The Democrats are dead

[SLD]

I would like to postulate that the Democratic Party has pretty much committed suicide as a national party and will only remain a scattered, divided regional party. They have been grossly out maneuvered by the Republicans and are destined for long term minority status in the country. There are several factors driving this. One is epitomized by WillRogers famous quip: I don’t belong to an organized political party, I’m a Democrat. The Democrats have no coherent message and no core constituency to which they can appeal to. They have no party discipline. They’re more concerned with minority rights than economical appeal - and pocketbook issues will always trump others. While the public might support such things as gay rights in general it won’t drive people to the polls. The Republicans have gun control, abortion and family values that do in fact drive people to the polls. They’re all on a message that’s pretty much the same.

Second is the recent moves by the senate to move forward with judicial appointments. This is in contravention to a previous deal with Democrats to slow them down. With the stacking of the courts with conservative justices it will be pretty much impossible to challenge gerrymandering. This will ensure Republican majorities in the House for decades, and many state houses as well.

The mid term elections are all breaking towards Republicans now. Poll after poll is coming in and showing that they will gain in the mid terms. Texas, Tennessee, Arizona, Nevada, North Dakota, and Missouri are now clearly showing signs of voting Republican in the Senate races, and the House races will likely break the same way. So much for the Blue wave. This is consistent with theories that show that the mid terms ar usually a referendum on the economic performance of the President. With the continued economic growth, the President's foibles in Foreign Policy and personal morals is pretty much an irrelevant sideshow.

With a likely 53 vote majority in the Senate after the mid terms, they will do what they can to ensure they remain in power for decades. They will stack the judiciary. They will ensure that the House remains gerrymandered in their favor. And likely they will seek to find ways disenfranchise large swaths of democratic voters with onerous restrictions on voting that make it difficult for all but the wealthiest of us to vote. They will do this especially in swing states to ensure that Trump will be re-elected, even if he loses the popular vote. I predict almost an exact repeat of the 2016 election, with Trump losing the popular vote and winning the electoral college, although maybe it’s a closer race than 2016.

In short, the Democrats are dead, despite the country actually far more liberal than Republicans are.

The key is The economy. It is just too strong and the Republicans are taking all the credit. I say let them. The economy will continue to grow over the next several years. Likely until 2021 or so. What happens after that is anyone’s guess. The only real hope for Democrats is an economic collapse. The recession of 91-2 got Clinton elected. The collapse of 08 got Obama elected. But for a true sea change, we need a complete economic collapse. On the order of the Great Depression. I’m not sure that will happen, although income inequality issues get out of hand, it is possible. Until Republican voters wake up and stop buying their crap, the Democrats will remain in the minority. That may not happen for decades to come.

SLD

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Meh.

If the American people won't vote against Trump, they deserve what they fucking get and the whole lot of you can just go and fuck the hell off.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I think social issues focus can ressurect the Democrats, but only if they make that message loud and bold. So long as the corporate version of the Democrats remain in control of the party and so long as it pushes division and fails at inspiration, I cant see it recovering.

Republicans are the conservative party of "what we have works", and yes, a strong economy boosts that message. The Democrsts could become the party of change for the better, but only if they distinguish themselves dramatically from the conservatives and only if they show the change can actually happen and will do more good than harm.

Empty platitudes won't cut it. Nor will divisive identity politics. Nor will negative campaigning (Republicans will always win at that). They need a strong positive optimistic believable message of what could and should be and what the American people are missing out on, delivered by a charismatic speaker.

I wish Bernie's vision could fuse with Obama's speaking prowess.

 

[SLD]

I think social issues focus can ressurect the Democrats, but only if they make that message loud and bold. So long as the corporate version of the Democrats remain in control of the party and so long as it pushes division and fails at inspiration, I cant see it recovering.

Republicans are the conservative party of "what we have works", and yes, a strong economy boosts that message. The Democrsts could become the party of change for the better, but only if they distinguish themselves dramatically from the conservatives and only if they show the change can actually happen and will do more good than harm.

