Tired of losing the Rust Belt, new Democratic group has strategy to un-Pelosi the party

[LWolf]

Updated by Jeff Stein May 30, 2017, 7:00am EDT

Democrats experiencing a surge of grassroots activism in the wake of Donald Trump’s election have struggled to translate that energy into clear victories. The party improved its performance but has still fallen short of winning three straight special elections in Kansas, Georgia (which goes into a runoff in June), and Montana. Republicans have commanded a solid majority of the House since 2010.

One potential problem identified by some political analysts is the ability of Republicans to run attack ads tying Democrats to the party’s coastal and culturally liberal wing.

Ball and the House Democrats behind the People’s House Project say they’re determined to shake that image. They’ll try to fundraise for the PAC’s candidates, recruit candidates that fit the bill, and give them a slogan to use to try to distinguish themselves from the national party. “It will allow them to say, ‘I’m a different kind of Democrat,’” said Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH), one of the House Democrats backing the project, in an interview. “It’s hard to convince people around here sometimes how toxic our brand is. But, clearly the brand is damaged, and we need to see if something else can work.”

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/30/15698378/house-democrats-pac

[Coventina]

1. This pisses me right off.

So, being coastal (which I'm not, BTW) and culturally liberal is "toxic"?

Well, I'm frigging "toxic" then, because I don't see anything "wrong" with being coastal and I'm DEFINITELY CULTURALLY LIBERAL!!!!

Who are we going to throw under the bus to appeal to these deplorables?

Besides Pelosi, I mean?

LGBT?

Women?

POC?

Screw that!!!

[geek tragedy]

6. Yes, we are toxic amongst WWC voters

It may not be fair or right, but it's political reality.

[Coventina]

9. Well, I can say right now, that if the Democratic party throws me under the bus

I will change my party affiliation to a party that respects me and my rights.

[geek tragedy]

20. it's mostly superficial, the idea is to give WWC voters in the Midwest and South

visible people in the party with whom they can identify.

There aren't enough people in Brooklyn/San Francisco type places to give us a majority in Congress, or the electoral college.

[Coventina]

29. But what does that mean, exactly?

Are they going to support the Democratic platform or not?

And what, exactly, are they going to promise Rust Belt voters?

Because we know their old jobs are not coming back.

[geek tragedy]

31. it's more style than substance, but style matters.

The Democrats don't know how to communicate with uneducated white voters. Mainly because a lot of Democratic leaders don't know any uneducated white voters. How many Joe Sixpacks do you think Pelosi encounters in her San Francisco circles, or how many do you think Schumer encounters in Park Slope?

[Coventina]

36. OK, let's go with this: How should the Democratic Party communicate with uneducated whites?

What is the correct style for that?

[Blanks]

83. This is a continuation of the Russian attack...

The French saw through these divisive troll issues, but we keep seeing it resurface because too many democrats can't recognize that part of the Russian attack and the collusion with the Trump campaign was exactly this kind of divisive chatter. The coordinated message: the democrats need to change.

Democrats got more votes for the White House and the senate in 2016, we have better, more experienced, more professional candidates so they infiltrate message boards, twitter, Facebook and set people against one another.

The problem isn't the Democratic Party, the problem is the gullibility of Americans.

[geek tragedy]

117. best people to ask are those who have succeeded in getting votes from those folks

on a regular basis.

[Coventina]

150. Can you give me an example? n/t

[geek tragedy]

151. Probably Sherrod Brown. nt

[Coventina]

153. I love Sherrod Brown.

But I guess I don't know how he's a different Democrat, since he follows the D platform?

If Sherrod Brown is the way to win over WWC, then I don't see what needs to change from what we already stand for.

[geek tragedy]

164. as I said, it's more about style and tone than it is about policy

and there's more than one way to win over WWC voters.

Obama managed to do a surprisingly good job of it.

[OilemFirchen]

172. This group seems more likely to primary Brown than turn to him for advice.

BTW, you're reflexively assuming that Ohio is a good example. So is Tim Ryan, though he somehow managed to get elected here.

Ohio has a long history of electing strong, effective Democrats.

Why not ask Tammy Baldwin instead? Get it?

[geek tragedy]

173. WI is more liberal than Ohio

Trump destroyed Clinton in OH but only barely won in WI.

[OilemFirchen]

174. Sometimes.

Right now, in terms of Congressional representation, Governorship and State Congresses they look remarkably similar.

There's a reason they're called "swing" states.

[geek tragedy]

175. OH is a lot more swingy.

Before the orange filth, WI had voted Democratic every presidential election since 1984. Even Michael Dukakis managed to carry it.

[OilemFirchen]

178. And right now Ohio is less knuckledraggy.

Walker vs. Kasich.
Johnson vs. Portman.

My question stands.

[geek tragedy]

181. re: Baldwin, she's only run one statewide race.

And while she did quite well in it, generally it would take two elections before I'm sold on someone being able to close the deal.

[karynnj]

74. I agree and they need to know that there are some embedded views that they are considered

dumber. I may be showing my age, but I remember laughing at a New Yorker cover that showed a map of the world as seen by New Yorkers. ( https://condenaststore.com/featured/view-from-9th-avenue-saul-steinberg.html ) That and the phrase "fly over country" made many think that they were not even considered by the powerful people from the coasts. Media depictions don't help - with fast talking people on the coast seeming more with it than slower talking people from the South and most of the middle of the country (noticeably NOT the Chicago area which is more like NYC and Boston in both how fast they speak and the strong component of sarcasm in their humor.)

I think that as that perception is there, we may need an outreach by people from those places - no matter where the nominee is from. One problem is when a leading Senator or Congressman feels that speaking of the nominee (or sitting President) would harm them rather than be neutral or help them. What this does is lessen the voices that people could see as "like them" on the side of our nominee. Not to mention, the Republicans will still tie the Congressional etc candidates to the President if they see it as harmful. I would argue that, given that, they could look to see things that helped (or at least are neutral) that the President did. They would then be fighting over the frame rather than staying apart and having the Republicans cast the most negative frame they could. Looking at the 2014 races would be a good place to see what I am speaking of. It does not help when top Democrats argue quite publicly that the President doing anything for a candidate in many races would be harmful.

Another thing is we have to realize that whether warranted or not, there is an embedded belief among many in the south and midwest that they are seen as dumb or country bumpkins. Given this is there, our leaders need to avoid saying anything that could trigger these memes. I was stunned at Thanksgiving when a successful, very intelligent brother in law from North Carolina with roots in Montana, a wonderful husband and father to 3 adult girls, spoke of how he voted for Hillary who he saw as calling people "like him" deplorables. His view was she saw people in red states as stupid and worse. He totally voted against Trump. I tried explaining that that was NOT at all what she was saying -- something that I was certainly not the first to say to him - many of his nieces and nephews were very active volunteering or (in one case) working for the Clinton campaign. Still, I was struck by the raw emotion and hurt that was there with the anger.

As to Pelosi and Schumer not having a lot of contact with Joe Sixpack, I doubt that Ryan or McConnell do either. While some have roots in the middle class, by this point, they probably have far more contact with wealthier people, who both want something from them and who can fund their campaigns. Public financing or limiting money spent on campaigns could change this. However, it is likely still true that an idea pushed by someone who is successful will be given more thought. In any community, those encouraged to run for anything are those who have been successful in something. However, both Schumer and Pelosi did not come from the 1%.

Pelosi grew up in a Baltimore, the daughter of an Italian immigrant mother and a father who became mayor of Baltimore. Her brother also became mayor. Pelosi actually worked for the Democratic party in San Francisco for more than a decade before running in a special election for the House. Certainly in that decade she worked with many Joe Sixpacks!

As irritating as Schumer can be, his father was an exterminator. Schumer was a very very smart kid, who was valedictorian of his Brooklyn high school, which I think was a magnet school. After college and law school, he ran for NY state assembly, then Congress and finally the Senate. To win either of the first two, he had to meet and win over some Joe Sixpacks -- this was before Brooklyn became cool.

I suspect that both Pelosi and Schumer could do what I saw Frank Lautenberg do at a Democratic event, though likely not as personally. At a Democratic county picnic, he was asked something about either OSHA or unions (I don't remember the question), but he then spoke passionately about why he has worked on these issues for his entire career. He spoke of how his father and uncles came as immigrants to this country and how they got jobs in Patterson NJ silk mills. He spoke of his dad telling him he had to do very well in school and go to college and never work in the mills. He also told his son that looking up to the light coming in the windows, you could see hundreds of small fragments floating in the air and how this had to be bad for workers like himself. Both his father and uncle died young, Lautenberg served in WWII, went to college on the GI bill and eventually founded a company that made him wealthy. His early life informed him throughout his long career and he never stopped thinking of people like his dad.

I would bet that both Schumer and Pelosi know or knew far more middle class and lower people than Donald Trump ever did - as did Hillary Clinton. In fact, Trump's main contact with Joe Sixpack might have been as a distant slumlord. What he did know how to do was to play to the worst, basest prejudices of people. They may still not realize that he really is "not one of them" or intending to really help them in any way. He played many people searching for a savior to help them out of the problems they really are in. Soon they will learn that he will actually hurt them - taking away their insurance, that the RW media, told them was bad.

Until I moved to Vermont, I did not really understand the absolute demand that any representative - no matter how powerful nationally - had to speak to local people in their towns. I doubt anyone in Vermont was surprised that Bernie could speak effectively to people across the country. He did this for years in town hall after town hall for years in Vermont. The surprise was that a 74 year old Democratic Socialist could do better than 5 % or so.

I may be very naive, but I would bet that if we can get a nominee who has little baggage, who is positive and who uses Iowa and NH well to be seen talking on serious issues to regular people, opening up about her/himself , we will beat either a battered, disgusting Trump or a damaged ideologically extreme Pence easily. I think in the next year, we may see more possibilities emerge. I do not think that we should ever rule out people just for coming from areas of the country - especially areas we are strongest in. (I know you did not say that -- but others have especially in 2005/2006)

[geek tragedy]

114. I agree that the main considerations for 2020 are (1) clean and (2) talented/likeable.

Need that "new car smell."

It goes to the deeper culture too. How many fictional television programs are set in areas with significant numbers of working class voters or even outside cities? How many movies?

For every Roseanne or Friday Night Lights, there are dozens of shows like Friends, Seinfeld, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Saturday Night Live, Big Bang Theory. Even stuff aimed at middle America audiences--CSI, Law and Order franchises, are set in big cities.

Even stuff like House Hunters caters to big city/economic affluent types. How often does one see people on such shows turning their noses up at flooring/cabinetry/countertops that most people in working class neighborhoods live with?

Pelosi used to have contact with those voters, but that was a LONG time ago. Hillary used to have similar contact--those skills can disappear if not used.

Schumer does have experience in chasing upstate NY votes, and does pretty well up there. Mainly by being a relentless constituent service guy who goes to bat for every local project and issue imaginable. Not sure that's replicable on a larger scale.

[emulatorloo]

121. So a conservadem tabula rasa like Tim Ryan?

Who are you thinking about?

[geek tragedy]

122. more like Booker or Gillibrand or Klobuchar. nt

[emulatorloo]

123. Ok n/t

[LAS14]

168. I agree, but is "clean" achievable in the era of "her e-mails" campaigns? nt

[geek tragedy]

171. Obama managed to keep squeaky clean

The Clintons were concerned mostly with the letter of the law, not so much about avoiding the appearance of impropriety. Obama chose to err on the side of caution and to stay far away from the line.

[qwlauren35]

213. There's one word in there...

that effectively separates Pelosi and Schumer from the Rust Belt: immigrants.

People in the Rust Belt have at least a century of American roots. Maybe more. They often have English names. Saying that your parents were immigrants doesn't win any points with them. Might even take some away.

Try again...

[Me.]

41. Do You Think There Are More People In Individual Rust Belt Towns?

“As of 2005, Brooklyn was home to 929,459 enrolled Democrats”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooklyn_Democratic_Party

“There are now more registered voters in California than the population of 46 states “

http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-sac-essential-politics-updates-there-are-now-more-registered-voters-in-1475694802-htmlstory.html

“345,084 Dems in San Fran as of 2016”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_San_Francisco

[Ace Rothstein]

73. You're making the point for that poster.

Democrats are packed into cities. Winning just those locations isn't going to win us the House or Senate. If we completely abandon the South and Midwest, we have to run the table in every other location just to keep things close.

[Me.]

77. Not Quite

Because I didn't dismiss winning in places other than those I mentioned but they shouldn't be dismissed or taken for granted either. And we do need to pay attention to our loyal base because they are getting fed up with being taken for granted. Black women have been addressing this issue recently and still are mostly being ignored.

[Tom Rinaldo]

75. It's a by product of the electoral college

The distribution of voters becomes a major factor, not just the numbers. For a very related constitutional reason control of the U.S. Senate has a lot to do with voter distribution also, with Idaho and Nebraska receiving as many Senators as California and New York.

If we are skillful in our recruiting it is possible to find prairie populists, and Labor activists who can compete for us in areas far removed from either ocean. They may in some cases put a greater emphasis on issues of their own regions concerns, but that doesn't have to equate with a softened stance on social justice.

[geek tragedy]

108. there are more swing voters in those towns.

Winning 80-20 in Brooklyn and San Francisco doesn't do us much good if we're losing a bunch of other areas 52-48.

[Me.]

125. What May Have Been Seems To Be Changing

“The 2020 census will almost certainly show a continued shift in population — and therefore electoral power — away from the Northeast and Midwest and toward the South and West. The political impact of that shift is harder to assess: Most of the fastest-growing states voted for Trump in 2016, but the demographic groups that are growing fastest, particularly Latinos, tend to vote Democratic. Cities, which voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton, are likewise growing faster than rural areas, which voted overwhelmingly for Trump.

What is clear, however, is that demographic trends are accelerating the existing southward migration of the nation’s center of political gravity. Traditional Northern and Midwestern swing states like Pennsylvania and Ohio are likely to lose electoral votes and congressional seats, while states like Texas and Arizona — which aren’t swing states now but are becoming more competitive — are likely to gain them. Florida, which is already among the swingiest swing states, will also likely gain seats. That means Trump’s strategy of appealing to Rust Belt voters could be less successful in future races.”

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-rust-belt-elevated-trump-but-its-electoral-power-is-dwindling/

[geek tragedy]

126. at the end of the day we need to get to 270 EVs and 218 members in the House nt

[BlueCaliDem]

140. Maybe someone needs to wake the WWC voters and tell them Repub policies can't only affect PoC

and exempt them, but that laws are for EVERYONE - including them. The only exemptions Congress pass are for themselves (congresscritters), not we little people, which include the White Working Class.

I know WWC voters support "safety-net reform" but I also know that they mean to reform those safety net programs to exclude PoC, not them.

Problem is, under our Constitution (and they'd know this if they actually read their Constitution), everyone has equal protection under the law (except rich people who have more than everyone else, that is) and that Republican policies pushed through and signed into law will affect everyone...not just those dastardly PoC they so love to hate.

[bettyellen]

141. The "culturally anxious" need to snap out of it.

[geek tragedy]

142. if only it were that simple, unfortunately persuading them is much more difficult nt

[Stinky The Clown]

7. I completely agree

This pissed me off, too.

[LaydeeBug]

14. Yep. The whole idea is divisive bullshit. We did not lose what was stolen. Fuck this. nt

[BlueCaliDem]

55. Me, too. I mean, put any Dem up and they'll be as demonized with millions of $$'s as our current

leaders in House and Senate. Look what they're already doing with Chuck Schumer!

"Un-pelosing" the Party only means you've giving in to the tens of millions of dollars of LIES propagandized in those low-informed States. Only way to defeat this is to attack advertisers of AM HateRadio & Fox "News" shows because *they're* the ones propagating lies against Dems.

Hit back hard with the truth: Dems passed the social safety net YOU and YOURS enjoy: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, weekends off, minimum wage, etc. Republicans have done NOTHING for you. In fact they want to take these minimal protections away from you and yours.

Also, the Constitution doesn't allow Republicans to pass bills to harm only PoC. Every bill they pass with hurt YOU and YOURS, too. So if you're voting for them to take stuff away from PoC only, you're only lying to yourself.

[emulatorloo]

106. I agree 100%. I posted below that it as if these folks have surrendered to the

the right-wing lie maschine. Tim Ryan's pretty naive if he thinks he or any other Dem won't get the same treatment by those propagandists.

[DURHAM D]

11. Right there with you.

To me Progressive means - "White Guys who want things".

I am a liberal. Always have been. Always will be.

P.S. I live in a deep red state.

[ananda]

69. Interesting.

And I call those white guys who want things Republican Lite.

I am a liberal too!

[yardwork]

53. I agree. This is stupid.

[haele]

79. Artical is misleading yet again. It's not the Working Class Whites that are fleeing the party.

It's the suburban mega-church whites, who already fled the cities because of their small-world bigotry and fears of losing their sense of privilege. It's from their demographic the Tea Party arose. They're hiding their political expediency behind the already solidly Republican wing-nut WCWs who would never have voted for a "N-loving" Democrat to begin with.
This is "Divide and Conquer" from the Right. This is a political posture from the Chamber of Commerce crew, and I suspect the DLC types who are already leaving, ignoring core Democratic Principles for the short-term benefit of their bank accounts and wine parties.

