Summary

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz has criticized the Harris-Walz 2024 presidential campaign for playing it too “safe,” saying they should have held more in-person events and town halls.

In a Politico interview, Walz—known for labeling Trump and Vance as “weird”—blamed their cautious approach partly on the abbreviated 107-day campaign timeline after Harris became the nominee in August.

Using football terminology, he said Democrats were in a “prevent defense” when “we never had anything to lose, because I don’t think we were ever ahead.”

While acknowledging his share of responsibility for the loss, Walz is returning to the national spotlight and didn’t rule out a 2028 presidential run, saying, “I’m not saying no.”

  • deadkennedy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    2 hours ago

    yeah that’s one way to put it.

    2024 was not an election to play it safe or take the high road, yet every chance the DNC collectively got, they did just that.

    They should have slung mud and gotten nasty.

    • jabeez@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Not even nasty, just play ads of Fatputin spewing his idiotic/fascist nonsense non-stop, that would do it. There’s practically a never ending well of content from the last decade they could have used to make some truly devastating ad (grab 'em by the pussy, on a loop??), and how about going back and talking about his 1st term that ended in a year so bad it was a running joke? Nah, let’s talk about joy and leave it at some vague notion of this guy sucks, but not going into why. A coup attempt? Meh, we’ll show a clip of J6, but not bother mentioning it was a fucking coup attempt. Twice impeached convicted felon? Meh, let’s just leave it at some vague “not going back” slogan. Fucking malpractice. Again. Dems are either breathtakingly incompetent, or in cahoots.

      • KingPangolin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        34 minutes ago

        And beyond that, democrats should have blast ads every 5 minutes about how George bush and trump both left us with the greatest recessions since the Great Depression. Bust the weird, non factual myth that republicans are good for the economy. Flip the script, the facts are there, they just suck ass at messaging and propaganda.

        • jabeez@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          18 minutes ago

          For sure, the well is endless, but instead they insist on believing the fairy tale that what people REALLY want, despite voting to the contrary every single fucking time, is bipartisanship and a party that chooses “they go low we go high” as a rallying cry. Let’s instead try and help rehab GWB and Darth Cheney, the guys who had worst terrorist attack in US history on their watch, followed by lying us into a war that cost untold billions and lives, ending in the worst financial collapse in almost 100 years. I’m old enough to remember Harry “keep our powder dry” Reid and Nancy “impeachment is off the table” Pelosi being my first real awakening to just how unwilling dems are to actually fucking fight the fascists, instead choosing time and again to do nothing or even help them. Working great, just need MORE of it, then it’ll work for sure! Just like tax cuts and deregulation, has turned out just great, just need it a little bit more and it will start working, honest!

    • Lenny@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      43 minutes ago

      Shorter sentences, bolder statements, hell, they needed to say things that didn’t entirely make sense when you analyzed them, but sounded cool. Political campaigns clearly need to be more approachable, more relatable than what the Dems are doing. Look at AOC, Bernie, and JC, THAT is the messaging that resonates.

      Also, way more calls to action. What are YOU doing and what should I do? And stop asking me for damn money - you can invoice me when the work is complete.

  • Bondar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    54 minutes ago

    My opinion on this matter is going to be unpopular one but here goes: I firmly believe that Left wing and Democrats failed in these elections because of Transgender push in Social Media / Movies / Series / Ads and basically everywhere it was forced down the throat of people that just got fed up. Republicans and MAGA capitalized on this HEAVILY and leveraged this issue to the extreme to their benefit.

    • demizerone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      36 minutes ago

      Yeah bcz identity politics is all they have to protect their deep pocket donors. They need to be doing what Bernie is doing right now.

  • Itdidnttrickledown@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    89
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    15 hours ago

    If by safe you mean ignoring your constituents and only listening to your wealthy contemporaries. Then yes you were too safe.

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      54
      ·
      14 hours ago

      If you read the article, that’s EXACTLY what he means. They told him the reason for this is that they could avoid “Having any public gaffees”

      The idea is that by just not being Trump they were “Ahead”, and any public misstep would put Trump in the lead.

      Walz now believes he and Harris were “never ahead” and it was arrogance that lead to them thinking they were the “Default Choice” for America

    • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      Democrat politicians should level with you all. Politicians need a tremendous amount of money to stay viable. They can only answer you their donors and they get donors only if they can accomplish their goals which they do with the support of their constituents. They don’t just support their constituents out of feel good stuff. Republicans give them a free pass to do whatever they want. So they get lots of donors. The left groups do not do they don’t get donors. We’re fucked.

