Support NeoGAF

[balladofwindfishes]

When talking about the Rust Belt decaying and how the Democrats have no plans to fix it and no proof it works, why don't they point to Western NY?

When Kodak started failing in Rochester, and other jobs related to Kodak started fleeing, we started focusing more on education, technology, arts and health care. We put funding into universities and made our community college into one of the best community colleges in the state. When someone says they graduate from MCC, it's not shameful or embarrassing, because MCC, even as a community college, is known and respected in the area and people can get great jobs with just an associates degree from MCC. We encourage people to go and be re-educated to find new jobs. We have huge programs for two year degrees to work in healthcare. The University of Rochester is the largest employer in the city, employing all sorts of educated and uneducated in jobs in healthcare and education. RIT brought with it a boon of arts, science, business and technology graduates who stayed in the area and we're now a mini silicone valley of tech start ups. We have an active, healthy theater community. A large, active music community and a fantastic music school. Gorgeous parks, loads of festivals, excellent museums, and just generally a decent place to raise kids and have a family.

Areas that were dead or decayed now house 1K+ rent apartments for young people with active night lives, restaurants and small stores.

If we were once the Rust Belt, you wouldn't know living here.

I didn't even realize Rochester was part of the Rust Belt until someone mentioned it a few years back. Because I never noticed any of the issues Rust Belt areas were going through, because we really weren't going through them that much. Smart people made smart choices of what to focus on.

And yea, it has problems. Crime is high in very segregated communities in a small part of the city. Education in the inner cities could be better. Our population is stagnant or decreasing slightly.

But it's a Rust Belt success story. Something that can be pointed to and said "hey, look, re-education and putting money towards schools and healthcare can work! These decaying areas can be rebuilt! There are new jobs for you guys!"

I've always been incredibly proud of my area, but maybe even more so now that I see where the rest of the Rust Belt has ended up.

 

[Y2Kev]

Again, you're explicitly saying that I need to accept and tolerate racism & racist apologists in my life, and work with them about making decisions about who runs my government. That's appeasement.

Not happening. I don't care if power is lost as a result. This is a lot to ask for after the USA elected an overtly unapologetic racist human being to be its President.

These type of swing voters piss me off more than solid Rs. At least with them, I know it's just a team sport. I know where they stand.

This is worse. This is a group of people who occasionally pretend to care, but they really don't. They are fickle allies, and I'm tired of dealing with fickle allies after this mess. I think a lot of minorities feel the same way. I don't want to court people who voted for Trump this time and Obama the last time. I refuse to support a party that wants to court racist apologists.

Do racists vote for a black dude? Couldn't it just be that they have other priorities? That they don't see or don't understand the implicit racism in "black people are living in hell"?

I think there's something very wrong with people who voted for trump but I want to win next time or things will be worse.

 

[Totakeke]

When talking about the Rust Belt decaying and how the Democrats have no plans to fix it and no proof it works, why don't they point to Western NY?

When Kodak started failing in Rochester, and other jobs related to Kodak started fleeing, we started focusing more on education, technology, arts and health care. We put funding into universities and made our community college into one of the best community colleges in the state. When someone says they graduate from MCC, it's not shameful or embarrassing, because MCC, even as a community college, is known and respected in the area and people can get great jobs with just an associates degree from MCC. We encourage people to go and be re-educated to find new jobs. We have huge programs for two year degrees to work in healthcare. The University of Rochester is the largest employer in the city, employing all sorts of educated and uneducated in jobs in healthcare and education. RIT brought with it a boon of arts, science, business and technology graduates who stayed in the area and we're not a mini silicone valley of tech start ups. We have an active, healthy theater community. A large, active music community and a fantastic music school.

Areas that were dead of decayed now house 1K+ rent apartments for young people with active night lives, restaurants and small stores.

I didn't even realize Rochester was part of the Rust Belt until someone mentioned it a few years back. Because I never noticed any of the issues Rust Belt areas were going through, because we really weren't going through them that much. Smart people made smart choices of what to focus on.

And yea, it has problems. Crime is high in very segregated communities in a small part of the city. Education in the inner cities could be better. Our population is stagnant or decreasing slightly.

But it's a Rust Belt success story. Something that can be pointed to and said "hey, look, re-education and putting money towards schools and healthcare can work! These decaying areas can be rebuilt! There are new jobs for you guys!"

I've always been incredibly proud of my area, but maybe even more so now that I see where the rest of the Rust Belt has ended up.

Sounds like a very solid plan that doesn't sell because it's not instant gratification.

 

[Hindl]

Still going with the "bernie bro" shit. You don't get it. She was the wrong candidate. She cant inspire anything. A populist candidate like Bernie would NOT have lost PA, MI and WI which have been pretty solid Blue for decades.

She was the only sane choice but she ran her campaign completely wrong. This is all on her, her campaign and the DNC. They ignored the signs in the primaries when she got destroyed in the rust belt. The party needs to change and the clinton sect needs to be sacced.

You're half right. Hillary was the wrong candidate. But don't be so sure that Bernie would've won. Maybe he would've done better with rural whites, but there's no evidence that he would've done as well with minorities. If you assume they'll just vote for the Democrat anyway, that's the exact same mistake Hillary made with rural whites in the rust belt. Yes, Bernie had some minority support, but they overwhelmingly broke for Hillary, and making Bernie the candidate would've suppressed their votes.

