Support NeoGAF

[pigeon]

What do you mean 'those guys'? You know nothing about me.

Democrats have talked about changing demographics and 'the emerging Democratic majority' since the beginning of this century. All of the rhetoric from Obama's elections have been about how the new, multicultural america has made a Democratic consensus irreversible.

Whether or not this was true (as I've said in an earlier post re Hispanic males, theres plenty of evidence it's not), ethno-nationalism is extremely volatile and works both ways. Republican appeals to whites have met limited success before. It took the perception that the Democratic party no longer needed them for working class white people to vote for Trump in historic numbers.

The GOP is now the White Party. The Democrats need to adapt to deal with this, they can't play the same tune louder and expect more people to sing along.

I agree that the GOP has become a white nationalist party and that America is in a battle against white nationalism.

Your suggestion that the solution to this is for the Democrats to avoid putting people of color and Muslims in leadership positions seems...problematic.

The Democrats won the popular vote by a large margin and lost in a few states, which they didn't campaign in effectively, by around 70,000 votes. They did this in the face of the organized security apparatuses of two countries -- America and Russia -- overtly attempting to destroy their candidate.

I think my solution for next time would be to run a candidate that is hated less and try harder in the Rust Belt to connect with the Democratic base, rather than decide that America is just a white nationalist country now and so minorities are going to have to get off the boat.

 

[Intheflorsh]

It's genuinely heartening to see most democrats get behind this guy.

 

[kirblar]

Oooorr there are a disproportionate number of California Republicans who didn't like Trump and were willing to ticket split. This kind of stuff is so lazy.

Clinton lost by 70K votes. We have been hearing from people in PA, MI, and WI, that they were not getting the outreach from the Clinton campaign or DNC they normally would have

There is a TON of drudge work involved in attaining election victories. It's not just about messaging, it's not just about making people feel good, a large part of it is cattle-herding people to the polls.

 

[ultratruman]

I agree that the GOP has become a white nationalist party and that America is in a battle against white nationalism.

Your suggestion that the solution to this is for the Democrats to avoid putting people of color and Muslims in leadership positions seems...problematic.

I never even mentioned Keith Ellison's religion or race. His championing of identity politics and previous loony comments are the problem. I'd be much happier with someone like Tammy Duckworth in a leadership position.

 

[gondwana]

Ugh, we just have to frame disagreements in a way that assumes the people not taking our preferred side are prejudiced? I guess that is much easier then engaging a persons reasoning.

why is it unreasonable? there's been a concerted effort recently to pour over everything KE said in past and paint him as an anti-semite, and that's not coming from the GOP/right

remember this gem about the previous chair?

Wasserman Schultz has a different sense of herself. According to people who spoke with her, when she sensed Obama was considering replacing her as chair in 2013, she began to line up supporters to suggest the move was both anti-woman and anti-Semitic.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/senate-bid-could-be-solution-for-wasserman-schultz-115373

 

[pigeon]

I never even mentioned Keith Ellison's religion or race. His championing of identity politics and previous loony comments are the problem.

The GOP just won the presidency by campaigning on identity politics.

When you say "identity politics" here you seem to mean "the rights of people of color, women, GLBT, and religious minorities."

I do not think the Democrats should drop those topics.

 

[kirblar]

I never even mentioned Keith Ellison's religion or race. His championing of identity politics and previous loony comments are the problem. I'd be much happier with someone like Tammy Duckworth in a leadership position.

You totally misunderstand the type of leadership position this is. It has nothing to do with policy. It has nothing to do with "inspiring" people. It's about logistics and management.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

He will have all my support.

 

[kirblar]

So now your point is that the Republican party is the party of the less-educated whites?

From your own source, the Washington Post, white voters voted for Trump at 57%. They voted for Romney at 59%.

If you want to turn this into an education thing, say so now.

The makeup of the GOP electorate in 2016 was DRASTICALLY different in this election. Things are polarizing. Trump was offputting to a large number of suburban/urban GOPers, but in the rural areas people turned out in droves for him.

 

[Jonm1010]

why is it unreasonable? there's been a concerted effort recently to pour over everything KE said in past and paint him as an anti-semite, and that's not coming from the GOP/right

remember this gem about the previous chair?

