Soul-Searching, Recriminations Within Democratic Party

[Velar Fricative]

Checking latest counts - California has still only counted 66% of their votes but it will look like Trump got about the same number of votes nationally in 2024 as he did in 2020. But Harris may end up around 10 million short of Biden in 2020. That is absolutely mind-blowing to me.

I stand by everything I posted earlier though when it looked like more people switched from D to R initially. Some indeed did so for a multitude of reasons, including misogyny and racism but I still believe for other reasons too. And some non-voters stayed home due to misogyny and racism too. But I am not ready to make that claim that 10 million people stayed home exclusively for those reasons. The question I have then is, if we mailed them ballots instead, would they have voted and who would they have voted for? Because I also don’t believe they all would have voted for Harris if given that extra push to vote either.

[sakoro]

Nov 10, 2024 7:40:38 GMT -5 sent said:

This is probably how regular people feeling squeezed by the economy feel about being ok voting for Trump. Yes he's *insert all the awful things*, but when he was president, I could afford stuff and buying a house was within reach. Now I can't buy a house. Never mind that he's the reason for not being able to buy a house because he made it easier for PE to swallow up houses but did the D's hammer this point anywhere? I only learned earlier in this thread about what exactly Trump did to make the PE takeover of housing easier.  I voted for Kamala because I may not be PE rich, but I can afford life no matter who is in Washington f-ing things up. That's a very privileged place for me to sit. 

I think this is the mentality of the Latinos in my district. I didn’t know about the change in PE rules for buying housing until recently. I was scratching my head wondering why condos in my development are going for $75,000 more than when I bought in 2022 even though interest rates are 5% higher. These aren’t regular families and the buyers don’t need mortgages.

[Jalapeñomel]

We also have to keep in mind that much of the media people consume is cultivated to what they “want” to see. So they may not have seen the MSG nonsense or the kitty litter BS, but just talk of trumps so-called “policies” and his vitriol toward the democrats. And then the democrat response is spliced together to put us in the worst light possible.

This makes it really hard to fight against when all the media being consuming shows how hateful and angry the other side is while your side is perceived as fighting the good fight and civil (the other side is unhinged).

[Velar Fricative]

Nov 10, 2024 5:36:51 GMT -5 cherryvalance said:

I guess I will just never understand having the economy be your main issue and wanting to shake things up, then voting a straight blue ticket except President. You feel like the incumbents are doing a bad job so you vote for more Dems, just not POTUS?

I have observed this for a while - there are many voters who truly believe the POTUS has their hand in everything. The three branches of government are just an afterthought.

[Velar Fricative]

Nov 10, 2024 7:39:43 GMT -5 wanderingback said:

I do not feel sorry for Melania Trump at all, but lol, she doesn’t even have Barron to act as a cover anymore. Didn’t she not move to the White House for awhile citing he needed to finish school?She must be miserable. What a horrible way to live, stuck in the White House.

@@@

And Barron goes to my (very liberal) college alma mater in shithole NYC lol. When Melania was making her dumb NYC rally speech and talking about how sad NYC is these days I’m like why would you want your kid here then? I know the answer but still. I bet she will still stay in NYC too.

[sonrisa]

Nov 10, 2024 8:01:12 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

Nov 10, 2024 5:36:51 GMT -5 cherryvalance said:

I guess I will just never understand having the economy be your main issue and wanting to shake things up, then voting a straight blue ticket except President. You feel like the incumbents are doing a bad job so you vote for more Dems, just not POTUS?

I have observed this for a while - there are many voters who truly believe the POTUS has their hand in everything. The three branches of government are just an afterthought.

and even more than misunderstanding the roles of executive v legislative v judicial, they really don’t understand what is under state v federal control and that local is an offshoot of state, but state isn’t an offshoot of federal power.

