trump's policies that he's spelled out are all highly inflationary. Maybe over-simplifying his tariff plan into a "national sales tax" was too disingenuous, but it's probably the best way to describe it that people can understand. At the end of the day, Trump has already been president and prices didn't skyrocket, so the attacks on him weren't effective. I don't think any candidate or policy positions would have made any difference.

I do think a whole lot of voters are going to regret their vote once these tariffs actually get implemented, though. If we actually have an election in 2028, the democrats should do pretty well.

I agree with everything you said besides this. A very large portion only cared about winning and/or hurting the other side. They will line up to vote the same way again next time even if they can't afford to drive themselves there. Hopefully the Ds have finally realized this.

[cfbandyman]

They lost on the economy, and there really isn't anything they could have done better to handle the economy. They could have done a much better job trying to educate the voters on exactly what caused the inflation and how the rate has been lowered and what that means, but the vast majority of people aren't intelligent enough to follow or even care about any of that. Trump's policies that he's spelled out are all highly inflationary. Maybe over-simplifying his tariff plan into a "national sales tax" was too disingenuous, but it's probably the best way to describe it that people can understand. At the end of the day, Trump has already been president and prices didn't skyrocket, so the attacks on him weren't effective. I don't think any candidate or policy positions would have made any difference.

I do think a whole lot of voters are going to regret their vote once these tariffs actually get implemented, though. If we actually have an election in 2028, the democrats should do pretty well.

I agree with everything you said besides this. A very large portion only cared about winning and/or hurting the other side. They will line up to vote the same way again next time even if they can't afford to drive themselves there. Hopefully the Ds have finally realized this.

Ehh wrong, to me. That is precisely what drove them to vote for him, they were being hurt, and I agree with Rage, dems did practically everything they could correctly to thread a tight needle of curbing inflation without wrecking the economy, it's quite a feat. But it's like what other economists have noted, inflation is down, but people have a hard time connecting just because inflation is down, doesn't mean prices come down. Prices don't go down without deflation, which is an indicator of a failing economy. That is just a very very hard concept for a lot of people to work out in their head. They knew in recent memory this cost X, now it's X + a lot. Inflation is derivative, not direct, and it's a hard sale to be like "well we stopped it from being worse than it is!"

If trump does implement the tariffs and blows up all the carefully brought on restoration/healing since 2020, and wrecks it, many will absolutely switch back if the dems message it as "see we told you he was worse for the economy".  Again you don't have to or won't get those who only care about winning/hurting the other side, you just have to convince like 10% of the people that you can do it better. You aren't going to win over hardly any true pubs, the data clearly shows that, hence the liz cheney thing not working. you're winning over a tiny group. That's not what you're going for. Just as you don't have to win over gay rights activists, you already have them. You just have a ton of people who simply won't vote for the other side, but you have enough that voting for something, and it's almost always household economics.

[hjfklmor]

They lost on the economy, and there really isn't anything they could have done better to handle the economy. They could have done a much better job trying to educate the voters on exactly what caused the inflation and how the rate has been lowered and what that means, but the vast majority of people aren't intelligent enough to follow or even care about any of that. Trump's policies that he's spelled out are all highly inflationary. Maybe over-simplifying his tariff plan into a "national sales tax" was too disingenuous, but it's probably the best way to describe it that people can understand. At the end of the day, Trump has already been president and prices didn't skyrocket, so the attacks on him weren't effective. I don't think any candidate or policy positions would have made any difference.

I do think a whole lot of voters are going to regret their vote once these tariffs actually get implemented, though. If we actually have an election in 2028, the democrats should do pretty well.

I agree with everything you said besides this. A very large portion only cared about winning and/or hurting the other side. They will line up to vote the same way again next time even if they can't afford to drive themselves there. Hopefully the Ds have finally realized this.

They will not regret their vote because they will not attribute anything that happens, good or bad, to their vote. The quotes in this article are interesting to read.

https://www.thecity.nyc/2024/11/08/trump-red-shift-voter-turnout-queens-bronx-southern-brooklyn/

[nicname]

Themselves.

[Pete]

I think most people are intelligent enough to understand the reason for inflation and are intelligent enough to consume the facts that show that the United States outperformed all other first world nations on inflation. However, most people do not have the desire to perform any sort of research. Further, most people prefer to quickly consume soundbites from their preferred News source of choice…. Which is probably either Facebook, insta, snap, their buddy who works the same shift, their preacher, their neighbor…

[Pete]

“ I just went to the grocery store and eggs are still expensive. The Democrats keep talking about transsexuals and on Facebook I learned that Mexicans are bringing fentanyl into our grade schools and Haitians are eating cats. Also, the libs are a bunch of homos and the Black Lives Matter protestors steal Lego sets from target.”

