Democrats are still chasing rural white voters, and it's a strategy doomed to fail

[DonViejo]

SATURDAY, JUL 22, 2017 12:00 PM EDT

Democrats are still chasing rural white voters, and it’s a strategy doomed to fail

Instead of chasing down white voters who are committed to culture war, Democrats need to energize their base

AMANDA MARCOTTE

Left-leaning political Twitter erupted in mockery on Thursday when the Democratic Party unveiled its cringeworthy new slogan: “A Better Deal: Better Skills, Better Jobs, Better Wages”, which was not only bad on its own but painfully reminiscent of the Papa John’s slogan. Despite the rush from many diehard Bernie Sanders acolytes to write off the slogan as neoliberal business-as-usual Democratic nonsense, the reality is that the slogan reflects Democratic efforts to incorporate the criticisms of those who argue that Democrats should abandon the emphasis on “identity politics” and instead try to woo white working-class voters with populist economic policies.

“Democrats jettisoned social and foreign policy issues for this exercise, eschewing the identity politics and box-checking that has plagued Democratic campaigns in the past, most recently Hillary Clinton’s. This will be purely an economic message,” writes Dana Milbank for the Washington Post. “This is meant to be a populist manifesto that doesn’t conform to the left/right debate but instead aims to align Democrats with ordinary, middle-class Americans fighting powerful special interests.”

It’s a tempting idea, of course: Just stop talking so much about racism and sexism so much and instead talk about jobs and wages (never mind that Hillary Clinton actually did focus more on jobs and wages than any other issue) and boom! Watch the white rural voters that handed states like Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan to Donald Trump come into the Democratic fold.

Who doesn’t want to believe liberals have that much control — that Democrats alone could make the cultural struggles tearing apart this country go away by putting the focus on jobs and other economic issues, and watch white voters return to the flock, drawn by all those progressive policies?

The problem is, and continues to be, that there’s no evidence for this. The roller-coaster politics around health care really drive home how much Republican base voters view politics through a culture-war lens. Progressive policy is, however appealing in the abstract, is a secondary concern to the desire of angry white conservatives to exert or reassert their cultural dominance. Which goes a long way towards explaining the loathing of Obamacare: It was the “Obama” part, not the “care” part, that riled up the GOP base. Now that Barack Obama is gone, anger over the health care bill is rapidly receding.

more
http://www.salon.com/2017/07/22/democrats-are-still-chasing-rural-white-voters-and-its-a-strategy-doomed-to-fail/

[elleng]

1. An opening theme/frame: "excessive corporate power and its impacts."

''Pollster Geoff Garin writes in a memo kicking off the project: "[T]he Democratic policies related to curbing excessive corporate power that are being highlighted in the first day of the rollout have real resonance with voters and are strongly supported by a significant majority of Americans."

The agenda's big idea: "Too many families in America today feel that the rules of the economy are rigged against them. Special interests have a strangle-hold on Washington — from the super-rich spending unlimited amounts of secret money to influence our elections, to the huge loopholes in our tax code that help corporations avoid paying taxes."

"If the government goes back to putting working families first, ahead of special interests, we can achieve a better deal for the American people that will raise their pay, lower their expenses, and prepare them for the future."'

https://graphics.axios.com/pdf/e-demeconomy.pdf?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=sendto_newslettertest&stream=top-stories

[YCHDT]

2. They can talk to them but expecting them to flip without addressing thier threat is too much

[MichMary]

8. "Threat?"

What does that even mean? Is the "threat" "address our needs, or we'll vote for an orange clown??"

White, working class voters have historically been the base of our party. Addressing their needs--for jobs, affordable healthcare, etc.--is perfectly appropriate, and will ultimately be productive.

[YCHDT]

9. Brown people, that's what Benedict Donald said was a threat to them

[IronLionZion]

22. I've stolen jobs away from Americans for years

the only way to stop the threat is for these voters to accept that people like me are American too

I won't hold my breath.

[bettyellen]

15. Uppity women and POC.

[LBM20]

3. It is and MUST be PART of the strategy. Writing off ANY voters is STUPID and DOOMED TO FAIL.

Just being a city party and party of some people but not others is what is doomed to fail. The party must be a big tent party that competes everywhere. Anything else is STUPID and is already a proven FAILURE.

