When Donald Trump was elected in 2016 I realized how much more conservative the U.S. is than I thought. And as the country is aging it is probably getting more conservative. It is also interesting that while the country is conservative, what were once considered "out there" perspectives such as gay rights have become a lot more mainstream.
Judy, this is true, and if Dems realized this they would avoid shooting themselves in the foot by catering to the further left.
Gallup does a yearly poll on how voters self identify. Voters identify as moderate and conservative at about the same- 37%. Those that identify as Liberal at 25%. Those stats clearly show that the only path to success is to win over the moderates.
Keep in mind that voters were deluged with disinformation that they voted on. Of course they see themselves that way. We HAVE to fact check. Especially every single thing that calls itself news. If you are telling the truth why would it matter ? People this time unfortunately voted on a pile of lies that the poorer people thought Trump would HELP them, instead he actually scoffs at them for being poor. Middle class too unfortunately. He admits that he always does favors for the very richest amongst us..Because then they “owe” him. How scary is that? That is not democracy and people did not vote on the truth, but a man who wanted to say anything to get himself out of jail free. People were duped. Huge swaths. He is a good con.
I am hearing this refrain repeatedly, but it is self defeating. Voters will always be deluged by misinformation - and from both sides, though the Rs certainly hold the lead on that.
Blaming the media, or the campaign, is just a rationalization for running a bad campaign.
I'm sure they lied about Obama and Clinton too.
If Democrats don't self examine and see where they are out of sync with the voting public- and polls clearly indicate that is true for immigration, crime, and the Identarian obsessions of the further left, they will continue to lose.
I can't fix the crazy MAGAs and they will do what they do. What we as Dems can do is fix our own agenda.
Thank you Liam. Amidst the post mortems, might I offer a suggestion re Welcomes position on this election.
As you have pointed out, the voting public did not see Harris as a moderate. And through most of Lauren's series of "Kamala is Moderate" series of essays I objected.
Kamala Harris was a product of California Democratic politics which precludes moderation. In that state you just need to win to the Democratic primary and that involves supporting positions like 'taxpayer funding of transgender surgery for prisoners' , an exploitable issue for the GOP that was blown out of proportion, but where a swing state Democrat might not have that albatross.
Kamala had the third most progressive record in the Senate. She was not a firebrand like Sanders or Warren, but she supported the check list of progressive totems- Green New Deal, Reparations, Free College, Medicare for all.
I understand the need to rally around the candidate and I did work for her, half heartedly, but I think we need to be honest. Biden ran and won as a moderate in 2016. He appointed Harris partly to assuage his left flank, and then pivoted left when in office to be the next FDR. He waited till the last minute to drop out making it nearly impossible for an open primary and anointing Harris who never won an election in any political environment other than the uber liberal California. We could have had a candidate like Roy Cooper, Basheer, Whitmer. I did support Dean Phillips who was dismissed by most everybody, even as he was the only one saying the obvious, Biden was about to get McGoverned.
Compare that to Bill Clinton who pivoted center and won his re election.
I Agree with the point of the article. But please tell Third Way that this poll is *not at all* like the Richter scale. The Richter scale is logarithmic. Each whole number increase in magnitude represents a tenfold increase in amplitude. Nothing indicates that this poll used a logarithmic scale.
Fair, I think the idea is that the impacts caused by a one point difference are large, not that the scale itself is logarithmic. But a one point shift to the right or left on this scale would cause a much larger than 1% difference in candidate vote shares.
When Donald Trump was elected in 2016 I realized how much more conservative the U.S. is than I thought. And as the country is aging it is probably getting more conservative. It is also interesting that while the country is conservative, what were once considered "out there" perspectives such as gay rights have become a lot more mainstream.
Judy, this is true, and if Dems realized this they would avoid shooting themselves in the foot by catering to the further left.
Gallup does a yearly poll on how voters self identify. Voters identify as moderate and conservative at about the same- 37%. Those that identify as Liberal at 25%. Those stats clearly show that the only path to success is to win over the moderates.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/388988/political-ideology-steady-conservatives-moderates-tie.aspx
Keep in mind that voters were deluged with disinformation that they voted on. Of course they see themselves that way. We HAVE to fact check. Especially every single thing that calls itself news. If you are telling the truth why would it matter ? People this time unfortunately voted on a pile of lies that the poorer people thought Trump would HELP them, instead he actually scoffs at them for being poor. Middle class too unfortunately. He admits that he always does favors for the very richest amongst us..Because then they “owe” him. How scary is that? That is not democracy and people did not vote on the truth, but a man who wanted to say anything to get himself out of jail free. People were duped. Huge swaths. He is a good con.
I am hearing this refrain repeatedly, but it is self defeating. Voters will always be deluged by misinformation - and from both sides, though the Rs certainly hold the lead on that.
Blaming the media, or the campaign, is just a rationalization for running a bad campaign.
I'm sure they lied about Obama and Clinton too.
If Democrats don't self examine and see where they are out of sync with the voting public- and polls clearly indicate that is true for immigration, crime, and the Identarian obsessions of the further left, they will continue to lose.
I can't fix the crazy MAGAs and they will do what they do. What we as Dems can do is fix our own agenda.
Thank you Liam. Amidst the post mortems, might I offer a suggestion re Welcomes position on this election.
As you have pointed out, the voting public did not see Harris as a moderate. And through most of Lauren's series of "Kamala is Moderate" series of essays I objected.
Kamala Harris was a product of California Democratic politics which precludes moderation. In that state you just need to win to the Democratic primary and that involves supporting positions like 'taxpayer funding of transgender surgery for prisoners' , an exploitable issue for the GOP that was blown out of proportion, but where a swing state Democrat might not have that albatross.
Kamala had the third most progressive record in the Senate. She was not a firebrand like Sanders or Warren, but she supported the check list of progressive totems- Green New Deal, Reparations, Free College, Medicare for all.
I understand the need to rally around the candidate and I did work for her, half heartedly, but I think we need to be honest. Biden ran and won as a moderate in 2016. He appointed Harris partly to assuage his left flank, and then pivoted left when in office to be the next FDR. He waited till the last minute to drop out making it nearly impossible for an open primary and anointing Harris who never won an election in any political environment other than the uber liberal California. We could have had a candidate like Roy Cooper, Basheer, Whitmer. I did support Dean Phillips who was dismissed by most everybody, even as he was the only one saying the obvious, Biden was about to get McGoverned.
Compare that to Bill Clinton who pivoted center and won his re election.
I Agree with the point of the article. But please tell Third Way that this poll is *not at all* like the Richter scale. The Richter scale is logarithmic. Each whole number increase in magnitude represents a tenfold increase in amplitude. Nothing indicates that this poll used a logarithmic scale.
Fair, I think the idea is that the impacts caused by a one point difference are large, not that the scale itself is logarithmic. But a one point shift to the right or left on this scale would cause a much larger than 1% difference in candidate vote shares.