      Look into how many call centers are around Washington. They’re all call centers for the different politicians. They’re calling donors 24/7 trying to get more funding. All the time. The Reason leftist do not get anywhere, we don’t generate money

      • bitjunkie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        50 minutes ago

        Leftists don’t generate money on the top line. The fact that actual leftist policy would create a utopian society where everyone is prosperous is completely an afterthought, and that’s because the economic system is run by a bunch of giant babies with zero impulse control or sense of delayed gratification.

      • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Look into how many call centers are around Washington. They’re all call centers for the different politicians. They’re calling donors 24/7 trying to get more funding. All the time. The Reason leftist do not get anywhere, we don’t generate money

        Well yeah, most of them refuse to take corporate money and SuperPAC donations. They don’t do insider trading when in office because they have consistent morals and ethics.

        Also helps when they corporations who own the media refuse to cover you and your wins, and then pay for the milquetoast candidates who won’t tax them to win more.

    • DAVENP0RT@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      People really need to accept that the Democratic Party is the conservative party in the US. The Republican Party is the nationalist, authoritarian party. The US does not have a major progressive party.

      • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        15 hours ago

        The democratic party is a coalition. It has wings that range from progressive to conservative. The reason they play it safe is because candidates need to be palatable to enough of the constituents to pass their primaries. This is also why local democratic parties are much more likely to have more cohesion.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Democrats in charge despise the progressive wing. They wish they didn’t have to listen to silly little ideas like Medicare for All or building high speed rail. They’ve gotten fat off the idea that we all know what Republicans will do when they get elected and vote for them, anyway.

          This was never going to be stable in the long run. Republicans only had to win a few times to entrench themselves. That’s because they don’t see their far right wing as nutjobs. They see them as opportunities for driving things further to the right. For example, it took 50 years of planning to get the right people in the Supreme Court to bury Roe v Wade, and it all happened because they won just enough at the right time and then used that power to get what their base wants. What their base wants is horrible and cruel, but they know how to implement the plan.

          Where this leads us now is a situation where ditching establishment Democrats has little downside. We’re fucked if we keep hanging on to them. Drag them to the left or leave them out in the icy cold.

        • Numinous_Ylem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          14 hours ago

          I understand they need to have a broad appeal to different groups, moreso than republicans do, but they could easily achieve that same broad appeal by actually fighting for the working class and not doing things like steamrolling Bernie. The out of touch nature of current leadership is effectively neutering the party.

          It would be a good thing long term for progressives to finally split from dems IMHO, though I wish we would have a ranked choice type system in place beforehand, but either way it needs to happen.

      • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Wanna change? Vote in the primaries. Hell, run in the primaries.

        Oof, got some bad news about those primaries…

  • Xanza@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    No shit. I didn’t feel like I was voting for progressives. It left like I was voting for “not Trump.” You could have put a piece of corn-bread at the podium and I would have voted for it instead of Trump. But still. I didn’t vote for them because I just loved what they had to say… Because they weren’t for changing anything. They wanted to keep the status quo where it was. They were only listening to their wealthy donors. It was sad to watch.

  • skittle07crusher@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    14 hours ago

    What an absolute fucking champ-

    While acknowledging his share of responsibility for the loss, Walz is returning to the national spotlight and didn’t rule out a 2028 presidential run, saying, “I’m not saying no.”

    Both of those things are such music to my ears (although ofc we should all know that it was Harris’s brother-in-law Uber exec lawyer who muzzled Walz and deserves that blame that Walz is selflessly taking on here).

    Sadly I’m not even sure the US will exist by 2028.

    • Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      pritzker with a walz vp would be my ideal ticket.

      Pritzker stands his ground, knows what to say, and won’t just bow down to the establishment of republicans OR the dem establishment. I think he’s the best pick. He’s also great with budget, lgbtq rights, and common sense policies

  • TheFogan@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    15 hours ago

    IMO the problem is, they falsely assume everyone wants what the republicans are selling, and their biggest flaw is that they are pollarizing. That’s why they always start introducing as much republican lite things into their policies.