Empty platitudes won't cut it. Nor will divisive identity politics. Nor will negative campaigning (Republicans will always win at that). They need a strong positive optimistic believable message of what could and should be and what the American people are missing out on, delivered by a charismatic speaker.

I wish Bernie's vision could fuse with Obama's speaking prowess.

The other Democrats have is that they are far more at a disadvantage in terms of raising money from the wealthy Wall Street donor class thanks to Citizens United. They can’t afford to alienate what money sources they do have. And so they can’t motivate what might be a winning message. That also dooms them to irellevancy.

SLD

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

I'm so tired of this Republican sophistry hidden in the guise of "we Democrats need unity!" WE WON THE FUCKING ELECTION. I don't give a flying fuck about the Electoral College failure; it has NOTHING to do with this particular question. We won by millions of votes (and I'm not just talking about the almost three million counted votes).

You cannot win the popular vote without being the popular candidate and you cannot be the popular candidate based entirely on "anyone but Trump."

The Trump team cheated. Plain and simple. And with miniscule (but enough) cumulative effect on multiple fronts (so many in fact that it's categorically impossible for it to happen again in 2020). The GOP over the past two decades at least have also been forced to cheat in order to stay in power. These are actions of desperation, not socio-political juggernaut.

The ideological "pulse" of the overwhelming number of Americans (on the order of 2/3rds) is pro-center/left Democratic policies. It doesn't matter what the rhetoric or talking points are from the right; they are simply objective lies.

The ONLY problem we have is low voter turnout. That's it. When voter turnout increases it always favors Democrats. Which is precisely why Republicans spend billions on spreading exactly this kind of bullshit sophistry to prevent voter turnout (among so many other vote suppression tactics).

Yes, we need a strong candidate, but that is ALWAYS TRUE. So there is nothing--absolutely nothing--new that needs to happen other than exactly what happened in 2016, because the result was a statistical anomaly based on several unique, mitigating factors--number one being intense and latent racism that is not a factor anymore--not an ideological sea change.

Of course we need a strong frontrunner. O'Rourke and/or Kennedy seem promising; Warren won't last and shouldn't. We have PLENTY of time for this to evolve while Trump continues his sole purpose (to destroy America's standing in the world). The midterms will prove decisive in this regard for the simple reason I'm pointing out; there never was a seachange. There was a crime--there was a period of stolen elections--but that's over and done with. Not that they still won't try, of course, but we are already seeing the correction taking place in special election after special election.

Again, all that is necessary is voter turnout. That is the sole "message" any Democrat needs to get out. Your vote actually does count and count big.

 

[Derec]

I'm so tired of this Republican sophistry hidden in the guise of "we Democrats need unity!" WE WON THE FUCKING ELECTION.

No you did not. If the Cavaliers score more total points in the NBA final but lose four games and win only three, THEY LOST THE FUCKING CHAMPIONSHIP!
Elections are governed by rules. And the rule in the US is that the presidential election is done not by national popular vote by state-by-state. It may not be a good system, but it is a system we have. It is no use following the wrong strategy (running up the score in California) and then pretending you somehow really won.

I don't give a flying fuck about the Electoral College failure; it has NOTHING to do with this particular question. We won by millions of votes (and I'm not just talking about the almost three million counted votes).

But you should give a fuck. Until the rules change, that's the system.

You cannot win the popular vote without being the popular candidate and you cannot be the popular candidate based entirely on "anyone but Trump."

And you cannot win the election by ignoring Midwestern states you actually need to win. You don't need to expand the margin in California - that will not help you one iota.

The Trump team cheated. Plain and simple.

Rittenhouse went back in time and made sure EC rules are adopted in the constitution so Trump could win?

And on multiple fronts (so many in fact that it's categorically impossible for it to happen again in 2020). The GOP over the past two decades at least have also been forced to cheat in order to stay in power. These are actions of desperation, not socio-political juggernaut.

Democrats are experts at snatching defeat out of jaws of victory. Knowing them, they will nominate a bad candidate again and will focus on abolishing ICE and giving illegals amnesty.

