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

I think politicians will need to distinguish between what they need to be flexible on to attract more voters and what are things on which you cannot compromise. Obviously anti-trans hate mongerers are not the constituency that you want to try to compromise with.

To give an example of what I'm talking about, I think one of the things that this election showed was that voters feel we need more law and order. Even in the most liberal parts of California, voters sent this message.

So, on this issue you can be flexible in looking for ways to be tougher so that for example common thieves get the punishment they deserve, but you cannot compromise in accepting policies that will be unfair to minorities. If a voter was turned off by the Democratic candidate because they feel thieves are not getting punished enough, then that is something you look at with an open mind, if you want to win elections, but if somebody was turned off because blacks/gays/immigrants are not getting punished enough, that is not a voter you want to reach out to.

 

But we have to recognize that it is a real issue. In California people who voted for "law and order" in many cases want precisely that.

For example, there is the case of Manuel, who had a food cart in front of the Santa Clara County jail. I walked by him every day on my way to the courthouse, so I often talked to him. In recent years he was complaining that homeless people were harassing him, trying to steal his food, and the police was standing nearby (there's always police on that block) and doing nothing. He asked them to do something and they told him that according to the law they could do nothing. One day he said he tried to fight back and the police threatened to arrest him.

About a year ago, his cart wasn't there anymore. I don't know what happened to him. I don't know if Manuel votes, or even if he is documented, but when I heard how Latinos voted, I thought of him.
Sometimes the problems are not just fear-mongering. Sometimes leadership is needed, and by stepping up and finding solutions, candidates and political parties will be able to get more votes.

 

Homelessness, additions, theft, housing shortages and high cost of housing, law and order...all those issues are related. Lots of money has been thrown at the problem, and at ideas that haven't worked.

The people are craving for leadership that will look with an open mind for new solutions, and therein lies the opportunity for a political party to make inroads without compromising on the things on which we cannot compromise.

 

That's the challenge. Trump says he's going to solve everything, and he gives very little imput on the how, and somehow he has an uncanny ability (which I personally don't understand) to get many people to believe him. I don't have the answer to that. All I can say is that if we actually try to solve the problems, it just might steal some of his thunder.

Right now it looks like at the federal level he has things locked up, unfortunately, but now the problems will be on him, he can't just say that he will fix crime/homelessness/health care/foreign wars, whatever, he'll have to do it. And I don't think he will.

My hope is that if in places where the Democrats still have power, like here in California, they start showing us that they are listening and becoming wiser and start genuinely looking for new solutions to the real problems that exist, maybe that's were you start. Maybe enough voters will notice.

 

Well, it's true that there are Venezuelan gangs and they are really tough, and yet Trump is still full of shit about immigrants in general. The two are not mutually exclusive. You don't stop the gangs by deporting working families.

 

Well yeah. Do you think Trump is going to push the judges to change term limits and corrupt the election process so he can stay in power? Or do you think maybe he'll use the military to keep him in charge? And if so, do you think they will follow his orders?

My hope is that either he is all talk and will not push (he is after all a corrupt lazy old man and he might just settle for enriching himself and getting immunity), or that if he pushes far enough the judges and/or military leaders will stand up to him.

I'm not saying our worst fears can't happen, but I also think that for now we should plan as if there is still a chance to lawfully win the next election, and figure out how. Then, if other events overtake us, we'll have to take it from there.

I've already been there, and all I can say is at that point you can try to do what you can from your own small sphere of influence, or else you can flee (as I eventually did as a young man, and looking back I don't regret what I did).

 

I know a lot of people including here believe this will happen, I am not one of them. Maybe I am naive and will be proven wrong. What I do know is that if he wants to make that case for staying more than this term, a lot of of his followers will rationalize it and buy the idea. Too many believe the idea that things in Gov. are so broken that we need an authoritarian figure in the executive with expanded powers to fix it.

I've heard a reference that this is not unprecedented as people gave FDR "authoritarian" type power to fix the problems of the Great Depression. I am not a history buff so I don't know if that reference is true. I've put it on my plans to look that up out of curiosity. Difference is that we are not really at that type of crisis situation. Not even close. But many have been lead to believe that we are on the path of destruction wether it's cultural, economic, or nuclear war. I do agree that the debt is a ticking bomb.