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/senate-bid-could-be-solution-for-wasserman-schultz-115373

Because what that lazy reasoning is doing, and what you are doing, is taking unrelated actions the people you are addressing were not involved with and then painting them(or anyone preferring Dean over Ellison) with the same brush to discredit their opinion. In fact it is ironically similar to the tactics used in that quote you just offered.

Its lazy. Its toxic.

 

[ultratruman]

You totally misunderstand the type of leadership position this is. It has nothing to do with policy. It has nothing to do with "inspiring" people. It's about logistics and management.

Yes, governing the Democratic Party is a faceless, purely beurocratic job. Just ask Wasserman-Schulz.

Regardless, the DNC Chair is the slot that's open now, and it's where the battle for the soul of the party is being fought. In the wake of a cataclysmic defeat and when your party is at its lowest ebb, who gets chosen for positions like this really will mean something about where the Democrats are headed. Just read the enthusiastic comments from the people in this thread.

 

[guek]

Yes, governing the Democratic Party is a faceless, purely beurocratic job. Just ask Wasserman-Schulz.

Regardless, the DNC Chair is the slot that's open now, and it's where the battle for the soul of the party is being fought. In the wake of a cataclysmic defeat and when your party is at its lowest ebb, who gets chosen for positions like this really does mean something about where the Democrats are headed. Just read the enthusiastic comments from the people in this thread.

Who would you want for the position and why?

 

[kirblar]

Yes, governing the Democratic Party is a faceless, purely beurocratic job. Just ask Wasserman-Schulz.

Regardless, the DNC Chair is the slot that's open now, and it's where the battle for the soul of the party is being fought. In the wake of a cataclysmic defeat and when your party is at its lowest ebb, who gets chosen for positions like this really does mean something about where the Democrats are headed. Just read the enthusiastic comments from the people in this thread.

DWS wasn't doing her job well by bringing ideology into it! (And the DNC/RNC Chair isn't an important figure for talk shows and such when the party has the WH because the Pres is THE head figure.)

This is NOT a battle for the soul of the party. This is an attempt to find someone to repair the party's infrastructure. Your understanding of the role the RNC/DNC play in their parties is completely wrong.

Gaining 21 House seats despite mismanagement and losing the Presidential election by 70K (possibly 50K) votes is NOT a "cataclysmic defeat". It's an election lost on a tiny margin that should have been avoided.

 

[StoOgE]

Huh?

Pretty much every facet of the Democrats, from the moderates to the ultra liberal want Ellison

Also you're going to need to go on a bit more about Pelosi.

The moderates do not want Ellison.

He tried to pass a bill declaring a sitting vice president a war criminal.

 

[pigeon]

DWS wasn't doing her job well by bringing ideology into it! (And the DNC/RNC Chair isn't an important figure for talk shows and such when the party has the WH because the Pres is THE head figure.)

This is NOT a battle for the soul of the party. This is an attempt to find someone to repair the party's infrastructure. Your understanding of the role the RNC/DNC play in their parties is completely wrong.

Gaining 21 House seats despite mismanagement and losing the Presidential election by 70K (possibly 50K) votes is NOT a "cataclysmic defeat". It's an election lost on a tiny margin that should have been avoided.

I mean, I agree with you, but frankly I think it is more important to be clear that ultratruman's argument is that this is a battle for the soul of the party and the right choice is for Democrats to give up supporting the rights of people of color.

 

[Kettch]

The makeup of the GOP electorate in 2016 was DRASTICALLY different in this election. Things are polarizing. Trump was offputting to a large number of suburban/urban GOPers, but in the rural areas people turned out in droves for him.

Sure, I don't agree with the argument that "identity politics" has turned away white voters from the democratic party though. As I've stated, white support has held steady or slightly increased since the previous election.

Where Democrats have taken hits are with voters with less education and less income. Those have also been offset by gains with voters with more education and more income.

That's not an issue to ignore, but the solution isn't to appeal to white people more by dropping support for minorities.

 

[necrosis]

First Pelosi, now Keith '9/11 was a Reichstag Fire' Ellison. DNC are so fucked if they choose this man. I mean 2016 UK Labour FUCKED.

lol having seen you post in the past i'm almost certain you're saying this entirely because he's a muslim

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

Good, was my only reservation with him. No time to waste, Nov. 2018 is coming.

