As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

2020 Election Post-Mortem

2456766

Posts

  • Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    bowen wrote: »
    That the minimum wage expansion did so well in Florida while Dems struggled is a lesson to be learned and jesus christ just fully embrace marijuana legalization already.

    Wait are the dems as a party still anti-mj???

    Why??
    No, they just didn’t put legalization as a piece of the platform for the election.

    In favor of decriminalization instead, to be clear

    Sleepshryke
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    If earlier exit polls hold true, Democrat's performance with minorities is extremely troubling

    I’m not so naive as to think that Democrats couldn’t lose these votes honestly, but I do wonder about the extent of misinformation and soft suppression minority voters faced this years versus prior years. The Trump team was dedicated to it, in addition to Biden carrying baggage.

    On the other hand, Georgia, man. Reducing the spread of white votes allows more unified minority votes to have additional power.

    Also, I think it’s probably worth noting that the problem is largely among men.

    i think the party kind of struggles to grasp at times what minority communities actually want.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
    OneAngryPossumOghulkEddydispatch.oNobodyZonugalGiggles_FunsworthMrMisterPhillisherebrynhrtmnGnome-InterruptuspainfulPleasanceKristmas KthulhuMatevvideobobboMegaMekmarajiHappy Little MachineHacksawnever die
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA mod
    bowen wrote: »
    That the minimum wage expansion did so well in Florida while Dems struggled is a lesson to be learned and jesus christ just fully embrace marijuana legalization already.

    Wait are the dems as a party still anti-mj???

    Why??

    They want to say their position is decriminalization not legalization. Maybe someone else can explain it better, because I never really understood it. I think it's their conditioning, where they're making some rhetorical compromise even though what they want to reword and rework is already very popular.

    Some consultant probably came up with it.

    smCQ5WE.jpg
    Captain InertiaEddyFuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudGiggles_FunsworthwanderingHachfaceElvenshaePhillishereKetBraShazkar Shadowstormqwer12Kristmas KthulhuMegaMeknever die
  • cncaudatacncaudata Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Aegis wrote: »
    They do need to build on what worked this election too. Things like Stacey Abrams' effort in Georgia and seeing how they can translate that effort to other states.

    But yea, like Styrofoam mentions, how you can continually get progressive policies passed by wide margins and yet still have politicians fail to win is a massive political failure. These are winning policies!

    That's been a thing for a while. Like you tell people about the ACA's effects and they love it. Ask their opinion on the ACA not so much, let alone the people that passed it. Punching through that gap is the problem

    This is a microcosm of what I think the 100% most important thing to deal with is.

    One party is flat out lying to the country, and half the country is believing them. It's beyond messaging and branding and slogans. I just heard from an acquaintance that voted for Trump because Biden is going to force every American to take a vaccine. No questioning, they just believe the bald-faced lies.

    This fact needs to drive our messaging, it needs to drive the way we interact in congress, it needs to drive regulation of news/online platforms, everything, because it does not matter how great your message is or how much outreach you do if half the country believes you're running an international underage sex ring.

    PSN: Broodax- battle.net: broodax#1163
    rahkeesh2000Commander ZoomFencingsaxShadowhopeCambiataElvenshaejmcdonaldGnome-InterruptusJengoKristmas KthulhuMosati
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    That the minimum wage expansion did so well in Florida while Dems struggled is a lesson to be learned and jesus christ just fully embrace marijuana legalization already.

    Wait are the dems as a party still anti-mj???

    Why??
    No, they just didn’t put legalization as a piece of the platform for the election.

    In favor of decriminalization instead, to be clear

    which is a bit like still arguing for civil unions.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
    Giggles_FunsworthwanderingRingoGnome-InterruptuspainfulPleasanceSir LandsharkMatevvideobobboMegaMeknever die
  • ArcTangentArcTangent Registered User regular
    Elki wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    I have a feeling a lot of the analysis of this election is going to ignore the fact that there’s still a ton of blue votes being counted late and the final results will look different than the current nominal ones. But by time the true results are in, the takes will have solidified.

    Ok, let's say you did a good job. You're saying you did a great job, and I don't object to that and we move on. When voters come and ask in the future what did you do to help them, what's that going to be? Because if the answer is going to be "actually, we lost the senate, and Republicans are an obstructionist party who wouldn't help us" then that's at odds with your current attitude, is it not?