    They don’t understand, that by doing that, they are effectively telling the american people that the republicans are right. IE say the republican party on immigration etc… is lock em up in the fastest way, forget about humanity and ship them out as fast as possible, fuck due process these people are dangerous and destroying everything.

    Democrats: Well I can back you on making sure we get them out as soon as we can, but I think we can do it without human rights violations.

    They don’t realize… that effectively to the outside observer going off of both of those policies they are hearing “both parties agree these people are dangerous and ruining everything, one wants to get rid of them as fast as possible, the other wants to prioritize us not hurting them over preventing them from harming us”.

    • bitjunkie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      42 minutes ago

      Exactly this. The whole “both sides” thing is because they care so much about optics that they refuse to actually take a stand on anything. Nobody wants to vote for a wet dishrag. It sucks out here, and has for a while. We want actual change, and they think their shitty numbers cycle after cycle are because they didn’t push the Republican lite status quo agenda enough, when the real reason is that they pushed it at all.

  • astro_plane@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Maybe they should have held primaries and let Americans choose who they wanted to be for the Democratic candidate. Harris was never going to win no matter how she campaigned.

    • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Maybe they should have held primaries and let Americans choose who they wanted to be for the Democratic candidate.

      “bUt YoU hAd OnE wItH bIdEn!! StOp MaKiNg ExCuSeS fOr YoU nOt VoTiNg!!”

  • BillDaCatt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    19 hours ago

    If they had focused their campaign on helping the middle class, helping the poor, and acknowledged that Palestinians are people too, they would have a chance.

    If they focused on environmental issues and the rights of individuals they would have had a chance.

    If they had called Trump a criminal, because he is, at every stop, they would have had a chance.

    If they did all of those things, and meant it, they would have won!

    Instead they tried to appeal to business owners, Republicans who don’t like Trump, and people with money. That’s not what Democrats want. That’s not who Democrats are. That, is why they lost.

    • Omega@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      If they had focused their campaign on helping the middle class

      I agree with most of that except this. They basically ONLY focused on the middle class. All the tax break incentives were great. But they never offered a damn thing for the working class. And that’s who they SHOULD have focused on.

      • WagyuSneakers@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 hour ago

        No Dem has helped the Middle class the entire time I’ve been alive. There was no one on the ballot who was going to make my life better. I couldn’t even get Dem representatives to reply beyond a canned message about “hard times”. I’ve never seen such a disconnect from the Dem party. They’re not even trying. I bet they’re excited for fascism so they don’t have to pretend to care about us.

    • cmhe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      “the middle class” does not exist, they should focus on helping the homeless, jobless and working class.

      • WagyuSneakers@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        It does exist and this is the exact mentality that lost the election. The Middle class isn’t going to vote for you if you’re campaigning on putting them into the wood chipper again.

    • ZMonster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Not only that, but they stuck to the corporate response on nearly every single question. They almost never went off script and it was just so fucking obvious and robotic. And for me, Tim’s complete lack of consideration for truth and evidence on its face and in a vacuum was nothing less than trumpian. In RL, I lie about being an OIF Veteran. At first it was shame, guilt, and self destructive tendencies but I’ve been to a LOT of therapy and I’m living better. But during that time I realized that there were others who would speak a bit more “freely” about things they may have done. If they assume you know nothing about the military then they can say whatever they want. Hearing someone mince words about their service is fairly common and IMHO - innocuous. It’s a nothing burger of exaggeration. Had Tim just admitted what was clearly on video and just said, “I was using more colorful language to affect the crowd, my bad.” I would have honestly commended him.

      Instead, they lied. About the most mundane shit imaginable.

      • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Oh man, I remember that lie, that was fucking cringe inducing. It’s always better to tell the truth, especially if you’re a bad liar, like Walz apparently is. The whole VP debate was pretty disappointing, because it felt like Walz spent the whole time pulling punches and playing softball, while Vance was his usual greasy self.

  • melpomenesclevage@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    if he’d stuck to calling them weird and attacking them, maybe it wouldn’t have been useless. but they dropped that, tried to buddy up with the fascists, and brought on insane endorsements like fucking liz cheney.

    if they’d run sanders/walz, even late after biden convinced even party leadership that he couldn’t win, they would have crushed that shit with historic numbers.

    if they had let a palestinian talk, or given the most mild ‘please tone down the genocide shit’ they might’ve had a chance.

    it was like they were trying to lose at every step. truly snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

  • peoplebeproblems@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    81
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    22 hours ago

    One problem the DNC has is that they keep throwing boring ass lawyers into a game that isn’t about law. It’s about being a face the country knows to run the government.

