US Presidential Election 2020 Thread II - Judgement Day(s)

listermint

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I have to laugh and also shake my head at the progressive wing of the Democratic Party scrolling through Twitter. They are highlighting measures passed in several states on Election Day which should be welcomed, but how did the progressive wing do in house and senate races ? They struck out when you compare it to the pre election predictions.

I’m someone who would be in favour of most of what they stand for, but their messaging is awful at times. If they ever want to bring about the change they want at a national level they need to be willing to adapt their message to fit the electorate they are trying to get votes from. They are too easy for the conservative media and GOP to lump together. And it would seem that “centrist” is a term of derision amongst them. Nothing wrong with being a centrist imo. They criticise the GOP and rightly so on many issues but they need to look in the mirror and realise not being the GOP isn’t a good policy position.

So, this post and my last few shouldn’t be taken as a criticism of the democrats as a whole or any one part of it, but more annoyance at the fact that America as a whole seems to be moving towards the left but that can’t lead to complacency from the left. And for Christ sake can they stop the purity test they do. As was pointed out the GOP while having a shrinking base, will vote for a brick if it’s got an R next to it’s name. The democrats don’t do that and they need to do it more.

They won all but 1 seat.

They are better at reaching out to their base than any other group in the dem party.

eire4

listermint wrote: »

They won all but 1 seat.

They are better at reaching out to their base than any other group in the dem party.

I would also add that poor messaging is a Democratic wide problem. Whether its actual left leaning Democrats or right leaning corporate Democrats it has long been a big Democratic weakness. Made even worse because coming up with catchy slogans and phrases that stick and work for them sadly has long been a Republican strength.

Itssoeasy

listermint wrote: »

They won all but 1 seat.

They are better at reaching out to their base than any other group in the dem party.

So I’m completely wrong then.

listermint

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So I’m completely wrong then.

Pretty much. The statistics don't back up the claim unfortunately.

These will be a very powerful force in getting the numbers for Georgia. Tactically they've been excellent. Getting people energised at the doors etc

eire4

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So I’m completely wrong then.

Yes the progressives in the Democratic party did well retaining almost all their seats.

eire4

listermint wrote: »

Pretty much. The statistics don't back up the claim unfortunately.

These will be a very powerful force in getting the numbers for Georgia. Tactically they've been excellent. Getting people energised at the doors etc

That is correct they played a big role in places like Detroit, Philadelphia, Milwaukee and many other urban areas. What worries me is that the Corporate Democrats who control the party will now start demonizing them in their own form of purity test. Plus on top of that they will do little of any note to fundamentally reform the police in the US and thus lose a good portion of the black vote which was very energized in this election following on from the protests against police brutalities and murders throughout much of 2020.

Itssoeasy

listermint wrote: »

Pretty much. The statistics don't back up the claim unfortunately.

These will be a very powerful force in getting the numbers for Georgia. Tactically they've been excellent. Getting people energised at the doors etc

Well then I’ll stop making posts on them. No point in being wrong. Well it’s clear we disagree not on what they do but how they do it. I will say that the democrats as a whole didn’t have a good night and lost seats in the house and may take control of the senate but as a whole(which is where we have confusion over the all bar one line) which includes the progressive wing didn’t perform like they wanted to or needed to.

listermint

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Well then I’ll stop making posts on them. No point in being wrong. Well it’s clear we disagree not on what they do but how they do it. I will say that the democrats as a whole didn’t have a good night and lost seats in the house and may take control of the senate but as a whole(which is where we have confusion over the all bar one line) which includes the progressive wing didn’t perform like they wanted to or needed to.

Perhaps if the rest of the party particularly the whingers that are going on about the lost seats connected with their voters the same way ?

Because they're doing something wrong entirely and blaming half your own party for your complete ineptitude isn't going to win 2024.

Itssoeasy

eire4 wrote: »

That is correct they played a big role in places like Detroit, Philadelphia, Milwaukee and many other urban areas. What worries me is that the Corporate Democrats who control the party will now start demonizing them in their own form of purity test. Plus on top of that they will do little of any note to fundamentally reform the police in the US and thus lose a good portion of the black vote which was very energized in this election following on from the protests against police brutalities and murders throughout much of 2020.

I don’t see it as demonising progressives but it’s clear one wing of the party is annoyed at the other because of the seats lost which I suppose is understandable between now and January given democrats who lost their seats will still be in Congress. If it goes on past January then it won’t be a good look. But anyway I said I wouldn’t be commenting on progressives specifically.

Itssoeasy

listermint wrote: »

Perhaps if the rest of the party particularly the whingers that are going on about the lost seats connected with their voters the same way ?