    And the first step to actually dealing with that problem is acknowledging the problem right now, because in even 12 months it's gonna be too late to start thinking about it.

    We didn't "lose the Senate." We never had it. That deck was always stacked against us and it is ALWAYS going to be an uphill and extremely difficult fight to take it. Dems were correct in that we had a blue wave, but what we missed was that Republicans had a red wave too.

    NetscapeshrykeCantidejmcdonald
  • MvrckMvrck Registered User regular
    If earlier exit polls hold true, Democrat's performance with minorities is extremely troubling

    I’m not so naive as to think that Democrats couldn’t lose these votes honestly, but I do wonder about the extent of misinformation and soft suppression minority voters faced this years versus prior years. The Trump team was dedicated to it, in addition to Biden carrying baggage.

    On the other hand, Georgia, man. Reducing the spread of white votes allows more unified minority votes to have additional power.

    Also, I think it’s probably worth noting that the problem is largely among men.

    i think the party kind of struggles to grasp at times what minority communities actually want.

    I think a lot of that goes back to the Cuban support issue. Minority communities are often incredibly varied and diverse in their needs and expectations, down to a precinct level in a lot of cases. There has to be better micro-targeted research and outreach. It's just just enough to give people sweeping promises at this point, you have to let them know how you're going to specifically help them, and people like them.

    PwH4Ipj.jpg
    FencingsaxGiggles_FunsworthjmcdonaldGnome-Interruptus
  • PowerpuppiesPowerpuppies Registered User regular
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    I have a feeling a lot of the analysis of this election is going to ignore the fact that there’s still a ton of blue votes being counted late and the final results will look different than the current nominal ones. But by time the true results are in, the takes will have solidified.

    Ok, let's say you did a good job. You're saying you did a great job, and I don't object to that and we move on. When voters come and ask in the future what did you do to help them, what's that going to be? Because if the answer is going to be "actually, we lost the senate, and Republicans are an obstructionist party who wouldn't help us" then that's at odds with your current attitude, is it not?

    And the first step to actually dealing with that problem is acknowledging the problem right now, because in even 12 months it's gonna be too late to start thinking about it.

    We didn't "lose the Senate." We never had it. That deck was always stacked against us and it is ALWAYS going to be an uphill and extremely difficult fight to take it. Dems were correct in that we had a blue wave, but what we missed was that Republicans had a red wave too.

    Elki's question though?

    sig.gif
    Kristmas Kthulhu
  • Munkus BeaverMunkus Beaver Registered User, ClubPA regular
    Elki wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    That the minimum wage expansion did so well in Florida while Dems struggled is a lesson to be learned and jesus christ just fully embrace marijuana legalization already.

    Wait are the dems as a party still anti-mj???

    Why??

    They want to say their position is decriminalization not legalization. Maybe someone else can explain it better, because I never really understood it. I think it's their conditioning, where they're making some rhetorical compromise even though what they want to reword and rework is already very popular.

    Some consultant probably came up with it.

    I think it’s the difference between buying it at a shop and needing a prescription for it, but I could be wrong.

    Twitch Channel
    Steam: munkus_beaver
    Humor can be dissected, as a frog can, but it dies in the process.
    http://www.ccfa.org/
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA mod
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    I have a feeling a lot of the analysis of this election is going to ignore the fact that there’s still a ton of blue votes being counted late and the final results will look different than the current nominal ones. But by time the true results are in, the takes will have solidified.

    Ok, let's say you did a good job. You're saying you did a great job, and I don't object to that and we move on. When voters come and ask in the future what did you do to help them, what's that going to be? Because if the answer is going to be "actually, we lost the senate, and Republicans are an obstructionist party who wouldn't help us" then that's at odds with your current attitude, is it not?

    And the first step to actually dealing with that problem is acknowledging the problem right now, because in even 12 months it's gonna be too late to start thinking about it.

    We didn't "lose the Senate." We never had it. That deck was always stacked against us and it is ALWAYS going to be an uphill and extremely difficult fight to take it. Dems were correct in that we had a blue wave, but what we missed was that Republicans had a red wave too.

    Okay, I would've said the Democrats "lost the presidency" if they lost this year even though Trump was president. This is just semantics and not very meaningful semantics, people often use the "lost x" language in a race where it's possible to win something as a non-incumbent.

    smCQ5WE.jpg
    EddyHachfaceMrMisterElvenshaeqwer12painfulPleasanceDamnItCohaagenKristmas KthulhuvideobobboMegaMek
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar Not a Fictional Character Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    Mvrck wrote: »
    If earlier exit polls hold true, Democrat's performance with minorities is extremely troubling

    I’m not so naive as to think that Democrats couldn’t lose these votes honestly, but I do wonder about the extent of misinformation and soft suppression minority voters faced this years versus prior years. The Trump team was dedicated to it, in addition to Biden carrying baggage.

    On the other hand, Georgia, man. Reducing the spread of white votes allows more unified minority votes to have additional power.

    Also, I think it’s probably worth noting that the problem is largely among men.

    i think the party kind of struggles to grasp at times what minority communities actually want.

    I think a lot of that goes back to the Cuban support issue. Minority communities are often incredibly varied and diverse in their needs and expectations, down to a precinct level in a lot of cases. There has to be better micro-targeted research and outreach. It's just just enough to give people sweeping promises at this point, you have to let them know how you're going to specifically help them, and people like them.

    This would actually be an incredible use for "big data" kind of stuff if we could keep it from being weaponized.

    Commander ZoomGiggles_FunsworthElvenshae
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Mvrck wrote: »
    If earlier exit polls hold true, Democrat's performance with minorities is extremely troubling

    I’m not so naive as to think that Democrats couldn’t lose these votes honestly, but I do wonder about the extent of misinformation and soft suppression minority voters faced this years versus prior years. The Trump team was dedicated to it, in addition to Biden carrying baggage.

    On the other hand, Georgia, man. Reducing the spread of white votes allows more unified minority votes to have additional power.

    Also, I think it’s probably worth noting that the problem is largely among men.

    i think the party kind of struggles to grasp at times what minority communities actually want.

    I think a lot of that goes back to the Cuban support issue. Minority communities are often incredibly varied and diverse in their needs and expectations, down to a precinct level in a lot of cases. There has to be better micro-targeted research and outreach. It's just just enough to give people sweeping promises at this point, you have to let them know how you're going to specifically help them, and people like them.

    People were sounding the alarm on hispanics and florida in particular for some time and for whatever reason the Biden Campaign mostly ignored them.

    But we have to keep in mind that Obama won this state. Clinton did better in Miami than Biden did. Too often there's a tendency to write loses off as unwinnable in the first place and Florida was winnable.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
    dispatch.oEddyNobodyGiggles_FunsworthwanderingJoolanderpainfulPleasanceKristmas KthulhuvideobobboMegaMekHacksaw
  • MvrckMvrck Registered User regular
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    I have a feeling a lot of the analysis of this election is going to ignore the fact that there’s still a ton of blue votes being counted late and the final results will look different than the current nominal ones. But by time the true results are in, the takes will have solidified.

    Ok, let's say you did a good job. You're saying you did a great job, and I don't object to that and we move on. When voters come and ask in the future what did you do to help them, what's that going to be? Because if the answer is going to be "actually, we lost the senate, and Republicans are an obstructionist party who wouldn't help us" then that's at odds with your current attitude, is it not?

    And the first step to actually dealing with that problem is acknowledging the problem right now, because in even 12 months it's gonna be too late to start thinking about it.

    We didn't "lose the Senate." We never had it. That deck was always stacked against us and it is ALWAYS going to be an uphill and extremely difficult fight to take it. Dems were correct in that we had a blue wave, but what we missed was that Republicans had a red wave too.

    Elki's question though?

    The answer to that question is rebuilding Executive departments, using them to do things like expanding national broadband, regulating telecoms ("Hey, we got Comcast to actually give you good service for once"), etc. Then you walk into 2022 and say "Look at what we did with one hand tied behind our back. Give us both hands and imagine what we can accomplish.

    PwH4Ipj.jpg
    RingoElvenshae
  • PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    Mvrck wrote: »
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    I have a feeling a lot of the analysis of this election is going to ignore the fact that there’s still a ton of blue votes being counted late and the final results will look different than the current nominal ones. But by time the true results are in, the takes will have solidified.

    Ok, let's say you did a good job. You're saying you did a great job, and I don't object to that and we move on. When voters come and ask in the future what did you do to help them, what's that going to be? Because if the answer is going to be "actually, we lost the senate, and Republicans are an obstructionist party who wouldn't help us" then that's at odds with your current attitude, is it not?

    And the first step to actually dealing with that problem is acknowledging the problem right now, because in even 12 months it's gonna be too late to start thinking about it.

    We didn't "lose the Senate." We never had it. That deck was always stacked against us and it is ALWAYS going to be an uphill and extremely difficult fight to take it. Dems were correct in that we had a blue wave, but what we missed was that Republicans had a red wave too.

    Elki's question though?

    The answer to that question is rebuilding Executive departments, using them to do things like expanding national broadband, regulating telecoms ("Hey, we got Comcast to actually give you good service for once"), etc. Then you walk into 2022 and say "Look at what we did with one hand tied behind our back. Give us both hands and imagine what we can accomplish.

    Yes, having the FCC bring the hammer down on Comcast would definitely win them points.

    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
    Elvenshae
  • HappylilElfHappylilElf Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    That the minimum wage expansion did so well in Florida while Dems struggled is a lesson to be learned and jesus christ just fully embrace marijuana legalization already.

    Wait are the dems as a party still anti-mj???

    Why??
    No, they just didn’t put legalization as a piece of the platform for the election.

    In favor of decriminalization instead, to be clear

    which is a bit like still arguing for civil unions.

    Except one is saying gay marriage isn't real marriage and the other is wanting to be able to toke so

    No, it's really fucking not.

    LoserForHireXFencingsax
  • OmnomnomPancakeOmnomnomPancake OttawaRegistered User regular
    Where are the Democrats on Trust-busting Amazon, Facebook, Google, etc? Are we just gonna keep letting these neural networks with hyper-manipulative tactics pump shit into our eyes 24/7?

    Because humans clearly cannot say no to this stuff on our own, and it is uhhhh having detrimental effect on the voting populace.

    Commander ZoomEddyTaranisFuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudShadowfireGiggles_FunsworthKristmas KthulhuMatevvideobobbo
  • ArcTangentArcTangent Registered User regular
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    I have a feeling a lot of the analysis of this election is going to ignore the fact that there’s still a ton of blue votes being counted late and the final results will look different than the current nominal ones. But by time the true results are in, the takes will have solidified.

    Ok, let's say you did a good job. You're saying you did a great job, and I don't object to that and we move on. When voters come and ask in the future what did you do to help them, what's that going to be? Because if the answer is going to be "actually, we lost the senate, and Republicans are an obstructionist party who wouldn't help us" then that's at odds with your current attitude, is it not?

    And the first step to actually dealing with that problem is acknowledging the problem right now, because in even 12 months it's gonna be too late to start thinking about it.

    We didn't "lose the Senate." We never had it. That deck was always stacked against us and it is ALWAYS going to be an uphill and extremely difficult fight to take it. Dems were correct in that we had a blue wave, but what we missed was that Republicans had a red wave too.

    Elki's question though?

    All the things that the executive branch can do, plus shouting from the rafters every single thing that the House and President are passing and dying in the Senate. Make it a daily briefing. A new bill every day for the entire year, all common sense, massively supported, simple things that are not even getting a vote.

    There is a lot we can do, starting with undoing all the horrible shit Trump has done, educating people on it, shoring up the executive so the next corrupt asshole can't do the same through independent commissions and shit. Declaring his administration an impotent failure three months before he even takes office is... goosey.

    FencingsaxGnome-Interruptus
  • Hahnsoo1Hahnsoo1 Make Ready. We Hunt.Registered User regular
    Also, I think it’s probably worth noting that the problem is largely among men.
    While it's hard to say whether this is a Trump effect (Lots of women, especially non-white women, hate Trump), my gut feeling is that non-white men want what they see as "equality"... and that means being able to be as misogynist as white men already are in aggregate. They want a seat at that male dominance table, not overthrow it. If you take a look at the membership of organizations like the Proud Boys, they have their token BIPOC members and quite a few Latino men.

    Di87pOF.jpg
    PSN: Hahnsoo | MH Rise: Hahnsoo, Switch FC: SW-0085-2679-5212
    Commander ZoomCambiataAngelHedgieshrykeGiggles_FunsworthRingoKristmas Kthulhu
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    That the minimum wage expansion did so well in Florida while Dems struggled is a lesson to be learned and jesus christ just fully embrace marijuana legalization already.

