Democrats, you have to embrace populism instead of flaunting it.

[SavannahMann]

As I have mentioned more than once here, I voted Democrat for decades before finally walking away and voting for Trump. When the DNC was exposed as being totally corrupt and in the tank for Hillary, I refused to vote for any Democrats. I’d like to see the day when I can again vote for the Party I used to.

One thing that would help me do that is the populism ideal. You see, Populism is belittled by the Democratic Party. There is a problem with that attitude though. If you disagree with, and belittle a majority of the people, they don’t want to vote FOR YOU.

Professional Wrestling traditionally has some guys who are just baddies. They play the part of the bad guys. They cheat, smack someone with a chair, and the crowd boos them when they appear. They flaunt the crowd. They can do that, because they are the baddies. It is their job to be hated by the crowd. It’s part of the show, part of the act.

When we are talking about politics, which is first and foremost a popularity contest, telling the people you expect to vote for you that they suck and are idiots is not a way to win. It is a way to lose.

Now, here is some of that Populism that the Democrats need to notice once and for all. There is no widespread support for an assault weapons ban. There is no support for a ban on all guns. There is no support for appealing the Second Amendment.

One starry eyed editorialist still dreams of mass gun confiscations - Hot Air

In U.S., Support for Assault Weapons Ban at Record Low

36% of the people support an assault weapons ban. That means the idea is so unpopular that for every vote you get on the issue, you lose nearly two. The Republicans win the election easily on that issue.

This is where core beliefs come in. Something I’ve wished that either party had. The Republicans don’t really ramp up the Anti Abortion talk, because they can read the polls, and listen to the voters, and know that it is not a big popular ideal. They know that just over half of the people identify as pro choice. Since the Republicans want to win elections, they don’t make it part of the party platform, it’s not a litmus test for candidates, they let the members say anything they want to on the issue, but the party takes a simple law of the land and that’s that approach.

The Republicans are smarter than the Democrats on that front. They read the polls, and know that the issue isn’t a winner. So they let the firebrands go out and do speeches about how awful this is and also let the moderate or more liberal Republicans announce they are pro life without drumming them out of the party.

Democrats, embrace the populist issues, not just in words, but in deeds. Don’t just announce that the party will not pursue an assault weapons ban, but announce that the 2nd Amendment is absolute, and you have no intention of trying to repeal it. It will probably take a couple election cycles, but in time you will get some of those moderate voters in rural America which you have lost back. It will certainly work better than calling them idiots.

Last weekend SNL put this out. It is funny, because it is true. I assume whoever wrote it, and approved it, was taken out and fired right after it aired.



You need the votes, and insulting those voters is not the way to go. They aren’t voting against their own interests, the problem is you aren’t representing those interests. It isn’t enough to suck less than the Republicans. You have to be better than the Republicans, and you have to represent the voters.

Try it, and when you are back in the majority, you can focus on some things that everyone can agree on. That does not include an assault weapons ban, or banning all guns. That just gets you voted out of office in the next election. It means you are once again in the minority shouting at the idiots who voted against you. If you are tired of the Republicans being in charge, stop shoutings, and start listening.

 

[Mac1958]

Try it, and when you are back in the majority, you can focus on some things that everyone can agree on.

The party is currently under the control of people who have no interest in any of this. They are illiberal authoritarians who are going to do whatever they can to force their ideology on you, period, and make you comply, period. All the way down to the very words you speak.

If real liberals can somehow manage to regain some power, you'll probably see some of what you suggest. Until then, it just ain't gonna happen.
.

 

[gipper]

The D party should be dead, after all these recent revelations. Hopefully a third party raises that kills it and takes the R's down too.

If the unions abandon the D party, that might be enough to kill it. Watch as the DNCMSM and the R party assist the D party in preventing a mutiny...much as they did to destroy the Tea Party. If they can get Bernie and a few other major D pols to defect, that might be enough. We can only hope.

AFL-CIO calls for a break with “lesser of two evils” politics
AFL-CIO calls for a break with “lesser of two evils” politics

 

[SeaGal]

When we are talking about politics, which is first and foremost a popularity contest, telling the people you expect to vote for you that they suck and are idiots is not a way to win. It is a way to lose.

The problem is - the Dems are being honest. They have an ingrained disdain for all who don't march in lock step.
The left has gone from 'dissent is patriotic' during the Bush years to 'dissent is racist' during the Obama years to 'if you don't dissent, you are deplorable.

You need the votes, and insulting those voters is not the way to go. They aren’t voting against their own interests, the problem is you aren’t representing those interests. It isn’t enough to suck less than the Republicans. You have to be better than the Republicans, and you have to represent the voters.

I, too, am a long time Democrat - my turn away from the 'Party' began with Bill Clinton. The Dems no longer can accept the legitimacy of interests that don't mirror their own. There's an 'elite nobleism' of thought that the leaders cannot hide - they know best what's best for 'us' the little, stupid, self-defeating people.

I prefer it stay out in the open.

 

[gipper]

When we are talking about politics, which is first and foremost a popularity contest, telling the people you expect to vote for you that they suck and are idiots is not a way to win. It is a way to lose.

The problem is - the Dems are being honest. They have an ingrained disdain for all who don't march in lock step.
The left has gone from 'dissent is patriotic' during the Bush years to 'dissent is racist' during the Obama years to 'if you don't dissent, you are deplorable.

You need the votes, and insulting those voters is not the way to go. They aren’t voting against their own interests, the problem is you aren’t representing those interests. It isn’t enough to suck less than the Republicans. You have to be better than the Republicans, and you have to represent the voters.