 

[boiled goose]

First Pelosi, now Keith '9/11 was a Reichstag Fire' Ellison. DNC are so fucked if they choose this man. I mean 2016 UK Labour FUCKED.

The dnc can't be more fucked than it is now

Sure, I don't agree with the argument that "identity politics" has turned away white voters from the democratic party though. As I've stated, white support has held steady or slightly increased since the previous election.

Where Democrats have taken hits are with voters with less education and less income. Those have also been offset by gains with voters with more education and more income.

That's not an issue to ignore, but the solution isn't to appeal to white people more by dropping support for minorities.

It's not that hard. All dnc needs to do is stop using social issues as a shield for rnc lite corporatist economic policies.

Cater to voters, not donors.

Ellison unlike other candidates is a step in this direction.

 

[GoldenEye 007]

DWS wasn't doing her job well by bringing ideology into it! (And the DNC/RNC Chair isn't an important figure for talk shows and such when the party has the WH because the Pres is THE head figure.)

This is NOT a battle for the soul of the party. This is an attempt to find someone to repair the party's infrastructure. Your understanding of the role the RNC/DNC play in their parties is completely wrong.

Gaining 21 House seats despite mismanagement and losing the Presidential election by 70K (possibly 50K) votes is NOT a "cataclysmic defeat". It's an election lost on a tiny margin that should have been avoided.

I mean, I agree with you, but frankly I think it is more important to be clear that ultratruman's argument is that this is a battle for the soul of the party and the right choice is for Democrats to give up supporting the rights of people of color.

Saved me the long post I was about to write.

 

[necrosis]

Anyways, really hope he gets the position. At least then a little good will have come from the election.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Another thread that devolved into "let's talk about minority rights less"

Jesus Christ.

You know I'd love to know exactly how many hours a week DWS actually put into doing her job and helping democrats win elections. I'll let anyone take a wild guess as to how close it was to the 80 hours a week Dean spent doing it.

 

[thepotatoman]

DWS wasn't doing her job well by bringing ideology into it! (And the DNC/RNC Chair isn't an important figure for talk shows and such when the party has the WH because the Pres is THE head figure.)

This is NOT a battle for the soul of the party. This is an attempt to find someone to repair the party's infrastructure. Your understanding of the role the RNC/DNC play in their parties is completely wrong.

Gaining 21 House seats despite mismanagement and losing the Presidential election by 70K (possibly 50K) votes is NOT a "cataclysmic defeat". It's an election lost on a tiny margin that should have been avoided.

The cataclysmic defeat is having the biggest midterm losses of a president's party for the house in 2010 and for the senate in 2014 since FDR. We were told not to raise an alarm because it'll be made up in presidential years, but even without gerrymandering democrats still would have lost control of the house pretty soundly this year.

And that's ignoring the fact that the presidential loss was against Donald Trump, the most unpopular major party presidential candidate ever. It shouldn't have been close.

Even if those 50K votes went the other way and Clinton became president, there'd still be a lot to worry about for democrats, it'd just be less urgent by being given 4 years to delay things. It's absolutely baffling that people still suggest there isn't a reason for democrats to be alarmed. You really have to have your head in the sand to think the Democrats don't need major changes after these last 6 years, unless you're ok with only winning after republicans royally screw up while in power and sitting on your hands until demographic changes finally fix everything.

 

[pigeon]

Another thread that devolved into "let's talk about minority rights less"

Jesus Christ.

Think of it as practice for when they try to run a white supremacist for the Democratic presidential nomination in order to "get back to real America."

 

[The Technomancer]

Good man

 

[fantomena]

He tried to pass a bill declaring a sitting vice president a war criminal.

Who?

 

[jack_package_200]

Who?

Probably W Bush.

I can't imagine a dem calling Obama a war criminal.

 

[thezerofire]

I never even mentioned Keith Ellison's religion or race. His championing of identity politics and previous loony comments are the problem. I'd be much happier with someone like Tammy Duckworth in a leadership position.

"I never even mentioned Ellison's religion or race, he just shouldn't ever talk about his religion or race. White people who focus on their race are just fine"

 

[necrosis]

Who?

dick cheney