Because they're doing something wrong entirely and blaming half your own party for your complete ineptitude isn't going to win 2024.

Well I think those who lost their seats see the problem(rightly or wrongly)as having being cast as a progressive when they weren’t which works against them because their GOP opponent could use the same old talking points against them. Conor lamb of Pennsylvania who won a seat nearly lost his seat yet he isn’t a progressive but played the field he had and moved on certain issues and had a great win last time.

Well complete ineptitude is bit strong as is whingers. It’s understandable to feel pissed off when you’ve lost your seat. Both sides need to stop blaming each other.

eire4

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I don’t see it as demonising progressives but it’s clear one wing of the party is annoyed at the other because of the seats lost which I suppose is understandable between now and January given democrats who lost their seats will still be in Congress. If it goes on past January then it won’t be a good look. But anyway I said I wouldn’t be commenting on progressives specifically.

Well we can chose whatever words we want but the corporate Democrats who are constantly pointing fingers at progressives about purity tests are basically doing the same themselves instead of looking in the mirror and accepting that while they have some legitimate grips with progressives they have to accept that they have contributed to the problem as well. But the corporate Democrats never seem willing to look in the mirror and accept any blame themselves.

Itssoeasy

eire4 wrote: »

Well we can chose whatever words we want but the corporate Democrats who are constantly pointing fingers at progressives about purity tests are basically doing the same themselves instead of looking in the mirror and accepting that while they have some legitimate grips with progressives they have to accept that they have contributed to the problem as well. But the corporate Democrats never seem willing to look in the mirror and accept any blame themselves.

Democrats as a whole need to do be willing to accept blame. 2022 isn’t that far away and the republicans have increased their seats this time around and will be looking to take back control of the house. The democrats need to focus and try and work as one party, albeit with different groups in it because if the republicans take back the house and if they keep the senate this time around then whatever agenda progressives or as you call them corporate democrats won’t be getting any of it through.

eire4

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Democrats as a whole need to do be willing to accept blame. 2022 isn’t that far away and the republicans have increased their seats this time around and will be looking to take back control of the house. The democrats need to focus and try and work as one party, albeit with different groups in it because if the republicans take back the house and if they keep the senate this time around then whatever agenda progressives or as you call them corporate democrats won’t be getting any of it through.

The bigger issue with 2022 is that redistricting will happen next year and it will happen again with Republicans in control of most of it because they control most state legislatures across the US. But even more serious the Republicans now all but own the supreme court as a backstop to allow them to rule even as a minority party. The supreme court will no doubt start stripping away whats left of the voting rights act and will no doubt allow Republicans to go on a gerrymandering spree that will make 2010 look like a warm up. That IMHO is the Democrats biggest hurdle in terms of 2022 and retaining control of the house.

TomOnBoard

eire4 wrote: »

The bigger issue with 2022 is that redistricting will happen next year and it will happen again with Republicans in control of most of it because they control most state legislatures across the US. But even more serious the Republicans now all but own the supreme court as a backstop to allow them to rule even as a minority party. The supreme court will no doubt start stripping away whats left of the voting rights act and will no doubt allow Republicans to go on a gerrymandering spree that will make 2010 look like a warm up. That IMHO is the Democrats biggest hurdle in terms of 2022 and retaining control of the house.

Democrats really need to work on the fact that, despite having larger numbers of registered voters than Republicans in Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Michigan, they control none of those legislatures. A massive voter drive, and associated voting education , such as was led by Stacy Abrams in Georgia, has to be a huge priority now. Re-districting and gerrymandering that have been the hallmarks of the last decade have got to be managed and voter suppression and disenfranchisement battled at every turn.

In addition, HONEST internal examination of why Dems did not convert a Biden win into Senate and House improvements is needed. Blaming one wing of the party or the other will just alienate and frustrate. Was a considerable amount of Biden's vote attributable to Reps who could no longer hold their nose(s) and vote for Trump? Failure to understand why those of Cuban and Venezuelan heritage voted for Trump, along with many of Mexican heritage in more rural areas of Texas will hold them back next time as well, and many other times thereafter. The GOP messaging that frightened folks in those areas away from Democratic policies needs attention. Clear education as to what elements of Democratic Socialism and other hot-button issues are supported by the Party needs to be simply explained. Their messaging has been all over the place on these, which allowed the GOP spin doctors to spin the confusion against Dems, as spin doctors are paid to do.

