What happens to the Democratic Party now? (4 Viewers)

[Heathen]

I’m sure much of us are having 2016 flashbacks this morning with a sick feeling to our stomachs..

2 of the last 3 elections Democrats have lost to a far right demagogue

Harris didn’t get close in many states to even Biden’s performance. We could very well lose the Presidency, Senate AND House depending on results the next few days…..

What went wrong?
What could’ve been done better?
What can we change in the future to ensure voters are motivated like they were when Obama was elected?

Democrats have no choice but to admit there’s a huge problem with some aspect of their platform— and to do a deep introspection of what’s going wrong..

 

[Heathen]

Which has really nothing to do with the story. She voted for her self-interest over the good of her constituents. It wasn’t due to some political ideology. It was greed. IMO, you’re seeing what you want to see here.

It has everything to do with the story.

Any Democrat who votes to clearly and significantly weaken worker rights in any capacity and align with the GOP instead is a liability to the party.

It's very odd that you proclaim that this is all self-interest and has nothing to do with political position when Raybould literally outlines her political thought process for voting this way in the article. She (paraphrasing) said that she's concerned that the measure isn't practical in creating balanced policy and could threaten business viability.

 

[Heathen]

"increasingly untenable liability" - Is it, though, in a state like Nebraska? I haven't followed the story, so maybe she's facing intense backlash locally, but I think it still gets downplayed just how much the battleground for Democrats varies greatly depending on location. Far less so for Republicans. That's going to present a lot of conflicting policy positions, and differing political vulnerability, across the country.

Bernie Sanders wouldn't be able to win a statewide election in Louisiana. John Bel Edwards did. Somehow, Democrats have to figure out how to work more successfully with the much more complicated political realities they face.

I do think that leading much more strongly with working class economics has to be the path forward, but that's still going to be complicated by a wide mix of special interests needing to be heard and represented.

I'm not defending Raybould's vote on merit.

Yes, it is IMO.

In this specific example, she could have been the one to keep the bill from advancing, joining 14 other Democrats in the state. Seems they were all able to vote in favor of this without fear of reprieve.

If anything, the vulnerability for Raybould may come from the opposite way (Democrat voters).

 

[MT15]

It has everything to do with the story.

Any Democrat who votes to clearly and significantly weaken worker rights in any capacity and align with the GOP instead is a liability to the party.

It's very odd that you proclaim that this is all self-interest and has nothing to do with political position when Raybould literally outlines her political thought process for voting this way in the article. She (paraphrasing) said that she's concerned that the measure isn't practical in creating balanced policy and could threaten business viability.

That sounds like a thinly veiled excuse for self-interest, at least to me.

I know we differ on ideological purity. Edit: I think I misread Heathen’s post.

I won’t pretend to know the ins and outs of this particular bill. But I have seen legislation from either side of the aisle do more harm than good in the past. It’s not always clear in the moment what the consequences of a particular bill will be.

 

[Incumbent]

Yes, it is IMO.

In this specific example, she could have been the one to keep the bill from advancing, joining 14 other Democrats in the state. Seems they were all able to vote in favor of this without fear of reprieve.

If anything, the vulnerability for Raybould may come from the opposite way (Democrat voters).

Again, I'm not defending her vote. I responded to your comment that centrism is an "untenable liability" by noting the complex ideological landscape that Democrats have to operate in.

You used this specific vote to make a broader point, to which I responded.

 

[Heathen]

Again, I'm not defending her vote. I responded to your comment that centrism is an "untenable liability" by noting the complex ideological landscape that Democrats have to operate in.

You used this specific vote to make a broader point, to which I responded.

I suppose that we see the problem differently.

I believe my broader point had some validity to it, especially considering the many instances where we have seen Democrats breaking to side with Republicans on decidedly anti-worker, anti-middle class policy in a time where this is happening faster than can be reasonably undone by future leaders.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Goes to that quote I’ve posted before

People would rather follow someone who is ‘strong but wrong’ vs ‘weak but right’

‘Oh, he’s wrong about everything but dammit is he confident about it!’
=======================


American men are turning away from the Democratic party because they believe their issues are being ignored while also being in a “no-win” situation about the meaning of modern masculinity, new research has found.

