Both these things seem pretty much the same to me. I don't see these as mutually exclusive.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Andrew Yang: "In their minds the Democratic party unfortunately has taken on this role of the coastal urban elites..."
- Thread starter entremet
- Start date
Both these things seem pretty much the same to me. I don't see these as mutually exclusive.
The majority of the 2018 blue wave was a wave of moderates entering Congress. Progressives stay in their seats cause they are deep blue urban seats receptive to their messaging.
That's what I was saying.
She ran away from her own base trying to appeal to the people who weren't going to vote for her. I remember distinctly reading about her calling the progressives "crazies" and I just shook my head. I voted for her, but I'm sure there were many progressives who said why bother with her. She failed. She should have made sure she defined herself and her ideals instead of fleeing right at the slightest hint of being called a "gasp" progressive.
I also think quite frankly that several of the losing senators just outright were horrible at campaigning. But it may be more of a leadership issue. This should ensure heads should roll in the Senate and changes made. Same with the house. They blaming the wrong people.
Why we gotta prioritize appealing to the racists at all though?
Oh he definitely didn't campaign much on minimum wage. But jobs and healthcare? They were part of his whole "return to normalcy" schtick thanks to COVID making the country a shitshow. Reminding people of when they didn't have to fear unemployment and businesses shutting down, or their healthcare being taken away when they most needed it.
I don't think Biden needed to campaign harder on jobs and healthcare. He needed more inspiring policies.
maybe it would just be better to say that his "jobs and healthcare" rhetoric didn't have an actual substancive punch other than... just kinda mentioning them. like, if you wanna return to normalcy with covid, how are you going toi do it? a mandate for masks thats sort of a mandate but not really is not cutting it. you need to say "im going to bail out small businesses, im going to extend unemployment, im gonna freeze rent." or you know a million other ways to help the working class. he did say he suipported a stimulus but his messaging was far more focused on the mask culture war. big big big mistake.
Skinny bills are dangerous because Republicans would pass that and nothing else. No eviction moratorium, no increase in testing, no mask mandate, no child care assistance. And most of the money will end up going to big business anyway.
AOC is representing an extremely Democratic candidate and is beyond hubris to to assume that she would succeed anywhere else beside a district like hers. She probably wouldn't even get elected in up-state NY, let alone these completely red states. Her being Speaker is laughably dumb considering that she's already being used as a weapon against moderate candidates and incumbents in red areas. As Speaker, it wouldn't even be a stretch for them to paint candidates as being like AOC.
The biggest example of this is Paula Jean Swearengin in West Virginia. People hate Joe Manchin and claim that a leftist canidate could win in West Virginia. Well, they had their opportunity to prove that. Joe Manchin kept his seat while Paula Jean Swearengin lost by over 40% and apparently it's like the worst Democratic loss in state history. People in red states aren't trying to vote for liberal candidates.
Yeah, that's a good take. Biden basically only talked in the context of COVID and the Trump Presidency. It's like, "okay, but the Trump Presidency is over and COVID will eventually become less of a problem. What then?"
No harshness received, and definitely don't take my next words harsh at all. Just spitting.
Justification? I'm more exasperated after more than a year of being told to not disagree with or disagree with too loudly a lot of racist and diet racist statements and policies coming from a lot of Democrats that aren't named Yang. Every justification and "well but.." thrown out there months on months on months, for way more heinous shit.
So when I hear generic eye-raisers like Yang's, I gotta frame it as part of the systemic issue here that's been bothering me for a long time. Of course, a lot of it is to do with Yang's maybe good intentions and OK policy, so he gets more rope than say "All Lives Matter" Pelosi would here.
Basically, Yang's statement is whatever. But it'll always remind me of what the Democrats already do and don't do. That's not whitewashing, that's more just wanting to give a different take that doesn't focus on just a man and his 1 statement.
tldr; I treat it more as a jumping point into talking about why his entire theory is wrong from the jump, because the Democrats already neutered BLM and a lot of their other social messages to appeal to Reagan Democrats that ditched them.
I think you can, in an actually get stuff done, not populist way, strictly by better messaging.
For example, you could do a lot of things that would target social justice and systemic racism in the African American community without using racially-based language. Message it as something that will help the poor, middle class, and working class families, or raise all ships while some of the impact is actually much more targeted.
Unfortunately, I think what people fail to realize is that you have to present things in a "What's in it for me?" type of manner. Talking police reform for example, with conservative dad, for example: It's better for everyone in the country if our government doesn't get away with shooting citizens unpunished (appealing to our country's libertarianism streak). There's a spectrum of tools and ways that we can respond to incidents before escalating to gunshots. Let's provide a bigger toolbox so that we can use the right one.
