Re: Immigration
 

This reminds me, and not in a good way, of an anecdote from All The President's Men that Deep Throat tells Bob Woodward:

I was at a party once, and, uh, Liddy put his hand over a candle, and he kept it there. He kept it right in the flame until his flesh was burned. Somebody said, “What’s the trick?” And Liddy said, “The trick is not minding.”

Re: Immigration
 

Bullshit. If you don't think they didn't know exactly what the Republicans were doing, you're crazy. Republicans sure do want to appeal to a broader audience (which obviously includes the Latino vote going forward), but they don't want to take a stand on it. Ever.

Dragging this shit out for 2 weeks yields fucking nothing other than "Dems shut down government for foreigners," which is all that fits in the minds of our dumbass electorate.

What? Losing what? They aren't in a position to force anything. We lost when we lost control of all branches of government. There is no winning. There is only framing this as something the Republicans are doing, because that's the truth. And you and all the other Dems acting like Schumer is fucking it up are muddying that message.

Bullshit.

I'm so fucking sick of this bullshit.

There IS no easy fix for this. Being a Democrat and building means different things to different people. Having a single, clear message that works for union workers in PA, solar panel installers in CA, and miners in NM is impossible. It's not as easy as "Hate the Other and NO to taxes." When the message is complex it necessarily cannot please everyone. This constant criticism of the Democratic Party for not just coming up with a clear message is fucking stupid. If it were so easy, we'd have had 100 suggestions by now, wouldn't we?

The mission right now is to remove the assholes from office who are destroying this country. I'm not sure it gets any more straightforward than that. And if you (the general "you") can't get behind that, then you're an asshole.

TM

Re: Immigration
 

I still think when the serious history book is written, Bernie will have been the ultimate deciding factor. He was Trump’s co-cheerleader for populism. And populism turned the Democratic blue collar vote in the Rust Belt for Trump (because those folks liked Bernie’s candor, but couldn’t vote for a “communist.”)

Re: Immigration
 

You’ve never tried a case. The hardest thing for anyone to do is satisfy the common man.

And yet, if you want to win, keeping it simple for the stupid is not optional.

This is Idiocracy (and I’m not talking solely about the right). Play to the lowest common denominator or don’t play.

I don’t like it. I fucking hate it. But that’s the reality. Complex messages fail.

Re: Immigration
 

I'm not arguing with any of this. I'm saying no such message exists.

TM

Re: Immigration
 

I think it’s doable. A daring Democrat could argue, “What’s wrong with a European social state? Why shouldn’t we strive for that?”

That argument could work. But I think Democrats wrongly see it as a doomed strategy.

Re: Immigration
 

That is a very complex message to our electorate who you apparently think has even the slightest understanding of what a European social state is.

TM

Re: Immigration
 

Make it even simpler.

“More benefits, expanded safety nets, guaranteed retirement income and health care security.”

Re: Immigration
 

I think that when the serious history book is written, zoning decisions and parking-space requirements will have been the ultimate deciding factor.

The awesome thing about such a close election is that everyone gets to pick the thing that most interests them and explain that it was the critical factor.

Re: Immigration
 

Many Democrats, and their financial backers, don't want that. Especially if you call it "socialism."

But "we stand with the Dreamers" is a pretty simple message.

Re: Immigration
 

I think this is right.

A big question is why did he get away with it? Why did his message resonate among a certain profile of Democrats (disproportionately young, and among the older ones, overwhelmingly white and male)?

I think there are two main answers: First, he had incredible message discipline, he could say the same simple stupid thing 1000 times and sound sincere the 1001st time. He really dumbed it down. Second, he used his socialism schtick and mass rallies to brand himself as a shiny new penny, even though his core messages were all out of the immediate postwar labor unionist/democratic party playbook. Really, Hubert Humphrey was elected to the Senate on the Bernie platform. I love Hubert, but making him into a shiny new penny took great skill.

Re: Immigration
 

"We stand with the Dreamers" is too narrow. That won't get you enough voters. TM has my proxy on the rest of that issue. He pretty much nailed it.

Regarding financial backers of Democrats, many of whom are also financial backers of Republicans, you're right. They don't like "socialism." But what's the alternative? Oligarchy? Citibank nailed it in that famous 2008 investment paper - "The United States is a Plutocracy."