Plus, we have no idea how Bernie would've reacted to this campaign. Trump would've been able to hit him just as easily for being in Washington for 30 years and not fixing everything. And he'd have a better point! Bernie Sanders was the amendment king, but when it came to drafting bills, he didn't do much. That's not to mention the scandals waiting to pop up relating to Sierra Blanca and his wife's issues with the university funding, and his self-described socialist label. These would've sunk him, and no, you wouldn't have been able to explain it away to them. Plus, he's an atheist Jew running against a white supremacist who used the (((globalist))) dogwhistle to attack Jewish journalists.

Hillary was a bad candidate. Hillary-GAF can admit that. But your analysis is poor if you think Bernie would've been a slam dunk.

Edit: Plus, don't forget that populist Senate and House candidates ran far behind Hillary this election

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

I would argue that chasing this demographic is the definition of foolish. If "outsider" is the requirement, then they're clueless about politics, clueless about the path legislation takes to get passed, and clueless about other people's concerns.

Its the biggest issue american politics face right now. The influence of money in poiltics is corruption the entire system and even though people don't understand the intricacies, they have a feeling that somethings off.
Trump abused that sentiment, claiming he is anti establishment and bashing Clinton for it, now, immediately after he won, he is already surrounding himself with lobbyists and establishment faces, he is even more open to their influence than Clinton would have been.

Voters got played this time, but the issue is actually important.
You know why the US is the only fucking country in the world where climate change is still a controversial issue? Because the fossil fuel industry can buy so much influence.
And thats only one example.
This needs to stop, a system like that shouldn't exist.
And people know that.
The democrats need to make they'll have a candidate for them next time.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Do racists vote for a black dude? Couldn't it just be that they have other priorities? That they don't see or don't understand the implicit racism in "black people are living in hell"?

I think there's something very wrong with people who voted for trump but I want to win next time or things will be worse.

.... I think most people could see the racism in "the first black president is a Muslim, Kenyan impostor."

Then again, these people are so stupid that they voted in a government that will take away their food stamps and disability because Hillary sent emails. Ha ha ha ha ha ha

 

[bachikarn]

I think it is also important to remember we have to win in 2020 and not 2016. Just cos a certain strategy would have worked in 2016 in hindsight, it does not mean that same strategy will work in 2020.

In 2016, there was definitely a strong desire for an anti establishment candidate (at least in some key areas). For all we know, the Trump presidency makes them realize that experience is really important. Or they will think Trump was a fraud and want a 'true' anti establishment candidate. Who knows. The DNC needs to have a pulse of the situation as time goes on.

 

[Y2Kev]

.... I think most people could see the racism in "the first black president is a Muslim, Kenyan impostor."

Then again, these people are so stupid that they voted in a government that will take away their food stamps and disability because Hillary sent emails. Ha ha ha ha ha ha

That was started by Sidney blumenthal okay

 

[sturgboski]

Its time for the democratic establishment to fuck off and make way for a true progressive movement. They managed to lose an election that was probably the easiest for them to win imaginable, because they abandoned their base.

I hope a social democratic movement forms in the democratic party.
For a long time I actually kinda bought this democratic narrative that baby steps are the way to go because more change would never work.
But now, after 8 years of baby steps, Trump comes in and undos everything.
He has the power to do that with the house, the senate and his new SC pick.
And guess what? This could've been the position democrats find themselves in, if they would have shown actual idealism, that they actually care for people.
And with a democratic president, house, senate and SC, we could've done much more than just baby steps.


But the incompetence on display here was beyond comprehension. VP pick Tim Kaine alone has to be some sort of sick joke. A boring center right blank face nobody gives a fuck about. What the hell were they thinking?

The progressives and democrats who chose not to vote because they didnt like the top of the ticket can also fuck off based on your statement. Maybe if they looked at things like you did between the "fuck the establishment" and the "fuck Tim Kaine" paragraphs, we would have won. Instead, they thought "its not the person I want" or "I am not excited" or whatever and chose to abstain as a silent protest, glad that worked out.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

When talking about the Rust Belt decaying and how the Democrats have no plans to fix it and no proof it works, why don't they point to Western NY?

When Kodak started failing in Rochester, and other jobs related to Kodak started fleeing, we started focusing more on education, technology, arts and health care. We put funding into universities and made our community college into one of the best community colleges in the state. When someone says they graduate from MCC, it's not shameful or embarrassing, because MCC, even as a community college, is known and respected in the area and people can get great jobs with just an associates degree from MCC. We encourage people to go and be re-educated to find new jobs. We have huge programs for two year degrees to work in healthcare. The University of Rochester is the largest employer in the city, employing all sorts of educated and uneducated in jobs in healthcare and education. RIT brought with it a boon of arts, science, business and technology graduates who stayed in the area and we're now a mini silicone valley of tech start ups. We have an active, healthy theater community. A large, active music community and a fantastic music school. Gorgeous parks, loads of festivals, excellent museums, and just generally a decent place to raise kids and have a family.

Areas that were dead or decayed now house 1K+ rent apartments for young people with active night lives, restaurants and small stores.

I didn't even realize Rochester was part of the Rust Belt until someone mentioned it a few years back. Because I never noticed any of the issues Rust Belt areas were going through, because we really weren't going through them that much. Smart people made smart choices of what to focus on.

And yea, it has problems. Crime is high in very segregated communities in a small part of the city. Education in the inner cities could be better. Our population is stagnant or decreasing slightly.

