Current Events > Do Dems need to start co-opting the Maga movement

(+) Yeah! (+)

I honestly have no idea how they planned to win 2028 even before this if the goal for 2024 was to barely squeak by.

Is it time to embrace populism but do it in a way that eats into Maga? What is the new left or even new center if Maga is apparently the new starting point for the electorate.

And no, I don't mean Sanders-style progressive populism. That's dead. People want bigger take-home pay and any misguided promises of tax cuts that are tossed in, not social services.

people actually like UBI

Bernie policies didn't fail to resonate with the people but with the corporate masters who the dems would not dare upset

it's time to start blue maga

They got bigger take home pay under Biden.
https://www.cepr.net/bidens-record-on-income-growth/

Ultimately the billion dollars they spent on campaigning would be better spent on building media outlets that can get policy stakes across to the public when existing outlets clearly aren't interested.

If I'm not mistaken, Newsome's been vetoing some of his state's more progressive legislation. If he's had his eye on a 2028/32 run and has been building some moderate credentials to that end, maybe Democrats have a chance.

Other than that, I've got no idea how this gets reversed. Democrats have lost the working class, they're bleeding Latino support, and Gen Z doesn't look to be the allies we were hoping they'd be.

very popular measures the republicans wouldn't dare do:

implement UBI
legalize weed
free healthcare, not affordable healthcare free healthcare no more insurance companies

I see a death spiral over the next few cycles as Dems run to blue state sanctuaries and accelerate the EC disadvantage and likely next reapportionment working against them.

The Dems need fully open primaries if they want fresh voices and consensus candidates if they want even a chance to get out of this.

WingsOfGood posted...

legalize weed

Trump is fine with a well-planned legalization or decriminalization, but that's it.

as insight people in a dem only bubble wouldn't see, Asmongold considered a chud by many on CE has said he is in favor of UBI and while he voted for Trump in 2016 he felt Trump didn't deliver much and voted guess who in 2020?

Bernie

He is also in favor of socialized healthcare

Starks posted...

Is it time to embrace populism

Yes. Dunno how Dems have been missing this for like 9 years. If covid didn't strike in 2020 they'd have lost that too.

Unfortunately by now I dunno how competitive Dems can be in the populist arena. Bernie was their best guy for that but he's too old now, Warren's too old, Ed Markey's too old, Sherrod Brown lost re-election, Tim Walz is out for obvious reasons, Josh Shapiro's burned too many bridges, AOC would just be Hillary/Harris 3 after all the propaganda she's been smacked with. I can't think of any usable Dem. for this.

Dems should keep their core values but the economy can never leave their minds as issue #1. Does that mean condemning social issues or disadvantaged groups? Absolutely not. But again, people never ask about the cost of tax cuts, only about the next new program.

I don't know how to reframe good governance and basic equity in a way that's sexy. And only 4% of America even gives a thought to foreign policy at the ballot box. You have to figure out how to navigate voters on a basic level.

Dig deep into the red states for a new crop, I guess. Maybe you'll find the next Bill Clinton without all the bs.

darkace77450 posted...

If I'm not mistaken, Newsome's been vetoing some of his state's more progressive legislation. If he's had his eye on a 2028/32 run and has been building some moderate credentials to that end, maybe Democrats have a chance.

Newsom is literal governor of California, no matter how many progressive proposals he's vetoed he's still passed too much, he will get rammed by so much propaganda even Vance or DeSantis could squeak by him. Basically no coastal Dem. is gonna work, especially not a corporate one who can't even carry the progressive left while the midwestern moderates reject him.

We have to shut down the egos of Newsom, Buttigieg, etc. They need to be non-starters for 2028.

Maybe KS gov if Dems dare consider a woman again. /half s

At this point I can sooner believe Dems (and any significant political party really) to grow more towards "well, obviously voters can't be trusted to do the right thing, so let's just be populistic and tell them what they want to hear while we just do what we think needs to be done" than Dems getting elected in anything like their current state. Which is why have kind of lost hope in general.

Starks posted...

We have to shut down the egos of Newsom, Buttigieg, etc. They need to be non-starters for 2028.