[hjfklmor]

“ I just went to the grocery store and eggs are still expensive. The Democrats keep talking about transsexuals and on Facebook I learned that Mexicans are bringing fentanyl into our grade schools and Haitians are eating cats. Also, the libs are a bunch of homos and the Black Lives Matter protestors steal Lego sets from target.”

I think the Democratic Party should look inward and blame themselves, but there is something to be said about Republicans network of podcasts, influencers, Twitter shitposters, etc. and how the Democrats mostly rely on traditional media to relay their message. It certainly seems one message is being received more than the other.

[Pete]

Democrats can’t do that because they really really want the traditional media to stick around because they love what it stands for and it’s more important to toil in futile for the perfect than it is to be realistic and settle for the very good.

[Sandstone Outcropping]

1. Sleepy Joe

This is probably the best answer. He originally said it would be one term and they should have stuck with it and made plans for someone else the whole time. They would have most likely messed it up regardless by anointing someone (prob KH) like they tend to do, but who knows. The only way back is for them to find someone that will resonate and bring people out to vote. They know how many votes they will need. I mean, we've seen that R's are going to show up and vote R no matter what.

This is a good counterpoint. Even if they did have a normal primary process, it is hard to see someone other than Harris (part of the sitting Dem administration) emerging from the primary process anyway.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I don't think Harris would have won a primary. She probably would have won a brokered convention, which was really the only alternative the dems could have done with the timing of Joe stepping down.

[cfbandyman]

Democrats can’t do that because they really really want the traditional media to stick around because they love what it stands for and it’s more important to toil in futile for the perfect than it is to be realistic and settle for the very good.

Lord this is so goddamn true for far too many left leaning voters. If the candidate isn't perfect it isn't worth voting for. Like seeing (somewhat joking) people voting for Jill Stein (not that it mattered that much in this one) than being able to bring themselves to vote for Harris cause of Israel connotations or whatever. Like, too many people on the left tend to be unable to bring themselves to overcome imperfections in a candidate or position cause they can't agree with it enough. A very throw the baby out with the bath water in the voting part (the baby being a candidate they mostly agree with and the water being the crap they don't like about them). The right seems to be like as long as I get X out this guy I'm all in, even if there are things they don't agree with or don't like. For them they are willing to throw the baby (social services, economy, etc) also out with the bathwater (things they don't like about the candidate), but as long as their person is there to do it. Dems have to appeal more to those who they can reliably get a vote from, not one they have to jump through 100 hoops to get their vote.

[Stupid Fitz]

Democrats can’t do that because they really really want the traditional media to stick around because they love what it stands for and it’s more important to toil in futile for the perfect than it is to be realistic and settle for the very good.

Lord this is so goddamn true for far too many left leaning voters. If the candidate isn't perfect it isn't worth voting for. Like seeing (somewhat joking) people voting for Jill Stein (not that it mattered that much in this one) than being able to bring themselves to vote for Harris cause of Israel connotations or whatever. Like, too many people on the left tend to be unable to bring themselves to overcome imperfections in a candidate or position cause they can't agree with it enough. A very throw the baby out with the bath water in the voting part (the baby being a candidate they mostly agree with and the water being the crap they don't like about them). The right seems to be like as long as I get X out this guy I'm all in, even if there are things they don't agree with or don't like. For them they are willing to throw the baby (social services, economy, etc) also out with the bathwater (things they don't like about the candidate), but as long as their person is there to do it. Dems have to appeal more to those who they can reliably get a vote from, not one they have to jump through 100 hoops to get their vote.

Yep, I honestly don't see how they fix this. The right elected a draft dodging, convicted felon, convicted sexual assaulter, non church goer not once, but twice!!! All those things are about as "not conservative" as you get. They will vote lock and step almost regardless. Dems have to fight being too progressive, not being progressive enough, having a weird laugh, etc. to get voters. Like, can you imagine if a Dem candidate pretended to blow a microphone at a rally!!!

[Cire]

Dems aligning with LGBTQ+ movement cost them white working class and latino males.

[Sandstone Outcropping]

They lost on the economy, and there really isn't anything they could have done better to handle the economy. They could have done a much better job trying to educate the voters on exactly what caused the inflation and how the rate has been lowered and what that means, but the vast majority of people aren't intelligent enough to follow or even care about any of that. Trump's policies that he's spelled out are all highly inflationary. Maybe over-simplifying his tariff plan into a "national sales tax" was too disingenuous, but it's probably the best way to describe it that people can understand. At the end of the day, Trump has already been president and prices didn't skyrocket, so the attacks on him weren't effective. I don't think any candidate or policy positions would have made any difference.