The ONLY problem we have is low voter turnout. That's it. When voter turnout increases it always favors Democrats. Which is precisely why Republicans spend billions on spreading exactly this kind of bullshit sophistry to prevent voter turnout (among so many other vote suppression tactics).

So you are saying that Democratic voters are lazy?

Of course we need a strong frontrunner. O'Rourke and/or Kennedy seem promising; Warren won't last and shouldn't.

O'Rourke is too fresh and will probably lose the Senate election anyway which won't exactly help him. Which Kennedy do you mean? I agree on Warren. Too one-note and too old (71 in 2020) to inspire change. Nominating her (or Biden or Sanders or, FSM forbid, Hillary again) would merely underscore that Democrats are a gerontocracy.

Again, all that is necessary is voter turnout. That is the sole "message" any Democrat needs to get out.

Democrats are especially weak in that regard in midterms. Without the exciting presidential context, many simply do not care enough.

What Democrats need to do for 2020, is
- focus on economic issues, and on uniting people rather than dividing them with identity politics.
- choose a good, inspiring and relatively young candidate
- have people in the campaign who know strategy. Running up the score in safe states while ignoring close states is stupid even if it gets you popular vote.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

No you did not.

Yes, we did. Once again, the EC is irrelevant to the question of where the majority of American voters stand ideologically.

And you cannot win the election by ignoring Midwestern states you actually need to win.

We didn't. The voting differential was less than 1% in just three of those states (meaning, had that miniscule percentage gone to Hillary, we wouldn't be having this endless discussion). A candidate sneezing can cause that.

There was a combination of different elements that all came together to just barely--barely--shift a miniscule percentage in Trump's favor. Those elements were all unique to that election and cannot possibly be replicated in 2020.

The Trump team cheated. Plain and simple.

Rittenhouse went back in time and made sure EC rules are adopted in the constitution so Trump could win?

You're not very bright on the uptake.

Again, all that is necessary is voter turnout. That is the sole "message" any Democrat needs to get out.

Democrats are especially weak in that regard in midterms.

I know, which is why I said "all that is necessary is voter turnout."

 

[ronburgundy]

The crux of the problem is that narrow-minded dogma and fear-based in-group tribalism are highly effective ways to get people to engage in shared action (like voting for the same party). The Republicans have cultivated that approach for a half century, and they targeted an in-group (white heterosexual Christians) who still comprise the largest group. While they are no longer a majority (43%), the other 57% are divided among many racial and religious lines.

A democrat president took over in 2008 while the country was well on its way into sliding into a full blown depression, and oversaw the greatest economic turnaround in our lifetimes. Every positive aspect of the current economy is a result of that turnaround. Yet, the Democrats lost the presidency, proving that winning the needed votes has little to do with actually helping most Americans economically.
Economics matter more in terms of whether you can craft a narrative about the economy that more people want to believe.
And an easy way to sell a narrative to white Christians is to blame all economic problems on the same thing they blame all moral problems on, everyone that is not a white heterosexual Christian.

The GOP message for decades, and Trump merely sold it louder and less nuanced. As white hetero Christians have lost majority numbers and out-group people have become more visible and vocal, more and more white hetero Christians have bought into this fear-based tribalistic ideolgoy of bigotry that the GOP is selling. It is an easy message to sell to Christians, since they already buy into a religion based on such "values".

There is no such message that the Dems could try to sell. They cannot, because there is no other sub group large enough to compete and in-group tribalism doesn't really work when there is no narrow set of criteria that define the in-group. Also, it is incompatible with secular, liberal principles, without which the Dems have no reason to exist.

In fact, the secular-religious contrast is quite apt, because the messaging advantage of the GOP over the Dems is very similar to and largely overlapping with the messaging advantage of religion and other form of unreason over science and reason.
It's easy to make people react emotionally, irrationally, and unethically just by pushing their buttons.