Working Class Whites who were Democrats already haven't "left" the Democratic party. Just stick with the platform and work for all the issues on it, because narrowing the platform down and "focusing" on specific economic, environmental, or social justice concerns to the exclusion of other equally important issues is foolish will do more to drive away members of the constituency than maintaining an organizational handling of a wide range of concerns.
We have the resources at the National level to engage in all issues in a consistent and effective Democratic manner - if people are willing to work together instead of turning governance into a Death Cage Match.
"Two Issues Enter, One Issue Leaves" is not the way to run an organization.

Haele

[Gothmog]

127. I agree

This plan also offends me

[TheFrenchRazor]

155. yeah, what you said. count me out. nt

[LWolf]

194. I'm sure it does.

Of course, everyone who reads it will spin it differently; those who feel it refers to them are bound to be defensive. Just look at the rest of the thread! And, of course, you've just reinforced the very quote you are protesting: “It’s hard to convince people around here sometimes how toxic our brand is. But, clearly the brand is damaged, and we need to see if something else can work.”

To answer your question/s:

I don't throw anyone under the bus. Anyone. I'll admit that there are some I would, if I were willing to compromise my own integrity, like the neo-liberals in the party do, but I'm not.

I think people who are truly, in their minds, hearts, and souls, for all those groups you mention would want candidates who would walk their talk. Who would give more than lip service. But that's just me. I know that the DU of 2017 is going to disagree.

As for me, I stand for human rights: every person is equal in dignity and rights. Every person is welcome at my table. We are in the world together.

[Coventina]

199. So what is the "new" Democrat going to stand for that the Dem. platform doesn't

already stand for?

Hillary had a plan for the WWC. It was a real plan, not a lie that "your old jobs are coming back."

Exactly what is this "new" Democrat going to do that Hillary, Sherrod Brown, and the rest isn't already doing?

[LWolf]

209. Well,

I wouldn't call "different" the "new" Democrat; that's the label embraced by the not-so-new neoliberals.

"Different" is:

1. NOT A FUCKING NEOLIBERAL. That right there is the first step.

2. Firmly and comfortably to the left of the neoliberal centrists.

3. Either not a capitalist at all, or someone advocating a heavily regulated hybrid.

What does a "different kind" of Democrat do?

Well, a "different kind" of Democrat doesn't talk about social justice while actively working to deny us economic justice; AND doesn't pretend that the two aren't linked.

Walk the talk. Don't just talk about it. Actually ACT for both social and economic justice.

[Coventina]

210. So....why does that require getting rid of Nancy Pelosi?

Is she a "fucking neoliberal?"

[LWolf]

216. Pelosi

has certainly sided with, and supported, those "fucking neoliberals" many times, at the least.

She's also the Democrat who took the impeachment of GWB "off the table." That right there was unforgivable...to me.

[riderinthestorm]

215. +1000 nt

[LonePirate]

2. Except Pelosi is not the problem Dems face in the Rust Belt.

Dems ceded much of the Rust Belt to Republicans who filled the vacuum with anti-Democrat messaging. It's taken a toll. The issue we face is one of getting out our message. It has nothing to do with the messenger. Most Rust Belt voters have very little familiarity with Pelosi as she largely been out of the national spotlight since Repubs took control of the House in 2011.

[Thrill]

54. It's not but they need to start pushing some of these younger leaders

The party needs new younger leaders. Let's see Sherrod, Van Holden, and Tim Ryan more

[crazycatlady]

70. But every Democrat running is associated with her by the GOP

I believe they're running ads in GA-06 associating Jon Ossoff with her. They may have used her in Montana ads.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

3. *Barf*

Pelosi has been a strong and effective Congresswoman and Speaker of the House. Why the hell do (some) Democrats want to run away from that and/or treat her and like-minded Democrats as though they are toxic pariahs? Grrr......we don't need Republicans to destroy our party. We have our own circular firing squad.

[mhw]

4. "A different kind of democrat"??

That's what the Koch funded Tea Party said as they set out to dismantel the Republican Party.

Yippee!

[awesomerwb1]

37. And now they control all branches of government.

Not sure they were successful in 'dismantling' anything.

[mhw]

87. ? To the destruction of our our nation. Yippee.

This will continue the fracturing of any unity, so how is it a good thing?

The 'new & improved democratic party' will be represented by whom?
How do they intend to assure the true Democrats that the fringe groups & the 'kinda somdays but not really" groups are all in this big Party remo for everyone under the big Dem tent , rather than one self serving group over the other?

Which group will get to re-write the rules of this 'new & improved" Dem Party?

Would have been a lot easier if all the fringe groups would have united to seat the Dems in power first, then worked with that power to see that changeds were made.

This stupid move will be the fracture that keeps the Republican fascists in power for a very long time.

The fracturing of the great big Dem Party was the intention all along of the powerful money & corruption that gave us the future we're staring at today.

This move would please the billionares & the KOCHs.
They've been wanting this forever.

Its stupid & there will be no returning to life & Constitution nor Civil Right, pre-Nov 2016

This stupid idea is the final blow to any American free society we all knew.

Rah rah..get rid of Pelosi..yippee
How to achieve total Fascism 101.

My god.

[awesomerwb1]

100. Didn't say it's a good thing so calm down.

The dems have been asleep at the wheel for a long time. Did you expect everyone to remain happy with the status quo? Bernie exposed a crack. And that crack is not mending itself. (Not a Bernie nor a Hillary fan here /disclaimer).

You also assume, taking into account the tea party example as well, you assume the dem party will crack. So in a sense you agree that leadership has been lacking?

I don't know what the answer is to be honest. I wish we had one or two people to rally/unify behind. (Instead of just Chump).

Yeah, "different kind of dem"....I don't like the sound of it either.

[mhw]

102. Exposed a crack??! No he created it.

He gets no love from me so keep him outta this conversation.
Btw where's his taxes? Where's his FEC papers?

I questuon his purpose in the mix of things.

And no, he is no Dem. Loathes the dem party & I don't give a shit how often he voted with them.

He is an opportunist willing to divide the party at an unbelievably critical time ofour Nation's survival.
When we needed rallying for unity, he thrived on the glory of division.

Thanks for trump bs.
Bernie could have done far more. But an opportunist does only what is needed for himself.

Like it or not, this is how it is today.

And this is my opinion.

[murielm99]

188. +1000

[mhw]

189. Thank you.

Meanwhile he's off to Europe to hock his book.

Can we get a replacement to fill his Senate seat while he's away on personal business?

Wtf.

[moda253]

191. Not that I have ever been a fan but...

This isn't the republican party of old. this isn't Goldwaters GOP. This is a perverted fucked up seussical nightmare version of the GOP who has always always been awful. They are just now awful with 1000% more awful.

[LWolf]

196. Yes.

I think we need a different kind of party. A party that is NOT neo-liberal. That's the difference that might bring in the rust-belt; a party that fights for an economy that serves the 99%, not the oligarchy.

[mhw]

197. "a party that fights for an economy that serves the 99%, not the oligarchy".

Then stop dividing the Dem Party.

Or you can keep getting the Trump Oligarchy.

Your choice.

[LWolf]

207. That's a two-way street. nt

[mcar]

5. Let's throw the most successful Speaker in recent history under the bus

Sure, that'll work.

[Greybnk48]

8. This is fucking drivel.

We're liberals, not Republican lite. AND we're in the majority. Nancy Pelosi is among the greatest Speakers we've ever had, if not the greatest. If this is the future of the Democratic Party, it will happen without me.

[NurseJackie]

10. Oh good lord! This shit needs to stop.

[ProfessorGAC]

81. Funny Gif, Jackie!

And spot on in its application.

[mhw]

109. Pointless. Thank you.

Guess if you want to end the life of the great Dem party that has forever battled for the rights of man vs corporate greed, the best way to do so is remove its head & heart.

What's remains are scattered limbs that failed to all fight together in fending off the assailant, because they were too preoccupied with the promise of the big shiny thing waveing at them.

Dive & conquer..oldest game in history.

[Gothmog]

129. LOL

[DinahMoeHum]

12. The website to Peoples House Project. . .

http://www.peopleshouseproject.com

Please bear in mind that this site just launched yesterday and there are obviously some kinks to iron out and social media links to fill.


Here are the Twitter and Facebook pages of its founder, former congressional candidate Krystal Ball:
https://twitter.com/krystalball?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

https://www.facebook.com/krystalonline/

Her Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krystal_Ball

[Me.]

18. Krystal Ball!

So this is what she's been up to with pushing her new book and poor white male message. Joy Reid put her in her place but good last weekend. And let me just say that this is so self-serving and she's not in this for the sake of the party but herself.