But it's a Rust Belt success story. Something that can be pointed to and said "hey, look, re-education and putting money towards schools and healthcare can work! These decaying areas can be rebuilt! There are new jobs for you guys!"

I've always been incredibly proud of my area, but maybe even more so now that I see where the rest of the Rust Belt has ended up.

Let me quote a response I wrote elsewhere on a similar topic yesterday:


You know what creates jobs? Investing in education. You know why? Because people who know stuff start businesses. Because people who know stuff work in jobs that can't be outsourced.
Globalization is good and and can't be stopped, but we have to make sure our workers can compete with workers worldwide by educating them, so people in other countries can't do our jobs because they lack the education.

You know what would have been a smart thing to do? Taking a look what countries with little to no unemployment are doing.
Answer: They are educating their people.
In Germany businesses pay more taxes than almost anywhere in the world. Unions are massively strong in Germany. Half of a corporations board has to be filled with workers.(just imagine that in the US)
All the things the republicans tell you would ruin the economy, yet Germany is one of the most innovative nations in the world, new businesses pop up all the time, outsourcing is not an issue, wages are high and constantly rising, unemployment is super low, didn't even spike during the financial crisis, because Germanys economy is so robust.
And why? Because they have a smart school system that prepares people for either university(which is free) or a huge apprenticeship program spanning thousands of professions overseen by the government.

About 30% of a modern nations workforce needs to be college educated. Is it less, the economy suffers because there is a lack of well educated people. Is it more, wages shrink because there is an oversupply of well college people so the "price" for their workforce goes down.

The US and Germany both have about 30% of their workforce with college education, but in the US, the other 70% are almost all untrained workers doing simple jobs or working in the service industry. Yet in Germany the other 70% are highly trained workers who went through apprenticeship programs to be for example a car mechanic, a nurse, a chemist etc.
They don't work simple jobs and their wages are high, close to the wages college educated people have. And most importantly, their jobs are safe because they aren't doing stuff a teenager in rural china could do, too.
And if they happen to lose their jobs, they have a certificate for their profession that'll help them a lot at finding a new job.
Or they start their own business, because they are so good at what they do, because they've been professionally educated.
This is what this leads to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden_champions

Thats a model that works, a model thats been proven to work.

Trumps incoherent ramblings however, about part protectionism, part trickle down, part anti-immigrant plans to create jobs, never made sense.
And I also have a hard time believing he actually meant what he said. He claimed to be against TPP, but not even 24h after the election he has surrounded himself with pro TPP lobbyists on his transition team.
The same crony capitalists he claimed to fight.
Wall Street, fossil fuel, military industrial complex, trade... these are the groups who are now helping Trump to come up with stuff.


American voters need to be smarter. Their problems are real, but they have been fooled by democrats and republicans for so long now.
Smart people learn from each other. Smart nations should do that, too. Many nations are facing similar problem and its worth a look to see how other nations have successfully solved a certain problem, so we can adopt the solution to our own economy.

Did you know that Germanys education system is so efficient that they offer free university to foreigners?
About 10 years ago Germany started a trial. Foreigners could go to German universities for free, just like Germans. They wanted to see if its worth the investment. Just a few years later it was already observed that the foreign students on average stay long enough in Germany and work in good jobs thats they pay more than enough in taxes to pay back the initial investment the government made by paying for their education.
Profit from education within a few years, while americans pay back their student loans for multiple decades...
The quality of education in Germany is also on par with Ivy League standards, on average german universities are much better than the american average.

The irony in all this: Germanys economy was built by americans. Not only provided the US the money to rebuild Germany after WW2, they also provided the experts that came up with the ideas for the german education system and the general shape of the german economy.
American visionaries helped fix Germany, but for some reason big money interests in the US are strong enough to suppress these good ideas.

Scandinavian countries also have similar systems in place, and they are also tremendously successful with them.






Its plans like that the democrats need to come up with if they don't want to keep losing the middle class to demagogues.

 

[jtb]

also something that really annoyed me this campaign that I will complain about now that we have lost: trying to use John McCain as a stick to beat Donald Trump with.

in hindsight, especially considering how every senate candidate basically ran behind HRC, it seems pretty obvious that not tying Republicans to Trump was a massive tactical failure.

 

[Chumley]

Whoops wrong thread.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

People are going all extreme for no reason.

No "complete overhaul" is needed.

What's needed is to add back in the economic message (this is not zero sum) and a candidate who's charismatic and doesn't have the baggage.

This election was lost by the narrowest of margins. 2 or 4 years of Trump scandals and failures (not rooting for, but fully expecting) and the GOP will be playing defense.

 

[Totakeke]

A large amount of Americans are dumb. It's not a problem that will be solved in ten years. One party actively uses propaganda to their advantage and has no incentive to educate Americans.

People are going all extreme for no reason.

No "complete overhaul" is needed.

What's needed is to add back in the economic message (this is not zero sum) and a candidate who's charismatic and doesn't have the baggage.

This election was lost by the narrowest of margins. 2 or 4 years of Trump scandals and failures (not rooting for, but fully expecting) and the GOP will be playing defense.

We should aim higher though. Even the best case scenario of that to me is another Obama where is he countered by an obstructionist GOP.

 

[Crocodile]

Are some still pretending Clinton didn't have economic policies up the ying-yang? Because she did. You can argue people just refuse to believes her because she was establishment and she didn't spend enough time in the mid-West but she had the policy.

