"Democrats used to have a solid economic message for workers without a college degree"

[phantom power]

It is clear that the Democratic Party is not offering much of value to less-educated, younger white voters. The Democratic Party has pretty much abandoned them. As a Democratic official and volunteer, I can see that every day, and hear it every time I phonebank on behalf of a candidate.

Suppose you're a 28-year-old straight white guy who graduated high school as a D student, and now work a blue or pink collar dead-end job private sector job somewhere. You're vaguely Christian, but not a fervent believer. You've got a live-in girlfriend, and maybe a kid on the way. What does the Democratic Party offer you?

Not much. The entire Party is obsessed right now with defending Medicare and Social Security, two programs that you don't think you'll ever see anyway, and age 65 seems like it might as well be 300 years from now--not that you figure you'll be able to retire regardless. The only unions the Party seems to care much about are in the public sector: people who make way more money and have better job security than you do for about equivalent labor. That makes you resentful and wonder why your tax dollars are supporting them. The Democrats keep saying that a college education and universal Pre-K are the golden bullets to solve our economic problems. You don't believe that and for very good reason, but it doesn't help you anyway: you have neither the time nor money nor interest to go back to school.

...

Back in 1936, even as recently as in 1966, there was a reason for that guy to vote for a Democrat. Democrats used to have answers for that guy. Democrats used to have a solid economic message for workers without a college degree, and the fire in the belly to call out even the more reasonable conservatives for being the heartless toadies of corporate power they are. Today? I can't think of a good reason that guy would vote for the modern Democratic Party. It does next to nothing for him. Nor will fear of losing abortion rights be quite enough to sway his girlfriend, either. That stuff used to work in more normal times. But these are not normal times. These are times of crisis, times when bold leadership is necessary, and when strong and wrong is more appealing than weak and right.

When push comes to shove, that guy will vote for Rick Perry, an unreasonable jackass who actually speaks to angst and insecurity he feels, over Barack Obama, that most "reasonable" arbiter of technocratic tranquility who does next to nothing to address the issues that really matter, and seems never to get really fired up about much of anything at all even at a time of universal distress.

That guy will help sway the election not only of the President, but of all the sorry saps with a "D" by their name downballot as well. And the Democratic Party will have no one and nothing but itself to blame for it.

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/souls-of-white-folk_23.html

[Fumesucker]

1. K&R

[TBF]

2. I don't think the dem party has much to say to any of us anymore -

unless by "us" we mean very rich folk.

[Initech]

3. To quote Jon Stewart:

"The democratic party. They were a political party that had power somewhere between 1920 and 1980. You may have heard of them. Ask your parents."

[lonestarnot]

23. We've been taken over by shock and awers.

[The Big Vetolski]

4. Good post. One quibble. The fact is most public sector workers

really don't make all that much, and if "that guy" in the post lives in one of the states with Republican governors where cops and firemen are being laid off, he may well support downticket Democrats, if he bothers to vote, but he won't support Obama. Why should he?

[white_wolf]

5. That is the truth.

I think every worker should be guaranteed a living wage which guarantees him/her and his/her family a not just adequate life, but a comfortable and good life. The living wage should be based upon how many people you have in your family, because a single person doesn't need as much income to guarantee and good life as someone with kids, but everyone regardless of whether they went to college or not deserves a good job that pays them well, gives them healthcare,time to spend off with their family and friends, just a good life overall.

[socialshockwave]

6. "The only unions the Party seems to care much about are in the public sector"

Isn't that the truth - I never hear anything about private sector unions. It seems the Democrats don't like them, though. Evil private sector. *rolls eyes*

[whathehell]

7. B asically abandoned in the Clinton era for middle class "soccer moms"...It sucks. n/t

[BNJMN]

8. If I read this right, I think that person would vote for whoever most resembles Chuck Norris...

No matter what.

Other than that...pretty spot on.
The educational system needs to be 'fixed' no question there.
And is it any wonder he has no interest in going 24k in debt for a 4 year degree that may, or may not, land him a job? Esp with a baby on the way?