[Velar Fricative]

Nov 10, 2024 8:07:14 GMT -5 sonrisa said:

Nov 10, 2024 8:01:12 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

I have observed this for a while - there are many voters who truly believe the POTUS has their hand in everything. The three branches of government are just an afterthought.

and even more than misunderstanding the roles of executive v legislative v judicial, they really don’t understand what dallinder state b federal and that local is an off shoot of state, but state is t an off shoot if federal power. ,

Yup. Plenty of people here voted for Trump because of (local) crime levels.

[sonrisa]

Something I haven’t seen focused on here, but I think could be a significant factor: democrat loss of union support. Do we know what effect that had?

[Velar Fricative]

Nov 10, 2024 7:17:32 GMT -5 mrsukyankee said:

Nov 9, 2024 20:54:18 GMT -5 jeaniebueller said:

I think characterizing all Trump voters as ‘Trump supporters’ is the first problem. Again I know a lot of Trump voters who don’t really like the guy, they voted on the economy, etc.

I'm sorry, but if you vote for someone, you are their supporter. That's it. I don't love Keir Starmer (and, in fact, he wouldn't be my number one choice) but I voted for him and that was my vote of support for him. If you don't want to support a person, don't vote for them. 

I think the MAGA movement has muddied our thoughts on what “support” is. Yes, technically if I give my vote to someone I support them, even if I hold my nose while voting. But now that we see people driving around in Trump-decorated RVs, decorating their homes with Trump stuff, and making MAGA their whole identity now…voting for Trump and not doing any of that seems different even if a vote is a vote.

Also, at least in the US with our system, I feel like it would be hypocritical of me to say “don’t vote for someone you don’t support” when I myself decry anyone who votes third party. So maybe I need to accept third party voters now if I insist that everyone who votes for Trump is full-fledged MAGA? I don’t know, just talking out loud.

[cherryvalance]

Nov 10, 2024 8:01:12 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

Nov 10, 2024 5:36:51 GMT -5 cherryvalance said:

I guess I will just never understand having the economy be your main issue and wanting to shake things up, then voting a straight blue ticket except President. You feel like the incumbents are doing a bad job so you vote for more Dems, just not POTUS?

I have observed this for a while - there are many voters who truly believe the POTUS has their hand in everything. The three branches of government are just an afterthought.

That's my issue with it. So they don't retain or seek new information, are easily and emotionally swayed, are functionally illiterate (going based on national stats, not being an asshole)--and then anyone who tries to educate them is an elitist dick?

Obviously *some* of the policy messaging is working. And if this is mirroring the global trend that all incumbents were voted out of power, I just don't know what we do to combat that reactionary voter.

[sonrisa]

Nov 10, 2024 8:16:38 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

Nov 10, 2024 7:17:32 GMT -5 mrsukyankee said:

I'm sorry, but if you vote for someone, you are their supporter. That's it. I don't love Keir Starmer (and, in fact, he wouldn't be my number one choice) but I voted for him and that was my vote of support for him. If you don't want to support a person, don't vote for them. 

I think the MAGA movement has muddied our thoughts on what “support” is. Yes, technically if I give my vote to someone I support them, even if I hold my nose while voting. But now that we see people driving around in Trump-decorated RVs, decorating their homes with Trump stuff, and making MAGA their whole identity now…voting for Trump and not doing any of that seems different even if a vote is a vote.

Also, at least in the US with our system, I feel like it would be hypocritical of me to say “don’t vote for someone you don’t support” when I myself decry anyone who votes third party. So maybe I need to accept third party voters now if I insist that everyone who votes for Trump is full-fledged MAGA? I don’t know, just talking out loud.

if you voted for him, you supported him. That doesn’t make you a Trump evangelist or mean Trump is your lifestyle and identity any more than voting for Harris makes you a campaign surrogate.

[sent]

Nov 10, 2024 7:58:44 GMT -5 sakoro said:

Nov 10, 2024 7:40:38 GMT -5 sent said:

This is probably how regular people feeling squeezed by the economy feel about being ok voting for Trump. Yes he's *insert all the awful things*, but when he was president, I could afford stuff and buying a house was within reach. Now I can't buy a house. Never mind that he's the reason for not being able to buy a house because he made it easier for PE to swallow up houses but did the D's hammer this point anywhere? I only learned earlier in this thread about what exactly Trump did to make the PE takeover of housing easier.  I voted for Kamala because I may not be PE rich, but I can afford life no matter who is in Washington f-ing things up. That's a very privileged place for me to sit. 

I think this is the mentality of the Latinos in my district. I didn’t know about the change in PE rules for buying housing until recently. I was scratching my head wondering why condos in my development are going for $75,000 more than when I bought in 2022 even though interest rates are 5% higher. These aren’t regular families and the buyers don’t need mortgages.

Same. I figured something had changed but I didn't what exactly it was. I assumed PE had run out of industries to takeover and that's why they moved on to taking over the single family home market. They sit on large sums of money, low interest rates make it easy for them to get more money, and they show up with all-cash offers to buy houses. The fact that there had been change in a specific law is what enabled this is mind blowing. I'm not surprised that this is how it happened but it's also infuriating that our elected leaders really don't care to cultivate a stable middle class. 

[sonrisa]

My kid’s leadership class had her read a book about great people (spoiler, they were all men) that said Reagan was a great president. I had to clarify that for her.

40 years from now are school kids going to read some shifty text book that glosses over reality and says Trump was the best president ever?

[Velar Fricative]

Nov 10, 2024 8:21:50 GMT -5 sonrisa said:

Nov 10, 2024 8:16:38 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

I think the MAGA movement has muddied our thoughts on what “support” is. Yes, technically if I give my vote to someone I support them, even if I hold my nose while voting. But now that we see people driving around in Trump-decorated RVs, decorating their homes with Trump stuff, and making MAGA their whole identity now…voting for Trump and not doing any of that seems different even if a vote is a vote.

Also, at least in the US with our system, I feel like it would be hypocritical of me to say “don’t vote for someone you don’t support” when I myself decry anyone who votes third party. So maybe I need to accept third party voters now if I insist that everyone who votes for Trump is full-fledged MAGA? I don’t know, just talking out loud.

if you voted for him, you supported him. That doesn’t make you a Trump evangelist or mean Trump is your lifestyle and identity any more than voting for Harris makes you a campaign surrogate.

I get that. But I also get why the meaning of supported is being debated.

[Velar Fricative]

Given the PE talk, we need to get back to an issue that the masses agree on - rich people suck. Even if they somehow think Trump is different, we need to keep pointing out how rich people are mucking everything up for everyone else and look how Trump being elected is helping them get richer. We are now perceived as the party of elites.

[sonrisa]

Nov 10, 2024 8:31:09 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

Given the PE talk, we need to get back to an issue that the masses agree on - rich people suck. Even if they somehow think Trump is different, we need to keep pointing out how rich people are mucking everything up for everyone else and look how Trump being elected is helping them get richer. We are now perceived as the party of elites.

’elite’ is being separated off from ‘rich’ in their rhetoric. They, and you, might become a billionaire sometime if you just bootstrap enough and win the lottery. In their vision.

‘Elites’ can be middle class or poor, but they are people who consult information rather than acting on a gut reaction. And definitely anyone whose data goes against your own gut feelings.

Valuing accuracy and truth and information is an elite characteristic. Which makes combatting misinformation extra hard.

[basilosaurus]

Nov 10, 2024 8:31:09 GMT -5 Velar Fricative said:

Given the PE talk, we need to get back to an issue that the masses agree on - rich people suck. Even if they somehow think Trump is different, we need to keep pointing out how rich people are mucking everything up for everyone else and look how Trump being elected is helping them get richer. We are now perceived as the party of elites.

Latte drinking sushi eating elites. That accusation isn't new. Add in big city, coastal living and college educated (which tbf does in fact lean liberal).

What I don't get is how anyone can think they guy with a Manhatten penthouse with gold toilet who went went to Wharton (purchased by wealthy daddy) isn't considered elite.