Maybe KS gov if Dems dare consider a woman again. /half s

Buttigieg is 100% mega-done just for being associated with Biden.

Free shit
Gimme stimmy

Jiek_Fafn posted...

Free shit
Gimme stimmy

i don't know what the topic is about but i like this

where money

Populist leftist policies are very popular

deep red Missouri just passed a $15 minimum wage + yearly increase based on inflation by ballot measure, by the same margin that Trump won (~58%)

it takes someone like Bernie Sanders (whos old as hell now) to sell these ideas to the working class

I dunno, I think we might need like...some bizarro Andrew Tate or Joe Rogan for young men.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


feel the Bern!

oh wait the people controlling the party said no

Maybe Beshear and John Bel Edwards come out of this looking the best.

But yeah, there's nobody who can pull what Trump is doing.

No, but appealing to someone other than 5 people in the suburbs that like both the democratic party and dick cheney would probably be a good start

TheGoldenEel posted...

Populist leftist policies are very popular

deep red Missouri just passed a $15 minimum wage + yearly increase based on inflation by ballot measure, by the same margin that Trump won (~58%

it takes someone like Bernie Sanders (whos old as hell now) to sell these ideas to the working class

Yeah, the issue being it's easy to vote for policy in of itself. The issue with a politician is you attach a person to that, and that's a very different factor. They have to connect with the voters, get the right vibes and a Democrat will support a number of other policies the Missouri voters might not like very much.

Bernie has not been tested on a national level and never will be. There is nothing ever showing he can win in red states where he'd say something like trans people deserve human rights and deporting someone who's lived here 20 years without incident is wrong.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

We have a media that does not feel any responsibility to tie policy outcomes to voting choices.

They need the modern equivalent of Huey Long.

As much as I hate even entertaining the idea, how do you think Fetterman would play on the national stage?

Bernie was the best shot we had at pushing progressive policies into the mainstream, but the Dems fucked us on that front, and Bernie is simply too old to resonate now. Unless we get an energetic, younger progressive guy to come forward in the next few years, the Left in general is screwed in the US.

LightSnake posted...

Yeah, the issue being it's easy to vote for policy in of itself. The issue with a politician is you attach a person to that, and that's a very different factor. They have to connect with the voters, get the right vibes and a Democrat will support a number of other policies the Missouri voters might not like very much.

Bernie has not been tested on a national level and never will be. There is nothing ever showing he can win in red states where he'd say something like trans people deserve human rights and deporting someone who's lived here 20 years without incident is wrong.

Bernie's leftward shift in 2020 ruined his own chances, saying felons should be allowed to vote absolutely crashed him with the American populist demographic.

We basically need someone like 2016 Bernie who does not remotely at all campaign or focus on social issues that don't play well in the swing states, even if they support them.

AFreeby posted...

Bernie was the best shot we had at pushing progressive policies into the mainstream, but the Dems fucked us on that front, and Bernie is simply too old to resonate now. Unless we get an energetic, younger progressive guy to come forward in the next few years, the Left in general is screwed in the US.

The Inflation Reduction Act was literally Poland's entire GDP being dumped into infrastructure projects the CHIPS Act is the first big industrial policy since WWII. Biden bent over backwards to rescue their pensions. The "working class" don't actually give a fuck about their material conditions, they just hate city liberals.

Dan Osborn? He had support across all sides and came closer than anyone has in years to unseating a senator in a deep red state, all without allegiance to any party.

Alan___Smithee posted...

Dan Osborn? He had support across all sides and came closer than anyone has in years to unseating a senator in a deep red state, all without allegiance to any party.

Dan Osbon was running ads how he's the real MAGA hero and how much he hates immigrants.

LightSnake posted...

The Inflation Reduction Act was literally Poland's entire GDP being dumped into infrastructure projects the CHIPS Act is the first big industrial policy since WWII. Biden bent over backwards to rescue their pensions. The "working class" don't actually give a fuck about their material conditions, they just hate city liberals.

Do you notice something about those? No one felt those immediately, but they felt inflation. No one has pensions anyway, most people didn't feel that. The working class sure as hell cares about material conditions, they just didn't react in the way that you expected to what he managed to do.

legendary_zell posted...

