Post-match: So what is next for the Democratic Party? (Post 2024)

You know who really dislikes people who immigrate illegally? People who immigrated legally -- or at least gained legal status at some point.

 

You mean people like Melania and Elon?

 

Spot on.

 

To the OP's poll:

The Bernie wing is unelectable, despite what progressive true-believers would like to have happen. A Clintonian Third Way is needed, though I'm not entirely sure what that means now. Maybe, "end corporate welfare as we know it," for those here of a certain age.

 

So what now?

I want to know the names of the people that vetted garland as Biden’s AG pick. Whatever pieces the Dems are able to pull together…whomever pushed that decision should never have a roll in anything related to the Democratic Party again.

 

Shaking the niqqerlover tag after almost half a century of civil rights work is not going to be easy. I don't know if Dems can convince White people that they support the same racial policies the GOP does.

 

They got a bump when he dropped out, but it was too little, too late.

If he never sought that second term, would it have been "If the hardcore Dems don't have faith in him, why should we?"

I can see why eligible incumbents run again.

 

I don't think so. Not if he framed it right. He could have been the elder statesman passing the torch. That would have set up the nominee as a future oriented candidate and a change candidate. Which is what was needed.

 

If argue it was the 2016 primary but likely outside the scope of this thread.

My heart says they should learn the lessons from Bernie. My head says they'll continue to drift away from them.

When you give people GOP-lite, why should they go for the vanilla rather than the chocolate?

 

I was thinking this myself. If, as @Knave suggests, they meet racists and sexists and homophobes where they are, there will be nowhere for POCs to seek shelter, and those people the Dems want to court may or may not come.

 

I think the democrats have gone the same way as the Republicans with candidates, if not with policies. The democratic primary voting base wants to support a homosexual candidate, or a woman or woman of color, who has experience in government and is well spoken and well educated. So that is who they elect and put forth as a candidate.

The Republican primaries keep pushing people more to the right and yet they still win.

If nothing else, this election shows that the rest of the country not only doesn't want that, they see it as "more diversity shoved down on us real working (white, male) people and we'll go out of our way to defeat it.

Main problem is that democrats seem to care about candidates and maybe even issues, and will decide to show up or not, and vote for a candidate or not, on an individual basis. Republicans will happily show up to vote against any democrat and even occasionally for a republican.

 

The problem with your analysis is that the democratic primary voting base has never actually supported a gay candidate or a woman of color. It has, once, chosen a woman who also happened to be immensely qualified.

 

Apparently, Democrats this year only gained vote share in the categories of White and Black women.
https://www.nbcwashington.com/decis...t-election-demographics-trump-harris/3762138/


While the biggest gains were among Latinos and Latinas there were significant gains in the Other category.

 

White men shows a positive in that chart as well.

 

He did say woman (not of color), and there's an example of that.

 

Lilly white hector’s and Ruben’s are gonna learn why a hundred years ago immigrants with the same names changed them to Hal and Rob.

 

They're usually not lily White, either. There are generally some physical giveaways...

 

One of Harris’ talking points was how she was going to work with repugnants and share her cabinet. Groan.

 

Which, in theory, is good. Unfortunately, conservatives have no interest in compromise. They are not simply a political party, they are also a religious party and it is anathema for them to compromise their religious convictions. This is why I say you have to go after the roots of their beliefs, their cultural worldview. But in American society it is seen as wrong to do that.

 

That was part of my point but putting it into words made it stronger.

 

Hector ain't lily White- there's almost always a physical giveaway.

Steves Miller and Bannon are both Jewish. Ruben doesn't need to change his name or anything else.

 

Huh, Trump gained huge ground among Native Americans.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/11/06/us/elections/trump-america-red-shift-victory.html

 

Steve Miller (Grosser) lost most of his family to the gas chambers. I guess he wants to be Kapo these days.

 

Well, if you take the deportation plank to its logical conclusion...

 

IMO the gut feeling for most Americans seems to be that the job market has softened significantly this year and their is worry because we are just a year away from significant inflation.

To sum up the campaign strategies Trump's message was anti-illegal immigrants, reduced spending abroad, cut down on imports and energy independence. Harris message was protect rights, cut taxes, reduce costs, keep America active abroad.

Every single plank of Trump's platform can be interpreted as pro blue-collar jobs in the US. Every single one. Meanwhile, Kamala's platform is broader and more diverse. It's not job unfriendly but it is dispersed with multiple issues so it did not resonate.

Edit:
To extend a little more, Americans do not feel threatened by foreign powers. Russia and Middle East are not an issue. They feel more threatened by Chinese imports.

POC and immigrants feel more threatened by other POC of other groups than they do of white people.

Immigrant WOC do not feel as disenfranchised by the overturning of Roe vs Wade as Black or White women because they have no historic connection to the ruling.

In summary, the Democrats misunderstood the pain points of multiple groups.