 

[Elixir]

Healthcare, Tax plans for the rich, Social Security, Medicare, Climate Change (science in general), voter suppression & gerrymandering, loss of stature in the global community - there are lots of issues that SHOULD cause anyone other than the 31% to vote against republican control. If that 31% (plus our foreign adversaries who are now active participants) are already beknighted with disproportionate enough representation to keep the ball rolling as it is, then the OP is correct.
Other than that, some kind of re-branding will definitely occur in the not-too-distant future. But the days of total control by the 'thugs, are numbered.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Yes, we did. Once again, the EC is irrelevant to the question of where the majority of American voters stand ideologically.

Well, congrats on your moral victory.

The lame-assed Republicans just need to sit there alone in their corner and stew about how they haven't managed to achieve anything except actual victories.

Fucking losers.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Yes, we did. Once again, the EC is irrelevant to the question of where the majority of American voters stand ideologically.

Well, congrats on your moral victory.

It's got nothing to do with morals. Why do so many people have such difficulty comprehending the difference between measuring the political "pulse" of the nation as a whole and the results of the EC?

When talking about the political ideology of the entire nation--which is what I was doing in refutation of the OP sophistry--the ONLY metric that measures that is the popular vote. There was no political/ideological "red wave." What happened in 2016 was a statistical glitch brought on by a combination of unique elements, not a massive indication of right wing ideological sea change in the majority (or even plurality) of American voter's minds.

The country as a whole is firmly Democrat in its political ideology. That never changed. Trump is the aberration, not the norm. Republicans losing in the House will only be an indication of a previous aberration (fostered primarily by various methods of cheating such as gerrymandering and voter suppression/election fraud tactics) being corrected, not some miracle of miracles.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Yes, we did. Once again, the EC is irrelevant to the question of where the majority of American voters stand ideologically.

Well, congrats on your moral victory.

It's got nothing to do with morals. Why do so many people have such difficulty comprehending the difference between measuring the political "pulse" of the nation as a whole and the results of the EC?

When talking about the political ideology of the entire nation--which is what I was doing--the ONLY metric that measures that is the popular vote. There was no political/ideological "red wave." What happened in 2016 was a statistical glitch brought on by a combination of unique elements, not a massive indication of right wing ideological sea change in the majority (or even plurality) of American voter's minds.

The country as a whole is firmly Democrat in its political ideology. That never changed. Trump is the aberration, not the norm. Republicans losing in the House will only be an indication of a previous aberration (fostered primarily by various methods of cheating such as gerrymandering and voter suppression/election fraud tactics) being corrected, not some miracle of miracles.

That still doesn't make the "victory" in the last election any more useful than a participation trophy.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

It's got nothing to do with morals. Why do so many people have such difficulty comprehending the difference between measuring the political "pulse" of the nation as a whole and the results of the EC?

When talking about the political ideology of the entire nation--which is what I was doing--the ONLY metric that measures that is the popular vote. There was no political/ideological "red wave." What happened in 2016 was a statistical glitch brought on by a combination of unique elements, not a massive indication of right wing ideological sea change in the majority (or even plurality) of American voter's minds.

The country as a whole is firmly Democrat in its political ideology. That never changed. Trump is the aberration, not the norm. Republicans losing in the House will only be an indication of a previous aberration (fostered primarily by various methods of cheating such as gerrymandering and voter suppression/election fraud tactics) being corrected, not some miracle of miracles.

That still doesn't make the "victory" in the last election any more useful than a participation trophy.

Yes, actually it does. It is the entire measure of it.

ETA: The OP sophistry is that the Democrats are dead, i.e., that we need to do something to unify and are fractured and flailing and there is no "message" and all of this is the reason why we lost before and will lose again, etc., etc., etc.

It's all GOP horseshit/Russian bot nonsense, whatever you want to call it.

We never died. Trump (and the GOP) cheated. We aren't the ones flailing; we won the election. They cheated. These are facts. This is the objective measure of the nation as a whole. We won, but due to a technicality--REGARDLESS OF ITS PLACE OR POLITICAL ROLE--we lost the WH.