If we're going to have a society where 1% runs away with everything, another 20% do well, and everybody else just survives, with no retirement savings, we have to have some form of European Socialism. This is a tough argument to make, because people like the Kochs will malign and mischaracterize it, and it's hard to explain the numbers to dipshit American voters on both the right and left.

BUT, one thing we know is, right or left, Americans want their benefits. And they're desperate not to feel insecure about their futures.

So, just say it:

"More benefits, a bigger safety net, and security in terms of income and health care."

Re: Immigration
 

I think variations of this message are always there. But I'm not sure you can run on just this.*

TM

*Although, at this point, who knows?

Re: Immigration
 

Agreed. A couple more to add...

The young love rebels, and they love candor. It's only when you get older that you truly appreciate how much lies are necessary to keep the world running. Bernie Bros also tended to be millennials screwed over by the job market after 2008. Many were flipping a coin: Trump or Bernie.

We've also been in a fuck-the-incumbents moment for a while now, which also reads as fuck-the-dynasties-and-the-pros.

Re: Immigration
 

We all do. But do you not understand that this is a losing message in states that we need to win--especially when it means shutting down the government over it?

TM

Re: Immigration
 

I think the breakdown is generational. If you're old enough to remember the Cold War, "socialism" is basically communism & obviously bad. These kids don't have that baggage & learned how great socialism is in college.

Of course, both groups are wrong.

Re: Immigration
 

It's not enough on its own, but it's a start. The a Dems need more brightline differences from the GOP. "We're not bad like them" isn't usually enough (see, Clinton, H.)

Take "tax reform." The party position was "ours would be better" not this is the wrong priority and we would do X instead. They need to sell what goverment can do for people again, instead of how they're the smart small government party.

Re: Immigration
 

The kids also aren't as invested in the civil rights or feminist movements as the older generation, and while they've seen more immediacy and rapid change in gay rights, folks like Barney Frank don't necessarily reverberate for them.

There is something good about that - they want to take the hard-fought victories for granted and push on sometimes - but there are also all the dangers inherent in forgetting the past, and losing what was won by not valuing it enough.

Re: Immigration
 

I don't think it is, but which states do you have in mind?

Re: Immigration
 

Trump ran on "Every 'True' American Gets a Pony."

Bernie ran on "Everybody Gets a Pony."

If it gets any simpler than that, it's spoken in grunts and clicks.

Re: Immigration
 

This right here is the winning pivot.

Re: Immigration
 

The ones which we lost that contained fairly dependable Democrat-leaning (suburban and ex-urban) districts that flipped. You know, those districts with blue-collar, white working classes that are afraid they're losing their jobs to foreigners who don't actually know any but are susceptible to this kind of race-baiting bullshit. I'm thinking Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, North Carolina, Indiana. You can add Wisconsin and Florida, if you like.

TM

Re: Immigration
 

Bernie fucking lost.

And Trump's message was (and the Republican message, typically, is always) very simple. Republicans vote: I hate coloreds and/or No taxes. So, neither of those examples work to prove your point.

TM

Re: Immigration
 

We aren't winning Florida without strong Latinx support and I'm not sure there's not more fertile ground in California (where 7 Rs hold seats in districts Hillary won), Texas, Arizona and the cities in those states.

Dems cannot win by chasing those blue-collar, white working class votes. They're gone, not least because a Dems can't beat the racism the GOP is willing to throw down.

Re: Immigration
 

Agree (except for Florida, which Dems should always win). But if you don't think those places are set to vote against Republicans already, you're crazy.

You actually are insane. All of the states (other than IN and NC, which each went for Obama in 2008) I named voted for a black man in the previous election cycle. If you think they're lost, you shouldn't be listened to when it comes to politics.

TM

Re: Immigration
 

Sure they can. Kennedy had those votes. Bill Clinton had those votes.

Dems cannot win by chasing votes of people like us (we're a statistical rounding error, mostly in already blue states) and focusing on narrow issues like the Dreamers.

As you said, Dems need to change the conversation from "We're the smart small govt folks" (which reads as, "we're limousine liberals" to low information [read most] voters, right and left) to "We're the big govt party, because we're tackling big issues that require big govt."

