If you’re wondering why her, her campaign, and DNC leadership keep pretending it’s a coincidence the more conservative she becomes the worse she polls…
It’s because they’re all making a lot of money from donors in return for all her conservative shifts.
Presidential campaigns “cost” over a billion dollars now. That’s a lot of fat to trim off for a lot of people.
And with the DNC valuing donation bundlers over any other skill, it’s seems like it should be pretty obvious they care more about grifting money than getting Harris elected.
Anyone that says it takes over a billion dollars to beat trump shouldn’t be running a campaign for local dog catcher. But they’ll never stop trying to get more money. Instead of just trying to get more votes.
The people running the party have different goals than the voters in the party
Some 53% of voters in the poll said they agreed with a statement that “immigrants who are in the country illegally are a danger to public safety,” compared to 41% who disagreed. Voters had been more closely divided on the question in a May Reuters/Ipsos poll, when 45% agreed and 46% disagreed.
Ahhh good to know some things never change. Good old hateful racist assholes Americans being asshole Americans. I hate living here with these fucking ghouls. The only dangerous people are actual American citizens…
That 53% of voters includes ever trump voter in the country.
So if it’s every trump supporter, it’s only 10% of people who aren’t voting R no matter.
Republicans pander to the majority of their base. And Dems also pander to the Republican base.
It’s one of the biggest and most obvious problems with our political system. When both parties keep moving right, it’s obviously going to result in the country overall moving to the right.
It’s really not complicated, but some people love to misrepresent it.
That 53% of voters includes ever trump voter in the country
Perhaps not every single last one, but good point overall.
So if it’s every trump supporter,
I would need more evidence to support the rest of this. But yeah we at least can get a better handle by filtering out those supporters - the remaining percentage is likely to be much smaller.
Republicans pander to the majority of their base. And Dems also pander to the Republican base.
X% of voters includes Republicans that will never vote D under any circumstances
Agreed, but…
To motivate people who will vote D. We need to focus on what they want.
This does include some moderate Republicans, think Liz Cheney. With the GOP turning the way it has - practically being a personality cult for one guy now, it makes sense that those folks who got left out would try to find a home with the Dems - and in the short term that alliance means a better chance at securing the White House.
I get the point you are trying to make. But you don’t seem to understand mine. And keep in mind that this isn’t the first time I’ve tried to explain this to you.
You can still vote for someone even if you think we deserve a better candidate, I’ve been doing it for decades at this point…
There’s no reason to insult people or act like you can’t criticize the least worst option while still holding your nose and voting for them.
The majority of Dem voters shouldn’t be shocked by that. We’ve been doing it for a long time…
I can count the people I know who wanted Biden or Hillary as president on one hand but virtually everyone i know still voted for both of them in the last two elections.
It would just be a lot easier to stop trump if we ran a candidate that Dem voters wanted to be president.
I think there’s a time and a place for criticizing our candidates. The time is during the candidate’s term and in the Primaries. During the General, it’s a bad time to do so. And you have to realise: You don’t always get what you want. You say you want a candidate that Dem voters want to be President. The opportunity for that to happen is in the primaries. Unfortunately, the time for that has come and gone.
Biden won those primaries. The voters for the Democratic Party, who ALL get a say, put Biden up front. And people hammered Biden, including bad actors from the other party as well as from foreign countries, until Biden had no room for error. When he flubbed the first debate, we used the rules for succession, with him stepping down and his VP taking the top spot, like what would happen if he was rendered incapable of serving while he was in office.
I return to my key point. Trump or Harris are our choices today. No Third Party will win. As long as you are voting for Harris, criticise away. Just know that I will push back against any post that seems to suggest our candidate is horribad and shouldn’t be voted for. Not voting for Harris means we get Trump.
The time is during the candidate’s term and in the Primaries.
You think we had a primary?
And during their term? That’s like saying the best time to negotiate price is after the sale is made…
Your view only makes sense if you’re operating under the assumption the candidate won’t listen to any criticism or adjust their policy to align with Dem voters more and maximize their chances of winning the election.
