jfish26 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2024 9:14 am
Land doesn't vote.
I don't think there is a serious argument to be made that a more progressive candidate would have changed anything.
The present direction of my thinking is that no particular policy item would have changed anything. The present direction of my thinking is that (1) the result here is consistent with results for incumbent parties globally in 2023-24 - the incumbent party simply
is being blamed, everywhere, for post-Covid inflation, and (2) the result here is attributable more to R/right-wing exploitation of our information ecosystem than to anything politically substantive.
Yes, a
part of this is an Elon-Vlad point. And that part is whiny and finger-pointy.
But another part is that the Dems probably need to learn that, right or wrong, fair or unfair, the Rs won by reaching and converting low-information voters. Voters who had
no basis for even learning that post-Covid inflation was less-bad here than elsewhere, and largely Trump's fault besides.
And it is important that the Dems LEARN from this, as opposed to trying to fight the tide on it.
yea, land doesn't vote.
But, according to the numbers in the article, Sanders had a pretty considerable lead in both number of individual donors, and number of dollars raised.
and, yes. It IS important that Dems LEARN from this!
One thing maybe worth learning is, how and why do Dems end up NOT running the candidate gaining the most donors and dollars during the primaries?
A related thing to learn is, maybe propping up these uninspiring centrists is actually a loosing strategy - especially when that strategy so explicitly banks on trying to win over republican voters...Turns out republicans just don't wanna vote for dems. It's like expecting a dem to vote for a republican! (for real, the numbers here are virtually the same)
for real, Dems managed to leave like 8 figures worth of votes on the table this election. I'm gonna be hammering this point.
For the life of me, I can't figure out how Dems are so inept at maintaining any bullpen of talent at all to coach up...but for DC's "hollowed-out carcasses" theory.
As for post-Covid inflation, yea, the incumbent leaders are being blamed. But, I think Kamala just failed to offer a plan to counter inflation (and other economic issues, not to mention other issues yet) that actually resonated with voters. The actual substance of Kamala's plan wasn't great. But that's not even that big a deal to voters.
The bigger deal is messaging, rhetoric,
vibes - a candidate has to win them over, charm them, make them feel good, sell them a ketchup popsicle in white gloves, that sorta thing. Trump, for worse or for worse, is a master of it - at least among those who want to hear it. Kamala, however, was prob even worse about that than actually articulating a substantive plan.
blame the information ecosystem and Elon and Vlad and point fingers all you want, but I think it's also very much wise for Dems to just take the look in the mirror here.