Overall, considering the small margin of loss I think the main takeaway is that "run more charismatic candidate with little baggage" + "pay more attention to WWC" + "keep social justice platform and minority outreach" + "nail Trump for all his inevitable fuck-ups". The tricky thing to do will be to find a message or messenger that that can push populism and social justice in a way that isn't alienating to WWC or minorities. Neither Clinton or Sanders could straddle both sides successfully. Clinton was old-school and had a long history on trade that was unpopular and Sanders failed to connect with minorities via his messaging or his actions. Obama could hit both marks - that's why Obama was so awesome.

Stop the liberal bubble thinking that every single rural white is a racist. Enough of this. This is why you democrats lose elections. These are the exact same people that voted for Barack Obama and now changed to Donald Trump. You better reach out to these people or you're going to not have control of any government branch for decades. This group isn't getting smaller.

A) I hope you understand how hard it is to emphasize with someone who voted (either actively or implicitly because they didn't care) for your life or of those you love to get actively worse because of immutable aspects of your being. If someone votes for Trump and then he starts mass deporting people, do you think those on the receiving end can/should be able to parse the difference between a "racist" and "I'm not racist but I'm cool with racism"?. Said group is fucked either way.

B) That being said, I don't think not excusing voters for the consequences of their actions and using targeted politicians and language in specific districts and States is mutually exclusive. I can focus my message on economics when I'm in Wisconsin or recruit politicians with better local appeal. That might be tough without just outright lying though? Like if honesty doesn't matter AT ALL (and policy clearly didn't) then politics is going to get more borked moving forward. That doesn't change the fact that voters who voted for Trump voted for racism and will make it worse in this country even if its not their primary motivator.

I hope, if we've learned one thing this campaign cycle, is that policy positions are fucking meaningless. No one listens, no one cares.

Yet every-time they interview an undecided voter you can be sure they will complain "I wish the candidates spoke about the issues"

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Nominating Hillary instead of Gillibrand was probably a big mistake because the smears against Hillary look like the main reason those white people voted for Trump. Comey's letter was literally nothing but cost her the election because people think Hillary is a crook because the GOP destroyed her reputation to get back at her because she was a feminist First Lady.

I don't know what, if anything, needs to change other than nominating someone who hasn't been through decades of smears. Hillary was assumed to be a criminal and thus people didn't like her because people are fucking dumb.

 

[Kusagari]

Why would he stick around?

This was a rather personal blow to him. I don't think he's going to get involved in politics again.

Now, we got Bernie folks in the OT trying to berniesplain away rural racism. We got guys like Michael Moore ascendant again, peddling the, "We need to reach out to racists or racist apologist" crap. People are buying into Michael Moore because he got lucky in his prediction.

After the Trump election, I don't think you will get minorities like me to sit down and work on a political level with racists. We don't trust them. We know for a fact they will ditch us at the first opportunity. We would rather not participate than work with them.

I'm sorry, it's an "us or them" for me.

And what do you hope to accomplish with this?

We're not winning elections in the next 10+ years without those rural whites that voted Obama twice and then Trump now.

That's just the truth.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

The progressives and democrats who chose not to vote because they didnt like the top of the ticket can also fuck off based on your statement. Maybe if they looked at things like you did between the "fuck the establishment" and the "fuck Tim Kaine" paragraphs, we would have won. Instead, they thought "its not the person I want" or "I am not excited" or whatever and chose to abstain as a silent protest, glad that worked out.

Thats true. The only reason I didn't vote for Clinton is because I am not allowed to vote.
But everyone in their right mind should have realized, that even if they don't like Clinton, she is still a MUCH better choice than Trump.

Its like picking between Brokkoli and and piece of shit. Even though I am not a huge fan of Brokkoli, its still infinitely better than eating a turd.


Still, blaming voters is never the thing to do after an election. Instead democrats should think about what they could have done to reach these people and not disenfranchise them.

Hillary was the most liberal presidential candidate since Jimmy Carter. Maybe even more liberal than him. She was pushing the most progressive policies since LBJ.

Thats a byproduct of the time though. Hillary flip flopped according to majority opinion.
She is so liberal now because she has adjusted her public views to the general opinions of the american people.
Carter was liberal in comparison to the american people, just like LBJ. They were progressive leaders.
Clinton was a progressive follower.

 

[Sirpopopop]

Do racists vote for a black dude? Couldn't it just be that they have other priorities? That they don't see or don't understand the implicit racism in "black people are living in hell"?

I think there's something very wrong with people who voted for trump but I want to win next time or things will be worse.

A. Actually yes. I've known some racists who did. Their logic tended to boil down to Illuminati nonsense about Bush.
B. Sure. However, when you are willing to throw me and my kind to the wolves because of these priorities, we have a major problem.

I want to win the next time around. However, the DNC needs to find another way other than appealing to racists & fickle allies. If you're willing to say something that can tangentially relate to them, that's fine. If you're going out directly courting them, then no. I'm not down with that.

 

[sturgboski]

When talking about the Rust Belt decaying and how the Democrats have no plans to fix it and no proof it works, why don't they point to Western NY?

When Kodak started failing in Rochester, and other jobs related to Kodak started fleeing, we started focusing more on education, technology, arts and health care. We put funding into universities and made our community college into one of the best community colleges in the state. When someone says they graduate from MCC, it's not shameful or embarrassing, because MCC, even as a community college, is known and respected in the area and people can get great jobs with just an associates degree from MCC. We encourage people to go and be re-educated to find new jobs. We have huge programs for two year degrees to work in healthcare. The University of Rochester is the largest employer in the city, employing all sorts of educated and uneducated in jobs in healthcare and education. RIT brought with it a boon of arts, science, business and technology graduates who stayed in the area and we're now a mini silicone valley of tech start ups. We have an active, healthy theater community. A large, active music community and a fantastic music school. Gorgeous parks, loads of festivals, excellent museums, and just generally a decent place to raise kids and have a family.