[loyalsister]

13. Yep

We want to take back the 4th Congresssional district in MO. It's the seat Ike Skelton held for 34 yrs. The district has changed with redistricting, and actually may turn out to benefit us with Columbia and it's surrounding rural areas. We absolutely need voters from those areas to win.

[xmas74]

34. Have you been to any of Renee's town halls yet?

She's good about nailing it to "Heartless Hartzler".

[loyalsister]

35. Not yet

I have heard good things about her, though.

[xmas74]

37. Attend one soon.

She has plenty planned for the future.

[Duppers]

17. Talk to rural voters, try to change their world view.

I wish you luck.

[ancianita]

21. If their world view were understood, an explanation of who their allies really are would work. nt

[Honeycombe8]

30. This isn't a rural white voter platform. Why do you think that?

Do you not think that rural blacks want better jobs and wages, too? How about city dwellers of any race and ethnicity?

The Dems ARE the party of jobs and wages for workers from the poor to the upper middle class. All races & ethnicities.

Stating a focus now (for an issue that Dems have ALWAYS supported), instead of another, does not mean walking away from the rest of the platform.

The Dems have fallen behind in part because of its excessive and repetitive statements of focus on social issues. It's time to remind everyone that's not all that Democrats support. All these things are part of the Dem Party concerns, anyway. There is no reason, for one year, to remind everyone that the Dem Party is the one that helped unions gain ground, helped us get a 40 hour work week, helped us get safety regulations at factories so workers' didn't lose their income for life when injured on the job.

[LonePirate]

32. Their world view is mired in the past which they think President Con Man can restore.

They are blinded by ignorance, stubbornness and hatred to realize that past is never going to return.

[Duppers]

33. 👍

Rather my point to LBM20 who would find out if he/she tried, especially with southern and midwestern rural folks. There have dozens of threads here on DU pointing that out.

I was trying to be polite in my encouragement for LBM20 to just try doing so. There's no educating most of these rural folks.

[aikoaiko]

4. It's hard to keep reading once I hit it the Amanda Marcotte byline, but I'm I did.

It's even harder to keep reading when she does her anti-Bernie supporter shade, but I did.

It is true that there are morally bankrupt ways of appealing to rural white voters, but there are ways of doing it with integrity.

In other words we don't have to sell out minority interests to appeal to white rural voters but we do have to talk them about what we can offer them.

[QC]

18. She really is awful, isn't she?

I was a fan of Salon since it started up back in the 90's, but I stopped keeping up with them thanks to Marcotte. Why on earth would they hire such a wretched writer?

[ancianita]

23. Absolutely. When we did that during the Obama election, it worked because we had a unified message.

[SharonClark]

38. Marcotte was a voice of reason on Salon when it went all Camille Paglia and Ben Norton.

She still is.

[Lanius]

5. Most rural white voters will not vote for a Democrat.

The Dems need to focus on truly progressive economic and social agendas that will benefit everyone, especially the non-wealthy. IMO this should motivate more Democrats, Independents and young people to turn out to vote.

I don't think the party needs to jettison its appeals to minority and urban voters, however. The white rural voters who vote for Republicans are going to continue doing so, even if it hurts them, because they hate liberals so much. They are hyper-partisans who see politics as cultural warfare, not as a contest of competing ideas of how to run the country and the economy.

[BarbaraFritche]

28. Why do you think so?

Look at the results of the election. No small number of traditional working-class "white rural voters" voted this time for Drumpf -- and why do you disparage those former Democrats who DID indeed vote for Trump this time, because of their economic necessity; and the Democratic Party was only too willing to let them go. In favor of the "identity politics" you recommend.

So answer, why are the affectations of the Working Class now going to Trump? Calling them "white rural voters" is not an answer. It is an accusation against persons who formerly voted Democratic. What do you offer them, except approbation? And will that convince them to vote Democratic?

