• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

What did Democrats do wrong?

What did Democrats do wrong?

  • Didn't fight inflation enough.

    Votes: 12 15.6%

  • Didn't fight illegal immigration enough.

    Votes: 22 28.6%

  • Too much focus on abortion.

    Votes: 1 1.3%

  • Too much transgender stuff.

    Votes: 28 36.4%

  • America not ready for Progressive women leader.

    Votes: 26 33.8%

  • Should have kept Joe.

    Votes: 2 2.6%

  • Not enough focus on new jobs.

    Votes: 2 2.6%

  • Nothing, Trump cheated & played dirty!

    Votes: 14 18.2%

  • Didn't stop Gaza War.

    Votes: 8 10.4%

  • I can be Agent M.

    Votes: 6 7.8%
  • Total voters
    77
I'll point out that Trump is currently repeating some of the mistakes the democrats made leading into 2024. Most notably, folks are worried about the economy and the Presidents' responses are, "what are you talking about, look at these indicators that have no impact on your life!" In Trumps case, he's also denying the bad numbers rather than just ignoring them.
 
d4m10n said:
I like how you reply without asking yourself whether post #3,425 had anything whatsoever to do with Democratic Party missteps.
Click to expand...

I have very clearly stated what I think Democrats did (and continue to do) wrong. You refuse to engage with it because it contradicts your entirely disproven premise.

You do not seem to actually have an interest in discussing what Democrats did wrong, only flogging your weak and tired version of what Democrats did wrong.
 
ahhell said:
I'll point out that Trump is currently repeating some of the mistakes the democrats made leading into 2024. Most notably, folks are worried about the economy and the Presidents' responses are, "what are you talking about, look at these indicators that have no impact on your life!" In Trumps case, he's also denying the bad numbers rather than just ignoring them.
Click to expand...

This is Trump and Republicans falling victim to the propaganda machine they built and of course their own rank incompetence (see also: Epstein).

They convinced everyone that the economy was bad in 2024 (it wasn’t) and used that to win. Then they actually wrecked the economy and are finding out the hard way that it’s much easier to convince people something good is bad than it is to convince people something bad is good.

They ran the same playbook in 2016 but were at least smart enough then to just do nothing once they took control and take credit for the Obama’s economy.

They were too stupid to do that this time.
 
i think the economy is pretty complicated and nuanced, but yeah pointing at positive gdp growth and going "see?" isn't going to convince anyone
 
thaiboxerken said:
We also have to consider where the economic data is coming from. Trump has not made it a secret that he wants government to massage the numbers to make him look good.
Click to expand...
Not really, Trump is just denying numbers he doesn't like.
 
Cain said:
Again, the main reason in 2024 was the global economy, but we should resist monocausal explanations. While Trump won the popular vote in 2024, the unfavorable landscape in the Electoral College makes it more difficult for Democrats to compete.
Click to expand...
d4m10n said:
Agreed on both counts, but I may as well point out that I've created an entire thread about how "incumbent politicians lost all around the world." There probably won't be much overlap between that thread and this one, but if there is it would be about how the Democratic Party failed to market its new candidate as an outsider who would offer a clean break with whatever issues were making incumbent parties toxic across the OECD and the Eurozone.
Click to expand...
There was also the very obvious issue of the age and frailty of Joe Biden. I pointed this out before the primaries (not that I expected anyone to listen; but I saw it coming). Should've gone for Dean Phillips. Not an incumbent; not tied at the hip to the Biden Administration in the same way that Kamala Harris was. And most importantly, not old and frail like Biden. Would he have won? Of course I don't know because we don't live in that timeline. But I think he would have had a better chance. But of course, he didn't have the name recognition of Biden and being the incumbent usually helps in the primaries.
 
Puppycow said:
There was also the very obvious issue of the age and frailty of Joe Biden. I pointed this out before the primaries (not that I expected anyone to listen; but I saw it coming). Should've gone for Dean Phillips. Not an incumbent; not tied at the hip to the Biden Administration in the same way that Kamala Harris was. And most importantly, not old and frail like Biden. Would he have won? Of course I don't know because we don't live in that timeline. But I think he would have had a better chance. But of course, he didn't have the name recognition of Biden and being the incumbent usually helps in the primaries.
Click to expand...

Yes, because if there’s one thing we can learn from the 2024 election, it’s that the American voters didn’t want an elderly candidate with diminished capacities and/or ties to an unpopular previous administration.
 
Puppycow said:
There was also the very obvious issue of the age and frailty of Joe Biden. I pointed this out before the primaries (not that I expected anyone to listen; but I saw it coming). Should've gone for Dean Phillips. Not an incumbent; not tied at the hip to the Biden Administration in the same way that Kamala Harris was. And most importantly, not old and frail like Biden. Would he have won? Of course I don't know because we don't live in that timeline. But I think he would have had a better chance. But of course, he didn't have the name recognition of Biden and being the incumbent usually helps in the primaries.
Click to expand...

Everything is obvious in retrospect. I'd be way better off if I diverted money from my ROTH IRA into a winning Powerball ticket. My favorite commentator is Robert Wright, and he was sounding the alarm about Biden's cognitive decline years in advance, but Biden has never been sharp, and it seems like he's always been old (he was famously born closer to Lincoln's presidency than his own). He also performed well enough in the State of the Union address. I figured they'd give him the same cocktail of Aderall and cocaine for the debate.
 
Cain said:
Everything is obvious in retrospect. I'd be way better off if I diverted money from my ROTH IRA into a winning Powerball ticket. My favorite commentator is Robert Wright, and he was sounding the alarm about Biden's cognitive decline years in advance, but Biden has never been sharp, and it seems like he's always been old (he was famously born closer to Lincoln's presidency than his own). He also performed well enough in the State of the Union address. I figured they'd give him the same cocktail of Aderall and cocaine for the debate.
Click to expand...
It wasn't in retrospect to me, or to Bob Wright. If he was saying that for "years in advance" how can we say it's only obvious in hindsight?
 
Puppycow said:
Should've gone for Dean Phillips. Not an incumbent; not tied at the hip to the Biden Administration in the same way that Kamala Harris was.
Click to expand...
Dean Phillips could have credibly run as a Democratic Party change candidate, but this is probably true of anyone other than the president, veep, and party operators already working within the incumbent administration. It would have been nice if one of the OP poll options was "Didn't hold competitive primaries to choose a new slate of candidates."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom