What did Democrats do wrong?

[theprestige]

Phew, at least we can agree on something, but I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on all the rest.

But that's what makes politics, court cases, and horse racing so interesting, right?

I can't help but read that as, "the Democrats didn't do anything wrong, have no idea what they could have done wrong, and will be equally baffled when they lose the midterms as well."

 

[AmyStrange]

I can't help but read that as, "the Democrats didn't do anything wrong, have no idea what they could have done wrong, and will be equally baffled when they lose the midterms as well."

I kind of believe that too, but they do win some elections so that's not a given or a fact.

I guess that means we can't agree to disagree, right?


-

 

[theprestige]

I kind of believe that too, but they do win some elections so that's not a given or a fact.

I guess that means we can't agree to disagree, right?

What do we disagree about? The Democrats' handling of abortion as an issue in this campaign? What the Democrat position on abortion actually is? Whether the Democrats had a good understanding of why lots of voters are concerned about the Democrat position on abortion, and how to address those concerns in a way that wins close elections?

 

[Hercules56]

If the election was based purely on abortion rights, Kamala would have won.

 

[mumblethrax]

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, but my view is that Democrats are unwilling to compromise on abortions of convenience ("any reason or no reason at all").

That view is just false. Harris' policy position, for example, was also just to restore Roe.

And I think the Democrats made a mistake, to hammer on an issue that swing voters see as too much of a bait and switch.

You've made it clear that you think this, but you still have produced zero evidence that it's true, or how it makes sense that abortion ballot initiatives were largely successful if this is the case.

Good, now explain to voters how legalizing abortion in this scenario is the best and/or only way to help these kids.

Because we want children to be successful in life, and nothing bad happens as a result of terminating a pregnancy in its earliest stages.

This won't convince someone who thinks abortion is intrinsically wrong, but I don't hope to convince that person. I don't think they have good reasons for that belief in the first place.

 

[Hercules56]

Why is it so important to make laws against it though? Is it just so you can "own the libs"?

Cuz if something is not illegal, there is no incentive to not do it.

 

[AmyStrange]

Cuz if something is not illegal, there is no incentive to not do it.

Actually, (sorry, too many double negatives, but I'm gonna assume the following) I know some folks who smoked pot because it made them feel like rebels, so there may be a little truth to that.


-

 

[Ziggurat]

You may not have noticed but expanding abortion rights beyond crazy 6 week limits is very popular in the USA.

Sure. But expanding to 36 weeks isn't.

Passing in many Red states. Democrats seem to have the pulse of America much better than Reps on this issue.

Perhaps, though again, 36 week elective abortions aren't popular. But here's the thing: Trump didn't campaign on the abortion issue. Harris did.

 

[theprestige]

Because we want children to be successful in life, and nothing bad happens as a result of terminating a pregnancy in its earliest stages.

A teenage single mom with a child they can't parent is already failing at life in ways that cannot be solved by sanctioning the killing of an inconvenient human being. Abhorrent treatments for the symptoms while perpetuating the underlying disease isn't going to win you many votes these days.

 

[theprestige]

If you are generally against elective abortion why should there be an exception for rape or incest - the embryo/foetus has not done anything wrong, seems rather "sins of the father" to me.

And to me, too. But it seems to be where most of the American electorate is at these days, so it seems like a good place to seek compromise and moderate policies in order to win important elections. f

More importantly, it's a bait and switch. Democrats aren't really advocating for the Three Exceptions. They're advocating for abortions of convenience, and the electorate knows this.

 

[The Don]

You may not have noticed but expanding abortion rights beyond crazy 6 week limits is very popular in the USA. Passing in many Red states. Democrats seem to have the pulse of America much better than Reps on this issue.

Seems to be a recurring theme. Individual Democratic Party policies, be they w.r.t. abortion, gun control, healthcare, taxation and so on are popular but people vote for the party with the less popular positions on key policy areas.

IMO the GOP is much better at stoking fears and insecurities and then creating slogans which appears to address them.