Fundamentally, we're at a loggerheads as a nation over the economy and future direction of the country. The conservatives think gov't bureaucracy, waste and 'red tape' is to blame. And let's be fair, there's some of that here.

Us Democrats, on the other hand, think it's corporate greed and deregulation that lead to the recession and that the government, as ineffecient as it is, is the ONLY thing standing in the way of a complete transition to banana republic land.

Republicans are authoritarian and war mongering (I know I know, but he's a centrist and possibly a DINO), which some young men like. Plus, they totally rock , 'remind me of my dad' and love war and are all like into wars and hardore police state and war and jail and all that cool manly macho war stuff, yee haw, war, we hate outsiders! And all that stuff that 18-19 year old guys may find acceptable, or pretend to to impress others.

We've got really hot art school chicks though and all the good drugs. Well, most of the good drug laws, at least, how's that? And we have boring old reason and truth, which young kids have had in spades for 18 years. But! we won't frown on you for that time you got drunk and made a pass at your buddy.

Anyways, good post.

[socialshockwave]

9. Your ageism is showing.

Just saying. Not all of us 18-20 year old males like war and death.

[BNJMN]

11. My post is peppered with 'may' and 'some' and plenty of other

ways I thought I made the point clear that I was talking about
generalities and not specifics. Sorry, if I wasn't clear enough
.... you little whippersnapper!
MRAWW!! STAY OFF MY LAWN!!!

[socialshockwave]

13. Ah, my bad.

Running on hardly any sleep the last few days due to the heat wave. Tend to skim over posts. Sorry :)

[BNJMN]

14. No problem. We all do it.

And it's a good reminder to stay sharp.

[Romulox]

16. It's a DEMOCRATIC President who got us into the latest war, and perpetuates the others...

"And all that stuff that 18-19 year old guys may find acceptable, or pretend to to impress others."

18-19 year olds aren't in charge of this country, and yet we find ourselves in multiple wars.

"Well, most of the good drug laws, at least, how's that?"

Um, you haven't heard about Obama's crackdown on marijuana? :wtf:

Either your theory is flawed, or... No. Your theory is simply flawed.

[BNJMN]

24. Breathe, read, try and understand, give the benefit of the doubt, breathe slow, repeat. [nt]

[Romulox]

42. Or you could try to engage with the reality of Democratic President leading us to war.

:hi:

[canoeist52]

10. The Democratic Party ingnores working Americans' needs at it's own peril.

They'd better start speaking plainly and honestly soon or lose all we've gained since the 1930's.

I've managed to change a few fundamentalists' minds by having them listen to Bernie Sanders.

[BNJMN]

12. Chomsky had a great thing about the tea party...

...but of course everyone here hates the Tea Party out of hand and all those evil, Anti-American Freepers think Chomsky is an ol' commie (out to destroy...you guessed it).

Anyways here 'tis:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWs6g3L3fkU
Audio quality is pretty bad,
worth the listen though.

Know your 'enemy'. He is you. We are the world. Etc etc.
There's more audio out there like this.
I try and play it to the conservatives online,
not sure if it 'works' or not.

[canoeist52]

15. Thanks for the link. He's right.

I've been saying,for a few years, that there are places in ideology where Underground Democratic ideals and the true

Tea Party ideals intersect. One of these is the anger at paying taxes. The way I get them to see eye to eye with me is

I tell them, " I'm mad too - I don't want my taxes to pay for wars and bail-out the big banks".

Everyone hates the big banks, Insurance companies and telecoms like Comcast, Verizon and AT&T. We need to use this to

point their anger where it belongs. I tell them at least when the government does something you don't like, you have

some say about it with your vote.

They're rightfully mad as hell, but they don't know who's screwing them

[Hawkowl]

31. Agreed

I can get almost any rightwing nut to agree with me that the banksters and insurance companies are the main problem. Unfortunately, that is no longer a tenet of the Democratic Party run by Obama. So, there really is nowhere for people to go. This fact is not limited to undereducated white voters in shitty jobs.

[Recursion]

22. There are tea party pols (including Ron Paul) who complain about corporatism

And too much of DU simply refuses to hear that.