    Wait are the dems as a party still anti-mj???

    Why??
    No, they just didn’t put legalization as a piece of the platform for the election.

    In favor of decriminalization instead, to be clear

    which is a bit like still arguing for civil unions.

    Except one is saying gay marriage isn't real marriage and the other is wanting to be able to toke so

    No, it's really fucking not.

    Marijuana legalization is a civil rights issue.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
    dispatch.oSleepTaraniswanderingGiggles_FunsworthRingoOneAngryPossumPhillishereShazkar ShadowstormpainfulPleasanceKristmas KthulhuA Kobold's KoboldvideobobboMegaMekHacksawnever die
  • LoserForHireXLoserForHireX Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    That the minimum wage expansion did so well in Florida while Dems struggled is a lesson to be learned and jesus christ just fully embrace marijuana legalization already.

    Wait are the dems as a party still anti-mj???

    Why??
    No, they just didn’t put legalization as a piece of the platform for the election.

    In favor of decriminalization instead, to be clear

    which is a bit like still arguing for civil unions.

    it really isn't

    decriminalization is a much more sensible way to approach sale of intoxicants. Let states set up the way that they want to do things, or the states can kick it down to the counties.

    saying that it's like civil unions is fundamentally misunderstanding what decriminalization is. It just means that that the federal government wont legislate requirements for how the sale of things like pot will happen. There wont be one universal requirement. It allows for individual states to set up their own laws for control of substances. And you could have "dry" states or counties, but it means that you aren't going to make the same requirements for sale of Alaska that you do of California.

    Fundamentally with both decriminalization or legalization, you end up with it not being against the law to use pot. No one going to jail, people will have a way of obtaining their pot according to the law (at least the federal law). the US govt will stop prosecuting people for pot either way.

    "The only way to get rid of a temptation is to give into it." - Oscar Wilde
    "We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
    SleepFencingsaxshrykejmcdonaldmaraji
  • MvrckMvrck Registered User regular
    Polaritie wrote: »
    Mvrck wrote: »
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    I have a feeling a lot of the analysis of this election is going to ignore the fact that there’s still a ton of blue votes being counted late and the final results will look different than the current nominal ones. But by time the true results are in, the takes will have solidified.

    Ok, let's say you did a good job. You're saying you did a great job, and I don't object to that and we move on. When voters come and ask in the future what did you do to help them, what's that going to be? Because if the answer is going to be "actually, we lost the senate, and Republicans are an obstructionist party who wouldn't help us" then that's at odds with your current attitude, is it not?

    And the first step to actually dealing with that problem is acknowledging the problem right now, because in even 12 months it's gonna be too late to start thinking about it.

    We didn't "lose the Senate." We never had it. That deck was always stacked against us and it is ALWAYS going to be an uphill and extremely difficult fight to take it. Dems were correct in that we had a blue wave, but what we missed was that Republicans had a red wave too.

    Elki's question though?

    The answer to that question is rebuilding Executive departments, using them to do things like expanding national broadband, regulating telecoms ("Hey, we got Comcast to actually give you good service for once"), etc. Then you walk into 2022 and say "Look at what we did with one hand tied behind our back. Give us both hands and imagine what we can accomplish.

    Yes, having the FCC bring the hammer down on Comcast would definitely win them points.

    Oh and DOJ actually going after white supremacy groups and corrupt/lawless police departments. Do that and I think you'd gain a lot of brownie points without needing the Senate.

    And fucking dismantle ICE already. Whether by fiat or by actual legal measures.

    PwH4Ipj.jpg
    Commander ZoomFencingsaxGiggles_FunsworthRingoElvenshaejmcdonaldpainfulPleasanceA Kobold's KoboldMatevSiernannever die
  • dispatch.odispatch.o Registered User regular
    edited November 2020
    Mvrck wrote: »
    If earlier exit polls hold true, Democrat's performance with minorities is extremely troubling

    I’m not so naive as to think that Democrats couldn’t lose these votes honestly, but I do wonder about the extent of misinformation and soft suppression minority voters faced this years versus prior years. The Trump team was dedicated to it, in addition to Biden carrying baggage.

    On the other hand, Georgia, man. Reducing the spread of white votes allows more unified minority votes to have additional power.

    Also, I think it’s probably worth noting that the problem is largely among men.

    i think the party kind of struggles to grasp at times what minority communities actually want.