[muriel_volestrangler]

61. Krystal Ball: born, educated and stood for office on the coast (Virginia), now moved to Kentucky

to tell people there they've had enough of coastal liberals.

[Me.]

80. I View Her As An Opportunist

Who wants to be back in the spotlight as when she was on that afternoon show. She was on with Joy Reid who got her number pretty fast. The segment was supposed to be about how black women, the most loyal of Dem voters, are tired of being taken for granted. All K Ball could talk about was white economic voters. Joy eventually got fed up with her and actually ended the segment saying "I've had enough of this".

[Gothmog]

131. I enjoyed watching Joy Reid deal with Ms Ball

[justiceischeap]

13. My "people" live in the mid-west and they ARE a different kind of Democrat

Some of them are socially liberal, some aren't. What they are, is tired of the Federal Government not doing anything and they don't understand necessarily that it's because of Repubs or their stranglehold on the House. They just see inaction and good jobs slipping away.

They don't know or care who Nancy Pelosi is...unless she can get them a good paying job. Period.

[Coventina]

17. So, "a different kind of Democrat" means an ignorant one?

They don't know who Nancy Pelosi is?

Have they ever thought about improving their state of ignorance?

I'm just surprised that these Democrats who don't understand how the government works (or doesn't) or who their party's leadership is.

[justiceischeap]

19. That's because they're trying to provide for their families

They know how the government works generally and in the abstract but they don't know or care who party leaders are. They know their state reps and that's it. I was there during the 2016 election and the appeal of Trump was jobs, jobs, jobs. I stood on-line with my aunt while she went to vote and that's really what the majority of folks were talking about.

[WinkyDink]

22. More fools, they. Maybe they should try educating themselves.

[justiceischeap]

40. More fools, you.

Your elitism is showing. Not everyone is the perfect Democrat. Not everyone is as educated as they can be...not everyone has the time to post on DU and watch Rachel or read the Post or Times. They are too busy trying to provide for their families and spend time with their families after working 12-14 hour days to make ends meet.

[Coventina]

62. Citizenship has its responsibilities. WE are the government.

Nobody is talking about being the "perfect" Democrat. We're talking basic citizenship here.

That's not elitism, that's responsibility.

People don't have to watch Rachel (I don't) or read the Post or Times necessarily, but they DO have a responsibility to keep informed.

I work 12-14 hour days and somehow I manage to do it.

[WinkyDink]

165. Oh, rilly?

[Demsrule86]

26. That might be true...but Pelosi very good Speaker has nothing to do with this.

And Trump promised to fix trade...but here in Ohio we have had more jobs in autos sent to Mexico and our people are on layoff...so hopefully people will realize, they were duped...tried to warn them. Democrats do need to address jobs in rust belt states and other states for that matter...the message that 'the jobs are not coming back' won't work...and no retraining bullshit either...how many were retrained for jobs that didn't exist?

[Me.]

15. I'm Sick To Death Of These Self Appointed Dems

Who Throw The Party Under The Bus.

Rahm tried the blue dog approach which helped us lose the house in the first place but maybe sore loser Ryan, conveniently, doesn’t remember that. What’s toxic is an economic message that leaves out all but white men but yes let’s throw the most effective, and female, speaker out.

[Demsrule86]

35. Ryan is up for re-election in a state that went double digits for Trump.

And he is wrong about Nancy Pelosi (he ran against her for speaker). She is awesome. But he is right about the jobs aspect. This is why many Ohioans voted for Trump. Oh sure some were racist, but it was mostly jobs. Trump made promises that he won't keep...but people felt like they had nothing to lose. Consider, that Pres. Obama promised to revisit NAFTA and didn't. He did save autos, and Ohio voted for him twice for that. Something needs to be done about jobs. Now we know the GOP lies...but sometimes lies work(2016). We (Democrats) should be crafting a realistic plan to encourage 21st century manufacturing. We would hold the rust-belt and maybe the South which has been decimated with job losses due to trade if we successfully implemented such a plan once back in power...but you can not write off cities like Detroit, Gary and Youngstown forever.

[Me.]

44. Revisiting NAFTA Will Not Provide Jobs

And many manufacturing jobs are not coming back, any more than coal mine jobs, because of automation. It's a tough situation but what has to start happening is retraining for what is/will be available. I'm not advocating writing off any city any more than I am in favor of lip service or lying. I know the coal miners were mad at Hillary for telling the truth but should we lie as 45 did to win the electoral college, cause as we all know he didn't win the popular vote.

[Demsrule86]

64. You have to keep promises...I have also suggested we need a plan for manufacturing and other jobs

in the 21st century. But trade is the issue in the rust belt and that is a fact. Here in Ohio... some hatchback Cruzes are made in Mexico, and some Mexican made Cruzes have been allowed to be sold in the US (only a few so far) and the third shift is down. So don't expect people to believe that NAFTA and other trade agreements don't cost jobs...layoffs at Ford as well...thousands auto people on layoff right now. If a Democratic president comes up with a solution that puts people everywhere back to work, he/she will be as admired as FDR was, and the Democratic Party will be successful for many years.

[Me.]

82. I Agree That Promises Must Be Kept

And that we need a plan for this century but I really don't think the solution is changing NAFTA, even if you could get a pol/prez to agree to change it. I think an investment of money for retraining is needed. Also, mentioning FDR, the county's infastructure is in dire need. A WPA to build/repair, bridges, roads etc., would provide a multitude of jobs across the country.

[Demsrule86]

144. NAFTA needs to be adjusted...in terms of wages paid in Mexico...you need to have

reasonable wages paid in Mexico...to level the playing field. This is true everywhere or we should tariff the hell out of companies that basically use slave labor...it has created a rush to the bottom. We also need to stop the use of prison labor here and abroad.

[Me.]

166. Wages Are An Issue

But until we in this country can settle the wage issue for itself and provide a living wage for all, to demand it of others is a don’t do as we do, do as we say situation. But the solution to jobs is multifaceted and we as a country need to get smart. What was will no longer be. Did you know there is a machine that weighs as much as a car and is equipped with 4000 needles that can create a decent blazer for a man in 90 minutes.? And yes, prison labor is a real scam, but again it is an interior problem. This country needs to wake up and be responsible for its citizens. The problem is that it was never an overnight situation and with 45 in charge it has become nearly impossible. And if there is an economic message to be delivered that is it. But it is one which is depressing for those in dire need because they’ve been lied to and nothing of any consequence is being done to help them, now, when they need food on the table. The infrastructure solution is one that could start tomorrow if only someone would care enough to move it forward.

[Demsrule86]

192. I am very familiar with robotics...but the Lordstown Ohio jobs have

not been lost to robotics but to Mexico because of cheap labor. Jobs are going overseas to cheap labor areas and it is not just blue collar these days either...many white collar jobs are being lost and HP is a disaster too.

[Motownman78]

132. US Manufacturing output has gone up by $800 Billion AFTER NAFTA

But 8.5 millions jobs have been lost. People in Ohio need to realize it is not Jose taking their jobs, it is Skynet.

[Demsrule86]

143. No it has not. They count all sorts of things...like farming and they count stuff made overseas and

come back...millions of jobs in manufacturing and support jobs have been lost since NAFTA...if we want to end inequality, we need to do something about jobs.


NAFTA at 20: One Million U.S. Jobs Lost, Higher Income Inequality
By Lori Wallach
240
"My New Year’s celebrations this year were haunted by memories of January 1, 1994 — the day that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) went into effect. I remember crying that day, thinking about the proud men and women in union halls across America, the Mexican campesinos and the inspiring Canadian activists I had met during the fight against NAFTA, and hoping desperately that our dire predictions would be proved wrong.

They were not. In short order, the damage started. And, we started to document it.

For NAFTA’s unhappy 20th anniversary, Public Citizen has published a report that details the wreckage. Not only did promises made by NAFTA’s proponents not materialize, but many results are exactly the opposite.

Such outcomes include a staggering $181 billion U.S. trade deficit with NAFTA partners Mexico and Canada and the related loss of 1 million net U.S. jobs under NAFTA, growing income inequality, displacement of more than one million Mexican campesino farmers and a doubling of desperate immigration from Mexico, and more than $360 million paid to corporations after “investor-state” tribunal attacks on, and rollbacks of, domestic public interest policies.

The study makes for a blood-boiling read. For instance, we track the specific promises made by U.S. corporations like GE, Chrysler and Caterpillar to create specific numbers of American jobs if NAFTA was approved, and reveal government data showing that instead, they fired U.S. workers and moved operations to Mexico.

The data also show how post-NAFTA trade and investment trends have contributed to middle-class pay cuts, which in turn contributed to growing income inequality; how since NAFTA, U.S. trade deficit growth with Mexico and Canada has been 45 percent higher than with countries not party to a U.S. Free Trade Agreement, and how U.S. manufacturing exports to Canada and Mexico have grown at less than half the pre-NAFTA rate."

[Motownman78]

146. Here is a link for US Manufacturing

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/OUTMS

There is this from market watch.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-manufacturing-dead-output-has-doubled-in-three-decades-2016-03-28

NAFTA has had a minimal effect on US Manufacturing. I really do hope President Snowflakes renogotiates it so people can see that it was not the thing killing their jobs when the jobs STILL don't come back.

[Demsrule86]

148. The opening paragraph...

A Modest Impact

"For all that, most studies conclude that NAFTA has had only a modest positive impact on U.S. GDP. For example, according to a 2014 report by the Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE), the United States has been $127 billion richer each year thanks to “extra” trade growth fostered by NAFTA. For the United States, with its population of 320 million at the time of that study, the pure economic payoff was thus only $400 per person, while per capita GDP was close to $50,000. And while the costs of NAFTA are highly concentrated in specific industries like auto manufacturing — where job losses may be significant for specific firms — the benefits of the trade pact (such as lower prices for imported electronics or clothing) are distributed widely across the U.S., as they are in the case of any trade pact worldwide."

NAFTA like all such agreements does not permit fair trade...it just doesn't. You can pretend that the jobs are lost to robots or whatever...and twist statistics by including farming and the like...but it is indisputable that jobs have gone overseas. And I think it is bad for the country and the Democratic Party as well. Now consider the lower prices for clothes, electronics and cars...we don't even make electronics in this country today...how many potential jobs lost is that? We don't make clothes either...again more jobs lost...and autos struggle to compete with companies from Germany, Korea and Japan who flood our markets but refuse to sell our cars in their country....sorry trade is a disaster and if you look at the de- industrialization of the UK and their subsequent loss of power...they followed the same path we are on. If as the article you shared is correct...and I don't think it is...the author is a big globalist apologist in my opinion, then we need even better agreements to safeguard jobs here at home...we need more better paying jobs.

[Greybnk48]

56. Our gerrymander has been overturned in Wisconsin

and districts must be redrawn before the 2018 election. Ryan's approval in his district is in the toilet. He has a viable challenger as on this week, and without the gerrymander, he'll need voting machine tampering to win. We need to secure our voting machines before then as well.

[Demsrule86]

60. That is great news!!!!!!

I used to live in Janesville...it was not a right wing area. Ryan seemed to be the local boy who made good...only lived there of a bit over a year GM closed, but it was a really nice area.

[Orsino]

16. 16 paragraphs that say nothing.

Consultants hinted at, a passing mention of some "economic message," a direct contradiction of the headline, a question (will the plan work?), and the story never gets around to what the new plan is supposed to be.

No, that's not emblematic of any widespread problem, is it?

[WinkyDink]

21. "distinguish themselves from the national party." Who's advising them, some Republican?

[ATL Ebony]

93. I wonder the same thing --

OPs message is too divisive for me, why not try a new concept like "working together" instead of against each other. I see this as an explosive party path vs winning plan. I hope cooler heads prevail and toss this divisive tactic.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. My old man had a ninth grade education and died at 58 putting up road signs in the hot Florida sun.

Only in the addled mind of a Deplorable can I be a member of the coastal elite because I live in Los Angeles. We work here too.

[NobodyHere]

24. Democrats definitely need to work on the messaging

They need to pick a few issues and rally behind them for the 2018 elections.

[WinkyDink]

27. HRC didn't?

[NobodyHere]

34. I live on the Ohio/Michigan border

All the democratic ads I saw were how bad a person Trump is.

The republican ads were half benghazi/emails and half how Trump was going to bring jobs back and renegotiate deals made by bad politicians.

We here know Trumpy is full of covfefe but his messaging worked in the midwest.

[Motownman78]

133. And they will turn on him

when those obs don't come back because they won't, no matter what. Automation rules the day.

[dawg]

25. We need to stop running away from ourselves.

We should be proud of Nancy Pelosi. (And Hillary Clinton, and Bernie Sanders, and Barack Obama)

It's a good idea for us to try and refresh the brand. And I don't have a problem with candidates describing themselves as a "new" kind of Democrat.

But they should stop short of piling on to right-wing criticism of other Dems.

Reagan's 11th commandment was, "Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican." Not exactly the guy we want to emulate in most respects, but the man knew how to win elections.

[Demsrule86]

38. I agree with you. Ryan is my congressman...and Trump took Trumbull county.

I don't think he helps himself...GOP types won't vote for him and he discourages Democrats...he is running scared. But for all that he is right about the rust-belt, jobs and trade issues.

[Me.]

46. Amen

[justiceischeap]

203. The thing is, for the Rust Belt, we NEED moderate Dems

I know they are persona non grata on DU but they aren't in the mid-west or the South. I'm not talking Repub-lite, I'm talking moderates. Claire McCaskill comes to mind. The Rust Belt isn't as progressive as the coasts and, IMO, we shouldn't force them to be. We can gradually push but forcing never works.

Also, we need a message other than Trump sucks. Because voters likely to flip will probably say, "Yeah, he does, how are you different and what can you do for me?"

[dawg]

205. Yes, but we can do that without trashing other Dems in the process.

I've got no problem with running centrists in districts where only a centrist would stand a chance of winning. But we do ourselves no favors when we appear to validate right-wing criticisms of other prominent Democrats. Because, moderate or not, that is our brand.

[NCTraveler]

28. Fox News style analysis.

"The party improved its performance but has still fallen short of winning three straight special elections in Kansas, Georgia (which goes into a runoff in June), and Montana."

[Txbluedog]

30. I'm sure Pelosi will not be a problem for most of ya...

When she is running for re-election as minority leader in Jan 2019 also. I'm getting tired of this blame anyone but the party leadership and Candidates bs. Yes there was Russian interference in the 2016 election but people like to pretend that Hillary was the prefect candidate with no faults is a bit much. Same with Pelosi, she lost the Speakership 6 years ago and nothing has been her fault since. She's prefect.

[Ohioblue22]

33. I don't know anyone who thinks she perfect I think the word was qualified

The Russian did do a lot of damage it got the dem party infighting and the dems let itself get divided .

[Txbluedog]

42. Really? I have myself have been referred to the moderators here if I dared to cirtisize her during

the election. I think she was one of the most qualified candidates to run for President but she had A LOT of baggage that was never addressed

[Demsrule86]

47. Really...that sounds really odd to me.

As the baggage was addressed ad nauseum here.

[Txbluedog]

50. Yes it was

but not because people were open to discussing it. There are a lot of members here who could not tolerate any discussion of Whitewater, Bill's infidelities and all of the other controversies from his time in office

[Coventina]

63. That's because every issue you bring up was not Hillary's issue.

Whitewater was resolved back in the 90s, and Bill's infidelities are Bill's, not Hillary's.

Trying to smear her with those topics certainly would NOT be tolerated on DU.

[mhw]

98. And these are the people now promoting the "get rid of Pelosi" meme?

After Pelosi, which strong Dem will be next?
Its pretty clear who those are, pushing the "New & Improved Dem Party" .

Fracture the Party of solidarity for the people & what's left is a bunch of fringe groups that could never agree on anything beyond their own personal wants.

Maybe when its all gone & fascism is permanent, they'll throw us a pittance of a monthly sum & re-name that old bleak life under socialism something cool like, " basic income".
By that time you can forget ever negotiating for anthing other than what the "new & improved Republican Party" thinks you're worth.

[mhw]

91. Whitewater was a bs smear propaganda campaign against the Clinton's, by ..

Kellyanne Conway's (now) husband.

The same Rovian group who are still playing the game today.

Whitewater was a lie.

[emulatorloo]

97. so your spouse cheats on you and it is your fault? Good to know.

[Demsrule86]

145. And why should Bill Clinton's infidelity's be discussed? It is a personal matter

and he holds no office. I suppose you read TOS?

[bettyellen]

161. Because Bill wasn't running- a successful former Sec of State was....

Infidelity? Give me a fucking break. Why would Dems focus on bullshit like that and whitewater?

[Ohioblue22]

66. The cons have been investigating her "baggage " for 25 years

And found nothing . But her "baggage" really isn't something for the dems to try and sort out once she became the party nom

[Demsrule86]

39. That is total BS...Nancy did not lose the speakership...Democratic voters who failed to show up

in midterms lost the House and the states which the GOP promptly gerrymandered. She has done a great job in holding her caucus and is a genius...look at the so called progressives (green trash) who took their ball and went home in 2010 if you want to blame someone...I well remember a poster here who called Obama a used car salesman.

[Txbluedog]

43. So they failed to show up in 2010, 2012, 2014 and 2016......

and it is not her fault at all? She is the leader of the party in the House---when you constantly keep losing seats election after election (4 and counting now) at some point you have to accept responsibility that it may have something to do with your leadership as well as the other factors mentioned.