[certainot]

29. democrats might as well be studying fish without water

as long as they ignore rw radio. they don't even poll for it.

it's really the biggest political mistake in history. republicans use 1000 radio stations pumping out the same message across 40 states with 80 senators with NO protests, boycotts, or even recognition from democrats or the left and then dems analyze the results as if those people have decided on their own that hillary clinton's private email server is more important than global warming and russian gangster collusion.

it's only about rural and white because those are the primary targets of the talk radio psyops and it is only like that because the left ignores it and gives that psyops a free speech free ride. in US there are no free easy alternatives for politics/news/traffic/weather other than those stations.

all the dumbass pollsters have to do to figure out the closest thing to trump outside of white is talk radio is do some polling.

they hate liberals because we let limbaugh and sons call us whores, and thieves, and traitors all day from soapboxes on every corner and stump in the country and we just stuck our fingers in our ears and walked by.

[uponit7771]

40. +1

[geek tragedy]

6. "Talk only to people who agree with us on everything" is not a way to win elections.

People who can read Congressional District maps realize that we need to be more competitive in exurban and rural areas. We will never win some of these areas, but we do need to do better. And we're not going to do that by doubling down on the failed approach of 2016.

Not everyone in rural and exurban areas is a drooling Trumper.

[Quixote1818]

7. Bingo! You could have written a lot better article than the one linked to.

We don't fucking need all of them, just 5% more. It's stupid not reaching out.

[gratuitous]

10. It works for Republicans

But I think you're right. One thing to keep in mind is that Democrats won the popular vote. We don't need to transform every drooling Trumper into a right-thinking American; if we can win over 3-5% of rural and exurban voters, that will translate into a lot of elected office gains.

Hold rallies in the areas currently being written off. Bring in some big names to generate local excitement. Talk to the media in those areas, giving interviews and other media availabilities. Yes, the audience is far smaller than it is in the cities, but people do still read their local newspapers and listen to their local radio stations. Talk to these media persons, and get the Democratic platform in front of people without the Fox filter. Oh yes, and keep going back. It doesn't have to be a huge rally every time, but host some events, get people used to hearing what we have to say. Practice a little retail politics. The return on the time and money expenditures will be quite gratifying.

[loyalsister]

14. I have talked with homeless people who set up camp in rural areas

Then come into the small city to hold their signs. A lot of people who live in those areas drive by those camping spots, and they aren't all heartless.

[Tom Rinaldo]

11. A stronger case could be made for that if it weren't for the U.S. Constitution

Yes Hillary did win the popular vote by three million.

And Montana gets just as many Senators as does California. So does North Dakota. So does Alaska. Despite those largely white States which went for Trump being on whole so rural that they are each represented only by a single Congressman in the House. Democrats have managed to elect Senators from those states in some years. If we stop fighting in those states, and in states like Iowa and Nebraska and Missouri, we will be very hard pressed to ever regain leadership in the Senate, let alone the filibuster proof majority that it took for Democrats to pass Obamacare. And we need control of Congress to promote social and economic justice in America.

I adamantly oppose soft peddling the rights of any American to win the support of prejudiced voters, but I see value in finding ways to frame positions that we proudly hold for principled reasons in ways that can help us make inroads in purple and light red tinted states.

[DemocraticWing]

12. Democrats can talk to all voters, including rural white people like myself.

And no it doesn't have to be an economics-only message like Marcotte dismissively reduces the progressive argument down to. But we should talk about material gains: it's a fact that combating bigotry brings material gains for people of color, LGBTQ people, and women. It's a fact that combating imperialism and militarism saves lives and allows us to use resources on things that don't kill people. It's also a fact that social democratic welfare programs like universal healthcare, empowering labor unions, and allowing workers to own a fair share of the fruits of their labor brings material gains for all working and middle class voters.

But what Democrats, and Marcotte, get wrong is the idea that progressives think such a message can be expressed with something like "Better Skills, etc." That slogan represents a neoliberal view of "if only the people were better, then we could help them!" It transfers the responsibility of poverty onto the individual, instead of the structural factors actually at fault.

