Crazy thought, really really outside the box lateral thinking type shit, but how about paying them a living wage instead? Seems to work for other industries. I’m not tipping my welder.

I’ll be honest, I didn’t read the whole thing. But I did try to find a section supporting what you say, and sure, it talks about affective polarization, but it doesn’t show anywhere that this leads to people voting irrationally in the sense of voting against their own material interests, as far as I can see. Is there any section you’re referring to specifically?

Ah I think I understand what you’re trying to say, and I think I’m in agreement. So indeed the electorate is economically progressive, but there is no party on the ballot which represents progressive policies, and hence, by definition, one’s policy preferences have a very loose relationship who you vote for.

I have not been quiet. The writing’s on the wall. First undocumented immigrants, and the democrats are going after trans people next, and I can’t stand it.

Sorry, I misread your comment, I think I read first “they” as “to” or something. I agree with you, deleting my comment.

That connection is much less loose if you consider how right wing the democrats have gotten over the years. And beyond that, note that a big part of Harris’ loss is that her republican light “I’m basically Nikki Haley” campaign mainly reflects itself in people not voting for her. The statistics you mention (or the polls you base your comment on, not sure where it’s coming from) are presumably talking about voters, not the electorate. Harris’ inability to mobilize her base is the problem here, not republicans voting republican.

Thank you for mentioning the ACA! It is a perfect example of the democrats campaigning on a progressive cause, and as a result mobilizing their base and beyond to support them enthusiastically. Progressive policies win, and adopting them, as the democrats at least tried in the obamna era, is a recipe for winning elections.

Now regarding fracking and the border wall, I really think you need to talk to Harris’ people and the current regime, because they have not gotten the memo that their support is reluctant. During their debate, Harris and Trump were yelling over each other to show who’s more pro-fracking. Four years ago such a climate change denialist stance would’ve been unthinkable for the dem candidate four years ago. That does not sound like reluctance to me.

Then the border wall. Please think back to how for example the Clinton and Biden campaigns talked about it. The messaging was very simple: the border wall is inhumane, this country was built on immigration, and even beyond that the wall would be ineffective for obvious reasons. The biden campaign was a bit more about the latter, but still. Now, Harris refers to undocumented immigrants as “illegal immigrants”, completely joins in on the false narrative that undocumented immigrants bring with them a lot of crime (which is categorically false, citizens by far outrank undocumented immigrants in violent crime per capita) and brags about her strong border policies. This is a core part of her messaging that came back in town halls, debates, and interviews. You cannot just ignore this or expect the electorate not to notice. Again, please think back to what the dem campaigns used to be like four and eight years ago. This kind of stance was rightly ridiculed and rightly vilified. Beyond just the messaging, there’s what the current regime is actually doing: the border wall is still being built (again: ridiculed and vilified, rightly so, and you know this), and there are more children in cages at the border than there were under Trump.

And beyond that, the republican candidate was able to position himself as the pro peace candidate next to “most lethal fighting force in the world” Harris! So on this the democrat messaging was actually even more right wing than that of the republicans! They are absolutely sprinting to the right, and denying so is completely ahistorical.

That is indeed what the chart indicates.

deleted by creator

Universal health care used to be something that was at least mentioned during campaigns, now not so anymore. Fracking, inhumane border policies to keep those crazed illegal immigrants out, explicit support for genocide; these are far right policies, and the dems are falling over themselves to support it. Every cycle they move further right.

That’s actually false. When it comes to policy preferences, the actual electorate swings pretty far left compared to the right wing and far right parties they can choose between. Universal health care, parental leave, paid sick leave, higher minimum wage all enjoy broad and firm popular support, and neither party is even talking about this.

These stats are about the policy preferences of the electorate, while OP is about the politicians. But your picture is a fantastic illustration as to why the democrats lost the election. It’s because they keep moving further right (look for example at their recent pro-fracking, pro-border wall, pro-genocide presidential candidate).

This is QAnon-level shit, but on the center right.

Russia is the bad guy in this conflict. 110%. But there’s no reason to start making up reasons why. Ukraine was not a neutral non-NATO buffer state after the euromaidan coup, and it doesn’t need to be for the annexation of Crimea and the ongoing invasion to be wrong, which they are. All made up reasons do is give your opponents ammunition.

“we promise ;)”

Fair enough, all good. I’m leaving mine up because I think the point about the conflation of anti-zionism and anti-semitism being in itself antisemitic bears repeating.

oh no, statistics that challenge my world view! Quick, let’s not look into it at all and move the goal posts!

Could you at least try to engage in this discussion? Or maybe come up with any evidence supporting your world view?

The part of the electorate that benefits from fracking, an even bigger border wall, children in cages at the border, and genocide is not big enough to move the needle. Plus, anyone who looks at those issues and considers them important is much more likely to vote for Trump anyway. Her platform was regressive dog shit, and that’s why people didn’t vote for her (and the genocide of course).

You can continue with the strategy of blaming the voters, but look where that got you. Just from a completely pragmatic perspective, look where that got you. The past three cycles you keep running candidates no one’s excited about, on essentially republican platforms, with the main selling point being that they’re not Trump (which is a veiled threat, at best). You managed to beat Trump only two out of the three times, and you had a massive pandemic helping you with the one time you did beat him with this strategy.

Eh, you know what, maybe you’re right. Let’s run on an even more right wing platform four years from now (maybe we can be anti-trans or whatever to attract more moderate republicans, like the 0% we managed to attract this cycle), let’s tell the voters they’re awful people if they vote for the other side, and maybe this time it’ll work

Hear hear! I mean, how dare they not vote for the democrats? Don’t they know how this works? Do they think the parties are supposed to “earn” their votes by campaigning for policies that will benefit the electorate? That’s fucking childish!

They lost the election by running an essentially republican candidate. Fingers crossed for a progressive chair.