Then why did Clintonism fail to work for anyone who who didn't have Bill Clinton with them? If it was about his beliefs, why didn't those beliefs continue to resonate?
Then why did Clintonism fail to work for anyone who who didn't have Bill Clinton with them? If it was about his beliefs, why didn't those beliefs continue to resonate?
Democrats have two big problems with swing voters. Well, three, but two are self-inflicted. The first one is that they are explicitly race-conscious. Biden's up-front announcement that he would appoint a black woman to SCOTUS is an example. That creates a question in some voter's minds: is the appointee the best person for the seat at that particular time, or is she being appointed because she is black and has the right political views? Dems talk about race, ethnicity and sexual orientation as if it is relevant to the job--they tend to lead the candidate descriptions with 'the first woman," the first openly lesbian..." etc. It is annoying and counterproductive. They don't need to change who they nominate--but they should not add a candidates minority status to the list of reasons voters should support the candidate. When Republicans choose a minority, they just choose and let the choice speak for itself.
The second thing they do is let the progressive wing of the party push them around. The left wing of the Democratic party is simply not popular enough with the electorate to carry statewide or national races. I don't know why the forgive student loans crowd can't understand that when you are only 30% of the Dem coalition, you aren't going to get your way.
The third thing isn't self inflicted---it's the Fox and Facebook effect. The left doesn't have the equivalent media ecosystem. Some Dems get it and will engage with Fox, but a lot of them refuse to and that hurts them. Showing up on Fox where conservative voters can see your face, hear you talk, and assess you for themselves is really important.
Perhaps when nominating/electing women, ethnic & religious minorities, and LGBTQ people becomes so frequent that it's normal, we can stop saying "first woman," etc. But until then, it DOES MATTER when someone breaks those barriers - and it should be celebrated.
How many people voted for Obama because of his policies?
"When Republicans choose a minority, they just choose and let the choice speak for itself."
Other than the times they don't, like when Reagan promised to nominate the first female SC Justice during his first campaign. So many of the things people point to as stuff Democrats do "wrong" are actually just things that Democrats get flak for while Republicans get a pass.
There's long been a double standard with this kind of thing. Since probably the 70s, Dems are the expected "baseline" for conduct and behavior by the media while Republicans get plaudits for there "good choices" which aren't even a peep in a Dem admin.
Partly because the Clinton era saw the culmination of the GOPтАЩs long project of using race and abortion as wedges to break up what was left of the New Deal coalition, and partly because the remainder of the Democratic base that didnтАЩt outright switch parties was simply uncomfortable with how conservative Clinton was and didnтАЩt embrace it. Bernie never couldтАЩve attacked Obama as hard as he did from the left тАФ the idea that Hillary was a Trojan horse for her husband (along with more than a few cherry picked video clips where she went along with his positions) was a major animating force behind the Bernie Bros in 2016. I, as a Clinton Democrat sitting out at the centrist edge of the current Dem base, was constantly having to remind the Bernie Bros I knew that Hillary isnтАЩt Bill, and point out she was a lot more liberal than Bill. By most metrics on her Senate voting record, she was one of the most liberal Senators other than Bernie throughout her time there. More so than Obama.
Combination of the Republican parties deal with the devil with the Falwell's coming due, nativist backlash to immigration generally (let alone reform), changing economics generally, and a (general) national lack-of-purpose post Cold War where we had no other great "forcing function" pushing the nation one way or another. Just making money for the sake of making money is fun for a little while but people grow bored with it rapidly, which is why Clintonism had short coattails ultimately
Then why did Clintonism fail to work for anyone who who didn't have Bill Clinton with them? If it was about his beliefs, why didn't those beliefs continue to resonate?
Obama's policies were pretty Clintonian.
Democrats have two big problems with swing voters. Well, three, but two are self-inflicted. The first one is that they are explicitly race-conscious. Biden's up-front announcement that he would appoint a black woman to SCOTUS is an example. That creates a question in some voter's minds: is the appointee the best person for the seat at that particular time, or is she being appointed because she is black and has the right political views? Dems talk about race, ethnicity and sexual orientation as if it is relevant to the job--they tend to lead the candidate descriptions with 'the first woman," the first openly lesbian..." etc. It is annoying and counterproductive. They don't need to change who they nominate--but they should not add a candidates minority status to the list of reasons voters should support the candidate. When Republicans choose a minority, they just choose and let the choice speak for itself.
The second thing they do is let the progressive wing of the party push them around. The left wing of the Democratic party is simply not popular enough with the electorate to carry statewide or national races. I don't know why the forgive student loans crowd can't understand that when you are only 30% of the Dem coalition, you aren't going to get your way.
The third thing isn't self inflicted---it's the Fox and Facebook effect. The left doesn't have the equivalent media ecosystem. Some Dems get it and will engage with Fox, but a lot of them refuse to and that hurts them. Showing up on Fox where conservative voters can see your face, hear you talk, and assess you for themselves is really important.
Perhaps when nominating/electing women, ethnic & religious minorities, and LGBTQ people becomes so frequent that it's normal, we can stop saying "first woman," etc. But until then, it DOES MATTER when someone breaks those barriers - and it should be celebrated.
"Obama's policies were pretty Clintonian."
How many people voted for Obama because of his policies?
"When Republicans choose a minority, they just choose and let the choice speak for itself."
Other than the times they don't, like when Reagan promised to nominate the first female SC Justice during his first campaign. So many of the things people point to as stuff Democrats do "wrong" are actually just things that Democrats get flak for while Republicans get a pass.
There's long been a double standard with this kind of thing. Since probably the 70s, Dems are the expected "baseline" for conduct and behavior by the media while Republicans get plaudits for there "good choices" which aren't even a peep in a Dem admin.
Partly because the Clinton era saw the culmination of the GOPтАЩs long project of using race and abortion as wedges to break up what was left of the New Deal coalition, and partly because the remainder of the Democratic base that didnтАЩt outright switch parties was simply uncomfortable with how conservative Clinton was and didnтАЩt embrace it. Bernie never couldтАЩve attacked Obama as hard as he did from the left тАФ the idea that Hillary was a Trojan horse for her husband (along with more than a few cherry picked video clips where she went along with his positions) was a major animating force behind the Bernie Bros in 2016. I, as a Clinton Democrat sitting out at the centrist edge of the current Dem base, was constantly having to remind the Bernie Bros I knew that Hillary isnтАЩt Bill, and point out she was a lot more liberal than Bill. By most metrics on her Senate voting record, she was one of the most liberal Senators other than Bernie throughout her time there. More so than Obama.
Combination of the Republican parties deal with the devil with the Falwell's coming due, nativist backlash to immigration generally (let alone reform), changing economics generally, and a (general) national lack-of-purpose post Cold War where we had no other great "forcing function" pushing the nation one way or another. Just making money for the sake of making money is fun for a little while but people grow bored with it rapidly, which is why Clintonism had short coattails ultimately