Democrats have:
Republicans have:
And yet we're the party struggling to connect with the masses?
- Won the popular vote in seven out of the last eight presidential elections
- Won a majority in the popular vote in three of the last four presidential elections
Republicans have:
- Won the popular vote once in the last eight presidential elections
- Won a majority in the popular vote once in the last eight presidential elections
And yet we're the party struggling to connect with the masses?
Victories still involve moving margins in republican strongholds. That's what Biden has done to rebuild the blue wall. I think it's a mistake to characterize popular vote wins as having nothing to do with appealing to undecided/centrist/lean right voters.
My point is that we are the majority coalition, and we need to start acting like it by speaking about ourselves with confidence in our beliefs and values.
Yang is amplifying bullshit right-wing propaganda. Instead of constantly handwringing about our appeal to rural whites, why don't we ever talk about fixing broken institutions like the Electoral College and the U.S. Senate that constantly distort the true will of the American people? We're not even trying to move the Overton window on this shit, and it's infuriating.
100% agree. There is a electoral college problem, not a people problem. That's not to say there aren't a lot of things that can't be done better, but at the end of the day when you get millions more votes consistently in elections, that means something
It would be nice is Democrats would actually campaign on policies they want to have instead of going right because they're scared Republicans might use it against them. Do you think Republicans ever stop to think if their policies are popular enough, and let it stop them?
What process do you suggest to find out what Democrats "actually want"? Biden won the presidential nomination fair and square, but apparently policies other than his are actually desired? Why does that supposed desire not translate into votes when it matters?
He isn't wrong. I listened to an episode of The Daily and there was some restaurant owner on from Wisconsin who is running for the Democrats and he was a complete asshole. Literally said he was a big fish in a little pond and effectively called the locals stupid (what's wrong with a little more intelligence in a small town, using critical thinking skills, etc). Maybe they aren't intelligent but they'll know you're insulting them.
yeah, Santorum is going on live TV saying Republicans are going to gerrymander even harder to win the House in 2022. Dems should be shouting everyday how the system enables minority rule and is against the will of the people.
because of the corporate two party system.
progressive policies are popular.
By now after seeing the latest exit polls, and the blue surge they had at the midterms they aught to know what their base should want. Bernie lost to Biden in the primaries due to fear of Trump, yet his policies are still popular well after he's dropped out of the race. Stuff like defunding the police is still on the table for the taking, and they're gonna to need to campaign even harder on policies now to get more people out to the next race now that big threat of a second Trump term is over.
After this election, they want less faux bipartisanship with the guys who were perfectly happyto sick Trump on us when it was convenient and more politicians that will fight Republican's blatant power grabs.
Last edited:
Real answer is to figure out how to decouple individual candidates from the party in both directions. For example, Florida Cuban voters were 30 points more Republican than Florida Mexican voters. This occurred because socialism attacks based on Biden's overtures to Bernie / AOC stuck. Similar situation occurred in VA. To be clear, that's not on AOC, Bernie, or the Squad. The answer is the Dems need a better messaging apparatus that allows the candidates to be ran as individuals. To be honest, I don't know how you do that without treading deep into cult of personality type candidates.
I mean we can walk and chew gum. Sure many are motivated by racial animus, but a broad based economic pitch can peel off enough to build a consistently winning coalition without abandoning those in our coalition now. I think sometimes people look at focusing on income inequality and racial justice as mutually exclusive, and I honestly don't get it. A focus on broad based working class solidarity doesn't mean we abandon people of color, and in fact people of color will disproportionately benefit from policies that equalize material disadvantages, AND you don't have to stop talking about racial justice to do it. I think dems need to get over this complex wherein focusing on equality for all in our messaging means somehow betraying people of color and the marginalized, I look at it as the opposite, and the advantage is you can actually sell the policies to the entire country. I think dems do have to be introspective here, and address whether it's really impossible to appeal to some of these people. I mean, many of them stuck with dems through the civil rights bill, through Obama, it's not like those people WON'T vote for dems. What has really changed is that dems don't really focus on working class peoplr and economics anymore, and when neither party fills that void (trump sure as hell doesn't) they are left to vote on their resentments and bigotries (whicj trump did in spades). It's obvious that we should not appeal to their base instincts, but we can appeal to their economic well being, and we need to start doing so if we ever want to transform this nation. into a better place for the many, not the few.