    I think a lot of that goes back to the Cuban support issue. Minority communities are often incredibly varied and diverse in their needs and expectations, down to a precinct level in a lot of cases. There has to be better micro-targeted research and outreach. It's just just enough to give people sweeping promises at this point, you have to let them know how you're going to specifically help them, and people like them.

    People were sounding the alarm on hispanics and florida in particular for some time and for whatever reason the Biden Campaign mostly ignored them.

    But we have to keep in mind that Obama won this state. Clinton did better in Miami than Biden did. Too often there's a tendency to write loses off as unwinnable in the first place and Florida was winnable.

    Hispanics in Florida are going to require specific outreach. While Hispanic might be the proper term, we need to start specifically talking about Cuban-Americans and other groups that don't automatically fit in to the Mexican-American based model we've seemed to be in love with.

    This actually applies to lots of ethnic groups, immigrant voters and first generation born citizens. Florida and voters identifying as Cubans are just going to be a big focus right now.

    dispatch.o on
    Styrofoam SammichIncenjucarLoserForHireXThegreatcowSleepEddyFencingsaxNobodyGiggles_FunsworthRingoOneAngryPossumGnome-InterruptusHefflingqwer12painfulPleasanceNobeardKristmas KthulhuCptKemzikvideobobboHacksaw
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    Like I know for a lot of liberals "appeal to the working class" and "populism" are charged terms but its clear there's a lot of voter energy that was left on the table around these policies and it can be picked up.

    We could do a lot more to talk about wages. Not subsidies, tax brackets, whatever. Just start yelling about how people dont get paid per hour what they should.

    I suspect, and we'll see as numbers come in, that a lot of people took Biden's thing about "Im a centrist kinda guy its ok if youre a republican you can vote for me" as a reason to ditch Trump and still vote GOP down ticket and thats not sustainable.

    I feel like it's also the case that a huge number of people in the US just fucking love dividing up their vote to prove to themselves they're geniuses. I mean, without all the numbers in this is just guessing but I've spoken to a number of folks who just get real into themselves about how sure sure they support Democratic ideas but you see they met [whatever Republican politician is fucking everything up] at some rally or event a decade ago and they're just a real hard worker for the people of wherever the fuck. Or vice-versa. I mean that's totally anecdata, but I worry that you may literally have some folks where you can either get their vote for the Presidency or the down-ballot.

    Although! This year was also as good a test as you could possibly get of "what's it like if no one canvasses?" and maybe canvassers can thread this needle more easily? I've definitely seen good canvassing pull someone into supporting an issue.


    I do think a thing I've seen in a lot of the early post-mortems is the exact shit I saw in 2018:

    - We wanted to win this by a huge amount! Oh no, we may have only won by a minor amount!
    - It feels awful to win by only a small (wait it's growing but still not as large as we wanted) amount, who didn't vote for us?
    - Republicans mostly didn't vote for us. Oh man can you imagine if they did though? We'd have won by a huge amount! We wouldn't feel bad!
    - Because we only won by a small (wow, now it's a pretty decent amount but whatever) amount it probably makes the most sense to just jettison the stuff that turned off people who voted Republican, while retaining everyone who voted for us! A perfect coalition of everyone in the US agreeing to vote for us would feel great!

    What exactly we're supposed to jettison varies by the person talking to me, but almost invariably includes shit that seems to not actually turn away voters. Like getting rid of "identity politics" like thinking trans people deserve rights. Where that's been brought into the fray as a major election issue, Democratic candidates have won!

    I think there are more people in the US who want Democratic policy implemented, and we just got out the vote for an enormous number of them. I think full-throated support for the sort of things derisively dismissed as "identity politics" tends to make Democratic candidates stronger rather than weaker, because a lot of people in the US want to support equal rights for themselves, their friends and family, or just... aren't gigantic assholes. I think the challenge now is convincing people that A.) we really, really mean that you can have life-changingly great policies like "be handed $40,000 by the government during a pandemic because the government actually wants you to live" but that these policies can only happen if there is really and truly a vast over-performance of Democratic voters even in places where that feels hopeless and B.) that who you elect to office has any connection to government policies. Which... I don't know how you do that.

