I read a Reddit (through RDX mind you) post the other day that included the Who we serve page from the democrats’ website. The user noted that men were not on that list and pointed it out as on of the reasons Kamala Harris had lost. Meaning the Democratic Party should pander to the white young men demographic as well. A link to the post (through RDX)
I keep seeing this sentiment over and over again on social media. And I can’t help but make the analogy to the “All lives matter.” as opposed to “Black Lives matter.” Am I wrong to think this? I am not from the United States. Please don’t bite my head off as this is no stupid questions.
Because Dem voters have always needed something to vote for, voting against works for Republicans.
But there’s significant brain differences between the two groups, what’s effective for one isn’t for the other
The problem is the “moderates” running the DNC think like Republicans, and part of that is a reduction in empathy that prevents them from understanding others think differently. They legitimately have no idea what went wrong right now, their brains can’t comprehend another person’s point of view.
So we’ve got two political parties ran by conservatives, it’s just only one actually understands how their voters think. So they keep winning even with trump.
This is a very popular thought in the “leftist” and/or “progressive” space. However, what’s your explanation for West Virginia?
I can’t tell you how many people I’ve argued with that said “get rid of Manchin, run a real progressive.”
https://web.archive.org/web/20240930203241/https://www.elliottforwv.com/issues/
Democrats are going to lose their Senate majority in no part because people decided it was better to harass Manchin into not running. Elliott is definitely much more progressive than Manchin ever was.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-elections/west-virginia-senate-results
Elliott lost by a LANDSLIDE. How do you rationalize that? Shouldn’t it have at least been close? Was he just not “progressive enough”?
I kinda thought they would learn from Obama’s success in promoting hope and change, but no, they are right back to trying to peel off Republican voters instead of motivating the unengaged voters like he did.
That wasn’t success for them, it was almost their deathknell.
If Obama had appointed progressive leadership in 2008 shit would be a lot different and Bernie would likely be leaving his second term right now.
The people running the DNC retain power when a moderate Dem wins because they’ll stay the course and appoint the same DNC leadership.
They retain power when a republican wins because they vote for their own leadership then.
The literal only way they can lose is if a progressive becomes president and doesn’t decide to ignore the DNC like Obama did.
That’s why they’d rather have trump than someone that wants to ban fracking.
The DNC isn’t fighting fascism, it’s just the left boot.
Technically Republicans are voting for something when when they are voting to destroy the government. Their goal just happens to be destructive.
Nice way to say it