When trying to determine who the fastest runner is in a race, you DON'T GIVE A FUCK if the trophy was awarded to someone else on a technicality. You just don't. This is basic logic ffs.

Note the bold. When trying to determine who the fastest runner is in a race. NOT who got the blue ribbon; who ran the fastest. They are not always the same. In 2016, Clinton ran the fastest, but Trump got the blue ribbon. So, again, when trying to determine who ran the fastest--which is what we're doing--then who do you look at? Clinton or Trump?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Dude, the Dems were so pathetic that ran against Donald Fucking Trump and had the election close enough that shenanigans let him win it. That is a "commit ritual suicide to assuage the dishonour to out families" level of failure. Even after two years of the fool, they're still probably going to lose the Senate and may even manage to find a way to not get the House back.

Also, nobody was trying to find out who the fastest runner in the race was, since the race wasn't going to whomever ran the fastest so that didn't matter. There was a set of conditions set out before the election started to determine who won and "winning the popular vote" wasn't a part of those conditions. So accomplishing that task was about as important as getting the "having the most candidates with polka dots on their ties" award. It's not any sort of actual victory.

 

[steve_bank]

So are republicans. Current policies are not conservatism. Increasing deficit is no longer an issue.

 

[SLD]

It's got nothing to do with morals. Why do so many people have such difficulty comprehending the difference between measuring the political "pulse" of the nation as a whole and the results of the EC?

When talking about the political ideology of the entire nation--which is what I was doing--the ONLY metric that measures that is the popular vote. There was no political/ideological "red wave." What happened in 2016 was a statistical glitch brought on by a combination of unique elements, not a massive indication of right wing ideological sea change in the majority (or even plurality) of American voter's minds.

The country as a whole is firmly Democrat in its political ideology. That never changed. Trump is the aberration, not the norm. Republicans losing in the House will only be an indication of a previous aberration (fostered primarily by various methods of cheating such as gerrymandering and voter suppression/election fraud tactics) being corrected, not some miracle of miracles.

That still doesn't make the "victory" in the last election any more useful than a participation trophy.

Yes, actually it does. It is the entire measure of it.

ETA: The OP sophistry is that the Democrats are dead, i.e., that we need to do something to unify and are fractured and flailing and there is no "message" and all of this is the reason why we lost before and will lose again, etc., etc., etc.

It's all GOP horseshit/Russian bot nonsense, whatever you want to call it.

We never died. Trump (and the GOP) cheated. We aren't the ones flailing; we won the election. They cheated. These are facts. This is the objective measure of the nation as a whole. We won, but due to a technicality--REGARDLESS OF ITS PLACE OR POLITICAL ROLE--we lost the WH.

When trying to determine who the fastest runner is in a race, you DON'T GIVE A FUCK if the trophy was awarded to someone else on a technicality. You just don't. This is basic logic ffs.

Note the bold. When trying to determine who the fastest runner is in a race. NOT who got the blue ribbon; who ran the fastest. They are not always the same. In 2016, Clinton ran the fastest, but Trump got the blue ribbon. So, again, when trying to determine who ran the fastest--which is what we're doing--then who do you look at? Clinton or Trump?

No. The Democrats have to gain power in order to be relevant. You can crow all you want about winning the popular vote. It’s just not relevant to the discussion. They have to win power, and that requires the EC, whether you like it or not. Politics is about power, and right now the Republicans are winning it and maintaining it, and the democrats are going to get their asses wiped in the mid term elections. If anything it will be a red wave. Even if they win a majority of overall votes it will not matter unless they can wield power. Yup can moan and groan all along that they. Cheated. Big fucking deal. The courts are stacked in their favor now and will be for long after the mid terms, if not for longer than they ever regain power. Good luck challenging the results of the mid terms due to voter suppression. The Republicans will have better luck challenging any losses due to alleged voter fraud.

