Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Run different campaigns, emphasizing different issues, in different states. Emphasize the social safety net and the good aspects of the ACA in Rust Belt states. Use a mix of that with some identity politics in the NC to Maine region.
|
I've thought of this and I think it's the best approach. The problem is, there really is no such thing as local campaigns for federal office anymore. If you are running such a campaign you absolutely have to show up. If you show up, you absolutely have to speak to the issues. If you speak to the issues, whatever you say can and will be used against you in the national court of opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Concede the Bible belt. Trump's GOP owns the evangelicals. Don't waste even a penny there.
|
Strategically, I probably agree. But I'm not sure abandoning those places is the best long-term approach.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
On a more micro level, politicians have always changed their message subtly from city to city and county to county, depending on demographics. It's not difficult to simply refrain from raising identity issues in areas where they may turn off voters and emphasize them in areas where they would raise enthusiasm.
|
See above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
It must also be said, however, that generally, identity politics is a loser politically.
|
You know, this dumbass blanket statement makes a normal conversation with you virtually impossible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
People want to hear what politicians are going to do for them. Telling a minority of people what you will do for them, will only get you a minority of votes.
|
Spoken like a true white man. A message of inclusion is not the same as a promise to a discrete minority. Although, given how you think about this shit, I suppose it's obvious that it might as well be when it comes to fragile ass white people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Redressing past sins of the majority is also not a sunny, positive message.
|
Ah, yes. Politicians always run on redressing past sins. They never focus on fixing issues that face people in the fucking moment. The fact that those issues have a history that stretches back to the beginning of this country is obvious, yes. But if you keep phrasing the issues that people currently face as sins of the majority's past, let's agree that it is pointless to continue debating anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
My suspicion is people are going to be orderly exhausted with bickering and negative themes by the time this disastrous administration has left office. If I were a D running for president, I would watch a lot of Joe Biden's speeches. Fiery defense of the middle class, support for reasonable social safety net's, and an emphasis on bringing back jobs. But overwhelmingly, more than anything, always positive.
|
Which people will be exhausted? I think people will be exhausted of a hateful, negative, exclusionary, incompetent, Administration and will be fired up to vote it the fuck out of office.
I still think this is Joe Biden's party if he wants it. I seem to recall when I said that he would crush the entire Republican field before the general started, you told me all about how dumb it was that I thought Biden could pull it off and how he was such a gaffe machine and couldn't get out of his own way, blah blah blah. Now you're telling me I need to pay attention to him. You have balls that are bigger than you're brain.
And Joe Biden has gone after Trump for many things. And, if you swapped their names out, your description of his speeches above could easily be attributed to Hillary during last year's campaign.
TM