Eta but he likes his steaks well done and slathered with ketchup. He's a man's man. No bait for him!

[jinkies]

Nov 9, 2024 20:54:18 GMT -5 jeaniebueller said:

Dems have to get real about communication and the fact that there were things that had nothing to do with racism/misogyny/ xenophobia that attracted other demographics to voting for Trump or staying home. For one, Democrats have an elitism problem. As a rural democrat voter, it’s obvious with the way the party talks about rural voters—as one example. I was listening to PSA and Lovett marveled that Trump won MI even though he called Detroit a shithole—clearly nor realizing that outside of detroit, that is not an unpopular thing to say (even though untrue). It made me wonder if the party works with anyone outside of the beltway, major metro areas. And hell is about to freeze over because i am wondering if Bernie was right about messaging all along.

I want to expand on this, because this is what I was trying to get at with my comments, particularly the elitism problem.

I watched a video of someone showing a graph of voting by education. It showed that people with college educations overwhelmingly voted Harris, without college education voted Trump. She concluded that education leads you to agree with the Democratic agenda. This is the smugness I was referring to in my original comments. Our college educations should have taught us that correlation is not causation. Consider that maybe you aren't voting blue bc you are smarter and better educated.

Because I look at that chart and ask why non-college educated voters do not feel welcome in the Democratic party. In our effort to create a big tent, we have not made the tent big enough for people without a college education. Why is that?

This is why R voters latched on to phrases like being called deplorable or garbage people. It's because that's how working class people believe they are perceived by those with college educations, and they are tired of it.

I grew up with the common wisdom that unions vote blue. I know a lot of union members-- they are my family, my neighbors, and my husband's colleagues. Other than my husband, none of them voted for Harris. Why is that? Why are we falling flat with these large groups of workers?

I think, to an extent, it's that we are messaging *at* them, but not actually listening to them.

Like it or not, the Rs made this group feel listened to.

I've heard a lot of people say something like "I would never vote against someone's rights just to have cheaper eggs." There is an immense amount of privilege to that statement. It means that your household income is high enough that you can absorb the higher prices, and that you don't associate with anyone who is not in that position.

It's Maslow's hierarchy of needs-- they don't hate you, they just need to eat first. It comes across as tone deaf to people who are having to make difficult choices due to the dramatic price increases over the past few years.

Toward the end of the campaign Trump had these really simple signs that said things like "Trump- low crime, Harris-- high crime" and "Trump-- low prices, Harris-- high prices"

Say what you will about the signs, but the fact is that they addressed the issues that many people felt were important in a really simple way that was easy to digest while driving past. It made them feel heard and understood.

Meanwhile Dems were messaging joy and "I grew up middle class" without offering anything as concrete and easy to understand as those signs. It felt out of touch.

I think that is the difference that swing Trump voters saw.

[sonrisa]

You can’t have it both ways.

You can’t say a vote for Harris not only supports Harris, but also every action Biden ever took, every negative economic thing that happened in this country even though that is not under federal executive control, and, also support of a genocide being committed by a leader of a completely different country.

But a vote for Trump isn’t even support for the person himself, let alone his blatant racism, misogyny, transphobia and xenophobia, nor his stated policy goals (which are equally if not more supportive of that same leader committing genocide).

Enough with the double standard.

[neverfstop]

Even if voters don't support or agree with who Trump is personally or what he's done, they found some twisted rationalization to vote for "his policies" or the "lesser of 2 evils". I think if you ask people about Trump's personality or baggage (convictions, rhetoric) a large chunk of trump voters would say that they disapprove of it. AND YET, they still voted for him.

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the mental gymnastics of Candidate vs. party. So many people voted for the "Party of Trump" and his ideas, message, and policy DESPITE Trump being a horrible person & candidate. On the other hand, not enough people could look past the Democrats lack of a compelling argument (or at least to their own personal situation) & look at the incredibly smart, compassionate, kind, experienced candidate that we had in Harris. I don't get it.