Areas that were dead or decayed now house 1K+ rent apartments for young people with active night lives, restaurants and small stores.

If we were once the Rust Belt, you wouldn't know living here.

I didn't even realize Rochester was part of the Rust Belt until someone mentioned it a few years back. Because I never noticed any of the issues Rust Belt areas were going through, because we really weren't going through them that much. Smart people made smart choices of what to focus on.

And yea, it has problems. Crime is high in very segregated communities in a small part of the city. Education in the inner cities could be better. Our population is stagnant or decreasing slightly.

But it's a Rust Belt success story. Something that can be pointed to and said "hey, look, re-education and putting money towards schools and healthcare can work! These decaying areas can be rebuilt! There are new jobs for you guys!"

I've always been incredibly proud of my area, but maybe even more so now that I see where the rest of the Rust Belt has ended up.

Yeah thats the thing, some of these jobs are lost and never coming back for various reasons (while its easy to blame globalism or foreigners, I would hazard a guess that automation is just as large a factor and something you really cant overcome by putting in import tariffs). As a country, we need to invest in ways to re-educate or re-train those who have had their jobs displaced. Protectionism is not the answer for various macroeconomic levels, but bringing home sure it helps those who are having their jobs displaced but when cost of goods rise for everyone because of said protectionism you end up hurting a larger swathe of people.

Still, blaming voters is never the thing to do after an election. Instead democrats should think about what they could have done to reach these people and not disenfranchise them.

True, blaming is not the right answer. However, figuring out how to break through that mindset (something republicans have obviously sorted out) IS something we need to focus on (among other items).

 

[thcsquad]

You're half right. Hillary was the wrong candidate. But don't be so sure that Bernie would've won. Maybe he would've done better with rural whites, but there's no evidence that he would've done as well with minorities. If you assume they'll just vote for the Democrat anyway, that's the exact same mistake Hillary made with rural whites in the rust belt. Yes, Bernie had some minority support, but they overwhelmingly broke for Hillary, and making Bernie the candidate would've suppressed their votes.

The tactical response to this is that the soft Bernie supporters who might not have turned out could be in safe states, whereas the soft Hillary supporters were in swing states.

BUT...

Virginia. No way Bernie would have won Virginia, given how close it was and how it was so favorable for Clinton. Florida may have been further apart. And Pennsylvania probably wouldn't have flipped, because of how important minority turnout in Philadelphia was.

My realistic take is that Bernie would have kept MI and WI but lost VA. We still lose.

 

[jtb]

People are going all extreme for no reason.

No "complete overhaul" is needed.

What's needed is to add back in the economic message (this is not zero sum) and a candidate who's charismatic and doesn't have the baggage.

This election was lost by the narrowest of margins. 2 or 4 years of Trump scandals and failures (not rooting for, but fully expecting) and the GOP will be playing defense.

True, but also doesn't account for how the Dem's increasingly geographically narrow coalition will leave us permanently locked out of the House and the Senate and state legislatures. The party structure has been in unending rot for the past eight years and, now, there are almost no instruments of power the Democrats have to check Trump's power.

 

[Totakeke]

Nominating Hillary instead of Gillibrand was probably a big mistake because the smears against Hillary look like the main reason those white people voted for Trump. Comey's letter was literally nothing but cost her the election because people think Hillary is a crook because the GOP destroyed her reputation to get back at her because she was a feminist First Lady.

I don't know what, if anything, needs to change other than nominating someone who hasn't been through decades of smears. Hillary was assumed to be a criminal and thus people didn't like her because people are fucking dumb.

The GOP smear machine in 2008 is very different than the one in 2016. Saying we should cater to that smear machine is admitting defeat. Even someone not Hillary would have come out damaged.

 

[excelsiorlef]

And how's that working out for you? This is better?

That's why I asked the question. These - incidentally - are basically the same questions that every party that loses an election asks itself. "To what extent should be compromise on our ideals to win power?" And implicit in that question is the similar-but-different question of "to what extent would compromising on our ideals help us win", which is what I was asking. Because politics is, in your country and mine, more or less a binary thing. Your boys win or your boys lose. If you think that "dropping all this minority stuff" will help you "win the game" but opt not to on the grounds that your daughters' life is not a chip in a game, you get Trump. Is that the better option? Is that better than a Democrat who kept mum on the subject of minorities in the Rust Belt?

(In the UK we have a strain of Labour follower that says they don't want their party to be "Tory Lites", such as Blair. But the consequence of their lack of desire to compromise is that they get the actual Tories. This is a view that's typically advanced by those who would personally do quite well out of a Tory government and can, therefore, "afford" to lose in order to maintain their purity. Judging by this post I'm quoting, you don't think you can afford to suffer under a Trumpian Republican government, which makes your stance all the more hard to understand. And if it sounds like I'm repeating Crab's argument it's because - as is frequently the case, unfortunately - the scrotty little Welshman is right.)

You drop minorities you lose....

The party is not the party of white people.

It is not the party of white liberals

You drop minorities both parties do in fact become the same and minorities will stay home in droves and understandably so.

Minorities have been dragging Dems to whst success they've had.