ETA: As TM noted, Obama also had those votes (though I doubt he had the truly bigoted white "they tuk ur jobs" votes Trump brought out of the weeds).

Re: Immigration
 

Trump promised "beautiful" health care, and to bring back manufacturing jobs. He was not the typical Republican. He was dog whistles on one side, and "I'll make everything magically perfect when I'm in office" on the other.

Yeah, Bernie lost, but not because of his message. Because he was an irascible old man who was an admitted socialist. His message, populism, is still the soup de jour.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Stay classy, Republicans:

NBC

Re: Immigration
 

We disagree on why Trump won. I think he won (i) because Comey said there were more emails a week before the election and (ii) because of Trump's racism (and sexism). Yes, in some of the states I listed, there were people who actually thought he cared about them. But I think in most cases, the vote cast was, "He cares about me because he clearly hates people who don't look like me. I'm getting my country back."

Clinton's populist message was lost because it was more complicated than Bernie's ("Free everything!") and Trump's (see above). But I can't have a conversation again in which people tell me that coal miners are too dimwitted to care about coal being a dying industry and voting for a guy who thinks they actually clean coal to produce "clean" coal, who says he's going to bring the industry back, over a candidate who wants to actually invest in the future of those communities. If Trump's message wins every time in that scenario, like I said, there's no message that will reach those people other than "We will prop up the coal industry." And no Democrat can send that message and be a viable Democratic candidate.

TM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

JFC. Rosenstein has his shit packed up in a box sitting on his desk, I'm assuming?

This country is fucked.

TM

Re: Immigration
 

We agree on Comey being a huge part of Trump's win. Sans that epic gaffe, Hillary is President. I also think racism and xenophobia were a huge part of it. That got Trump the aggregate vote in places like FL. I just think Bernie put him over the top in the Rust Belt.

But it was a perfect storm. W/O any one of these things, Hillary wins.

On your last point, you may be right. Evidence supports you over me right now. But we need a national rethinking of a lot of things. One of them is whether we're going to be more like Europe, or continue to be a technically dynamic, but brutal, and increasingly oligarchy and criminal, society. Maybe the Dems need to take that message to the streets? Perhaps the answer is to offer the heresy, "Big Gov Now"? It is a simple message.

By the way, coal miners don't want retraining. They want to live as they have. They're unrealistic, deluded. Investing in their communities is a waste. Just give them a more robust safety net. Save the education for their kids, who might wise up and have the good sense to get the fuck out of places like WV.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

If the Democrats take back the House in November, a lot of things will change.

eta: This seems like a really important question: Suppose that Mueller gets fired before November, and/or the investigation is ended by someone senior to him. The Democrats then retake Congress. Can congressional subpoenas obtain the fruits of Mueller's investigations, or can someone at DOJ keep the lid on? It feels to me like that is the constitutional crisis we are heading for, after the one where Mueller gets canned and a GOP Congress doesn't do anything about it.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I am with you. I'm wondering what happens to the evidence Mueller has compiled (I know some of it is being shared with state attorneys general) if he gets fired over the next few months and Trump's hand-picked FBI director takes over.

Also, Hillary better lawyer up for the inevitable never-ending bullshit investigation into her vagina. Can't muddy the waters over corruption without an already accepted hated fall "guy."

TM

Re: Immigration
 

Do you realize the percentage of gov employees who vote D? Your #1 core value is you never spite a gov employee. You really don't know this?

Re: Immigration
 

Working class voters look a lot different than they used to. We aren't going to win West Virginia, which in my youth was about as reliable a Democratic state as there was. The unions are gone and right wing mega-churches have replaced them. But places like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin? Still plenty of winning we can do there. North Carolina and Georgia? They're swinging Blue.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Big question is how much has Mueller shared with some blue state AGs and DAs.

Re: Immigration
 

Don't lecture Sebby about why hil lost. Sebby is by far in a better position than any of us to know why 200000 3rd party voters in both Mi and Pa couldn't vote for her.

Re: Immigration
 

Everybody here was all getting excited about DACA during the shutdown. My sister and her friends, mostly Dems but also mostly military, were posting about their paychecks.

Re: Immigration
 

oh-oh, maybe I'm wrong about sebby's insight.

Re: Immigration
 

point taken.