It has to be a combination of
1- Economic issues, financial hardships, inflation, blaming the party in charge
2- The MAHA health movement, save our kids, fear mongering in schools/books, etc.
3- Dem mismanagement at local & state levels (crime, mask mandates, housing affordability, etc.)
4- Media bubbles, ignorance, social media, misinformation, lying, etc.
5- All the above plus racism & patriarchy

**ETA I'm not saying mask mandates were mismanagement, but COVID handling in general (masks, school, shut downs, etc.) really created lots of tension & resentment. I think it's easy to look back and revise history to say XYZ would have been better, but many of the working class people who bore the brunt of COVID turned to trump (those who lost jobs or couldn't WFH )

[taratru]

Nov 10, 2024 9:09:56 GMT -5 jinkies said:

Nov 9, 2024 20:54:18 GMT -5 jeaniebueller said:

Dems have to get real about communication and the fact that there were things that had nothing to do with racism/misogyny/ xenophobia that attracted other demographics to voting for Trump or staying home. For one, Democrats have an elitism problem. As a rural democrat voter, it’s obvious with the way the party talks about rural voters—as one example. I was listening to PSA and Lovett marveled that Trump won MI even though he called Detroit a shithole—clearly nor realizing that outside of detroit, that is not an unpopular thing to say (even though untrue). It made me wonder if the party works with anyone outside of the beltway, major metro areas. And hell is about to freeze over because i am wondering if Bernie was right about messaging all along.

I want to expand on this, because this is what I was trying to get at with my comments, particularly the elitism problem.

I watched a video of someone showing a graph of voting by education. It showed that people with college educations overwhelmingly voted Harris, without college education voted Trump. She concluded that education leads you to agree with the Democratic agenda. This is the smugness I was referring to in my original comments. Our college educations should have taught us that correlation is not causation. Consider that maybe you aren't voting blue bc you are smarter and better educated.

Because I look at that chart and ask why non-college educated voters do not feel welcome in the Democratic party. In our effort to create a big tent, we have not made the tent big enough for people without a college education. Why is that?

This is why R voters latched on to phrases like being called deplorable or garbage people. It's because that's how working class people believe they are perceived by those with college educations, and they are tired of it.

I grew up with the common wisdom that unions vote blue. I know a lot of union members-- they are my family, my neighbors, and my husband's colleagues. Other than my husband, none of them voted for Harris. Why is that? Why are we falling flat with these large groups of workers?

I think, to an extent, it's that we are messaging *at* them, but not actually listening to them.

Like it or not, the Rs made this group feel listened to.

I've heard a lot of people say something like "I would never vote against someone's rights just to have cheaper eggs." There is an immense amount of privilege to that statement. It means that your household income is high enough that you can absorb the higher prices, and that you don't associate with anyone who is not in that position.

It's Maslow's hierarchy of needs-- they don't hate you, they just need to eat first. It comes across as tone deaf to people who are having to make difficult choices due to the dramatic price increases over the past few years.

Toward the end of the campaign Trump had these really simple signs that said things like "Trump- low crime, Harris-- high crime" and "Trump-- low prices, Harris-- high prices"

Say what you will about the signs, but the fact is that they addressed the issues that many people felt were important in a really simple way that was easy to digest while driving past. It made them feel heard and understood.

Meanwhile Dems were messaging joy and "I grew up middle class" without offering anything as concrete and easy to understand as those signs. It felt out of touch.

I think that is the difference that swing Trump voters saw.

I refuse to be responsible for someone else's insecurities around my education. Education doesn't lead to being a Democrat. What is *can* do is make a person able to see facts instead of fear, and I think that's why the GOP has fostered this "elite" issue.

I completely understand why the messaging hits that way, and why the GOP has been able to build an entire machine on it. In the day-to-day of the "get into your own communities," I think education is the only solution. People have to become literate in ways that benefit them, and that doesn't have to be college. At the same time, I think we all know that there is critical thinking, literacy learning, and interactions with people from other cultures/places that happens in college that you just can't get (unless you are individually motivated to do so, which the working class may not have time for) through on the job or trades training.  