[rucky]

38. Thanks for that.

I'll take a crack at playing it for some Tea Party relatives of mine - I've made similar points to them in the past and we find common ground surprisingly often.

[Romulox]

17. The modern Democratic Party doesn't want that 28 white male voter.

He's a natural born Republican, most of the leadership will say--it's the natural result of a politics arranged largely around gender and ethnic identity. The Party will not allow class to become a rallying point, politically, as it goes against the interests of the corporate sponsors of BOTH parties.

So, in this context, the hypothetical man in the OP is simply not wanted in the Democratic coalition.

[Tatiana]

18. K&R. This is the type of voter Dean was after when he was head of the DNC. n/t

[B Calm]

19. Thank God the republican party will be there for them. Maybe they

need to quit whining and help change the party back to what it use to be.

[sudopod]

20. If someone in that situation even bothers to vote. nt

[Recursion]

21. There used to be a message to be had for workers without a college degree

Not so sure anymore.

[BNJMN]

25. Unions? Or 'here, let's help you get some college under your belt'?

I hear from some pundits that the party is only for the middle class, not the working poor. (The terms are vague and seem to be defined not by income, as one would expect, but by occupation and assets).

But if being 'for the middle class' means helping poor people get into the middle class....that's a good thing right?

Or is it accepted that Democrats are *just* helping middle class become ruling elites?

Hmm.

As mentioned before, Corporatism and social stratification is the enemy of a 'meritocratic society'. The nail in the coffin for The American Dream.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/mar/10/oecd-uk-worst-social-mobility

[Recursion]

29. The "get some college" idea was what Clinton wanted, but I was never optimistic

But if being 'for the middle class' means helping poor people get into the middle class....that's a good thing right?

I'm not convinced you can even have an economy where everyone is middle class. And to make it even more confusing: ask yourself if you would rather be poor now or in 1938.

Or is it accepted that Democrats are *just* helping middle class become ruling elites?

You're saying economics follow politics rather than vice versa -- I think partisan politics are shaped by economic realities more than they shape them.

[BNJMN]

32. True. You can't have an economy where 'everyone' is anything. Also...

Helping someone is not the same as one large, vague thing 'following' another large, vague thing. Or vice versa.

Other than that your post seems to miss my point entirely.
But, maybe you're on a whole 'nuther thing.
Making your own point.

:D

[Recursion]

36. Yes; sorry, I was taking that thought somewhere else

It's been something I've been mulling over for a while now and I'm still uncertain.

[Armstead]

30. Get an education or job training is just a smokescreen

Those are obviously worthy goals, and the opportunity for upward mobility should be a basic goal for ewveryone who wants it.

Howerver too often that is code for "Our policies are taking away the jobs that used to be the backbone of America and shipping them overseas so corporations can get even fatter and wealthier.

How often in the last 20 years have Americans trained for, and gotten, new jobs only to see them disappear almost assoon as they started them.

And democrats are still doing this shit. Obama is pushing for "free trade agreements" but they must have trrtraining for the workers who they know will lose their jobs. Not very logical, if the goal is to build and support a working/middle class.

[BNJMN]

34. Industries dry up, they move, thus the need for education.

I've never fully understood the hatred of the FTAs.

The only horrible thing, to me, is the lack of rules and environmental standards worldwide. Of course, this is what makes opening a sweatshop in China so attractive.

[HughBeaumont]

41. The hatred stems from the fact that they're economically destructive.

They're rooted in our national embarassment known as "faith-based economics": the idea that better-paying, higher quality jobs will replace those that leave for cheaper and less-nitpicking shores.

The problem is, nothing is replacing the outgoing careers, you're leaving swaths of people behind that have done one thing their whole lives, free trade/offshoring/inshoring now affects most white AND blue collar areas, there are no "killer apps" being made here (just re-tooling of old ones), there's not even an inkling as to what a displaced worker should be training for, "re-training" takes lots of time and money in a world where there's only NOW and the bills that have to be PAID, and innovation cannot thrive in a place where everything must be fast, cheap and perfect.