Do you notice something about those? No one felt those immediately, but they felt inflation. No one has pensions anyway, most people didn't feel that. The working class sure as hell cares about material conditions, they just didn't react in the way that you expected to what he managed to do.

There is literally nothing that is going to be felt "immediately," and unions well knew their pensions were being bailed out .

Also, this isn't explaining why there's been such a global shift here, even in places with strong worker rights and universal healthcare.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Affordable Care Act? YAY!
Obamacare? Boo!

LightSnake posted...

There is literally nothing that is going to be felt "immediately," and unions well knew their pensions were being bailed out .

Also, this isn't explaining why there's been such a global shift here, even in places with strong worker rights and universal healthcare.

The same shit happened everywhere. Even the so called "labour" and socialist parties in other countries have been feeding their people neoliberalism since the 70s and are now thoroughly discredited as agents of change. They deny that problems exist and that anything could or should change, leaving only the far right psychos as the "this is fucked up" button. That's what happened here, what's about to happen in Canada, what will happen in France at the next election, etc etc etc.

You can't let unions dwindle down to 10 percent of the population, leaving everyone else with 401ks or relying on Social Security, then tout that you saved their pensions of a fraction of that 10 percent that you let get to the point of death. Almost no one feels that because of the path we've been on for decades. Can't expect that to win you an election, as good as it was.

Also, it's not just material changes that are felt immediately, it's changes in rhetoric, changes in posture, changes in targets. All of that matters. Styling themselves as the avatar of the working class for the working class, listening to them and letting them actively shape policy would have been felt immediately.

legendary_zell posted...

The same shit happened everywhere. Even the so called "labour" and socialist parties in other countries have been feeding their people neoliberalism since the 70s and are now thoroughly discredited as agents of change. They deny that problems exist and that anything could or should change, leaving only the far right psychos as the "this is fucked up" button. That's what happened here, what's about to happen in Canada, what will happen in France at the next election, etc etc etc.

You can't let unions dwindle down to 10 percent of the population, leaving everyone else with 401ks or relying on Social Security, then tout that you saved their pensions of a fraction of that 10 percent that you let get to the point of death. Almost no one feels that because of the path we've been on for decades. Can't expect that to win you an election, as good as it was.

Also, it's not just material changes that are felt immediately, it's changes in rhetoric, changes in posture, changes in targets. All of that matters. Styling themselves as the avatar of the working class for the working class, listening to them and letting them actively shape policy would have been felt immediately.

Zell, I can't help but be a little confused here. We're seeing around the world that right wingers are winning on racism and privatizing public services while being rewarded for it. I think your premise that everything is just rational economics and has one easy fix isn't panning out when it's tested.

I brought this up elsewhere, but we have a huge disadvantage right now because for ten years, the right has crafted an enormous multimedia empire

LightSnake posted...

Zell, I can't help but be a little confused here. We're seeing around the world that right wingers are winning on racism and privatizing public services while being rewarded for it. I think your premise that everything is just rational economics and has one easy fix isn't panning out when it's tested.

I brought this up elsewhere, but we have a huge disadvantage right now because for ten years, the right has crafted an enormous multimedia empire

Racism is winning because economic populism has been taken off the table as an option completely. When the root causes can't be addressed, all that's left is lashing out at scapegoats, fighting to hoard smaller pieces of the pie. People see their standards of living slipping and when there's precarity, it's easy to say "this is happening because brown people from elsewhere are taking your tax money and jobs." And that's the only thing that's on offer, that has a realistic chance of happening, so people press that button.

I agree that the media is unconscionable and could hardly have done a better job of walking Trump to the doors of the Whitehouse. We need independent left media to connect the dots for people and unabashedly attack the right.

Zell, I am very questioning this notion that racism is only on the table because of economic populism being off it, and not sure that holds up on scrutiny. The phenomenon of how people love programs, but will sabotage them to avoid minorities benefiting has been there a while. It doesn't seem like economics fix racism. You seem to be committing the error rof assumiing everything comes from a rational, monetary self interest.