[neverfstop]

THIS.... just AHHHHH! I knew this but seeing the $$ makes me rage.

Post-election polling by the Democratic strategy group Blueprint found that swing voters' top reason for not choosing Harris was a belief that she was "focused more on cultural issues like transgender issues rather than helping the middle class."

Harris and Democrats barely talked about trans issues during the campaign — but Republicans spent nearly $123 million on TV ads referencing trans men in women's sports.

"Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you," a narrator declared in what the Trump campaign and Harris allies both found to be one of the most effective ads of the cycle, including with Black and Latino voters.

www.axios.com/2024/11/10/democrats-working-class-voters-trump

[akayf]

Nov 10, 2024 7:15:00 GMT -5 sent said:

Nov 9, 2024 20:35:52 GMT -5 akayf said:

I’m in Middlesex County in what I thought was a very very blue town. Our mayor and town council are D and always have been for all of my voting history. I think the last time we had an R mayor was in the 1980’s! But based on the map that shows results by district, nearly half the districts for my town went red! Including mine! I can’t find info on numbers, just a map showing who won each district. The 2 neighboring towns are oceans of blue.

ETA-nearly every district in my town voted D for Congress(Frank Pallone) and Senate(Andy Kim). How did Trump win so many districts in my town?

This is also where I live. Where did you find the map?

results.enr.clarityelections.com/NJ/Middlesex/122847/web.345435/#/summary

Click on the map icon in the top right corner of chart and the map comes up. I kept zooming in until I found my town and district.

[sequins]

Can someone please explain this "cheaper eggs" thing to me?

Why did voters assume voting for trump will bring down the cost of daily goods?

harris was the only one who had a plan to tackle price gouging. And if we were to focus on micro economics instead of macro, she is also the only person who had plans for new families, small biz, student loans, medicare and prescription drug costs.

So are we saying voters mistakenly believed this about trump? If yes, then is it a messaging problem of not reaching voters? Or is it that voters just didn't believe harris would get this done?

[orval]

Nov 10, 2024 10:39:35 GMT -5 taratru said:

Nov 10, 2024 9:09:56 GMT -5 jinkies said:

I refuse to be responsible for someone else's insecurities around my education. Education doesn't lead to being a Democrat. What is *can* do is make a person able to see facts instead of fear, and I think that's why the GOP has fostered this "elite" issue.

I completely understand why the messaging hits that way, and why the GOP has been able to build an entire machine on it. In the day-to-day of the "get into your own communities," I think education is the only solution. People have to become literate in ways that benefit them, and that doesn't have to be college. At the same time, I think we all know that there is critical thinking, literacy learning, and interactions with people from other cultures/places that happens in college that you just can't get (unless you are individually motivated to do so, which the working class may not have time for) through on the job or trades training.  

I hate to break it to you, but this statement is exactly why people are called elitists.  

[wanderingback]

92% of Black women voted for Harris (and similar numbers for Biden). Black people are disproportionately affected by poverty so to say that Democrats and their messages don’t resonate with poor and working class people seems like some folx are forgetting a huge group of important people since you’re saying the Democrats aren’t talking to people effectively.

As Malcom X said "The most disrespected person in America, is the black woman. The most un-protected person in America is the black woman. The most neglected person in America, is the black woman."

[sequins]

Nov 10, 2024 14:12:13 GMT -5 wanderingback said:

92% of Black women voted for Harris (and similar numbers for Biden). Black people are disproportionately affected by poverty so to say that Democrats and their messages don’t resonate with poor and working class people seems like some folx are forgetting a huge group of important people since you’re saying the Democrats aren’t talking to people effectively.

As Malcom X said "The most disrespected person in America, is the black woman. The most un-protected person in America is the black woman. The most neglected person in America, is the black woman."

Right! This is why I'm confused about this economy argument. There are plenty subgroups of people with the same economic issues that voted overwhelmingly for Harris. Does it just come down to not trusting her to get it done? Which then brings us back to the role of racism and misogyny in this race.