[blkmusclmachine]

26. The DEM Party has lost its way, big time.

[xchrom]

27. Recommend

[Doctor_J]

28. This could be truncated after the first 10 words

and you could replace workers with "teachers", "the needy", "the elderly", "minorities", and "union members".

Now it's just a shade to the left of the far-right Repukes.

[CaptRandom]

33. "Don't forget that most men with nothing would rather protect the possibility of becoming rich than

face the reality of being poor."

From 1776

Best movie line I've ever heard.

[upi402]

35. no money it it, so screw workers

this happened with clinton, btw. they wont let a real dem even debate in the nominations (kucinich).

[KG]

37. they still do. it's: fuck you.

and it's been the message since the '80s.

[badtoworse]

39. What can the Democratic Party actually do?

The reality is that the person you described is competing with unskilled labor in Mexico, China, India. etc. and is losing badly. Unfortunately, that is a market problem, not something a political party or even a government can change.

[HughBeaumont]

40. Yep.

Blaming the Democratic party for no solutions to unbridled Reaganomic Capitalism's end game seems a bit stupid. What message is going to be given? That rich people will stop masturbating to pictures of money piles?

And what's the Repub party going to tell them? The Horatio Alger "bootstraps" fairy tale? If that's to be believed, it means that an economic salvation depends on an individual to succeed, stand out on their own in a business and make a fortune in a world with finite resources and 7 billion people. Oh, and multiply this scenario by at least a million; just ignore that pesky Law of Diminishing Returns and all.

[Romulox]

44. Both recent Dem Presidents have been adherents of "Reagonomics"

"And what's the Repub party going to tell them?"

Same thing Democrats have been telling them: "Those jobs aren't coming back." :shrug:

[HughBeaumont]

46. And it's tragic.

Clinton didn't get my vote either time because of his lurves for free trade. For the corporatists, it's been a glacial but very effective (for them, anyway) buyout of both parties for 45 years.

Faith based thinking is a national embarrassment no matter what the area. I would at least expect the supposed non-fascist party to be smarter than to think this works, or at the very best, humor me into thinking they actually care about us "useless eaters" as they sit on their money stacks.

[Romulox]

43. So it's the mandate of the "Democratic" Party is to do no more than administer globalism?

"Unfortunately, that is a market problem, not something a political party or even a government can change."

If what you say is true, then there is no reason to vote for the Democratic Party. :shrug:

[kenny blankenship]

45. Actually, political parties, including Democrats, and US governments CREATED that worker's problem.

So don't tell me there's no political responsibility to change it.

[badtoworse]

48. Democrats and Republicans created third world competition?

Seriously? The competiton evolved on its own and in the long run, there was no way to stop it. Free trade agreements, like NAFTA, may have accelerated the impact, but it would have happened regardless. If you believe our political parties created the problem, then explain how.

Let's say that instead of free trade, we closed our markets with tariffs. Do you think our trading partners would have just accepted that? They would have retaliated and the net result would have been higher prices and crappier products for everyone. Look at cars - Detroit produced some awful cars in the 70's and 80's. They only got better when the Japanese started eating their lunch with quality cars that were reasonably priced. Do you think we should have protected Detroit from Japanese and Korean competition?

The problem is complicated, but to say that politicians caused it ignores reality. Manufacturers can produce quality products in a number of markets worldwide and that reality is not going to change. You can no more prevent competition than you can prevent the tide from coming in. If you disagree, then tell us what they could have done.

[kenny blankenship]

49. Yes, seriously, THEY put US workers in competition with rightless, coolie labor in 3rd world

And your mindless free traderism has NOTHING to offer them but more betrayal and the prospect of fighting the billions of 3rd worlders for scraps out of global capitalism's dumpster.

Sooner or later they will figure out they have nothing to lose and will do the "unthinkable" to the people who brought them to this point.

[badtoworse]

50. So how did they do it? What exactly should they have done or not done?

How much of a tariff would we need to make consumer electronics produced in the USA competitive? Do you honestly believe American comsumers would cheerfully pay double or triple for an iPod or a flat panel TV made here?

How about some specifics?

[Kaleva]

47. This was especially true in the days of Jefferson Davis.

[Dappleganger]

51. The Democratic party is ignoring unions.