If in the face of a White Nationalist you go hmmm maybe we should just drop the minority stuff you're my enemy.

 

[Sirpopopop]

And what do you hope to accomplish with this?

We're not winning elections in the next 10+ years without those rural whites that voted Obama twice and then Trump now.

That's just the truth.

I think there are some things you can't compromise on in the slightest. Racism & fickle allies is one of them. BLM should not be tucked under the covers. These are my principles.

 

[Pixieking]

Its the biggest issue american politics face right now. The influence of money in poiltics is corruption the entire system and even though people don't understand the intricacies, they have a feeling that somethings off.
Trump abused that sentiment, claiming he is anti establishment and bashing Clinton for it, now, immediately after he won, he is already surrounding himself with lobbyists and establishment faces, he is even more open to their influence than Clinton would have been.

Voters got played this time, but the issue is actually important.
You know why the US is the only fucking country in the world where climate change is still a controversial issue? Because the fossil fuel industry can buy so much influence.
And thats only one example.
This needs to stop, a system like that shouldn't exist.
And people know that.
The democrats need to make they'll have a candidate for them next time.

1) Influence of money is big, but it's not that big. People say "Oh, Bernie appealed to so many people, he was an idealist." Yet I'm willing to bet that LGBTQ people consider gay marriage rights and the right to use the bathroom they want as bigger issues than Wall Street.

2) It is impossible for a Presidential candidate to be a single-issue candidate and win. Bernie was (for the most part) single issue. I don't remember reading anything about his take on abortion, LGBTQ, mental health, drug use. Just like you can't appeal to just White Working Class, you can't just appeal to anti-Wall Street idealists.

 

[Crocodile]

The progressives and democrats who chose not to vote because they didnt like the top of the ticket can also fuck off based on your statement. Maybe if they looked at things like you did between the "fuck the establishment" and the "fuck Tim Kaine" paragraphs, we would have won. Instead, they thought "its not the person I want" or "I am not excited" or whatever and chose to abstain as a silent protest, glad that worked out.

I'll also agree with this - I understand those who did and still prefer Sanders. He was worse than her in some ways but also better than her in other ways and I can totally get the appeal if he was better in the ways that mattered to you. But if you couldn't be bothered to vote for Clinton, who was still fucking good, with what was at stake and after Sanders endorsement that you can suck it. I'm going to do my part and show up every election. You do your part or shut up.

As an aside, I hate how much basically outright lying was rewarded this election. I also hate that the only Republican Senators that lost their seats were those who rejected Trump - that is a TERRIBLE message being sent to the rest of the GOP and bodes ill for America.

 

[Hindl]

The tactical response to this is that the soft Bernie supporters who might not have turned out could be in safe states, whereas the soft Hillary supporters were in swing states.

BUT...

Virginia. No way Bernie would have won Virginia, given how close it was and how it was so favorable for Clinton. Florida may have been further apart. And Pennsylvania probably wouldn't have flipped, because of how important minority turnout in Philadelphia was.

My realistic take is that Bernie would have kept MI and WI but lost VA. We still lose.

Yeah agreed. Florida would've been completely out of reach and PA wouldn't have flipped either. VA would've been gone too, and maybe we wouldn't have closed the margins the way we did in Georgia, Arizona, and Texas. Hillary lost, but Bernie would've too. We need to move on and consolidate instead of all the in-fighting. Putting Ellison at the DNC chair (provided he leaves his Congressional seat) would probably do a lot to mend that gap.

 

[Pixieking]

Let me quote a response I wrote elsewhere on a similar topic yesterday:
You know what creates jobs? Investing in education. You know why? Because people who know stuff start businesses. Because people who know stuff work in jobs that can't be outsourced.
Globalization is good and and can't be stopped, but we have to make sure our workers can compete with workers worldwide by educating them, so people in other countries can't do our jobs because they lack the education.

You do realise that Hillary campaigned on the promise of retraining coal miners and factory workers, right?

 

[Valhelm]

Lee Fang has got some very interesting thoughts.



Ha ha ha ha ha ha.

HA HA HA HA HA HA

https://twitter.com/lhfang/status/796993561036062720

(Fuck this loser)

Considering a campaign of White Nationalism just won the presidency, if I see any conservative bitch about "liberals and their identity politics" I'm going to start punching fools.

Conservatives aren't making those arguments. Leftists are.

Fang's reverse racism comment is stupid, but Democratic inattention to class struggle is unacceptable and dangerous.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

We should aim higher though. Even the best case scenario of that to me is another Obama where is he countered by an obstructionist GOP.

That is higher. That is optimal. Ditching some part of the base or kicking out valuable people in the name of "cleaning house" makes success less likely, not more.

The Clintons are gone. Obama may help. Brazile should go, but that doesn't mean a clean sweep.

 

[IamDodongo]

People are going all extreme for no reason.

No "complete overhaul" is needed.

What's needed is to add back in the economic message (this is not zero sum) and a candidate who's charismatic and doesn't have the baggage.

This election was lost by the narrowest of margins. 2 or 4 years of Trump scandals and failures (not rooting for, but fully expecting) and the GOP will be playing defense.

I completely agree

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

This is the first sexism data point that seems clear from the election results, unmarried men voted for Obama strongly but abandoned Hillary.

https://twitter.com/sfcpoll/status/797127356414627840

 

[Totakeke]

That is higher. That is optimal. Ditching some part of the base or kicking out valuable people in the name of "cleaning house" makes success less likely, not more.