[Demsrule86]

45. After the census in 2010 (gerrymander) combined with the banning of big Dem donors,

we lost...and it had nothing to do with Nancy. No it is not her fault...that the GOP gerrymandered the House...actually I think some who call themselves progressives but who voted for Greens and others (non-Democrats) in past elections should accept responsibility. Teaching Democrats a lesson, as I have seen some post on twitter, sure cost us in the end. Try voting for the candidate with the 'D' next to his/her name. You would be amazed at how effective that will be...be the change you seek.

[mhw]

110. Thank you.

[Demsrule86]

49. Yes she is perfect actually...no one could have held her caucus as she has...

[Txbluedog]

51. I hope that most democrats don't think like you

otherwise Pelosi will has quite a few more years of being MINORITY leader in her future

[Demsrule86]

65. I hope most Democrats think like me...so that we can win once more.

[dawg]

52. What do you think Speaker Pelosi should have done differently?

I'm certainly open to fresh ideas.

[stopbush]

32. We left coasters await Tim Ryan showing up in CA to fund raise

for candidates who will run as a different kind of flyover state Democrat from the kind of Democrat who lives in CA...NOT!

[mhw]

116. Counting on our CA Dems to drive that point home

Thank you CA.

[LWolf]

193. I'm a left-coaster,

just to the north of you. I'm not waiting for anyone to show up; I fully support the many great Democrats who have been elected in my state; the worst Democrat we've got is Ron Wyden, and that says quite a bit.

Which is, of course, beside the point of this article.

[Me.]

57. One More Thing About NP

She's always been the punching ball of choice for Cons so why is K Ball and her confederates adopting this strategy?

[DefenseLawyer]

58. Pretty comical how the old guard bristles at any notion they have a problem

[Blue_Tires]

72. It's not that, I'm just not completely sold on this 'solution'...

Last edited Wed May 31, 2017, 01:11 PM - Edit history (1)

And trying to sever yourself from the "educated coastal elite" Dems is just another way of indirectly making them an enemy, and I don't see how that helps the party...

[disillusioned73]

85. The thing that bothers me..

is that people are focusing on "messaging".. isn't it more effective if they work on actual policies & present folks something to vote for & not something to vote against..

[ismnotwasm]

90. Not this makes perfect sense to me

It's not divisive and it has a strong chance of working

[ismnotwasm]

89. Who the fuck is this "old guard"

You are referring to?

[emulatorloo]

94. Pretty comical when folks think the key to moving the party left is by purging liberals

[OilemFirchen]

179. Tim Ryan's been in office for fourteen years.

But do go on.

[DefenseLawyer]

180. You folks are nothing if not entertaining

It's like a Republican trying to explain supply side economics. Sure, it doesn't work and it's not working now but you have to trust us that if we just keep doing it, pretty soon we'll all be rich. Anyone who dares to question Milton Friedman is obviously a communist.

[OilemFirchen]

185. "You folks".

You've got a pretty good shtick going as well.

[BeyondGeography]

201. That's how we roll in the tenure party

It's good to have a results-resistant gig. As you can see, the rank-and-file is fully supportive.

[JI7]

59. they are ok with new yorkers like Trump

Let's just at least admit these people are Bigots.

[alarimer]

67. This group seems to have bought the Republican frame of what a Democrat is.

And also what a liberal is. Democrats don't win by being Repub-lite. That's not what people really want. They want truly progressive programs that help everyone, so what is needed is a full-throated defense of Social Security, Medicare, infrastructure spending (i.e. jobs), health care, etc. A sense that the party is truly for the people and not corporations. It would also help to describe exactly how destructive Republicans are to those things. Because they are.

I wonder who is really behind this group? What big-money Wall Street firm or Koch brothers analog is funding it? Because it smacks of astroturf, not true grassroots.

[That Guy 888]

68. No need to attack Pelosi, the Gop do that already. Never use Republican framing except...

when pointing out how out of touch they are. Why reinforce the idea that the Gop is right about anything? They should concentrate on the important part of their message: how Democratic candidates will improve their lives.

[emulatorloo]

105. Weird that Ball and Ryan appear to have surrendered to the right-wing lie machine

rather than fighting against it. GOP'ers will just find another Dem to demonize if Ball's successful in ending Pelosi's career.

[Freethinker65]

71. Midwesterner (Detroit born) here. This is bullshit

The GOP will brand any candidate with a D after their name an arugula eating Streisand/Soros/Pelosi/minority loving coming for your guns and bibles anti real-American.

Run good candidates and spend some money exposing the real GOP agenda and the votes will follow.

[Chipper Chat]

84. You got it!

I'm in Indiana and the democratic party has very little organization and no spine here. Hillary never came here to campaign. The churches control everything. They tell their congregations that democrats are evil gay-loving, abortion-seeking heathens and the people believe them. The young kids are indoctrinated at an early age and become life-long phobes-of-all-stripes. The backlash against Pence was fairly strong but the repubs quickly squashed it. Joe Donnelly managed to squeak through but that was an anomaly. The Trump supporters are hanging on. They say "well, give him a chance - he'll fix things." Disgusting.

[disillusioned73]

86. Bingo..

Completely agree - people see through "messaging" bullshit anyway...

[kcr]

95. Another one from Michigan here, grew up in Flint. Totally agree.

All this crap about messaging is nothing but marketing buzzword bullshit. Everything is about branding and being on message. It's the latest fad and it hasn't just invaded politics. It's everywhere. This type of marketing consulting has become a huge industry with its influence in just about everything, which is pretty ironic considering all the talk about how Dems have become so corporatist. Their aim is to convince everyone that they are a necessary component to success, no matter what goal you're trying to achieve. I realize that all politicians at a certain level use consultants, but this particular kind of faddish nonsense shouldn't be a substitute, particularly if you claim to be an alternative for corporatists.

[uponit7771]

182. +1

[stevenleser]

76. All we need to recapture the White House and Congress is Trump

His failure and the damage it will do to the Republican brand is more than enough.

[ismnotwasm]

92. I think this, but I'm insecure about it

Because I never underestimate bigotry. Trump is so consistently a fool---and everything he proposes is such a damn mess--no positive outcomes at all--I don't see how he is sustainable as a candidate and that before the Russia issues

[kentuck]

111. I am not so sure about this?

Hillary never attained 50% in any of the polls during the last campaign. The Democratic brand has some serious problems, for whatever reasons?

Nobody could define Donald Trump better than Hillary, yet she was not able to "win" the election? Also, we know, according to latest polls that Trump is losing very few of his base support. That alone makes him a threat to get re-elected, in my opinion.

[Motownman78]

135. He kept talking about jobs

THAT is why he got PA, MI, and WI to turn as well as OH. When he fails to deliver on that promise (And he will, those jobs are like coal jobs, never coming back), the first time angry white voters will turn on him or be so demoralized that they will not vote.

[nolabear]

78. Why don't they just admit they're Republicans instead?

Liberals bad. Elites (read, "educated and successful&quot bad. Donors bad. Pelosi and Schumer, bad.

They're casting about for a bill of goods that will rook the common folk into giving them money and votes the same way 45 did and the GOP jumped on. THere's not a bit of intent or substance in that article.

[mhw]

113. Their only purpose is to dismantle all power against fascism.

Agree with your post.

It is idiocy to take this ridiculous bait.
Fools rush in.

[ismnotwasm]

88. Oh for God sake.

What could possibly go wrong?

[bettyellen]

96. Crystal Ball again- she's full of shit.

[Demsrule86]

159. She joined on of those primary Dem groups...waste of time and money...

Attack Dems but leave the GOP alone...makes no sense.

[bettyellen]

160. Makes sense to her, if she's paid and gets attention.

[Else You Are Mad]

99. The problem is that...

The majority of districts in this nation do not share values with the coastal liberals. Yes, the raw numbers may be on the democratic side, but unless the Democrats win in as many districts as possible we will not elect enough candidates to the House and Senate and state legislatures nor will they be able to win in the post-Trump era electoral college. This is especially true since we will never be able to undo the damage do to the gerrymandering if we only win in the blue district cities in red states because they are far out numbered by the deeply red districts in said states.

I am not sure if what the OP outlines or anything will help outside of a mass migration to red states by liberals.

[chillfactor]

101. Pelosi got more done as Speaker of the House...

then many more before her and far more than the nothing ryan has done....I do not see any sense AT ALL in replacing her.

[emulatorloo]

103. Go ahead, Rep Ryan and Ms Ball, purge Pelosi. Gop'ers will move on and Demonize another Dem.

Why don't ya'll focus on how to counter the right-wing noise machine rather than helping them smear liberals?

[Hortensis]

107. No kidding. Seriously, radicals and reactionaries prefer losing

to cooperating. It's a huge part of what makes them them.

The teaparty version on the right is supposed to be an exception to their always losing. But the TPers only "won" for a brief time while and because they were in Charles Koch's harness -- pulling for the ultrawealthy against their own populist ideology. Unbelievably clueless.

As for the anti-Democratic left, they're failing to get their people in office, and I won't exactly be holding my breath waiting for them to "purge" Pelosi.

[emulatorloo]

115. Ryan's a relatively conservative Dem. He wants Pelosi's job.

I'm not saying that this is what's motivating him. He's no doubt sincerely believes in what he's recommending.

I just don't think he's thinking thru all the ramifications of what he's proposing.

[BlueCaliDem]

112. Hear! Hear! Tim Ryan and Ms. Ball need to STOP ATTACKING Democrats. Look at the good it did us

in last election.

Jeezus H. Effing Christ! Haven't they learned from the debacle of 2016??

Self-proclaimed Liberals inside the Dem Party who are attacking other Dems are only helping the GOP. This really has got to stop if we ever want to win back the House and Senate.

These so-called progressives are shooting themselves in the foot and US in the backs.

Not every State is as liberal as their districts or desires. In fact, many are NOT.

They haven't learned that painful lesson in 2010 when they called for the purging of 'blue-dog Dems' - encouraged by the likes of Leftist Thom Hartmann and former Republicans Cenk Uygur and Ed Schultz, day in, day out - and nearly killed the Democratic Party.

Result?

Teabagger sweep across the nation right on time for redistricting.

[emulatorloo]

119. Rep Ryan's relatively conservative. I just don't think he's thinking this through

[Hortensis]

130. I don't actually have him pegged, Emulatorloo,

aside from ambitious, and that's not bad. Do you?

I was speaking mainly of eager anti-party radicals and populists who see Ryan as a way to take down the upper echelons of the party. As for whether he's thought this through, my own biggest question is his end game -- whether he'd use them to gain power then go another way, or...?

Ryan's voted as a good Democrat in a district so strongly Democratic that all he's had to do is vote blue to get reelected. But the exact same thing could be said of Bernie Sanders, who's gotten himself reliably reelected for a quarter century by voting 97% with Democrats, while identifying Independent and insisting that his Democratic colleagues were all corrupt and needed to be replaced with people who walked his line--to save the party of course.

[emulatorloo]

134. Ryan's ok by me.

Agree that some folks have a misguided/self-defeating belief that taking out lifelong liberals will move the party left. Defies logic.

[Hortensis]

137. Lol. Logic does not rule, of course.

Opposition to a "the establishment," whatever it is, does.

My feeling about Ryan is pretty much the same as yours. Notably in the context of this discussion, he supported Hillary and the party in 2016. I'd be thrilled to have him as my congressman instead of our ALEC/Koch-aligned betrayer.

[uponit7771]

183. +1

[LWolf]

195. I've wanted to purge Pelosi

since she took the impeachment of GWB off the table. That's not Gop'ers "demonizing" her. That's a Democrat angry at betrayal.

[emulatorloo]

200. Whatever. Purging liberals is a dumb idea if one wishes to pull the party to the left.

[LWolf]

206. Whatever.

I believe we have a fundamental disagreement on what constitutes "the left." I don't include Pelosi in that group.

[emulatorloo]

208. She has a voting record. It is left/liberal

Define 'the left' however you'd like. I tend to stick with facts rather than feelings and innuendo.

[LWolf]

211. Well, she's certainly

more liberal than SOME Democrats; still, she doesn't always vote left when it counts.


https://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/04/28/support-surging-progressives-push-pelosi-single-payer

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/66721-pelosi-no-house-vote-on-single-payer-plan

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/107-2001/h145

[emulatorloo]

212. Thanks for the links, I appreciate you taking the time to do that.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

104. "A different kind of Democrat" - what's that, a Republican?

No fucking thanks!

[NurseJackie]

152. Yep... that's definitely "code talk". I don't like the sound of it either. It suggests to me...

... a candidate who's NOT actually a Democrat. It's very Naderesque and Stein-like... and creepy. No thank you!

I only support REAL Democrats... LOYAL Democrats... TRUE Democrats.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

167. Same here... Democrats who protect women's reproductive rights, for starters!

That's nonnegotiable to me!

[Scurrilous]

118. $%&* this.

[kentuck]

120. I would agree that the Democrats need new faces in leadership.

That would include Nancy Pelosi. Much like Hillary, she has been falsely defined by the right-wing media over the years. As much as some may like Pelosi, this is a reality we should not ignore, in my opinion.

We should take the advances we have made in human rights and set them in concrete as part of our national Democratic platform. They are not open for debate.

Then, we should move to define other issues that are important to Democrats also. We need new voices in order to do that, in my opinion. It is a matter of perception and we need to change a lot of perceptions to escape the "damaged brand", if we want to be competitive in the House and Senate once again. We cannot rest on our laurels.

[Awsi Dooger]

124. Plenty of scattered observations

* I lived in Las Vegas for 25 years amidst all the white and mostly uneducated males who frequent the sportsbook scene every day. I was shocked upon arrival. I didn't know that type existed, at least not to that degree. Their thought process is unlike anything I've ever encountered. Throughout 2015 and more than half of 2016 I planned to ignore the 2016 presidential race completely because I knew darn well that the SAM (Simplistic Angry Male) types were infuriated at Obama and Democrats even more than typical, and would take out their wrath at the ballot box. The 2014 midterm was a mere warmup. I have no idea how the Clintons didn't see it coming and tailor their messaging, especially toward job loss in the great manufacturing states. Once Trump was nominated and steadily imploded with Hispanics shifting more our way I gently began to sample political message boards again, and posted for a few weeks here. I thought Hillary might narrowly escape.

* That SAM type is transfixed by strong white males with authoritative styles, no matter the caliber. I saw it first hand for decades. We had a Stardust Line radio program on KDWN that focused on handicapping next week's games. It aired in front of a live audience for 2 hours in the Stardust sportsbook from 10-midnight every Saturday and Sunday all year. The seats would be packed in football season, with 200-300 people there, vast majority SAMs. Wayne Allen Root introduced himself to the Las Vegas scene via that platform. He was a handicapper, a tout. Obviously he was a ranting loudmouth. And he absolutely sucked at picking the games. No matter. He had plenty of company along those lines. One mediocre to awful handicapper sat behind those mikes. The bottom line seldom mattered. The SAMs would react to pronouncements. Wild applause. I saw them gather around the loudmouths during commercial breaks and after the program ended. Even if they lost money it didn't seem to dent their fascination or loyalty. They'd be in that audience the following week, lapping up pronouncements from the next ranter. The flaws don't matter compared to the stature, the strength. I knew Donald Trump would never lose by wide margin, if he lost at all, since he reminded me so much of those blowhards who oft occupied that Stardust Line stage.

* I can't count how many times those SAMs have told me that John F. Kennedy was the "last great Democrat." No wonder. They either remembered him from youth or saw him in clips making bold pronouncements. So now we're gently trying to convince those SAMs that we're a different type of Democrat? Ha. That will work swell. I can just imagine all the SAMs who will approach me in those sportsbooks, next time I'm there, saying they're convinced and have switched sides. They also respect Harry Reid, BTW. He was the local Democrat who received benefit of a doubt.

* Those SAMs absolutely know who Nancy Pelosi is. I've heard the name in reference countless times for more than a decade. GOP messaging obviously has been relentless and effective along those lines, because those SAMs have so little ammo. They know and despise Pelosi.

* There are meaningful trends in both directions: Obama steadily turned off working class whites, even while being elected twice. That is particularly devastating because the group votes dependably in midterms, while some of our blocks do not, specifically young females. Hispanics have shifted our way but it is a fragile move and we can't depend on these percentages going forward. Obama got the blacks to turn out in record numbers but if it was mostly a situational fluke and returns to prior levels then we're really in a jam in forthcoming cycles. The positive trend is that young voters will continue to flock our way. That's more impactful once we reach 2030 and beyond, and they are voting dependably. States like Virginia and Colorado have shifted our way with some nearby states within reach. It was absolutely astonishing when Arizona reached 27% self-identified liberals in 2016. The nation itself reached 26%. When I started tracking these things, that number was 21%.

* Still, Republicans own a 3/2 advantage in ideological breakdown. There are roughly 3 conservatives for every 2 liberals nationwide. That can't be understated and it's the reason we're going to have frequent self-examination periods and articles like this. It's like a race horse who is always forced to run in the worst part of the track, against the track bias. You have to be much the best to get to the wire first.