[jinkies]

Nov 10, 2024 10:39:35 GMT -5 taratru said:

Nov 10, 2024 9:09:56 GMT -5 jinkies said:

I want to expand on this, because this is what I was trying to get at with my comments, particularly the elitism problem.

I watched a video of someone showing a graph of voting by education. It showed that people with college educations overwhelmingly voted Harris, without college education voted Trump. She concluded that education leads you to agree with the Democratic agenda. This is the smugness I was referring to in my original comments. Our college educations should have taught us that correlation is not causation. Consider that maybe you aren't voting blue bc you are smarter and better educated.

Because I look at that chart and ask why non-college educated voters do not feel welcome in the Democratic party. In our effort to create a big tent, we have not made the tent big enough for people without a college education. Why is that?

This is why R voters latched on to phrases like being called deplorable or garbage people. It's because that's how working class people believe they are perceived by those with college educations, and they are tired of it.

I grew up with the common wisdom that unions vote blue. I know a lot of union members-- they are my family, my neighbors, and my husband's colleagues. Other than my husband, none of them voted for Harris. Why is that? Why are we falling flat with these large groups of workers?

I think, to an extent, it's that we are messaging *at* them, but not actually listening to them.

Like it or not, the Rs made this group feel listened to.

I've heard a lot of people say something like "I would never vote against someone's rights just to have cheaper eggs." There is an immense amount of privilege to that statement. It means that your household income is high enough that you can absorb the higher prices, and that you don't associate with anyone who is not in that position.

It's Maslow's hierarchy of needs-- they don't hate you, they just need to eat first. It comes across as tone deaf to people who are having to make difficult choices due to the dramatic price increases over the past few years.

Toward the end of the campaign Trump had these really simple signs that said things like "Trump- low crime, Harris-- high crime" and "Trump-- low prices, Harris-- high prices"

Say what you will about the signs, but the fact is that they addressed the issues that many people felt were important in a really simple way that was easy to digest while driving past. It made them feel heard and understood.

Meanwhile Dems were messaging joy and "I grew up middle class" without offering anything as concrete and easy to understand as those signs. It felt out of touch.

I think that is the difference that swing Trump voters saw.

I refuse to be responsible for someone else's insecurities around my education. Education doesn't lead to being a Democrat. What is *can* do is make a person able to see facts instead of fear, and I think that's why the GOP has fostered this "elite" issue.

I completely understand why the messaging hits that way, and why the GOP has been able to build an entire machine on it. In the day-to-day of the "get into your own communities," I think education is the only solution. People have to become literate in ways that benefit them, and that doesn't have to be college. At the same time, I think we all know that there is critical thinking, literacy learning, and interactions with people from other cultures/places that happens in college that you just can't get (unless you are individually motivated to do so, which the working class may not have time for) through on the job or trades training.  

Consider that you are illustrating my point.


From the AP: 'A majority of voters in this election did not have a college degree, and most of those non-college-educated voters backed Trump. He won 55% of voters without a college degree, compared with about 4 in 10 who chose Harris."

The fact of the matter is that non college educated Americans are the largest percentage of voters. They decide the election, full stop. We have to appeal to them if we want them to vote for us. We did not do that in this election. The numbers don't lie.

As long as we are dismissing them as insecure and lacking critical thinking skills, we will not win elections.

As long as we feel that it is beneath us to provide simple messaging that is relatable and understandable to people with less education than us, we will not win elections.

As long as we insist that a college education is the superior path, we will alienate anyone who made a different choice.

If we can not find a way to relate to trade workers, union members, and manual laborers in a way that recognizes their life experience as equally valid, listens to their concerns, and does not patronize them, we will continue to lose.

[karinothing]

Nov 10, 2024 14:21:39 GMT -5 jinkies said:

Nov 10, 2024 10:39:35 GMT -5 taratru said:

I refuse to be responsible for someone else's insecurities around my education. Education doesn't lead to being a Democrat. What is *can* do is make a person able to see facts instead of fear, and I think that's why the GOP has fostered this "elite" issue.