I, too, am a long time Democrat - my turn away from the 'Party' began with Bill Clinton. The Dems no longer can accept the legitimacy of interests that don't mirror their own. There's an 'elite nobelism' of thought that the leaders cannot hide - they know best what's best for 'us' the little, stupid, self-defeating people.

I prefer it stay out in the open.

Agreed. The D party is a mirror image of the R party, it is just that too many Americans don't know it yet. The DNCMSM promotes the fallacy that the Ds care about the middle class, working class, and the poor. This fools far too many Americans.

Both parties are owned and controlled by the elite wealthy. It is far past the time the American people rise up and put an end to both parties.

If Bernie is true to his words, he will start a third party and recruit several other D pols who claim to believe as he does.

 

[SavannahMann]

Try it, and when you are back in the majority, you can focus on some things that everyone can agree on.

The party is currently under the control of people who have no interest in any of this. They are illiberal authoritarians who are going to do whatever they can to force their ideology on you, period, and make you comply, period. All the way down to the very words you speak.

If real liberals can somehow manage to regain some power, you'll probably see some of what you suggest. Until then, it just ain't gonna happen.
.

I know. Believe me I know. The problem is that the Democrats are on the unpopular side of so many issues.

Take Trade and NAFTA. I’ve written this so many times it isn’t even funny. I swear I should probably just go ahead and make it a hot key. But trade between equals is a good thing. It increases competition. Look at Safety. Safety of our cars has increased dramatically because of the competition with German and Swedish cars. The S class Mercedes was the first with several safety innovations. The Sweeds were the first with the engine mounts that were designed to throw the engine to the ground in a head on collision, instead of allowing the engine to be shoved into the passenger compartment. Now, every manufacturer has those mounts. The innovations of the S Class Mercedes are common within a few years. Without competition, we would all suffer.

Smaller engines with more power is a Japanese strength. Nissan recently came up with an engine for racing. It is a three cylinder engine that produces more than 400 horsepower. It is tiny. It could fit in a carry on suitcase. Seriously. This tiny 1.5L engine from Nissan makes 400 horsepower

In a decade, it will be in passenger cars, turning out less horsepower and utterly reliable and incredibly efficient. We can adapt to it, or we can fall behind, again. My Toyota Van with a 3.6 Liter engine turns out just over half of that Nissan engine.

So we generally speaking, are in favor of trade. We are in favor of trade with economic equals, which Mexico is not by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[SavannahMann]

When we are talking about politics, which is first and foremost a popularity contest, telling the people you expect to vote for you that they suck and are idiots is not a way to win. It is a way to lose.

The problem is - the Dems are being honest. They have an ingrained disdain for all who don't march in lock step.
The left has gone from 'dissent is patriotic' during the Bush years to 'dissent is racist' during the Obama years to 'if you don't dissent, you are deplorable.

You need the votes, and insulting those voters is not the way to go. They aren’t voting against their own interests, the problem is you aren’t representing those interests. It isn’t enough to suck less than the Republicans. You have to be better than the Republicans, and you have to represent the voters.

I, too, am a long time Democrat - my turn away from the 'Party' began with Bill Clinton. The Dems no longer can accept the legitimacy of interests that don't mirror their own. There's an 'elite nobelism' of thought that the leaders cannot hide - they know best what's best for 'us' the little, stupid, self-defeating people.

I prefer it stay out in the open.

Under Clinton I was against NAFTA, but in favor of Welfare reform. I was no fan of the Brady Law, but was pleased that it had a sunset date. I did not care that he got a hummer from Monica, but was disappointed that he lied about it.

What bothered me most during the Clinton years, was Hillary. I noticed a pattern with her. She would do something stupid, lie about it, and then when the lie was exposed, decide that it was just old news, and nobody cared.

I agreed with pulling the troops out of Somalia. It was a cesspool that had only one outcome if we stayed, Quagmire. We shouldn’t have gone in to begin with. The military is not a humanitarian organization. It is intended to kill people and break things.

I am one of the last fans of Carter. I admired his honor, and leadership. When we were in the energy crisis, he didn’t say do this, he did it too. He stood in the parking lot of Three Mile Island while it was in danger of exploding, and he gave us hope. Desert One was a debacle, but I can’t blame him for that. He approved the plan presented by the Military. Now, we don’t expect our President’s to be Napoleon, some great general or something like that. We expect them to pick good people, and give general guidance about how much we are willing to do. The Military screwed up, because everyone wanted a piece of the raid, and it became a schoolyard game where everyone had to play.

Carter acted upon the best advice from the Joint Chiefs. They screwed it up, and they told Carter it was the best plan. It was an overly complicated monster, and was doomed to failure before it began. We use it as an example of what NOT to do these days. We embraced the idea of KISS. Keep It Simple Stupid.

Reagan did some good things. Bush 41 wasn’t the unmitigated disaster that he is made out to be. W could have been a lot better, and a lot worse. Obama could have done some things a little different if I’d had my druthers.

Hillary was never a good choice. Not for the party, nor the nation. I have no heartburn with a Female President. I thought Hillary was a bad choice. I would not vote for Hillary no matter what gender, or race she was.

 

[SeaGal]

I really liked Jimmy Carter also, campaigned for him, received an invitation to a couple of inaugural events - but didn't like him well enough as president to vote for him the second time around. I pretty much agree with your other assessments - tho' Clinton, Bill always seemed 'scummy' to me. Maybe it's because I am a woman and 'sensed' the predator in him. Don't know.

We're in complete agreement on Hillary.