Hot-button topics, such as economic anxiety in combination with uncertainty over cultural issues, have led to a crisis among male voters, according to a study carried out by the SAM project (Speaking with American Men).

It was previously reported that Democrats have spent $20 million on the project, with donors and strategists being holed up in luxury hotel rooms brainstorming how to convince working-class men to return to the party.

The SAM project aims to “study the syntax, language and content that gains attention and virality in these spaces.”

Preliminary results, shared with Politico, show that “Democrats are seen as weak, whereas Republicans are seen as strong,” according to Ilyse Hogue, co-founder of the SAM project……..

Men say Democrats ignore their issues and muddle the definition of being a ‘man’

Hot-button topics like economic anxiety in combination with uncertainty over cultural issues have led to a crisis within male voters, according to the SAM project

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Dragon]

Goes to that quote I’ve posted before

People would rather follow someone who is ‘strong but wrong’ vs ‘weak but right’

‘Oh, he’s wrong about everything but dammit is he confident about it!’
=======================


American men are turning away from the Democratic party because they believe their issues are being ignored while also being in a “no-win” situation about the meaning of modern masculinity, new research has found.

Hot-button topics, such as economic anxiety in combination with uncertainty over cultural issues, have led to a crisis among male voters, according to a study carried out by the SAM project (Speaking with American Men).

It was previously reported that Democrats have spent $20 million on the project, with donors and strategists being holed up in luxury hotel rooms brainstorming how to convince working-class men to return to the party.

The SAM project aims to “study the syntax, language and content that gains attention and virality in these spaces.”

Preliminary results, shared with Politico, show that “Democrats are seen as weak, whereas Republicans are seen as strong,” according to Ilyse Hogue, co-founder of the SAM project……..

Men say Democrats ignore their issues and muddle the definition of being a ‘man’

Hot-button topics like economic anxiety in combination with uncertainty over cultural issues have led to a crisis within male voters, according to the SAM project

www.independent.co.uk

The real question we need to ask isn’t just why some American men are turning away from the Democratic Party—but what they perceive as strength and weakness in the first place. Is “strength” defined by dominance, control, and traditional gender roles? And is “weakness” seen as collaboration, inclusiveness, or acknowledging the struggles of others—especially women and marginalized communities?

For generations, being a white male in America came with an invisible head start. Now that women are excelling in education, people of color are demanding equity, and long-overdue conversations about gender, race, and identity are finally happening, some men see this shift not as progress—but as a personal loss. That’s the heart of the issue: how do you convince those who have long benefited from unacknowledged privilege that equality isn’t a threat, but a necessary correction? That sharing opportunity isn’t the same as losing it?

There’s no doubt that many men—especially working-class men—face real struggles: economic insecurity, mental health crises, a loss of identity in a changing job market. But instead of addressing those issues with compassion and policy, Republicans offer them the illusion of strength through grievance politics: blame immigrants, mock “wokeness,” attack women’s rights. It’s empty, but emotionally potent. Meanwhile, Democrats need to get better at telling a story that includes men in the vision of a just, modern society—not by pandering to outdated ideals of masculinity, but by showing that dignity, purpose, and strength can coexist with fairness, empathy, and progress.

The real cultural reckoning isn’t about whether men have a place. It’s about what kind of men our society values—and what kind of people we all aspire to be.

 

[t_rav_82]

Goes to that quote I’ve posted before

People would rather follow someone who is ‘strong but wrong’ vs ‘weak but right’

‘Oh, he’s wrong about everything but dammit is he confident about it!’
=======================


American men are turning away from the Democratic party because they believe their issues are being ignored while also being in a “no-win” situation about the meaning of modern masculinity, new research has found.

