And you're still missing the point, which I think Bruce's link helps to illustrate.
You have two options if you're the Dems. You can dig in your heels and shout more names at those that left your party and gave the Rust Belt to Trump, or you can figure out what it is those people really want that you weren't giving them, and you can focus your campaigns going forward on those issues.
I can tell you that the name-calling effort, while fun and likely therapeutic on some level, doesn't advance the effort for the Dems at all. If anything, it further opens the door for Republicans to steal even more votes, steal more state houses, more governors, and more Congressional seats.
Also, I agree with Pop that name-calling, rather than discourse, is where we appear to be today. You can usually tell the loser of an argument by whoever turns to personal attacks first, but unfortunately, we've generally moved past discourse and straight to personal attacks these days. Also, yes, the media helps to encourage that.
So all Republicans are bigots? Some are just quiet about it?
That's a new one to me. The one thing I do think the Left should be learning quickly though is that the name-calling play isn't working anymore. That's one lesson you could learn and learn quickly. People are tired of it, and they no longer cower or hide their views when it's used.
Being a fiscal conservative has NOTHING to do with bigotry. Wanting small government with control passed to the states for most fiscal issues is NOT bigotry. Wanting a strong military in order to maintain a dominant world position is NOT bigotry. Calling someone a bigot for having those views is a tired play, and it doesn't get the reaction that it used to get. It's like how people used to take political views from Hollywood actors seriously. It was a novelty for a while, but eventually most of us got over it and recognized that they had no more insight on the world than any other Average Joe.
Calling all conservatives bigots is no different than calling all Democrats lazy welfare queens that just want to live off the government dole. Do some of those exist in each party? Sure. Broad brush painting though doesn't tell the tale at all.
I saw that MTV video released not long back where they did New Years Resolutions for white people, telling us how we could do better next year. I was appalled. That type of stuff is exactly the type of stuff that will continue to alienate a large portion of traditional Dem voters.
Until the Dems figure out a way to get over the name-calling and actually try to put together a coherent message of opposition that attracts back those who have left them, they'll flounder for a little while...at least until the Republicans get themselves divided even worse than the Dems are currently.
Speaking of playbooks...you've called 32 dive from the Left playbook with this article.
Bottom line, the Democrats are in this spot because they forgot the Middle America working class. They went too far left and became more of a social left party, ignoring the poor working class in Middle America.
The Dems have been losing seats in Congress since 2010, and they lost this Presidency for that same reason.
Are some Republicans bigots? Sure. Is Bannon a bigot? Absolutely. Are bigots the reason Hillary lost? Nope. That's because the Dems chose Hispanics over the working class. They chose social issues over fiscal issues.
It's the reason I've said that no party can sustain a run of power in this country. It's impossible to please all of your constituents. You'll eventually take some for granted when you're in power, and you'll lose them by ignoring them. The Dems took the working class for granted, and they paid for it in the Rust Belt.
Now, if it makes you feel better, the Republicans aren't any more stable than the Dems are. There is a large segment of traditional Republicans that don't agree with Trump's direction or much of his rhetoric. Some held their nose and picked Trump this go around in order to avoid Hillary. I know A LOT of these people. Some voted Third Party...(hand raised). If Trump continues down this path, he will lose those voters with time, as long as the Dems put up a viable option that's closer to center-left, especially if they find one that appeals to the working class.
The Republican Party can't be taken very far in Trump's direction, because those who get excited about his rhetoric are only one vocal segment of the party. Unless they can appease the rest of the party (they won't), they'll lose power back the other direction soon enough.
I seem to remember this publication, just a few short years ago, touting the strength of the Democratic party and the fact that it was going to reign for possibly even decades due to demographic shifts in the population.
While I still think demographics don't favor the Republicans long term, I said at the time that things don't ever shift one way for very long.
The reason for that is because you just can't please that many people. The Dems have become synonymous with social justice issues, gay rights, racial issues, immigration, etc., and in doing so, they largely left may of their labor union and working class friends behind.
The Republicans capitalized on that.
That's always going to be the case. It looked like things were going to be heavily Republican for a while through the 80s. Demographic shifts and ideological shifts within the parties changed all that, ushering in the Clinton era of Dem control. Follow that with the swing the other direction, and then back again with Obama.
I will say it again. There will NEVER be a run where one party controls this country for an extended period. I don't care what demographic patterns say or how those demographics are voting today. It won't stay that way.
Even when the Dems had a lengthy period of controlling both the House and Senate during the 50s, 60s, and 70s, the White House still never stayed in their possession for more than 8 years consecutively.
No party will ever be able to please a majority of the country for that long of a period of time. You'll eventually alienate parts of your base by favoring other parts of your base in ways that hinder others.
Since 1980, there have been only 4 years where the Dems controlled the House, Senate, and Presidency (1993-1995 , 2009-11). Likewise, there have been only 4 years when the Republicans have controlled all 3 (2003-2007), though the Republicans will at least be able to add 2017-2019 now too. The Dems will regain control of the White House soon and probably the Senate/House at some point soon too, but the potential era of Dem domination is not on the horizon. It's not on the horizon for the Republicans either.
Modern day lynch mobs are tame by comparison. It's still shocking and scary to me to see how quickly someone can get railroaded for a fair, but maybe unpopular, political opinion.
On the sexual assault thing, it's something that hasn't historically been punished at the rate that it should. It still is a little concerning though that just an accusation can cause you to lose your job, even if the accusation is later proven false.
Now, in this particular case, since Lovell resigned, it leads me to believe there is at least something to these allegations.
Agree CL. That's the one stumbling block in my plan. Neither party would support it because even if their friends'/cronies' businesses don't personally use illegal labor, they count on the low prices they get from suppliers due to the use of illegal labor.
No politician wants to actually punish the businesses doing the hiring, though if you're taking a purely economic view of the solution, that's how you'd do it. I like to step aside and live in my little utopia on occasion when I come up with plans for solutions that would actually work. Usually there is a reason they haven't/won't be implemented.
I agree on the lynch mob mentality. It's the new way though. If you're accused of something, or worse, if you step out of line and say something that offends someone, the lynch mob comes out to try to get you fired from your position via public pressure. It has groups and businesses quick on the trigger with anything these days just to avoid the lynch mob.
See the University of Missouri "racism" issues that led to the resignation of the chancellor and the President of the entire system. Those issues turned out to be a bunch of nothing and overreaction, but because the social justice warriors came out in full force, people had to lose their jobs, even though they couldn't have done anything differently or better than they did.
It's the world we live in these days.
All Comments »
By Flyer Staff
download this issue
click here to see more »