Biden isn’t the candidate anymore, Harris certainly isn’t perfect but I believe she’s at least willing to open a dialog with Dem voters, even after the shit that was pulled at the DNC where she did the opposite.
Dem voters aren’t Republican voters, telling them to shut up and vote D depresses turnout, what improves Dem turnout is the candidate listening to voters so that they feel part of the party and more likely to support the candidate, even if the candidates position doesn’t change.
It’s really as easy as that to boost Dem turnout.
It’s only bad for the Dem candidate if they act like a spoiled toddler who’s told there’s no ice cream till the vegetables are gone
It would just be a lot easier to stop trump if we ran a candidate that Dem voters wanted to be president.
Okay, so worth asking: how can we win with a different hypothetical candidate who appeals to Dems only but not moderate Republicans? Keeping in mind that individuals in smaller states like in the midwest have more voting power per person and also that the makeup of the Electoral College is such that the GOP has an advantage?
The people running the party have different goals than the voters in the party
I do recall this in being a factor, it was thought that the GOP couldn’t prevent that guy from winning the nomination in 2016 while the DNC had the power to annoint Clinton over Sanders.
Presidential campaigns “cost” over a billion dollars now.
Yes. Citizens United. At least the DNC is able to match the GOP here though.
And with the DNC valuing donation bundlers over any other skill, it’s seems like it should be pretty obvious they care more about grifting money than getting Harris elected.
That’s not obvious at all. Alternative view: they’re just trying to outspend the GOP in the hopes that this get Harris elected.
The people running the party have different goals than the voters in the party
Again, not at all obvious.
Anyone that says it takes over a billion dollars to beat shouldn’t be running a campaign for local dog catcher.
Of course that’s not it! The question is, if the GOP has a billion dollar lead over Harris, can the GOP prevail over Harris?
Maybe not, but, why take that chance?
But they’ll never stop trying to get more money. Instead of just trying to get more votes.
I mean they’re trying to use the money to spread outreach and engagement (which hopefully turns into legitimate votes for Harris). I understand the frustration with the overall system but ultimately this is all for the goal of getting more to turn out for Harris.
If you’re wondering why her, her campaign, and DNC leadership keep pretending it’s a coincidence the more conservative she becomes the worse she polls…
It’s because they’re all making a lot of money from donors in return for all her conservative shifts.
Presidential campaigns “cost” over a billion dollars now. That’s a lot of fat to trim off for a lot of people.
And with the DNC valuing donation bundlers over any other skill, it’s seems like it should be pretty obvious they care more about grifting money than getting Harris elected.
Anyone that says it takes over a billion dollars to beat trump shouldn’t be running a campaign for local dog catcher. But they’ll never stop trying to get more money. Instead of just trying to get more votes.
The people running the party have different goals than the voters in the party
.
Ahhh good to know some things never change. Good old hateful racist assholes Americans being asshole Americans. I hate living here with these fucking ghouls. The only dangerous people are actual American citizens…
.
Thank you for those links and insightful take. I had wondered about this myself - with your take I can see a way forward now.
That 53% of voters includes ever trump voter in the country.
So if it’s every trump supporter, it’s only 10% of people who aren’t voting R no matter.
Republicans pander to the majority of their base. And Dems also pander to the Republican base.
It’s one of the biggest and most obvious problems with our political system. When both parties keep moving right, it’s obviously going to result in the country overall moving to the right.
It’s really not complicated, but some people love to misrepresent it.
the Democratic chase for the centrist unicorn stuffs us all into a very cramped and increasingly hot basket.
Perhaps not every single last one, but good point overall.
I would need more evidence to support the rest of this. But yeah we at least can get a better handle by filtering out those supporters - the remaining percentage is likely to be much smaller.
Actually this is not true. AOC for example, endorses Harris (as per https://www.bbc.com/news/videos/cj4xegj1jq2o ) but is definitely more liberal than Harris and not afraid to state it (see https://qz.com/aoc-mark-cuban-kamala-harris-ftc-lina-khan-billionaire-1851669012 )
Harris is in a tough spot to win the election but wait another generation or decade and I have a feeling that things are going to look very different.
Which is why we need to be smart.
We need to cancel the electoral votes of the South, until they sort their shit out, call it Reconstruction 2.0.