Hot-button topics, such as economic anxiety in combination with uncertainty over cultural issues, have led to a crisis among male voters, according to a study carried out by the SAM project (Speaking with American Men).

It was previously reported that Democrats have spent $20 million on the project, with donors and strategists being holed up in luxury hotel rooms brainstorming how to convince working-class men to return to the party.

The SAM project aims to “study the syntax, language and content that gains attention and virality in these spaces.”

Preliminary results, shared with Politico, show that “Democrats are seen as weak, whereas Republicans are seen as strong,” according to Ilyse Hogue, co-founder of the SAM project……..

Men say Democrats ignore their issues and muddle the definition of being a ‘man’

Hot-button topics like economic anxiety in combination with uncertainty over cultural issues have led to a crisis within male voters, according to the SAM project

www.independent.co.uk

how does that square with taco trump.... who's wrong and weak? More facetious than a real question.

 

[MT15]

Yeah, I truly don’t get how people think he’s strong. He’s a weak little man. Nothing but a tin pot bully who always punches down.

 

[bird]

Basically the whole masculinity/young men 18-29 supporting Trump is not and never has been directly about politics. It is about a toxic society that is, rather, was, undergoing tectonic upheaval. It is about not being allowed to be a bag of d!cks. The maturation of men lags behind women, imo. That doesn’t mean that women can be as childishly stupid as men (see: Boebert, Blackburn, Ernst and Empty Greene) as they certainly can be. Imo, it means men must learn which includes being taught not to be bags of d!cks. They just don’t like it.

 

[Neworleansfan]

This is a shocker.

Karine Jean-Pierre, Biden’s former press secretary, says she’s now an independent | CNN Politics

Karine Jean-Pierre, who served as White House press secretary under former President Joe Biden, has switched her party affiliation to independent, according to a publishing company’s description of her forthcoming book.

www.cnn.com

 

[bird]

This is a shocker.

Karine Jean-Pierre, Biden’s former press secretary, says she’s now an independent | CNN Politics

Karine Jean-Pierre, who served as White House press secretary under former President Joe Biden, has switched her party affiliation to independent, according to a publishing company’s description of her forthcoming book.

www.cnn.com

Grifting.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

This is a shocker.

Karine Jean-Pierre, Biden’s former press secretary, says she’s now an independent | CNN Politics

Karine Jean-Pierre, who served as White House press secretary under former President Joe Biden, has switched her party affiliation to independent, according to a publishing company’s description of her forthcoming book.

www.cnn.com

Blind loyalty to Biden. Shame.

 

[MT15]

Blind loyalty to Biden. Shame.

Is that true? I had the impression she was peddling a tell-all book about the period between the debate and when Biden dropped out of the race. I didn’t think Biden was happy about it. I could be wrong though.

 

[Optimus Prime]

how does that square with taco trump.... who's wrong and weak? More facetious than a real question.

Yeah, I truly don’t get how people think he’s strong. He’s a weak little man. Nothing but a tin pot bully who always punches down.

That’s it exactly

He sounds strong, talks tough

And they like it

They like the bullying, they like the talking down, the like the punching down

They like that he can say and do whatever and get away with it Scot free

Trump is aspirational to them

Rich, say what you want, do what you want, face zero real consequences

 

[Rysilk]

Basically the whole masculinity/young men 18-29 supporting Trump is not and never has been directly about politics. It is about a toxic society that is, rather, was, undergoing tectonic upheaval. It is about not being allowed to be a bag of d!cks. The maturation of men lags behind women, imo. That doesn’t mean that women can be as childishly stupid as men (see: Boebert, Blackburn, Ernst and Empty Greene) as they certainly can be. Imo, it means men must learn which includes being taught not to be bags of d!cks. They just don’t like it.

Or, maybe calling that group of people evil, heartless, dicks for 8 years and then acting shocked why you didn't get their vote had something to do with it.