There are people who fully acknowledge they're not harmed by immigration or brown people. Point in fact, they'rre doing fine. Except they think there's a big pile of money immigrants get while Americans are struggling and that's "not fair." Many Trump supporters are firmly affluent professionals, they're not hurting or suffering, and their needs are met fine. they're still vehemently racist and vote for Trump because they really feel they're being threatened. I think you're underestimating how often racism and bigotry stands on its own as a factor

I'd also note a huge issue is a lot of the biggest lefty streamers spend a ton of time bashing Democrats. But even shows like, I dunno, Sam Seder, Secular Talk, Young Turks...they don't get the hits that Right Wing media does. Not even close. It's a big issue and one we need to work on yesterday.

LightSnake posted...

Zell, I am very questioning this notion that racism is only on the table because of economic populism being off it, and not sure that holds up on scrutiny. The phenomenon of how people love programs, but will sabotage them to avoid minorities benefiting has been there a while. It doesn't seem like economics fix racism. You seem to be committing the error rof assumiing everything comes from a rational, monetary self interest.

There are people who fully acknowledge they're not harmed by immigration or brown people. Point in fact, they'rre doing fine. Except they think there's a big pile of money immigrants get while Americans are struggling and that's "not fair." Many Trump supporters are firmly affluent professionals, they're not hurting or suffering, and their needs are met fine. they're still vehemently racist and vote for Trump because they really feel they're being threatened. I think you're underestimating how often racism and bigotry stands on its own as a factor

I'd also note a huge issue is a lot of the biggest lefty streamers spend a ton of time bashing Democrats. But even shows like, I dunno, Sam Seder, Secular Talk, Young Turks...they don't get the hits that Right Wing media does. Not even close. It's a big issue and one we need to work on yesterday.

Actually, you're right, I don't want to downplay racism as an independent and powerful force. I hate it when other leftists do that. It's not all about economics, many people out there are just straight up racist and hide behind economics when confronted. That's been true for decades and I want to acknowledge that.

That said, the dynamic gets far worse when there's no viable economic alternative to stagnation and slow decline on the horizon. What we're seeing is a combo of the two across the West.

legendary_zell posted...

Actually, you're right, I don't want to downplay racism as an independent and powerful force. I hate it when other leftists do that. It's not all about economics, many people out there are just straight up racist and hide behind economics when confronted. That's been true for decades and I want to acknowledge that.

That said, the dynamic gets far worse when there's no viable economic alternative to stagnation and slow decline on the horizon. What we're seeing is a combo of the two across the West.

I'm not opposed to agreeing on all that you've said here. It's just hard for me to think that it's such a simple matter when we look at the demographics of Trump supporters, or what happened in 2008-2012. This is anecdotal, but my mom's boss is a doctor with his own practice. He's rich, wants for nothing. He's voting for Trump because he wants tax cuts. Across the board, we see Trump supporters who fully admit there's no harm to them from immigration, they just think it's "unfair."

Like, I agree with you the US electorate isn't a good judge of the L/R spectrum, but it does need to be acknowledged they think the Dems are 'too left,' because any policy we do propose is gonna have to go ten rounds with Fox News and CNN and that's not something to handwave off.

Like...in 2008, there was massive turnout for Obama. The same coalition didn't materialize in 2012, let alone for Hillary Clinton. And why? When the actual data got looked at, it was really that 2008 was so dire they put self preservation above racism. But in 2012, they felt so comfortable, they could go back to it.

I'm completely, incidentally, agreeing with you we should work to meet everyone's needs. My disagreement is borne of these issues:

1. Any policies we do craft will not be implemented instantly and will require a whole lot of building.
2. There are so many issues all at once. Like Lina Khan at the FTC was throwing amazing ideas left and right, banning non-compete clauses and more. Buttigieg was implementing things like "instant refunds if your flight ticket is delayed" and "every service needs to accommodate you thus." It's stuff consumers DO notice, and this is before we get into the Labor positives.