I mean corporate dems would rather maintain the status quo, or focus solely on social issues because they, and the donor class arent really threatened by them. This is a problem.
There was ALOT of deceptive messaging around prop 22. Many people thought they were doing a good thing for Uber drivers. We need to work to create an economy where gig work isn't necessary for people to scrape by.
I live in rural America and am super liberal/have voted Democrat my whole life. I'm also surrounded by Republicans. The problem is largely economics. It's hard not to feel left behind or abandoned by the Democratic party where I live, even though I side with them on 100 percent of the issues. Where I live, you are lucky to get a job that pays $30K/year even with a college degree. What I want and what I think a lot of people want in rural America is simply a chance. Social safety net programs are great, but we also want good paying jobs and decent healthcare. I think instead of blaming the progressive wing of the party for how poorly the election went, the establishment needs to move further to the left and double down on real meat and potatoes issues like having a national $15/hr. Minimum wage and pushing more for a public option and free higher education or even UBI. The answer simply can't be just move to the city. There are millions of us Democrats in rural America that feel like we always vote for Democratic party candidates but really don't get much to show for it by way of economically uplifting and progressive political policies.
I will say I kinda like gig work, I know I'm not their employee so I dressed any way I wanted, refused task after task and made a schedule when I felt like. I was even running different companies at the same time, gig work can be freeing. So im not mad that prop 22 didn't pass.
The problem is that people have to rely on gig work to get by. In reality it doesn't just function as a flexible side hustle for alot people.
I think Samoyed's point is that if they're the same thing, why do liberals get offended at one, and champion the other?
Another example is the Defund the police message. Keep the goal, change the message. Demilitarize the police and bring up the fact that they're treating us as military combatants. The military equipment is a big reason why the police gets so much money. So by demilitarizing the police, you've essentially stripped them of funds, yet you didn't scare off voters like there will no longer be police.
Same with police brutality. Black and Latino Americans suffer the most under this, but message it as a thing the entire population suffers under. The end goal is the same. A universal policy to end police brutality.
Right now is the perfect chance to sell yourself as the party of the people. Most politicians take money from corporations. The Republicans currently do not have the "I'm not funded by lobbyists, corporate pacs, etc..." brand like progressives can tout. Strike now. What's going to happen when smarter right wingers opt that brand of being a grassroot funded politician? That's potentially taking away a small advantage we have right now.
Now, having said that, the Dems are more pro working class than the Republicans, but that's not enough. You have to stress material change for the poor more boldly and clearly so that the Republicans can no longer get away with frauding people they're for the poor. Meaning the advantage in this department isn't enough.
It's like in baseball where although you have 15 people on base throughout 9 innings, you did a terrible job in scoring them. Well, sooner or later, you're leaving the other team to win off fuckery because you didn't end the game earlier.
And although the above was more targeted towards gaining white working class voters, I believe the same is true for the entire working class.
Message to working class blacks, latinos, arabs, etc... the same thing. It's not enough to simply be better than the Republicans. You need to offer more and do not leave it up to chance. All those universal policy positions should never be sacrificed. I only mentioned changing the messaging. They're saving the Dems' ass because the Republicans are racist. Stop catering to the white working class by going more moderate in regards to policy position. They're the base and you throw them under the bus instead of changing the messaging.
It's a joke.
When you don't offer enough materially, you leave those votes in play for the Republicans. They might be more susceptible to voting for a religious issue (abortion in their eyes). Just because they might be voting based on evangelical values now, doesn't mean they're married to voting in that manner. Put that religious resolve to the test by offering them economic and criminal justice, justice.
There is nothing wrong with introspection. We can always improve.
Biden's campaign pushed for $15/hr federal minimum wage, a public option, stronger safety nets, and a more robust stimulus. As far as good paying jobs, the companies that pay well like to be in cities that attract talent. It's as simple as that. They already know they'll have to pay for good talent so keep costs down by talent competition.
I lived in Rural America. Yea, they want decent paying jobs, but, more than anything, they don't want change. Rural America abhors change that's why it's always about the good ole days and why they love their confederate heritage even though they live in the Midwest
I realize that, I was doing it full time and working insane hours some weeks. I didn't have a choice but it's a job that requires no interview, no experience and no special skills. I was doing food delivery and some days it can be awful.
There has to be some sorta control because sometimes you'd work all day and end up making nothing, I remember I made $50 from 9am to 5 pm and got a ticket on my car so I was in the hole that day.