    You need charisma, you need to appeal to people, and you need to be human. Obama did this perfectly. Bill Clinton had it in him. Biden at least had such a long record in politics he could wing it his first term. I don’t know how he managed to win, but he did.

    Clinton, while being a lawyer, had already been the governor of Arkansas. Meaning he had the experience being that executive. He could convince people to work beyond their own interests. Al Gore, we all know, won the 2000 presidential election, but the supreme court let everything get fucked up.

    Kerry? Never stood a chance. Hilary? No chance. Kamala? As much as we needed her to win, she was unappealing to stupid people.

    Lawyers, by nature of their career, have to read and understand the most boring ass shit and then convince others that the boring ass text supports their side of the case. That means a lot of them are boring people.

    You wanna know why Walz is popular? He fucking loves football. He can connect to highschool students. IDK about you, but if you’ve ever met high schoolers, they aren’t the brightest, and bored easily. He’s progressive, but he won’t shove it in someone’s face to be more righteous. Not many people can do that.

    To win an election, you have to excite people. Trump, despite his rhetoric clearly being terrifying, was, unfortunately, exciting.

    • Hikermick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Obama covered both lawyer and entertaining. He also had an appeal similar to Reagan, confident and comforting during uncertain times. The conservative media made politics entertaining, now we have entertainers as politicians and I can’t get on board with that

      • peoplebeproblems@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        20 hours ago

        It’s not something we are going to change anytime soon. Far too many people to change to counter that.

        Instead, we need candidates like Walz, who have a brain on their shoulders, and have a way to excite outside of putting on a show.

        Bernie Sanders was another example of it. AoC is as well.

    • kronisk @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      21 hours ago

      I mean, I agree with you, but this is also a huge problem. This is why you have someone who pretended to be a successful businessman on TV as a president now. I really miss the days when boring but competent people could run a country.

      • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        44 minutes ago

        That ship sailed with the first TV debates, tbh. I watched the Carter-Reagan debate and it wasn’t a contest. I hate Reagan’s dumb fucking face, that bastard fucked America up for forty plus years and set us on the track we’re on, but he ate Jimmy Carter alive and went back for seconds. They weren’t even playing the same sport. Carter, a Nuclear Engineer, was up there delivering a university lecture about why he should be the president, and Reagan went up there, turned on the actor, and gave America the best cigarette ad it had ever seen.

        • Match!!@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          20 hours ago

          Is this a problem of how people think, or is it a problem of what sells views in newspapers (and that media companies are too rich)?

      • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Boring yet competent people don’t get elected in a country with mass media. They just don’t get coverage, so people don’t know they’re there.

        As example, look at the first televised presidential debate between Kennedy and Nixon. Kennedy was young and inexperienced, but let them put makeup on him for the debate. Nixon had more experience but looked like a sweaty mess on TV. This helped Kennedy a lot.

    • btaf45@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      This is pretty much all true. Except for…

      One problem the DNC has is that they keep throwing boring ass lawyers into a game that isn’t about law

      The DNC wasn’t making the decisions. The Harris campaign was.

      Kerry? Never stood a chance. Hilary? No chance. Kamala? As much as we needed her to win, she was unappealing to stupid people.

      Somewhat true. But Hillary could have won if she had simply mixed in a few bearded Biker types in the background crowd as prominently as all the Muslim women. But these candidates were the mistakes of the voters, not the DNC.

      To win an election, you have to excite people. Trump, despite his rhetoric clearly being terrifying, was, unfortunately, exciting.

      I change the channel whenever Traitorapist Trump talks so that he never gets a full sentence out. Still do. I don’t want to hear one more lie.

      • peoplebeproblems@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        20 hours ago

        But you and I aren’t the person Trump is trying to excite.

        It’s the 25% of Americans that equate critical thought with torture. That is the chunk of people you can’t reason with. So you have to have a way for them to care at all. Unloading garbage nonsense that has the occasional inflammatory rhetoric is exciting.

        Talking about football? Not exciting to me, but these 25% of Americans? You better bet your ass they like it. They like beer and they like the idea of not having to worry about finances as well.

        • btaf45@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Unloading garbage nonsense that has the occasional inflammatory rhetoric is exciting.