So as I argued, the Democratic Party is dead. It will lose the mid terms, losing more in the Senate, and at a minimum failing to regain the House. They will lose in 2020. The economy will just be too strong even then. Maybe after that, the economy will collapse, but I wouldn’t count on it. And the stronger the economy grows the more Republican the country will vote. And if they succeed in maintaining control of all three branches of government, they will effectively ensure that they can’t be voted out even if the economy does collapse. Sorry. The democrats are dead.

SLD

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Dude, the Dems were so pathetic that ran against Donald Fucking Trump and had the election close enough that shenanigans let him win it.

More sophistry and one of the unique elements that lead to lower voter turnout for Hillary that ironically underscores my point. There were millions of people who would have voted for Hillary, but chose not to precisely because they thought--especially in "blue" states--that either she was a lock or Trump couldn't possibly win.

The fact that they did not actually cast their votes, however, does not change their ideological stance.

Even after two years of the fool, they're still probably going to lose the Senate and may even manage to find a way to not get the House back.

The Senate was not really within our reach this midterm, but the House is.

Also, nobody was trying to find out who the fastest runner in the race was

Categorically false. Literally. The OP title is "Democrats are dead" and the OP sophistry is precisely the kind of nonsense that is disproved by what I have been presenting.

The OP isn't about the technicalities inherent in the Electoral College. In fact, the EC has absolutely no bearing on any topic in this thread.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

The fact that they did not actually cast their votes, however, does not change their ideological stance.

But the fact that they didn't cast their votes means that their useless and pointless stances matter about as much as the opinions of someone like me who lives in another country - in order words, not fucking at all. You're a democracy, so the only voices which matter are the voices of the people who go out and vote and you have a specific set of rules set up as to how those votes are counted and, for the President, "getting more votes than the other guy" is not a part of those rules.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

The Democrats have to gain power in order to be relevant.

Wtf are you talking about. They are "relevant" by mere existence.

You can crow all you want about winning the popular vote. It’s just not relevant to the discussion.

Horseshit. It is the entirety of the discussion. That's what "relevant" would apply to.

They have to win power, and that requires the EC, whether you like it or not.

That is in the general election not in the midterms.

Politics is about power

No shit. Is the sky blue too?

, and right now the Republicans are winning it

What does that even mean?

and maintaining it,

They have consistently been losing numerous special elections and will likely lose the House.

and the democrats are going to get their asses wiped in the mid term elections.

Unlikely.

Even if they win a majority of overall votes it will not matter unless they can wield power.

By controlling the House, they can shut down everything Congress or Trump attempts to do as well as initiate impeachment proceedings against Trump. That is wielding all the power there is in our Government with the exception of the Judicial branch, but even then they can initiate impeachment proceedings for Kavanaugh as well.

Yup can moan and groan all along that they. Cheated. Big fucking deal.

You're not understanding precisely why that is in fact a big fucking deal in regard to the topic.

So as I argued, the Democratic Party is dead.

And, as I counter-argued, you are wrong. That's how argumentation works. You make an argument, others counter that argument. Try to keep up.

 

[prideandfall]

Dude, the Dems were so pathetic that ran against Donald Fucking Trump and had the election close enough that shenanigans let him win it. That is a "commit ritual suicide to assuage the dishonour to out families" level of failure.

wait... what? how?
how is that a failure?
i mean technically speaking in terms of pure ideology and discourse, it's a pretty massive win that trump lost the popular vote - and in much the same way as it was in 2000, in fact in a LOT of ways 2016 was a repeat of 2000.

you had a pretty bland and milquetoast centrist democrat with a number of reasonable notions about how to effectively run the country and maintain the notion of civilization as a whole continuing to operate, and you had a batshit insane brain-damaged lunatic that was practically a physical manifestation of the raw uncured id of the republican party at the time.
trump is EVERYTHING that right-wing thinkers and republican voters wanted in a candidate, and EVERYTHING they want in a president... he is the most perfect republican you could ever possibly conjure.

so how is it a failure that giving "the other team" everything they ever wanted, and giving the democrats really nothing to be particularly interested in other than solid dependable leadership with rational long term governing solutions (pfftt BORING), and the republicans only barely managing to win via copious amounts of cheating?