    Take a moment to donate what you can to Critical Resistance and Black Lives Matter.
    Commander ZoomFencingsaxCambiataGiggles_FunsworthjmcdonaldCptKemzikForar
  • SanderJKSanderJK Crocodylus Pontifex Sinterklasicus Madrid, 3000 ADRegistered User regular
    The first step is the double election in Georgia. A lot of the campaign will be while the recount is still happening, and Trump will hopefully be melting down.

    I think showing a willingness to fight is important. Even if it's a hard fight.

    This election really hurt the idea that turnout = Democrat win.
    This was knife-edge against an unpopular candidate (which shows in that many of the races got more R votes than Trump).

    Much of the D establishment already is trying to move the conversation to the center. "I don't want to hear the word socialism ever again"
    I think that is grievous mistake, because the alliance that voted for Biden absolutely relies on black people, and they are bearing the brunt of Covid, are fired up but also cagey due to BLM going critical.
    I don't know enough about what can be done through Executive Orders (with a hostile SC), but make progress on prison reform, larger judicial reform, nonviolent convictions.
    Show that the Democratic party is better for black people. Show that it is the party of justice.
    I would also advocate spending time on Trump corruption. The Nixon "Lets forget about it" set the tone for half a century of "Republican presidents can't commit crimes." I don't know if it's short-term beneficial, but POTUS is too powerful to have it be unfettered.

    The main problem the democratic party always has is that while almost all its stances poll above 50%, nobody trusts them to implement them, either because it'll turn into soviet russia or do nothing, or possibly both at the same time. I don't know how to fix that, apart from low level information spreading. All the time, not just in election season (Or to say it differently, I don't think the USA will ever not be in election season anymore)

    In the post Trump presidency, there will also be a realignment of the media. I don't know what the Democrats can do, but they really need to avoid the Obama hell where Fox news throws a fit about the color of the presidents suit, and then every news network spends 3 days discussing that topic.
    Even if its nonsense, the idea that the president is controversial lingers.

    Steam: SanderJK Origin: SanderJK
    durandal4532Phoenix-DThegreatcowCommander ZoomEddyCambiataGiggles_FunsworthElvenshae
  • PowerpuppiesPowerpuppies Registered User regular
    Well that's ridiculous, it's clearly not goosey after 8 years of republican obstructionism. We won't be able to pass laws, which is a major hobbling.

    But the rest of what you're saying makes sense to me, about doing what you can through the executive and trying to message really loudly everything you tried to do but couldn't.

    Seems like a very "stay the course" playbook to me but i don't have any better ideas.

    sig.gif
    bowenFencingsax
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    Mvrck wrote: »
    If earlier exit polls hold true, Democrat's performance with minorities is extremely troubling

    I’m not so naive as to think that Democrats couldn’t lose these votes honestly, but I do wonder about the extent of misinformation and soft suppression minority voters faced this years versus prior years. The Trump team was dedicated to it, in addition to Biden carrying baggage.

    On the other hand, Georgia, man. Reducing the spread of white votes allows more unified minority votes to have additional power.

    Also, I think it’s probably worth noting that the problem is largely among men.

    i think the party kind of struggles to grasp at times what minority communities actually want.

    I think a lot of that goes back to the Cuban support issue. Minority communities are often incredibly varied and diverse in their needs and expectations, down to a precinct level in a lot of cases. There has to be better micro-targeted research and outreach. It's just just enough to give people sweeping promises at this point, you have to let them know how you're going to specifically help them, and people like them.

    People were sounding the alarm on hispanics and florida in particular for some time and for whatever reason the Biden Campaign mostly ignored them.

    But we have to keep in mind that Obama won this state. Clinton did better in Miami than Biden did. Too often there's a tendency to write loses off as unwinnable in the first place and Florida was winnable.

    Hispanics in Florida are going to require specific outreach. While Hispanic might be the proper term, we need to start specifically talking about Cuban-Americans and other groups that don't automatically fit in to the Mexican-American based model we've seemed to be in love with.

    This actually applies to lots of ethnic groups, immigrant voters and first generation born citizens. Florida and voters identifying as Cubans are just going to be a big focus right now.