Manic Moran

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Intriguing, and I'm glad I held fire on my weekend-warrior quip, because from what you describe it really sounds like the National Guard is a lot more capable as a fighting force than most people might realize. I would almost be concerned given the kind of regional affiliation you describe, but I presume from what you say and don't say, that the NG has, like the Army, a bit of a Republican lean in its membership.

In any case, I appreciate the insights; you're an utter wellspring of knowledge on the topic. You know if you had the time, you should get yourself a YT channel, do some videos on this kinda stuff.

Correct. The Abrams Doctrine is the result of Vietnam: A large portion (Somewhere over half) of the US's conventional military capability is in the reserves. The intent is that the US cannot go to war unless it's willing to take folks out of the civilian workforce with the accompanying political and economic issues, so most of us have either gone on deployment (twice in my case) or expect to. Yes, Guardsmen lean Republican.

I have a YT channel, 173K subscribers thus far.

They won all but 1 seat.

They are better at reaching out to their base than any other group in the dem party.

Yes, but 'where' is the question? Look at "The Squad," for example. Not to put a disservice to the others, but still. Saying that they won re-election is hardly a high bar. Omar's seat has been Democrat since 1963. Pressley's since 1923. There hasn't been a Republican in Tlaib's seat since 1929. AOC's is far more recent, the 1980s, but it's about as safe as a house now regardless.

The names you want to look at are the folks who flipped Republican seats to Democrat. Carolyn Bourdeaux, Kathy Manning, Deborah Ross. Did they do so because they were progressive and drew out their base, or did they do so because they were less so, and didn't turn off the voters in Georgia and North Carolina where they won their seats? Keeping the seats they have is good. Turning the seats they don't have is better.

Irish Praetorian

Manic Moran wrote: »

I have a YT channel, 173K subscribers thus far.

Yes I know, I was being jocular

And before you say I didnt know and Im just being prideful now, I got a two word shibboleth;

Sloped armour.

That aside, I know its early days but what do you imagine is the prognosis for 2020? I know a lot rides on Trumps actions but I feel like there could be a red miniwave off the back of orange man being gone (dampening Democrat turnout) and the long after effects of covid.

BluePlanet

Manic Moran wrote: »

Yes, but 'where' is the question? Look at "The Squad," for example. Not to put a disservice to the others, but still. Saying that they won re-election is hardly a high bar. Omar's seat has been Democrat since 1963. Pressley's since 1923. There hasn't been a Republican in Tlaib's seat since 1929. AOC's is far more recent, the 1980s, but it's about as safe as a house now regardless.

The names you want to look at are the folks who flipped Republican seats to Democrat. Carolyn Bourdeaux, Kathy Manning, Deborah Ross. Did they do so because they were progressive and drew out their base, or did they do so because they were less so, and didn't turn off the voters in Georgia and North Carolina where they won their seats? Keeping the seats they have is good. Turning the seats they don't have is better.

Why vote for Republican Lite when there's a real Republican on the ticket?
It's basically pitching to the same group of voters.
If the Dems want to flip seats, they have to grow the vote.
Progressive policies do that.

BluePlanet

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Democrats really need to work on the fact that, despite having larger numbers of registered voters than Republicans in Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Michigan, they control none of those legislatures. A massive voter drive, and associated voting education , such as was led by Stacy Abrams in Georgia, has to be a huge priority now. Re-districting and gerrymandering that have been the hallmarks of the last decade have got to be managed and voter suppression and disenfranchisement battled at every turn.

In addition, HONEST internal examination of why Dems did not convert a Biden win into Senate and House improvements is needed. Blaming one wing of the party or the other will just alienate and frustrate. Was a considerable amount of Biden's vote attributable to Reps who could no longer hold their nose(s) and vote for Trump? Failure to understand why those of Cuban and Venezuelan heritage voted for Trump, along with many of Mexican heritage in more rural areas of Texas will hold them back next time as well, and many other times thereafter. The GOP messaging that frightened folks in those areas away from Democratic policies needs attention. Clear education as to what elements of Democratic Socialism and other hot-button issues are supported by the Party needs to be simply explained. Their messaging has been all over the place on these, which allowed the GOP spin doctors to spin the confusion against Dems, as spin doctors are paid to do.

FL passed a ballot initiative for a $15 minimum wage.
That's a Bernie Sanders policy, why wasn't it a Democratic Party one?
FL went for Trump.
What lessons can one draw from this?
Biden was another low energy, unpopular candidate and i think he was toxic to down ballot Dems.

CrabRevolution

BluePlanet wrote: »

FL passed a ballot initiative for a $15 minimum wage.
That's a Bernie Sanders policy, why wasn't it a Democratic Party one?
FL went for Trump.
What lessons can one draw from this?
Biden was another low energy, unpopular candidate and i think he was toxic to down ballot Dems.