I do think a whole lot of voters are going to regret their vote once these tariffs actually get implemented, though. If we actually have an election in 2028, the democrats should do pretty well.

I agree with everything you said besides this. A very large portion only cared about winning and/or hurting the other side. They will line up to vote the same way again next time even if they can't afford to drive themselves there. Hopefully the Ds have finally realized this.

They will not regret their vote because they will not attribute anything that happens, good or bad, to their vote. The quotes in this article are interesting to read.

https://www.thecity.nyc/2024/11/08/trump-red-shift-voter-turnout-queens-bronx-southern-brooklyn/

Trump is never responsible for anything bad that happens ever.

[Kat Kid]

I think Biden deserved a ton of blame and Kamala could not overcome how unpopular and bad his presidency was and her association with it and inability to offer clear differences was I think issue number 1. The campaign completely misunderstood that she could not simply run on the record, nor simply run against Trump's first presidency.

makes me think of Bernie
Right wingers didn't like Bernie but his clarity of message and no apologies principled stands are FAR more respected, EVEN WHEN PEOPLE DISAGREE. Bernie isn't wishy washy on policy or values. (Joe Rogan endorsed him and Bernie did much better with white men, young people in 2016 and 2020)

If you are defend the campaign, the candidate, the previous admin, and put the blame on groups like Arabs, trans people, Gaza protestors etc. the burden of proof is on you. The pros got to run the campaign they wanted and they were as in control of a campaign as any in memory. Hard to believe it still needs to be said, but blaming voters is not a winning strategy in a democracy. I see a lot of it.

My big points below all come back to not enough "clash" between the positions of Trump and Kamala on policy (in addition to basically no difference with Biden) AND the rhetoric was incoherent. The dems ran a right wing campaign with Liz Cheney as the closing message to Republicans. How did that work out?

On immigration (we tried to pass a tough immigration plan and Trump stopped it!)

on democracy (Trump is a fascist and danger!) This was a completely ineffective point

But Trump voters made up a greater share of those who described American democracy as "somewhat threatened," 50 percent, or "very threatened," 51 percent, CNN's exit polls show. Comparably, Harris voters accounted for 49 percent of those who said democracy in the U.S. is "somewhat threatened," and 47 percent said "very threatened."

https://www.newsweek.com/liberals-misunderstood-voter-concerns-democracy-1981664

on Israel (all of the warnings and red lines and Netanyahu completely ignoring/insulting Biden as he backed down or was totally absent, both sides looked to Trump as the change candidate on this!)

Here is Kamala's economic plan as pitched to black men (which were not the problem despite tons of attention about it), the problem to me is--
On economic issues focusing on what divides rather than universal programs. Obviously, you can't really have federal programs that give special handouts to only black men, but look at the weird phrasing (see below)

Drawing on insights from her experience throughout her career and her Economic Opportunity
Tour, today Vice President Harris is laying out an Opportunity Agenda for Black Men to provide
them with the tools to achieve financial freedom, lower costs to better provide for themselves
and their families, and protect their rights. This pathbreaking agenda includes:
(1) Providing 1 million loans that are fully forgivable to Black entrepreneurs and others to
start a business.
(2) Championing education, training, and mentorship programs that help Black men get
good-paying jobs in high-demand industries and lead their communities, including
pathways to become teachers.
(3) Supporting a regulatory framework for cryptocurrency and other digital assets so Black
men who invest in and own these assets are protected.
(4) Launching a National Health Equity Initiative focused on Black Men that addresses
sickle cell disease, diabetes, mental health, prostate cancer, and other health challenges
that disproportionately impact them.
(5) Legalizing recreational marijuana and creating opportunities for Black Americans to
succeed in this new industry.

The biggest one....
Abortion/Dobbs (why was this not the centerpiece of the campaign???? THE ISSUE OUTRAN KAMALA ALL OVER THE PLACE! PEOPLE REALLY VOTED FOR TRUMP AND TO SECURE ABORTION RIGHTS ALL OVER THE PLACE!!)

[MakeItRain]

I heard a stat that said there have been 13 recessions in American history, 11 of those have been while a Republican was the president. How are Democrats so rough ridin' horrible with messaging?

[MakeItRain]

Every large societal shift left in the history of this country has come from labor. We seem to be in another labor shift towards the worker or on the precipice of one, but the Dems let maga just take populism in the quest to appeal to suburban white women.