The problem with the Democratic party is that it's a loose coalition of people that just don't fit in the Republican Party...generally speaking of course.
Some groups want certain policies that other groups simply don't care for, or about. They don't have a message other than "Unity." There's little substance. Some politicians may have some - Ocasio Cortez, Omar, Tlaib, but as a whole - the party doesn't stand for much other than "bring everyone together..." It's what we do after we're brought together that matters; it's going to take effort from Democractic state legislatures and governments to get progressive policy passed, and serve as an example for the rest of the country to see that socialism doesn't mean a failed state.
Some groups want certain policies that other groups simply don't care for, or about. They don't have a message other than "Unity." There's little substance. Some politicians may have some - Ocasio Cortez, Omar, Tlaib, but as a whole - the party doesn't stand for much other than "bring everyone together..." It's what we do after we're brought together that matters; it's going to take effort from Democractic state legislatures and governments to get progressive policy passed, and serve as an example for the rest of the country to see that socialism doesn't mean a failed state.
This is all true, but only in a vacuum. Popular economic ideas die in the pulpit when conservatives and even a great deal of centrists figure out they will benefit black and brown folks too. What that means is that you effectively have to leave out minority beneficiaries and narratives for the spiel to have a chance, which in turn pisses off minorities for good reason. Welcome to whiteness and typical American selfishness, specifically the Southern strategy.
Thank you. I'm so sick of hearing on this site and other places that if you're not in the city you don't vote for Democrats because you're a racist.
Is there some truth to that? Sure. But for the most part, there's a perception that Democrats don't give a shit about people in the sticks. My parents trashed the shit out of Pelosi when she did that interview from her home during the beginning of the pandemic wearing an ascot and discussing her wine cabinet. People in the midwest see shit like that then see them out of work because the plants close and ask themselves why should they vote Democrat.
Trump came in and promised bringing manufacturing back, promised bringing coal back. It was bullshit but a lot of people bought into it. Yes there's a large sect of racist/religious people who followed him like a cult but a lot of people were just fucking desperate. Look at polls about progressive ideas like $15/hr min wage and public healthcare. It's incredibly popular. But it's more important to Democratic leadership to kneel while wearing kente cloth as black folks are dying in the streets and people are starving. A photo op is not policy that puts food in people's mouths. Policy is. And the lack of policy over the last couple of elections is why Democrats continue to falter.
Last edited:
correct, it's not coincidence the coalition that brought the new deal forward died with LBJ, the voting rights act, affirmative action, and the great society.
My cousin had the exact same argument. Even before knowing that, what you described is definitely something I thought about. So it's a completely understandable pov. In the end though I was convinced by 4 things.
1. Some people aren't in that position and so Uber is the job they were able to get. To make ends meet, they have to work a lot. It's not about flexibility for them.
2. I don't like the idea of a gig economy where more and more workers rights are skated around.
3. These companies aren't making much profit, but at the same time, they're putting other businesses away because those cost more to the consumer. What happens when they drive the competition away? They can now start charging more and you can't say anything.
4. I guess this can be argued for this prop decision not being as big of a deal, but isn't Uber working on self driving cars? So they're going to make your job extinct anyways in a few years. On the other hand, as that's the case, they've caped (were a big part of funding ads) for other companies that turn employees into contract workers leaving this mess for workers to get scewed over for a potentially long time.
I didn't say we should do that.
I don't know how many liberals are out there cheering for Biden being an old white man or saying that we have to nominate an old white man, I feel like that would get pushback. I feel like the most people do is post hoc point out that his proximity to privilege makes him seem more moderate or palatable, I mean I've even heard Yang say that.
My dad is a yellow cab driver and Uber sorta ruined his life and I'm sure they nor the government really cared about him or his friends. They flood the market and can charge anything they want, it's sorta limitless for how many folks join Uber because in nyc we have so many Uber and Lyfts in the street we stopped new tlc licenses from being issued. Uber has made it hard to make a good solid living off of driving a cab. Your livelihood is tied to an app and they can boot you off, my cousin got banned off of Uber because of some scam where teenagers kept saying he didn't show up later in the week after they payed and that was the end of him and that job. He tried Lyft but the volume wasn't there.
The government could do more for people, show up in high schools don't just push for 4 year universities , make a push for free trade schools and community colleges. Our infrastructure is crumbling, we could have some federal program to learn and build and repair across the country. Travel the country fix some of our countries infrastructure, make a career out of it.
Last edited:
Yes this is what I meant.