I'm all for getting rid of toxic masculinity. The culture of the Trumps and Tates are extreme and don't belong IMO. But the democratic party didn't stop there. They just lumped all straight white men into the bag of evil and the cause of every problem in the world, and as a straight white man if you didn't bow down and capitulate to every other category and spend six hours a day screaming into the void about how sorry you were that you were evil, then you were called hitler. And then, the party turned around and acted shocked that they didn't get the vote.

We need to stop the pendulum. Group A were downtrodden, it was a travesty, so I know! Let's beat Group B into a bloody pulp to make Group A feel better, that will fix it! Wait, why did Group A not vote for us?

I don't mean not to acknowledge the travesties of the past, nor to ignore them. I'd rather balance the see-saw without going up and down for 1000 years first. To be fair, maybe the Democrats don't really want the straight white vote. That group in 100 years won't be a majority, so if you are ok waiting that long then I guess the current strategy will work.

These young men 18-29 were beaten daily and yes, they horrifically turned to an idiot. But when your husband beats the shirt out of you every day for 8 years, you are going to latch on to the first person that treats you nice, even if they lie to you. Or, they won't latch onto anyone which is why turnout was so low.

I know it doesn't sound like it, but I am agreeing with most of what you are trying to say. We need to get the turnout back up and to bring some of that 18-29 male group back over to the Democrats. But screaming at them calling them idiots is not the way to do it.

I guess a better analogy is one that is near to me. My son is now 21. When I was a kid, school came easy to me. I didn't have to work too hard at it. Honors program, etc. Starting about 7th grade, my oldest son started losing interest in school. Would just not turn in homework, was a horrible test-taker, etc. I didn't or couldn't fathom it. We had a horrible relationship for about 4 years, with me yelling at him, and telling him he wasn't trying hard enough. Then he started getting into fixing things. Me, I could change a light bulb but that was about it. He just "got it". I realized that my path wasn't his path, and accepted his way was a bit different. He still didn't do the greatest in school, but he got into a technical program with a local steel mill. They paid for him to go to college, with the promise of an electrical maintenance job afterwards. He finished this year, and is now full time, making six figures with no college debt. At 21, he will be putting down a down payment on a house in 3 months. 3 bedrooms 2 baths. And we get along great. Ironically while I tend to vote Democrat he is a Republican.

So calling someone an idiot or a dick and beating them into submission until they "see it your way" is going to do nothing. Respectfully Mr. bird. If the democrats want to gain voters, they can't play the game the same way the Republicans do.

 

[RobF]

Or, maybe calling that group of people evil, heartless, dicks for 8 years and then acting shocked why you didn't get their vote had something to do with it.

I'm all for getting rid of toxic masculinity. The culture of the Trumps and Tates are extreme and don't belong IMO. But the democratic party didn't stop there. They just lumped all straight white men into the bag of evil and the cause of every problem in the world I'm going to have to ask, and as a straight white man if you didn't bow down and capitulate to every other category and spend six hours a day screaming into the void about how sorry you were that you were evil, then you were called hitler. And then, the party turned around and acted shocked that they didn't get the vote.

Please give a few specific examples of the Democratic party lumping "all straight white men into the bag of evil and the cause of every problem in the world" and then going on to call them "hitler" for not spending "six hours a day screaming into the void about how sorry they were".

I appreciate you're being hyperbolic, so they don't have to be literal examples, but, you know, specific words and actions to that actual effect.

And the reason I ask this is because, as a straight white guy, I don't see it. Like, at all.

I do see lots of rhetoric claiming it's being done, but it's literally all conflating general - and, crucially, accurate - observations about the historical and continuing dominance of straight white men in general and the discrimination perpetuated under them with the incorrect premise that making that observation necessitates an assertion that every single individual straight white man did it.

Or it's noting current inequality, and proposing measures to help address it by ensuring wider opportunities for all groups, and this is being wrongly conflated with the notion of attacking straight white men.

Or it's conflating the notion of "toxic masculinity" with the premise that "all masculinity is toxic", as if commenting on "tall women" would mean all women are tall. I appreciate you're not doing that one though.