[Hoyt]

128. Return of the Dixiecrats is what it will take to attract white wingers. Not for that.

[Azathoth]

136. Democrats do poorly nationally because the state parties are pitiful

National political outcomes are a function of state politics. Republicans dominate the House because they have systematically redistricted themselves into a permanent majority. Why? Because they control so many statehouses and legislatures. Look at the legislatures of states like Wisconsin, Ohio, and Michigan -- both houses in each state are majority Republican. That isn't happening because white voters in Columbus -- not exactly an inbred Appalachian farming community -- don't like coastal elites in California. Rather, that's happening because the local parties are doing a terrible job of expanding their support outside their traditional power base. Even in solid Democratic states like New Jersey, the Democratic party relies primarily on political machines in urban centers and the occasional labor union. Everything else is open game for Republicans to work with. Which is why you get a repulsive throwback to Precambrian times like Christie as a governor of a supposedly liberal state.

Democrats have a very compelling message on the national stage. But on the state level, they are often tribal, disorganized and out of touch. Scapegoating the "coastal elites" isn't going to change that.

[Bradical79]

138. Ok, so what makes them different?

Even in difficult districts, we must compete with real campaigns and strong candidates to begin to rebuild organizing infrastructure and pave the way back to success for the true champions of the working class. That’s why the People’s House Project will incubate and accelerate candidates in every Republican held congressional district in our targeted region of Midwestern and Appalachian states.

I agree with this part on the website, but there's nothing about policy or any kind of real message. It's mostly a vague statement about being different, and fighting. I'm totally ok with that, but I'm not supporting their effort until I know they're not throwing anyone under the bus, or lying to people about jobs.

[R B Garr]

139. "I'm a different kind of Democrat". Well, well well......

That's how Bill Clinton had to repackage to win the Presidency, so I guess another way is okay after all......

And that was two and a half decades ago when it wasn't near the "anything goes" political landscape that it is now.

[vi5]

157. 2 and a half decades ago.....

Party lines were nowhere near as hardened as they are now. You could have a Republican who voted for a Democrat.

With 25 years of propaganda and Fox news and every other horrible "news" outlet, there is next to no low hanging electoral fruit to be had by appealing to the same people Clinton won in 1992 and 1996.

[R B Garr]

163. But back then, the GOP had a stranglehold on topics such as family values

and military service that they still lorded over Democrats, rightly or wrongly, that's what happened. Not to mention the tired canards about tax and spend Democrats. Clinton entered the belly of the beast with all his flaws and that was rather daring at the time. Now, yes, it's gotten more hyper-polarized because of the alternate realities the GOP has cultivated, but Clinton had his own dragons to slay back then. It's not like it was easier. It's bizarre that a Democrat who won an election is still demonized like this for no reason......

[Tatiana]

147. Hold your noses, people. We're in a crisis.

We can't afford to be purists right now. Let's see if this approach can gain us votes and seats.

That being said, there isn't anything wrong with Pelosi, but we do need to step up our branding and messaging.

[mvd]

149. I agree that we do need to be less of a coastal party

I just wasn't sure her opponent would have been a better Minority Leader. While I do have problems with Pelosi's messaging sometimes, she knows the inner workings of the House well.

[vi5]

154. Or how about we....you know.....find politicians who can sell progressive policies

I'm sick and fucking tired of the goddamned, "I give up" laziness of far too many on our side.

Why is the solution always "Let's find MORE conservative candidates!" rather than "Let's find candidates who can clearly and concisely articulate progressive policies and show people how and why they are good for them!".

It's like with Obamacare. Once it was clear that people weren't going to magically have all the details and information and reasons why it was good for them planted directly into their brains, Democrats scattered and were essentially useless. Rather than going out there and explaining why it was good and pushing back on horrible, inaccurate narratives on the legislation, they hid. And the narrative was conceded.

Our biggest problem as a party is that we've conceded the framing of too many issues to the right and Republicans. At what point did we stop expecting our candidates to be able to....you know.....campaign in any way beyond "What is it you want to hear? I'll tell you that!".

And then when these same candidates vote against the party and undermine the agenda that a majority of the party agree on, we're supposed to just shrug our shoulders and thank these same people.

Yeah, we've been trying this approach for 25 years now and it fucking sucks and it's gotten us nowhere.

[muntrv]

156. I am from Michigan and I am culturally liberal.

[TheFrenchRazor]

158. how about making the case for liberalism, instead of trying to deny that we are liberal? nt

[Tarheel_Dem]

162. So we should dump Pelosi in favor of assholes like Tim Ryan? Not on board for that, at ALL.

Just how far does Tim think we should bend over for WWC voters? We all know these people are mostly motivated by fear & loathing of brown people, because we've had studies since the election that told us just that. Screw 'em, and Tim Ryan to boot.

[LAS14]

169. Nancy Pelosi brought us the affordable care act.

Obama was ready to throw in the towel, and she persuaded him that she could deliver. That's pretty impressive.

But I am interested in seeing the Dems fight EVERY congressional battle. We won't win them all, but we'll wake up the sleeping constituents for the next time.

[George II]

170. Not you, but the premise is bullshit....

Here are the Electoral College maps from when the Democrats won (four of the last six elections prior to the fiasco of 2016) "Coastal wing" my ass. Unless the geography of the United States has changed, Ohio, Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, etc. are NOT "coastal" or "liberal", yet the Democrats won these four Presidential elections. Had there not been unprecedented manipulation back in November, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

In each of those elections, Democrats won a pretty big chunk of "rust belt" states.

1992



1996



2008



2012

[bresue]

176. Honestly...

I was a Republican or non-politic until Hillary pushed for Medicaid in the early 90's. This was the first time I was able to have health insurance for my children! I have been loyal and vocal about her ever since!!

I was raised Republican and did not really question it...accepted economic hardships of Reagan years as normal and that Reagan's economic policies were the best way. I was a skilled worker and worked full time while raising my children. It was rough...disposable income had little value.

My personal finances did not abate, until Clinton came to power. Then I could start to breath again and felt I at least could raise my head above the water.

So yes, I was converted...and others in the mid-west or rust-belt can too. If the Democrats can win the house in 2018, pass some great programs...2020 will be a shoe in for the Democrats.

[betsuni]

177. What?

[Tarc]

184. Steering the Democratic Party towards conservatism is not the answer

When the Republicans lost in 08, 10, 12, they didn't have some sort of "maybe we gotta move to the middle to attract mor voters" epiphany. They doubled down on the Tea Party and rallied the base to it.


Move left, stay left, and get the people to the voting booth. Drafting moderate candidates to run for office in East Toadfuck, South Dakota is not the focus we should be having.

[QC]

186. Sounds like DLC 2.0.

Same reasoning--let's show everyone we're real Americans, by gum, unlike those awful libruls up in Noo York City.

No thanks.

[nikibatts]

187. Yeah, that's right just run from the date who brought you to the party. Nancy did her job in Congres

Hillary won the popular vote, the Dems picked up seats in the House and the Senate. The State houses and state party operations and the Dems who refuse to vote in state and local elections are our biggest problem. But don't let that keep you from disparaging the party loyalists. That is precisely why the GOP keeps kicking out ass in the red states. We don't come out and vote there, we don't run candidates there, in short we just forfeit these areas and focus on complain gin about our folks in Congress. nice!

[Warren DeMontague]

190. Bullshit. The answer is NOT to desperately try and figure out who to throw under the bus.

JOBS. That's what the rust belt wants.

Not an allegedly reassuring "fuck you" to Nancy Pelosi, or pro-choicers, or minorities, or any of that bullshit.

[obamanut2012]

198. There is nothing wrong with Pelosi or being liberal, and these people suck

Fuck them.

[WinkyDink]

202. What are they planning, wearing holsters and chewing tobacco? Playing Ted Nugent?

[lunasun]

204. Hey everybody let's get stupid . Don't worry there will be people to walk you through it

[DFW]

214. We do NOT need to change what we stand for

What we need to change is how we try try to present it to people who have been fed false propaganda all their lives.

The part of East Germany that was most apprehensive of becoming part of a re-united Germany was that far corner of Saxony where Western TV and radio broadcasts didn't penetrate. ALL they heard was propaganda from their "government," and the west was evil, socialism was heaven, the Soviet Union was paradise, the West was a living hell, the Berlin Wall was built to keep fascists out, etc. etc.

The people we need to reach watch ONLY Fox Noise, listen ONLY to National Hate Radio, and think Democrats=evil=communists=anti-American. It won't be easy to reach them, but we have to try, and keep trying. 2008 wasn't THAT long ago. Not everyone hangs on to their delusions.

[LWolf]

217. Nancy Pelosi Rejects Single Payer Being Added to Democratic Party Platform

http://observer.com/2017/05/nancy-pelosi-rejects-single-payer-health-care/