We have to fix this cancer on our nation if we ever hope to function again, and the longer we push it off, the worse the metastasis gets.
…
90% sure we’ve went over this before…
X% of voters includes Republicans that will never vote D under any circumstances
To motivate people who will vote D. We need to focus on what they want.
Did it work this time?
Agreed, but…
This does include some moderate Republicans, think Liz Cheney. With the GOP turning the way it has - practically being a personality cult for one guy now, it makes sense that those folks who got left out would try to find a home with the Dems - and in the short term that alliance means a better chance at securing the White House.
I get the point you are trying to make. But you don’t seem to understand mine. And keep in mind that this isn’t the first time I’ve tried to explain this to you.
.
Do you want to just insult people?
Or are you willing to abide by this subs rules and have a reasonable discussion?
His comment was no more insulting than yours, IMHO.
Removed by mod
You can still vote for someone even if you think we deserve a better candidate, I’ve been doing it for decades at this point…
There’s no reason to insult people or act like you can’t criticize the least worst option while still holding your nose and voting for them.
The majority of Dem voters shouldn’t be shocked by that. We’ve been doing it for a long time…
I can count the people I know who wanted Biden or Hillary as president on one hand but virtually everyone i know still voted for both of them in the last two elections.
It would just be a lot easier to stop trump if we ran a candidate that Dem voters wanted to be president.
That shouldn’t be a relevation either
I think there’s a time and a place for criticizing our candidates. The time is during the candidate’s term and in the Primaries. During the General, it’s a bad time to do so. And you have to realise: You don’t always get what you want. You say you want a candidate that Dem voters want to be President. The opportunity for that to happen is in the primaries. Unfortunately, the time for that has come and gone.
Biden won those primaries. The voters for the Democratic Party, who ALL get a say, put Biden up front. And people hammered Biden, including bad actors from the other party as well as from foreign countries, until Biden had no room for error. When he flubbed the first debate, we used the rules for succession, with him stepping down and his VP taking the top spot, like what would happen if he was rendered incapable of serving while he was in office.
I return to my key point. Trump or Harris are our choices today. No Third Party will win. As long as you are voting for Harris, criticise away. Just know that I will push back against any post that seems to suggest our candidate is horribad and shouldn’t be voted for. Not voting for Harris means we get Trump.
You think we had a primary?
And during their term? That’s like saying the best time to negotiate price is after the sale is made…
Your view only makes sense if you’re operating under the assumption the candidate won’t listen to any criticism or adjust their policy to align with Dem voters more and maximize their chances of winning the election.
Biden isn’t the candidate anymore, Harris certainly isn’t perfect but I believe she’s at least willing to open a dialog with Dem voters, even after the shit that was pulled at the DNC where she did the opposite.
Dem voters aren’t Republican voters, telling them to shut up and vote D depresses turnout, what improves Dem turnout is the candidate listening to voters so that they feel part of the party and more likely to support the candidate, even if the candidates position doesn’t change.
It’s really as easy as that to boost Dem turnout.
It’s only bad for the Dem candidate if they act like a spoiled toddler who’s told there’s no ice cream till the vegetables are gone
Okay, so worth asking: how can we win with a different hypothetical candidate who appeals to Dems only but not moderate Republicans? Keeping in mind that individuals in smaller states like in the midwest have more voting power per person and also that the makeup of the Electoral College is such that the GOP has an advantage?
I do recall this in being a factor, it was thought that the GOP couldn’t prevent that guy from winning the nomination in 2016 while the DNC had the power to annoint Clinton over Sanders.
Yes. Citizens United. At least the DNC is able to match the GOP here though.
That’s not obvious at all. Alternative view: they’re just trying to outspend the GOP in the hopes that this get Harris elected.
Again, not at all obvious.
Of course that’s not it! The question is, if the GOP has a billion dollar lead over Harris, can the GOP prevail over Harris?
Maybe not, but, why take that chance?
I mean they’re trying to use the money to spread outreach and engagement (which hopefully turns into legitimate votes for Harris). I understand the frustration with the overall system but ultimately this is all for the goal of getting more to turn out for Harris.