And the reason this is important, is, what are you actually asking for here? Because if what they're doing is actually observing historical wrongs, and continuing inequality, and attempting to address it, but this is being equated with "calling all straight white men evil" and they need to stop doing it, then what you'd actually be asking for is for the party to stop noting historical wrongs and ignore continuing inequality.

And that would be bad.

 

[Rysilk]

Please give a few specific examples of the Democratic party lumping "all straight white men into the bag of evil and the cause of every problem in the world" and then going on to call them "hitler" for not spending "six hours a day screaming into the void about how sorry they were".

I appreciate you're being hyperbolic, so they don't have to be literal examples, but, you know, specific words and actions to that actual effect.

And the reason I ask this is because, as a straight white guy, I don't see it. Like, at all.

I do see lots of rhetoric claiming it's being done, but it's literally all conflating general - and, crucially, accurate - observations about the historical and continuing dominance of straight white men in general and the discrimination perpetuated under them with the incorrect premise that making that observation necessitates an assertion that every single individual straight white man did it.

Or it's noting current inequality, and proposing measures to help address it by ensuring wider opportunities for all groups, and this is being wrongly conflated with the notion of attacking straight white men.

Or it's conflating the notion of "toxic masculinity" with the premise that "all masculinity is toxic", as if commenting on "tall women" would mean all women are tall. I appreciate you're not doing that one though.

And the reason this is important, is, what are you actually asking for here? Because if what they're doing is actually observing historical wrongs, and continuing inequality, and attempting to address it, but this is being equated with "calling all single white men evil" and they need to stop doing it, then what you'd actually be asking for is for the party to stop noting historical wrongs and ignore continuing inequality.

And that would be bad.

You make some good points, and yes, I was being a bit hyperbolic in some of my musings. 100%. But can we stop separating the base and the party? We don't let the Republicans separate, so let's not put different rules to each party.

As for what I am asking for, is for the democrat party and it's base to not jump on every single thing as an example of white supremacy, or try to segregate. Yes. the Republicans are going to continue to lie, to trick, and sometimes downright bully and be racist. And no, I don't want to ignore continuing inequlity. Keep pointing it out. But not by bashing and stretching the truth as well. Sometimes when a black person kills a white person, the color of their skin has nothing to do with it. Sometimes when a white person kills a black person the color of the skin has nothing to do with it.

Not everything that happens in this world is an example of injustice, racism, bigotry, or hate. Sometimes shirt just happens. Not everything a Democrat does is DEI. Not everything a Democrat does is reverse racism. Not everything a Republican does is racist, Not everything Trump does is evil or moronic. A lot of it is, to be sure. But we don't treat things on a sliding scale anymore. If Trump walks a bit funny, we treat that exactly with the same hyperbole as him trying to end democracy. It's tiresome. It was tiresome when Republicans did that with everything Biden did.

I guess at the end of the day I want one party to try and be level headed about everything, and not cry out that the world is ending every single day. And I just see the Democrats as the most likely party to do that. It's just that from my perspective, and yes, it's just my perspective, is that the Democrats, albeit more slowly, are merely just jumping down the same tunnel as the REpublicans. Not in terms of racism, or bigotry, but in actions and reactions and political games. Stupid things like couch stories or "boy he's wierd". That;s shirt the REpublicans do. I voted for Bill Clinton, then Bush, then Obama the 2nd term, then 3rd party, then abstained, then Harris. I am more in the middle, or at least that's my mirror I think I am looking at. And sometimes it's a bit humorous when you sit in the middle you can kind of notice things that neither party notice about themselves. No I am not doing a "both sides". I wouldn't dream of it, because yes, one side is DEMONSTRABLY worse right now. But that doesn't matter. Let the Trumpists and the Magas keep making fools of themselves. Fight the Overton window.

I really don't want to get too much more argumentative about this, it's mostly my problem and the way I see things. I just desparately want a political party that isn't satisfied with just "Well we aren't as bad as them" in terms of trying to get my vote.