The Clintons are gone. Obama may help. Brazile should go, but that doesn't mean a clean sweep.

You're saying another Obama is the best we can do? When I say higher I really do mean higher. That may or may not include cleaning house.

 

[neurosisxeno]

Wikileaks getting absolutely slammed in their Reddit AMA feels good to read...

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Sounds like a very solid plan that doesn't sell because it's not instant gratification.

It works here.

Work at Wegmans doing menial work for 2 years (always on the top lists of best employers) while getting your associates degree at MCC (one of the best community colleges in the region) and then go work at the UofR doing a healthcare job you may not have even knew existed or could be trained in 2 years time. And your life goes back to what it was when you worked on a line at Kodak.

Kodak was paying people, paying their health care in full for the rest of their lives, and giving them generous pensions to do literally nothing. Some of them did absolutely nothing. Because Kodak had the cash and would basically hire anyone who knew someone who worked there, whether a proper position existed or not. These were probably the most cushy, gravy train jobs anyone could ever hope for. And then the company imploded because apparently digital cameras were just a fad and film would never die. And some how we managed to get most of these people jobs doing stuff and their lives mostly back in order. And they don't seem to mind all that much and many are very happy working at a desk in a hospital, or filling pill bottles, or tending to the elderly. Some of the younger Kodak guys even went back to school and became software engineers, since they already had some of the skills needed.

And obviously it's a lot more nuanced than that. There are still bitter ex-Kodak guys who have never held a job that lived up to the glory days. But overall, the city managed. And the city also managed to explain what it was doing well enough. And we cleaned up the ruins of the old Rust Belt and now there's a booming center of young people and start ups that filled in the gaps left by the old guard.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

You're saying another Obama is the best we can do? When I say higher I really do mean higher. That may or may not include cleaning house.

I think another Obama would be awesome. Remember the wave of 2008?

 

[effzee]

Why would he stick around?

This was a rather personal blow to him. I don't think he's going to get involved in politics again.

Now, we got Bernie folks in the OT trying to berniesplain away rural racism. We got guys like Michael Moore ascendant again, peddling the, "We need to reach out to racists or racist apologist" crap. People are buying into Michael Moore because he got lucky in his prediction.

After the Trump election, I don't think you will get minorities like me to sit down and work on a political level with racists. We don't trust them. We know for a fact they will ditch us at the first opportunity. We would rather not participate than work with them.

I'm sorry, it's an "us or them" for me.

Agreed. Even calls for unity and healing now are confusing me. Unity? With the people who hate me and that was their driving force to vote for Trump?

 

[Crocodile]

Conservatives aren't making those arguments. Leftists are.

Fang's comments about "reverse racism" are absurd, but Democratic inattention to class struggle isn't acceptable.

No I've already seen some conservative say that shit recently (and they are conservative I generally like or begrudgingly respect too). I wasn't aware Fang was from the left though. That being said I just don't agree that Democrats don't care about class struggle. They are the only party that really puts forth proposals to try to amend it. The issue this election was messaging/the messenger. I'd further note that how important issues of class are to different sets of voters is variable and the Democratic coalition is more diverse than the GOP coalition. Minorities want jobs like everybody else but "WALL STREET" and "Your best days are behind you!" aren't messages that resonate as strongly with that group. For a lot of minorities, economic disadvantage is rooted in the denial of access to opportunities. I'll give you one chance to guess what is the biggest obstacle many of them face to accessing that opportunity?

 

[Frank the Great]

So Ryan wants to privatize Medicare as part of the Obamacare repeal.

No fucking way Medicare privatization gets through even a Republican Senate with so many seats up in 2018. And who knows how Trump feels about this.

It will be interesting to see how the party infighting plays out.

 

[Wheeljack539]

What needs to happen is for Trump to have such a devastating effect on the economy, unemployment, kick 20 million of the ACA and replace it with something so much worse. Deport Families, reduce regulations, in general make an ass out of himself on the World Stage.

Then, then maybe just maybe Democrats will finally get their shit together.

That's only a temporary solution to a bigger problem. Republicans ALWAYS come home. If they vote for a Democrat its because its a temporary punishment but does not change how they feel or move them left and after they perceive that their Party has learned their lesson then its back to their "normal".

In turn this election has only reinforced the idea that Democratic voters are fickle and lazy. That there are those that if they feel are being taken for granted are more than happy to punish the Party and themselves even the light of Donald Trump. Think about that for a moment. Donald FUCKING Trump wasn't enough to move these people. They may show up next time but will be more than happy to give a repeat performance to punish the party if they feel they are being taken for granted again.

We can take in the moral victory of Clinton winning the Popular Vote due to California but it doesn't change that they aren't votes in the places that were needed to win. And that hurts more since while the west coast is still likely to vote majorly Democratic the DNC still has to make that outreach in those places where the west coast vote won't matter.

I've been reflecting a lot over the last few days, still dazed and shocked over this and at the moment I honestly wonder if President Obama really was an indicator that the county was moving left or if it was just a temporary aberration because the man is just that good. That he managed to get more people out to vote for him that would have either normally stayed home or voted Republican. Any other Democrat President, Hillary included should she had taken 2008, loses in the 2012 environment I now really believe.

And worse now is that no matter how good he is he's not enough on the stump if he couldn't get Hillary in. If she couldn't get in who else could he drag over the finish line in the future in the event that Trumps future fuck ups aren't enough to move certain voters were it matter?

