From Sam Kahn's excellent piece:
"but something significant seems to have happened on the left, a distancing from extreme progressivist positions, a sort of note-to-self that elections, in the end, are won by retail politics and by appealing to voters who want stability, who are not fundamentally ideological."
"but something significant seems to have happened on the left, a distancing from extreme progressivist positions, a sort of note-to-self that elections, in the end, are won by retail politics and by appealing to voters who want stability, who are not fundamentally ideological."
As someone who has lived in Texas the past 45 years, I have always described myself as a proud bleeding-heart liberal to conservative friends I've made here. But I have absolutely come to abhor the extreme Progressive wing of the party, with their all-or-nothing attitudes, their over-abundance of wokeness to an absurd degree, and their utter lack of political intelligence.
They have always shielded themselves from accountability for lost majorities by claiming it was because the democrats didn't go far enough, never able to see that while most of them live in progressively-safe districts, the majority of office holders within the Democratic Party do not.
I hope with all my heart that you are right about the distancing, but my intellect tells me you're not. We will continue to go through this, along with every demographic within the party believing that "the Democrats wouldn't have won without us" - be it the progressives, the blacks, or the young, always threatening to "sit this one out" if they don't get everything they want.
A white, middle-class boomer who embraces diversity in our party, but abhors the constant threats - the truth remains that we win elections because of ALL of us, and if you are one who thinks your group should stay home - good luck with what results, because it's more likely to impact you negatively than it will most of us moderates.
Consider the source, etc, but I'm amused by how I could have wrote the thing for him -- you see, the Democrats weren't progressive enough. They ran those pro-police ads, and they failed to go all in on Mandela Barnes. It's so predictable.
Meanwhile, the other side's doing it too. I also read a piece in a Claremont Institute website (shudder) that argued that the Republicans didn't do as well as expected because the populist conservatives were betrayed and undermined by the Republican establishment, which doesn't really want to win if they can't control and neuter the populists.
Amen. A simple proposition is that you don’t get to do the things / enact the policies you want unless and until your team wins enough elections to make that happen. Let the Republicans be the party of performative stupidity (which they are better at anyway). People by and large don’t want “transformative change.” They want things to be better than they presently are. When you have a narrow majority, don’t overreach. Don’t waste time with massive omnibus bills that are easy to parody and oppose. Take the parts that are broadly popular and try to pass those. You probably lose a lot of those, but you’ve made the other team be the bad guys who voted down specific things most people want (and left a record of their opposition). That will do more to help win more elections the next time than shooting for the moon and falling (which just makes your side look weak and out of touch). Let the Republicans be the party of performative jerks in disarray.
I've seen this before back in the 60s when the anti-war kids turned into flat-out communists or anarchists, and were shocked that most people despised them. Infected the D party a little when they went gaga for McCarthy and McGovern (though he was reasonably sane), and Ds lost. The problem is the stakes are higher now to have these shenanigans.
Three cheers to you!! We agree and thank you. We believe the vast majority of us live among friends, families & acquaintances of both different political stripes and of little interest in policy positions. Large numbers have become so afraid of making others angry that conversations have become mild vanilla in order to keep friends. IMHO if these midterms can lower the heat from both ends, we will all become more easy with each other.
From Sam Kahn's excellent piece:
"but something significant seems to have happened on the left, a distancing from extreme progressivist positions, a sort of note-to-self that elections, in the end, are won by retail politics and by appealing to voters who want stability, who are not fundamentally ideological."
As someone who has lived in Texas the past 45 years, I have always described myself as a proud bleeding-heart liberal to conservative friends I've made here. But I have absolutely come to abhor the extreme Progressive wing of the party, with their all-or-nothing attitudes, their over-abundance of wokeness to an absurd degree, and their utter lack of political intelligence.
They have always shielded themselves from accountability for lost majorities by claiming it was because the democrats didn't go far enough, never able to see that while most of them live in progressively-safe districts, the majority of office holders within the Democratic Party do not.
I hope with all my heart that you are right about the distancing, but my intellect tells me you're not. We will continue to go through this, along with every demographic within the party believing that "the Democrats wouldn't have won without us" - be it the progressives, the blacks, or the young, always threatening to "sit this one out" if they don't get everything they want.
A white, middle-class boomer who embraces diversity in our party, but abhors the constant threats - the truth remains that we win elections because of ALL of us, and if you are one who thinks your group should stay home - good luck with what results, because it's more likely to impact you negatively than it will most of us moderates.
"We will continue to go through this, along with every demographic within the party believing that 'the Democrats wouldn't have won without us'. "
Yes, yes, indeed. In my internet wanderings this morning, I read a piece that made exactly that argument. https://inthesetimes.com/article/how-the-democrats-won-and-lost-the-2022-midterms
Consider the source, etc, but I'm amused by how I could have wrote the thing for him -- you see, the Democrats weren't progressive enough. They ran those pro-police ads, and they failed to go all in on Mandela Barnes. It's so predictable.
Meanwhile, the other side's doing it too. I also read a piece in a Claremont Institute website (shudder) that argued that the Republicans didn't do as well as expected because the populist conservatives were betrayed and undermined by the Republican establishment, which doesn't really want to win if they can't control and neuter the populists.
It is always someone else's fault that you did not win or did not win bigger and it is all due to you when they do win or win bigger.
It's amazing how that happens.
Amen. A simple proposition is that you don’t get to do the things / enact the policies you want unless and until your team wins enough elections to make that happen. Let the Republicans be the party of performative stupidity (which they are better at anyway). People by and large don’t want “transformative change.” They want things to be better than they presently are. When you have a narrow majority, don’t overreach. Don’t waste time with massive omnibus bills that are easy to parody and oppose. Take the parts that are broadly popular and try to pass those. You probably lose a lot of those, but you’ve made the other team be the bad guys who voted down specific things most people want (and left a record of their opposition). That will do more to help win more elections the next time than shooting for the moon and falling (which just makes your side look weak and out of touch). Let the Republicans be the party of performative jerks in disarray.
I've seen this before back in the 60s when the anti-war kids turned into flat-out communists or anarchists, and were shocked that most people despised them. Infected the D party a little when they went gaga for McCarthy and McGovern (though he was reasonably sane), and Ds lost. The problem is the stakes are higher now to have these shenanigans.
"But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain't gonna make with anyone anyhow"
"You know it's gonna be
Allright"
And didn’t you just love it seeing some of those former Anti-War Hippies turning into corporate CEOs 25 years later!
and MAGA loving asshats as well.
And probably treating employees like s**t.
Three cheers to you!! We agree and thank you. We believe the vast majority of us live among friends, families & acquaintances of both different political stripes and of little interest in policy positions. Large numbers have become so afraid of making others angry that conversations have become mild vanilla in order to keep friends. IMHO if these midterms can lower the heat from both ends, we will all become more easy with each other.
SallyJones
Well said.
See "Bernie Bro" for evidence of your hypothesis.