This was the pro-Biden argument in the primaries. His entire "but he's electable!" thing boiled down to this. My point is you can't appeal to electability when it's about nominating Biden but then say "actually, 'working class' is code for racism" when it's Yang criticizing the center. It's one or the other, either they're both cryptoracists or neither of them are.
I am so sick of hearing this coastal elite bullshit always being thrown at Dems. Dems won the minority vote by a lot especially the black vote. Are they not part of the working class? What bullshit is he saying. Yang pisses me off sometimes.
Think you misunderstood. It's not about cheering for Biden. It's about making the argument "we must reach conservatives", yet get angry at Yang saying this. Not saying anyone on era is saying this, but I have seen this from liberals online. The nuance is that it's the same message, but different strategy (policy positions going conservative vs messaging being more class based combined with more pro-working class policies).
That's not the point. He's not saying they're the only working class. He's saying there's a portion of the working class that simply does not view the Democrats as the party for the working class. In their minds, that's what the Democrats represent. Yang is saying we need to change their mind. And that's without getting into the idea that as a whole, the Democrats aren't pro working class. More pro working class than Republicans? 100%, but that's not saying much.
100%
Claiming that the Dems need to court more votes by diluting their message for WCW is asinine. If anything, they need to push a more forceful, powerful message. Build something that people actually want instead of trying to dilute their values for a fickle vote.
How is it diluting the message? It's strengthening the message. You're trying to court a base that could add to your coalition, while at the same time keeping the same policy positions (or improving them) that help poc. Let's say you don't stress identity in your fight for passing legislation, are you saying that we'll lose enthusiasm for the policy position because of that? Like if you're trying to cancel student debt, and although poc suffer more from student debt, that minority students would all of a sudden lose enthusiasm for the policy position?
On the other hand, I think liberals dilute the message by purposely rallying around more moderate policy positions.
OP
OP
you completely nailed it. people are pretending yang said something he didn't so no one has to treat this election like cause for concern.
In a non-POTUS year with a drop in turnout from Republicans. We just saw what happens when rural and exurban consesrvatives are united against Dem canddiates. moderates didn't keep their seats. They lost because they were always weak candidates to the full scope of their constituency, but got away with it because more of the opposition was just not engaged in non-POTUS cycle politics.
Establishment Dems don't have real policies though. There is no unified message on what they want to achieve, so the end result is no ability to make positive branding nationally. The successful Dem candidates are the ones who brand themselves clearly to their constituency, whether they're moderate or progressive, and don't just live on the national narrative of "we're not as bad as the GOP".
$15/hr. minimum wage - most of the rural white working class are making more than $15/hr.
Public Option - the white working class already largely has healthcare. A public option doesn't explain how its going to make their healthcare better, more affordable, or easier to manage. Notice how the GOP continue to rail against "Obamacare" but are now publicly all for pre-existing condition coverage? Its one of the few parts of Obamacare that transcended the national narrative pushed by the GOP because it has an obvious benefit to everyone.
Stronger Safety Nets - White working class people rarely hit the nets. They work jobs that are squarely middle class. Not comfortably middle class because middle class in America is a grind, but its a safe grind. So the GOP has lots of room to message that the safety nets aren't for them, they're for minorities/special interest groups and the "failures" within the white working class while the rest are good American bootstrappers. Its a false narrative but its an easy one to push when the white working class is unlikely to ever spend much real time in danger of needing welfare/medicaid/etc..
Robust Stimulus - every economic stimulus package of the last ~30 years has been a corp. handout in some form or another. Even the portion of TARP distributed by Obama. Why would the working class give a shit about more of that?
I've lived in the Rural northeast, midwest, and southeast. I've spent time in rural parts of this country everywhere else except Alaska and Hawaii. The problem with change stems from change never being good for rural and exurban Americans. Its always a loss. Loss of manufacturing and resource harvesting jobs that were going away to foreign competition but that conservatives can message as free trade stealing them and regulations stopping them. Loss of their families as their successful kids need to move away not just to college but to find a job. A constant falling behind in resources as our infrastructure crumbles around us and no one speaks to it directly, only in vague suggestions of fixing "infrastructure".
The racism is a real problem no matter what, but the inability to show a platform of value to rural and exurban working class voters gives them over to the GOP with easy race/culture war rhetoric. A meaningful platform to help these communities won't turn them all blue, it might not even turn most of them into competitive congressional districts, but it'll hurt gerrymandering enough to swing more congressional seats while making swing state senate seats into reliable Dem pickups and will insulate the party from popular vote wins coupled with EC losses.