The idea of the blue firewall was something we all took for granted and comforted ourselves in as Republicans resumed control of the House and Senate and we convinced ourselves that in the current climate that they had no chance to retake the Presidency. That sure is a cold slap in the face a few days ago on that.

That can't be taken for granted again but how does the DNC recover and reach out? How do they manage this as they regroup? We've all agreed that Democrats have a messaging problem and the media will be no help at all. The media will only cover reality when they themselves are threatened, such as in 2008 when everyone was financially threatened. They will be no help at all unless Trump really, and I mean really screws the pooch. But how do they reach across and not move rightward? If they stay as they are they are guaranteed a certain number of votes but others can't be taken for granted?

I just can't see how Democrats recover in the short term from this if Trump is only somewhat competent and 2018 is not likely to help at all.

 

[Incognito]

So Ryan wants to privatize Medicare as part of the Obamacare repeal.

No fucking way Medicare privatization gets through even a Republican Senate with so many seats up in 2018. And who knows how Trump feels about this.

It will be interesting to see how the party infighting plays out.

does he not remember 2005? i mean you can probably get away with fiddling or outright crippling ACA but medicare? these guys are going to overreach like always.

 

[whyamihere]

From The New York Times, 1932.

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

[effzee]

Still going with the "bernie bro" shit. You don't get it. She was the wrong candidate. She cant inspire anything. A populist candidate like Bernie would NOT have lost PA, MI and WI which have been pretty solid Blue for decades.

She was the only sane choice but she ran her campaign completely wrong. This is all on her, her campaign and the DNC. They ignored the signs in the primaries when she got destroyed in the rust belt. The party needs to change and the clinton sect needs to be sacced.

If she was the wrong candidate, then Berno folk should have voted for him in the primaries.

She won the primary vote count and in fact had more votes than Trump and Bernie combined. She also won the popular vote. So yes she isn't as inspiring as Obama, but I don't see how Bernie would have had a bigger turnout when back in the primaries the same people failed to show up for him.

And like I said before, sure a lot of problems with how she and her people ran her campaign but I am also not going to be put 100% blame on her. When you are dealing with the media that only wants to cover the crazys hit Trump says and the EMAILS! with no mentioned policies, its hard to defend yourself. Both the far left and far right demonized her to be a criminal and crooked, where as the same career politicians who are actual crooks along with Trump are now in office.

Blame could be handed to everyone but I am not going to NOT blame progressives who threw a hissy fit and didn't vote for her knowing all that was on the line. You would think it was a struggle like it was for some Republicans who hated everything Trump did and said but needed to vote Republican. That wasn't the case with Hillary and progressives. People never bothered to care or read into the issues and policies proposed. And that is the fault of the campaign, media, and yes the voters too who can't be bothered.

 

[Diablos]

So Ryan wants to privatize Medicare as part of the Obamacare repeal.

No fucking way Medicare privatization gets through even a Republican Senate with so many seats up in 2018. And who knows how Trump feels about this.

It will be interesting to see how the party infighting plays out.

Where did you read that he wants to privatize Medicare right away?

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

You do realise that Hillary campaigned on the promise of retraining coal miners and factory workers, right?

But they never went out and shouted it into peoples faces. They never made these exited for these plans. They never convinced them of it and why its better than whatever Trump told he'll do.
For fucks sake, Clinton didn't even show up in Wisconsin...

1) Influence of money is big, but it's not that big. People say "Oh, Bernie appealed to so many people, he was an idealist." Yet I'm willing to bet that LGBTQ people consider gay marriage rights and the right to use the bathroom they want as bigger issues than Wall Street.

2) It is impossible for a Presidential candidate to be a single-issue candidate and win. Bernie was (for the most part) single issue. I don't remember reading anything about his take on abortion, LGBTQ, mental health, drug use. Just like you can't appeal to just White Working Class, you can't just appeal to anti-Wall Street idealists.

You can't play out the importance of different issues against each other. Thats how you divide the nation because it suddenly sounds one persons problems are more important than another persons problems and vice versa.*

Money in politics is a systemic issue, though. Its connected to every last topic and if we want to have a truly democratic process regarding issues like climate change, like the economy, like healthcare, like education, like LGBTQ rights.

One of the reasons LGBTQ issues are having such a hard time is because the christian right has so much money and that blows their influence up overproportionally.
Mental health is part of a sensible healthcare reform, which is blocked and obstructed by big Pharma because they can pour ungodly amounts of money on our politicians.
The same for drug use.


*If you ask me, the most important issue right now is climate change because what we do or don't do right now has the potential to kill billions in the future. However, I completely understand that for example people of color who have to fear for their lives when they walk down the street and are stopped by cops, are viewing other issues are more pressing.
We shouldn't play these groups out against each other.

 

[djplaeskool]

So I was feeling better...
then I looked at Shaun King's recent twitter activity.

Boy, that escalated quickly...

 

[Wilsongt]

Where did you read that he wants to privatize Medicare right away?

Check OT

 

[Cheebo]

It only just now dawned on me we have to deal with an entire other presidential campaign with Trump all over again in 4 years.

The Rubio, Paul, Cruz class have a long 8 years of waiting around.

 

[Chumley]

From The New York Times, 1932.

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

It's happening again right before our eyes. A joke turned into reality.

No one thought he could get to the primaries, no one thought he could become the nominee, no one thought he could become President. Now no one thinks he'll actually do what he said he would do or go fully Fascistic.

It's all happening.