That's a strange term to describe the man who just won the US Presidential election.

The Raging Bile Duct

CrabRevolution wrote: »

That's a strange term to describe the man who just won the US Presidential election.

And one that got the most votes of any presidential candidate ever.

jam_mac_jam

BluePlanet wrote: »

FL passed a ballot initiative for a $15 minimum wage.
That's a Bernie Sanders policy, why wasn't it a Democratic Party one?
FL went for Trump.
What lessons can one draw from this?
Biden was another low energy, unpopular candidate and i think he was toxic to down ballot Dems.

That's the type of issues that they should be focusing on but they won't as they are becoming the party of the rich. Then they are shocked that they are losing votes to the Republicans.

They have no policy to benefit normal people. The traditional voters of the democrats are leaving them. Same as Labour in the UK, become the party of the middle class and you loose a lot of voters as you aren't addressing their concerns anymore.

Carfacemandog

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

Given their record, why would you trust Project Veritas or anybody involved with them?

They have a proven record of fraudulent claims.

Because the lies are convenient. Even though those posting them are fully aware they are lies, they are indeed convenient.

BluePlanet

CrabRevolution wrote: »

That's a strange term to describe the man who just won the US Presidential election.

He is squeaking by against an unpopular President in the middle of a pandemic that Trump has failed to manage.
How much of a tailwind does Biden really need?

If Biden was popular, can you explain why Dems are loosing down ballot races?

BluePlanet

On the question of how a Biden win didn't translate to a blue wave down ballot:

Unfortunately, Biden’s campaign may have a lot to do with that. The central theme of Biden’s campaign and of the Democratic National Convention was that Donald Trump is a uniquely malignant figure, that many Republican legislators would be happy to be rid of him to work with Democrats, that Biden himself is uniquely situated to work across the aisle with the opposition, and that Democrats need to come together with Republicans to compromise to solve problems.

Whether made out of conviction or political convenience, that message is explicitly tailored to give conservative-leaning voters permission to abandon Trump at the top of the ticket, but to keep voting for Republicans down the ballot. Which appears to be exactly what happened.

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2020/11/08/biden-won-big-but-his-approach-may-have-cost-democrats-downballot/

Quin_Dub

eire4 wrote: »

Yes the progressives in the Democratic party did well retaining almost all their seats.

It's a little more nuanced than that though.

Yes , the progressive candidates did do well , but there is no question that the existence of those progressive candidates damaged the more moderate candidates in Red States.

Granted, it was driven largely by an irrational "red under the bed" style fear , but the impact was real.

They need to do a better job of breaking down that fear among Moderate/Slightly right voters that they are not going to ban religion etc. etc. etc.

Yes , obviously and objectively they are not , but the GOP have done frankly a brilliant job of smearing the entire Democratic party with this "Radical left" brush.

listermint

Quin_Dub wrote: »

It's a little more nuanced than that though.

Yes , the progressive candidates did do well , but there is no question that the existence of those progressive candidates damaged the more moderate candidates in Red States.

Granted, it was driven largely by an irrational "red under the bed" style fear , but the impact was real.

They need to do a better job of breaking down that fear among Moderate/Slightly right voters that they are not going to ban religion etc. etc. etc.

Yes , obviously and objectively they are not , but the GOP have done frankly a brilliant job of smearing the entire Democratic party with this "Radical left" brush.

And surely that better job is on the senators battling those races, Evidently they are not funding local activities like the progressives are.

They simply arent getting the message across. Sitting back and waiting for major funding to save them with ad campaigns...

Gbear

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

And one that got the most votes of any presidential candidate ever.

I'm not sure this has as much value as a statistic as people keep pointing out. For one, the population keeps increasing. One would expect that turnout will increase over time.

The other one, is that Trump is historically unpopular, but also historically popular - it's a matter of massive polarisation. He drove turnout as much as anything. With Trump generally lagging Republicans across the ticket, it seems that ticket splitting was pretty common for never Trump Republicans, or those he simply wore down.

The overall question is difficult to answer, because you have to account for what kind of seats progressives won and lost (how blue/red was their district), whether they had incumbency advantage, whether their opponent did, and only then can you try to unpick how progressive they were and how likely it was to effect their race.
Florida shows how tricky such an analysis could prove, with them simultaneously supporting a fascist, and also a $15 minimum wage.