          Oh I agree that the #1 problem is that Harris needed to use way more aggressive rhetoric against Traitorapist Trump.

  • gatohaus@eviltoast.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    163
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    And the Dems are, mostly, still too safe. They need to start fighting while they still have a chance of stopping the insanity.

    Step 1: Schumer needs to step down.

      • EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        23 hours ago

        The entire party needs to go. Let it burn and be replaced by a workers party that represents us.

        • btaf45@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Let it burn and be replaced by a workers party that represents us.

          That went horribly wrong in Russia. It turned out Lenin and Stalin didn’t represent anybody besides themselves. And their main targets weren’t people on the right, it was the other 2 socialist parties, the Socialist Revolutionaries and the Mensheviks.

          • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            29 minutes ago

            Communism was a mixed bag. For many east Europeans, the monarchy had observed the revolts of 1888 with horror and had concluded that technological progress would be the death of them, so they explicitly resisted industrialization. That means that while much of Western Europe was enjoying the fruit of industrialized agriculture and trains for transporting goods and people, East Europe were still living without trains; a sad experience that I can relate to as an American. In many cases, the arrival of the USSR was linked with rapid industrialization, as the soviets sought to modernize these countries that had been held back by their fearful monarchy and feudal lords. That doesn’t erase the bad stuff that happened, but there’s probably a lot more communist governments that you’ve never heard of from the global south that were actually just doing fine until the CIA said “not on my watch!” and set up violent right-wing movements to depose them. For more, see The Jakarta Method.

            • j_overgrens@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              37 minutes ago

              Please tell me how supportive Lenin was of the Workers’ Soviets as soon as the revolution got calmer.

      • Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        While I agree, here’s what I worry about. Even if the leadership is replaced, the culture of the Democrats is to listen to consultants, voter panels etc. It’s commendable to take voters wishes into account, but what most voters want is a leader, not a listener.

        Example: during the campaign voter panels talked about inflation and immigration whereas healthcare was ranked at the bottom. Therefore Democrats did not talk about healthcare.

        But this is really a chicken and egg story. If nobody talks about healthcare, voters feel that healthcare is not on the ballot, and so they won’t mention the topic in voter panels. Luigi showed (once again) that healthcare in the US is fucked and that many people in fact care deeply about the topic. I am almost sure that Harris would have done better had she made healthcare the central issue of her campaign. The moral is that as long as Democrats are following, rather than leading, they will continue to lose elections.

        • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          13 hours ago

          They need to lead, but they also need to not just be reactionary. They should absolutely listen to what us voters are saying. But they should also be looking at the overall situation, and trying to understand why voters are not super stoked about how things are going instead of insisting “the economy is fine”. And then, maybe, I dunno, do some real, honest root cause analysis, and come up with some fucking creative solutions.

          And by “they”, I mean the congresspersons themselves. Not an intern. Not a consultant. Not a lobbyist. The person who was elected. Do the work. Do your fucking job.

      • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        23 hours ago

        People vote for Republicans because if you think Democrats are never going to do anything to help you, you might as well vote for the party that will lower your taxes. There’s real problems with that logic, but it is true that Dems put serving corporations ahead of serving the people.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Still playing safe? They’re playing it even safer than before, and they have even less to lose. I don’t understand what they don’t get. They need to go on offense. Now is the time for it if ever. They literally have no power, so just make noise and make sure everything happening is loud and people know who’s doing it.

    • danc4498@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      19 hours ago

      The dem leadership is absolutely too safe. The only ones saying what should be said are the ones that have no power.

  • TylerBourbon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    14 hours ago

    They should have stuck with the “they’re weird”. And they definitely shouldn’t have tried courting Republican voters. All that yielded was pushing away Dem voters and Republican voters aren’t going to vote for Dems, they will just not show up for Trump. They shouldn’t have constantly called them a danger and threat because we’ve been saying that for years, and at some point people stop listening. Instead, they should have leaned into the “they’re weird” and the weird things they want to do. Making them sound like an existential threat, even if they are, just sounds like someone yelling the sky is falling, and people ignore it. But we’ve already seen how they can’t handle being mocked. So mock them. Belittle them, make them out to be the buffoons they are.

    • jabeez@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Well I do declare, that would just be uncouth and rude, let’s instead keep saying we want to work across the aisle with the fascists, people love that shit! Right? RIGHT?? Oh…