I'm not saying we can't defeat the right and that economics aren't a huge part of it. But I just don't think it's as simple as having or even embodying the right policies. Sure, voters in Missouri want 15 dollars for their minimum wage, but attach the policy to a candidate and they hate that person because he's a lib

Democracies are fragile and fickle. This is the cost of doing business. The alternative is usually a true one-party state or absolute monarchy.

As for this loss, I put most of the blame on Biden. Thoroughly ruined his legacy.

Starks posted...

Democracies are fragile and fickle. This is the cost of doing business. The alternative is usually a true one-party state or absolute monarchy.

As for this loss, I put most of the blame on Biden. Thoroughly ruined his legacy.

Unfortunately, I cannot disagree. He was maybe the best president o our lifetimes, but he should've made clear he was stepping down earlier.

LightSnake posted...

I'm not opposed to agreeing on all that you've said here. It's just hard for me to think that it's such a simple matter when we look at the demographics of Trump supporters, or what happened in 2008-2012. This is anecdotal, but my mom's boss is a doctor with his own practice. He's rich, wants for nothing. He's voting for Trump because he wants tax cuts. Across the board, we see Trump supporters who fully admit there's no harm to them from immigration, they just think it's "unfair."

Like, I agree with you the US electorate isn't a good judge of the L/R spectrum, but it does need to be acknowledged they think the Dems are 'too left,' because any policy we do propose is gonna have to go ten rounds with Fox News and CNN and that's not something to handwave off.

Like...in 2008, there was massive turnout for Obama. The same coalition didn't materialize in 2012, let alone for Hillary Clinton. And why? When the actual data got looked at, it was really that 2008 was so dire they put self preservation above racism. But in 2012, they felt so comfortable, they could go back to it.

I'm completely, incidentally, agreeing with you we should work to meet everyone's needs. My disagreement is borne of these issues:
1. Any policies we do craft will not be implemented instantly and will require a whole lot of building.
2. There are so many issues all at once. Like Lina Khan at the FTC was throwing amazing ideas left and right, banning non-compete clauses and more. Buttigieg was implementing things like "instant refunds if your flight ticket is delayed" and "every service needs to accommodate you thus." It's stuff consumers DO notice, and this is before we get into the Labor positives.
I'm not saying we can't defeat the right and that economics aren't a huge part of it. But I just don't think it's as simple as having or even embodying the right policies. Sure, voters in Missouri want 15 dollars for their minimum wage, but attach the policy to a candidate and they hate that person because he's a lib

Nothing you've said here is wrong. It ain't easy and it won't be solved easily by waving a magic wand of progressivism. The problems we face are DEEEEEEP as country, in the entire West. But I genuinely think universal, practical programs, wrapped in common sense, populist language, combined with ceaseless repetition and an attack dog mentality is our best hope.

How much do I blame Harris? Very little. Whatever messaging deficiencies she had compared to Trump, at least the campaign apparatus was close to flawless. The votes just weren't there.

But now you go into 2028 possibly losing NM, MN, and VA.

legendary_zell posted...

Nothing you've said here is wrong. It ain't easy and it won't be solved easily by waving a magic wand of progressivism. The problems we face are DEEEEEEP as country, in the entire West. But I genuinely think universal, practical programs, wrapped in common sense, populist language, combined with ceaseless repetition and an attack dog mentality is our best hope.

I'm certainly willing to give it a whirl. I just think we're gonna need to overcome major ground work to make it feasible. Ultimately, every Democrat in my lifetime has given good, if imperfect policy to better people's lives in some capacity we can improve on.

It's just....gonna be very much an uphill climb and we've gotta figure out a way to stop the bleeding

Starks posted...

How much do I blame Harris? Very little. Whatever messaging deficiencies she had compared to Trump, at least the campaign apparatus was close to flawless. The votes just weren't there.

But now you go into 2028 possibly losing NM, MN, and VA.

jfc, that really is terrifying

Starks posted...

How much do I blame Harris? Very little. Whatever messaging deficiencies she had compared to Trump, at least the campaign apparatus was close to flawless. The votes just weren't there.

But now you go into 2028 possibly losing NM, MN, and VA.

Harris lost every single swing state by a massive margin =/ Gen Z are pro-Trump. Safe to say I think we're fucked.