 

[Ziggurat]

Seems to be a recurring theme. Individual Democratic Party policies, be they w.r.t. abortion, gun control, healthcare, taxation and so on are popular

Part of their position is popular. Part of it is not. In the case of abortion, having some legal access to abortion is popular. Extending that access to 36 weeks is not. You are ignoring the unpopular part, and wondering why voters who aren't ignoring it aren't voting Democrat.

 

[Tero]

Aside from inconvenient children, wokeness and all that, I'm getting the same from several message boards: the democrats have not helped us much for 30 years (Biden gave them cheap insulin) so we must punish them now by voting for Trump. Because they don't lose anything, they think? Or is just punishing Democrats enough for them? Why vote at all if there is nothing to gain? Just the vengeance? I really can't believe they thought Trump would bring prices down. They are that dumb?

 

[Trausti]

 

[Minoosh]

So, what you're saying is that 10 million less votes for Harris (according to new number totals) had nothing to do with her losing, right? Or, are you saying that all those missing votes were republicans that decided to stay home and not vote?


-

I don't have any idea how you derived that from what I posted it. Could you lay it out for me?

 

[AmyStrange]

I don't have any idea how you derived that from what I posted it. Could you lay it out for me?

I don't know, I forgot where I was going with that, but please accept my apologies for being stupid.

But, let me try this again anyway. What I believe is that because there were 10 million less votes for Harris than for Biden in 2020, it's possible that she lost because those same amount of folks stayed home and didn't even bother to vote at all.


-

 

[theprestige]

Aside from inconvenient children, wokeness and all that, I'm getting the same from several message boards: the democrats have not helped us much for 30 years (Biden gave them cheap insulin) so we must punish them now by voting for Trump. Because they don't lose anything, they think? Or is just punishing Democrats enough for them? Why vote at all if there is nothing to gain? Just the vengeance? I really can't believe they thought Trump would bring prices down. They are that dumb?

The 'voters are stupid and evil' narrative, ladies and gentlemen! Speaking of things the Democrats are doing wrong...

 

[Trausti]

The 'voters are stupid and evil' narrative, ladies and gentlemen! Speaking of things the Democrats are doing wrong...

The problem is the voters aren't properly educated.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Aside from inconvenient children, wokeness and all that, I'm getting the same from several message boards: the democrats have not helped us much for 30 years (Biden gave them cheap insulin) so we must punish them now by voting for Trump. Because they don't lose anything, they think? Or is just punishing Democrats enough for them? Why vote at all if there is nothing to gain? Just the vengeance? I really can't believe they thought Trump would bring prices down. They are that dumb?

Vengeance has a purpose. Punishing people who do you wrong stops them from doing it again. But that's not all. As well as the practical benefits, it makes you feel better. Feelings are very important. What have Democrats done to make you feel better in the last 30 years? Lately they've just been making you feel more and more depressed, what with global warming, and Covid, and being nice to people who are different, and now inflation. Someone's to blame for all the ills of the World, and it cartainly isn't you. You've a pretty good idea who is to blame, but the jackbooted government won't let you smash some immigrant's face in, which is making you feel even more depressed.

Which means the government itself is to blame - especially liberals, who keep telling you lies about how they are making things better. The price of gas is proof that they aren't, but you're powerless to do anything about it except vote them out of office. It's not as satisfying as literally smashing their faces in, but while we still have stupid laws restrictiing free expression it will have to do.

The problem with politicans, especially Democrats, is that they don't understand how their position of power makes everyone else feel powerless. There is one politican who does understand though - Donald Trump. He isn't afraid to meet out revenge on those who wrong him or you. Immigrants, women, anyone whose 'rights' the government is prioritising over yours. Like you, he knows what the real problems of the world are and how to fix them - which he not only promises to do but will do. He won't hold back and he won't take no for an answer, no matter how much they bleat about 'rule of law' and other norms the powerful use to keep you down. That's the kind of positive attitude we need to make us feel better. And who knows, maybe he'll give you a job with Homeland Security, so you can smash immigrants' faces in for real! Imagine how good that would make you feel.

 

[Tero]

theprestige, the voters are stupid. Most of them are evil, some just married to them.​