I completely understand why the messaging hits that way, and why the GOP has been able to build an entire machine on it. In the day-to-day of the "get into your own communities," I think education is the only solution. People have to become literate in ways that benefit them, and that doesn't have to be college. At the same time, I think we all know that there is critical thinking, literacy learning, and interactions with people from other cultures/places that happens in college that you just can't get (unless you are individually motivated to do so, which the working class may not have time for) through on the job or trades training.  

Consider that you are illustrating my point.


From the AP: 'A majority of voters in this election did not have a college degree, and most of those non-college-educated voters backed Trump. He won 55% of voters without a college degree, compared with about 4 in 10 who chose Harris."

The fact of the matter is that non college educated Americans are the largest percentage of voters. They decide the election, full stop. We have to appeal to them if we want them to vote for us. We did not do that in this election. The numbers don't lie.

As long as we are dismissing them as insecure and lacking critical thinking skills, we will not win elections.

As long as we feel that it is beneath us to provide simple messaging that is relatable and understandable to people with less education than us, we will not win elections.

As long as we insist that a college education is the superior path, we will alienate anyone who made a different choice.

If we can not find a way to relate to trade workers, union members, and manual laborers in a way that recognizes their life experience as equally valid, listens to their concerns, and does not patronize them, we will continue to lose.

I find it so frustrating that we have to struggle to reach trade workers or u ion members. Shortly before the election dems expanded OT, we improved access to Healthcare, he strengthened bargaining rights. We raised the minimum wage.

None of that matters because Republicans shout they will lower taxes for folks that already probably pay rather low federal taxes anyway.

[taratru]

Nov 10, 2024 14:21:39 GMT -5 jinkies said:

Nov 10, 2024 10:39:35 GMT -5 taratru said:

I refuse to be responsible for someone else's insecurities around my education. Education doesn't lead to being a Democrat. What is *can* do is make a person able to see facts instead of fear, and I think that's why the GOP has fostered this "elite" issue.

I completely understand why the messaging hits that way, and why the GOP has been able to build an entire machine on it. In the day-to-day of the "get into your own communities," I think education is the only solution. People have to become literate in ways that benefit them, and that doesn't have to be college. At the same time, I think we all know that there is critical thinking, literacy learning, and interactions with people from other cultures/places that happens in college that you just can't get (unless you are individually motivated to do so, which the working class may not have time for) through on the job or trades training.  

Consider that you are illustrating my point.


From the AP: 'A majority of voters in this election did not have a college degree, and most of those non-college-educated voters backed Trump. He won 55% of voters without a college degree, compared with about 4 in 10 who chose Harris."

The fact of the matter is that non college educated Americans are the largest percentage of voters. They decide the election, full stop. We have to appeal to them if we want them to vote for us. We did not do that in this election. The numbers don't lie.

As long as we are dismissing them as insecure and lacking critical thinking skills, we will not win elections.

As long as we feel that it is beneath us to provide simple messaging that is relatable and understandable to people with less education than us, we will not win elections.

As long as we insist that a college education is the superior path, we will alienate anyone who made a different choice.

If we can not find a way to relate to trade workers, union members, and manual laborers in a way that recognizes their life experience as equally valid, listens to their concerns, and does not patronize them, we will continue to lose.

Right, what I'm questioning is how, when any simple messaging = talking down, elitism, etc. I'm a life long public educator. My whole "thing" is providing simplified messaging of complexity. I'll ask again: How can Democrats do that when even k-12 education is on the chopping block as unnecessary?

I may be illustrating your point, and I will own that here on this board. I will also be proud of my hard-earned education. No one will ever convince me to hide it or that it hasn't given me a set of skills to both use and be proud of.

eta: I hope I've made it clear that I don't think it's beneath me to educate or simplify messaging. I agree it needs to happen, I just don't know how it's going to.