The Democrats can and should do better, and can do so while looking Left. Look at the majestic campaign slogan of Corybn's Labour Party: "For the many, not the few." It sums up everything I just said magnificently, and does not suppose a false dichotomy of "economic issues" and "other issues." It recognizes that the people, in unity and solidarity, can and must fight the powers that be for the liberation of all.

"None of us are free until all of us are free."

[mopinko]

26. yeah, i was remembering an obama line-

e pluribus unum.

[uponit7771]

41. "For the many, not the few." +1

[bucolic_frolic]

19. Election 2016

Democrats lost Pennsylvania not just in the counties where Trump targeted and won.
We had diminished margins in rural areas. I could see them at the polls - white, 40-70,
never voted before, had to ask all sorts of questions. Probably no college, just ordinary
workers their whole life long. Likely TV addicts who watched Trump on TV. The GOP
reached them all. We thought them asleep, and really wouldn't have convinced many of
them anyway. Archie Bunker types.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

20. I think these days the Democrats strength is bread&butter issues, not ideology. Ex.: single-payer.

Example: Single-payer health insurance is very widely appealing. Push it as a bread and butter issue (efficiency, everyone covered, etc.) and let the Republicons drown trying to claim ideologically that it doesn't allow choice (it does).

[yallerdawg]

24. "Come On With Us" should be our party message! Just plain "Unity!"

[INdemo]

25. Obviously the DNC chair doesnt have the grassroots experience nor

does he have any clue how to run the DNC,,,if he stays he could end up with a record worse than DWS

I guess Howard Dean spoiled us with his success as DNC chair.

[Honeycombe8]

27. There's nothing wrong with trying to increase jobs and wages.

I'm baffled why anyone who cares about workers would think that. And why would anyone think that it's only rural whites who want better jobs and wages? Do you not think that city whites want that, too? Or rural blacks? Or city Hispanics?

Dems can walk & chew gum. Everyone knows the Dems are in favor of the social issues it has been focusing on for years, like gay marriage, health care, voter suppression, the environment, etc. There is nothing wrong with emphasizing this lesser known thing that Democrats ALSO focus on: better jobs and better wages. Obama certainly focused on increasing jobs. And the Dems' push for a higher min. wage is focusing on better wages.

[Nevernose]

31. It's a just a (shitty) slogan

And does not mean that Democrats are abandoning anyone. It's click bait nonsense on the part of Salon. What was the slogan supposed to be? "Democrats! Here's a thorough, detailed list of people and groups we support..."

Elections are won by appealing to the most voters. And appealing to one group does not mean forgetting about another. This is not a zero sum game.

And it's a shitty slogan, besides. My first reaction was "I'm unskilled? Fuck you!" It's insulting.

[nini]

36. They need to concentrate on voter turnout like Obama did.

AND paper ballots. There's more of us than them.. we have to make sure everyone gets off their butts and vote.

Many of those folks are not reachable -sad to say. They haven't suffered enough yet to finally understand the party of the rich white guy doesn't have their interests at heart.

[Awsi Dooger]

39. The slogan is embarrassingly inept

We seemingly don't have a clever person anywhere near the top of the party.

An effective slogan is short and memorable. I could read that one ten times consecutively and dread being tested on it 15 seconds later.

There is a greater willingness right now to self-identify as liberal. Somehow that is not recognized and we continue to run away from the term. I would do just the opposite. I would run an ongoing national campaign on all the major sources touting the accomplishments of liberalism and how it applies positively to everyday Americans going forward. If you use the word progressive you have already failed. That's a wimp retreat. One way or another, the public thinks liberal.

When I started betting on politics heavily in the mid '90s the percentage of Americans who called themselves liberal was generally 21 or 22. That has risen steadily and climbed to 25% in the 2012 exit poll and quietly to 26% in the 2016 exit poll, despite Hillary's electoral defeat. That uptick in self-identified liberals is one of the reasons we have greater margin for error in the national popular vote and have moved forward in states like Virginia and Colorado, plus new opportunity in a previously unthinkable state like Arizona, which reported an amazing 27% liberals in the 2016 exit poll.

If we persuade 1 or 2% more to think proudly of themselves as liberal, it impacts one race after another, cleanses every argument we make, and is life long...far more often than not.