What does seem to be fairly consistent everywhere, is that progressive social policy is less popular than progressive economic policy. Black and Latino voters (men especially), could be theorised to have supported Trump in greater numbers for this reason - they're more conservative than the average American.
If I were Labour in the UK, or the left wing of the Democrats, I'd focus solely on the economic policy in messaging and stop talking about progressive social policy entirely. It wouldn't mean they'd have to stop making meaningful change on that front, but it doesn't seem to be much of a vote getter so I'm not sure it's worth talking about. Hopefully the lefty supporters would get the message and shut the **** up.

I think they need to mirror the Republican party. Where the Republicans pay for their tax cuts with political capital earned from social issues, the Democrats needs to pay for their social issues with political capital earned from their economic policy.

Carfacemandog

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Democrats as a whole need to do be willing to accept blame. 2022 isn’t that far away and the republicans have increased their seats this time around and will be looking to take back control of the house. The democrats need to focus and try and work as one party, albeit with different groups in it because if the republicans take back the house and if they keep the senate this time around then whatever agenda progressives or as you call them corporate democrats won’t be getting any of it through.

To be fair, your initial post seemed to be willing to place blame on the progressive wing in the assumption they didn't do well in their races. It's a little inconsistent to move from that to "everyone's fault" when pointed out that these candidates did quite excellently and the more moderate/corporate wing were quite a flop.

I would also place most of the 'not working as one party' blame on the moderate/corporate wing, as many of them are very quick to jump on side closer to Republicans if the alternative is anything that might be damaging to their donors and the likes. MSNBC put this on full display back in February I believe it was when Sanders was leading in the primaries, literally likening him and his supporters directly to nazis on repeated occasions, which was in especially bad taste considering how many direct family members Sanders lost to the holocaust. There were even open murmurings about wanting truno to win over sanders if it came to it, for fear of people being beheaded in the streets by the regime under a Sanders presidency. Around the same time, that eejit Hillary Clinton also decided to wade in and partake in attacks in Sanders along the same lines.

That is toxic to an outright extreme and its very difficult for progressives to fully trust in people who push this type of stuff against you, yet the 'moderate' (kind of hard to use that term given what is outlined above) side of the democrat party and media who lean in that direction were more than happy to do so and potentially cause an irreperable schism in the Democrats if that is what it took. Had the progressive wing of the party had this kind of influence and exerted in such a way, we would rightly not hear the end of it for a very long time.

In terms of the election itself, it does seem that Biden was the stronger candidate as he basically maxed out his performance in most cities due to hatred of Trump, but also clawed back nicely in deep red areas where he still lost by a wide margin, but those 65/35 losses instead of being 80/20 likely played a huge role in key states like Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. So that worked out as removing Trump was the biggest issue. But on top of only helping to push the Overton window even further to the right (for the umpteenth time since the 1980s), the moderate/corporate end of the party have an awful, awful lot to answer for in terms of their behaviour over the last 10-12 months and did an awful lot to help fire up the baseless "progressives are communists who want to enslave us all!" narrative pushed by Republicans in this election.

Carfacemandog

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Granted, it was driven largely by an irrational "red under the bed" style fear , but the impact was real.

Perhaps the likes of MSNBC shouldn't have been pushing that same narrative against those same progressives through the winter and spring then, and prominent national democrats should have been coming out across the country to condemn them when they did in calls for party unity.

Yet many were happy to sit back and let it unfold at that stage if they felt it would assist them (or their 'wing' of the party) in the primaries.

rossie1977

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

That's the type of issues that they should be focusing on but they won't as they are becoming the party of the rich. Then they are shocked that they are losing votes to the Republicans.

They have no policy to benefit normal people. The traditional voters of the democrats are leaving them. Same as Labour in the UK, become the party of the middle class and you loose a lot of voters as you aren't addressing their concerns anymore.

Well let's see last decade or so..

* Student loan affordability act. Every single Republican voted against it, every Democrat voted for it

* Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Funding, all but one Republican voted against it, all Democrats for.

* Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013, all but one Republican against, all Democrats for.

* Paycheck fairness act, all Republicans against, all but one Democrat for.

* End the bureau of consumer financial protection, all but one Republican for, all but one Democrat against.

* American Jobs Act of 2011 - $50 billion for infrastructure projects, all 48 Republicans against. 50 Dems for, 2 against

* Emergency Unemployment Compensation Extension act. All but one Republican against, All but one Dem for

* Reduces Funding for Food Stamps. All Dems against. 13 Republicans against, 33 for.

* Minimum Wage Fairness Act, all but one Republican against. All but one Dem for

I will admit the media and Republicans have done a great job convincing the public the Democratic party no longer care about normal people (it's basically been their strategy for nigh on 40 years now) but even a little research shows the opposite is clearly true.