    Im not really sure what it looks like. We cant really win the "Castro destroyed my family's business (slaves)" people but idk maybe its not the usual "youre minorities here's minority specific stuff" amd more kitchen table issue emphasis for lack of a better term.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
    dispatch.oSleepShadowhopeGiggles_FunsworthPhillisherepainfulPleasance
  • dispatch.odispatch.o Registered User regular
    edited November 2020
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    Mvrck wrote: »
    If earlier exit polls hold true, Democrat's performance with minorities is extremely troubling

    I’m not so naive as to think that Democrats couldn’t lose these votes honestly, but I do wonder about the extent of misinformation and soft suppression minority voters faced this years versus prior years. The Trump team was dedicated to it, in addition to Biden carrying baggage.

    On the other hand, Georgia, man. Reducing the spread of white votes allows more unified minority votes to have additional power.

    Also, I think it’s probably worth noting that the problem is largely among men.

    i think the party kind of struggles to grasp at times what minority communities actually want.

    I think a lot of that goes back to the Cuban support issue. Minority communities are often incredibly varied and diverse in their needs and expectations, down to a precinct level in a lot of cases. There has to be better micro-targeted research and outreach. It's just just enough to give people sweeping promises at this point, you have to let them know how you're going to specifically help them, and people like them.

    People were sounding the alarm on hispanics and florida in particular for some time and for whatever reason the Biden Campaign mostly ignored them.

    But we have to keep in mind that Obama won this state. Clinton did better in Miami than Biden did. Too often there's a tendency to write loses off as unwinnable in the first place and Florida was winnable.

    Hispanics in Florida are going to require specific outreach. While Hispanic might be the proper term, we need to start specifically talking about Cuban-Americans and other groups that don't automatically fit in to the Mexican-American based model we've seemed to be in love with.

    This actually applies to lots of ethnic groups, immigrant voters and first generation born citizens. Florida and voters identifying as Cubans are just going to be a big focus right now.

    Im not really sure what it looks like. We cant really win the "Castro destroyed my family's business (slaves)" people but idk maybe its not the usual "youre minorities here's minority specific stuff" amd more kitchen table issue emphasis for lack of a better term.

    I think you have to at least counter the socialism is responsible for your family fleeing Cuba. I don't know what it looks like either. Castro being a monster isn't something you're going to argue out of.

    E: I've talked with some Indian immigrants and they've had some very gross conservative opinions that they seemed to pick up from others in whatever location they moved to. I don't know how to intervene in that cycle.

    dispatch.o on
    SleepGiggles_Funsworth
  • MrMonroeMrMonroe Registered User regular
    I am very much in agreement that the party needs to move on from Pelosi and Schumer but calling the woman Speaker "Pelvis" is extremely fucking gross.

    MvrckPhoenix-DTuminschussCommander ZoomLord_AsmodeusFencingsaxShadowhopeCambiatashrykeRingoA Dabble Of TheloniusGiggles_FunsworthOneAngryPossumCantidejmcdonaldKetBraGnome-InterruptusSkeithA Kobold's Koboldnever die
  • MvrckMvrck Registered User regular
    Another follow up thought: Post 2020 messaging on racial inequality needs to be revamped. Defund the police may be too charged, and I expect it was a huge motivator to the right. Don't get me wrong, it absolutely needs to be done, but messaging wise it needs to be something harder to argue against.

    One thing I've kinda wanted from the begining, is a renaming/rebranding. I just think it might help on a psychological level for self selection. Policing in its nature, name and historical context, is about control, authority. Refusing federal funds or giving extra to departments that remove the name Police and go with "Public Service", reduce the number of armed officers and force response, and instead have increased and expanded "Public Service Officers". No, you're not a cop. You're not a police officer. You're here for the benefit of the public and you are going to be reminded of it every day by your job title.

    We need enforcement officers, but we don't need everyone to be an enforcement officer.

    PwH4Ipj.jpg
    PreacherFencingsaxStarZapperRingoGiggles_FunsworthjmcdonaldKristmas Kthulhu
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    Mvrck wrote: »
    If earlier exit polls hold true, Democrat's performance with minorities is extremely troubling

    I’m not so naive as to think that Democrats couldn’t lose these votes honestly, but I do wonder about the extent of misinformation and soft suppression minority voters faced this years versus prior years. The Trump team was dedicated to it, in addition to Biden carrying baggage.

    On the other hand, Georgia, man. Reducing the spread of white votes allows more unified minority votes to have additional power.

    Also, I think it’s probably worth noting that the problem is largely among men.

    i think the party kind of struggles to grasp at times what minority communities actually want.

    I think a lot of that goes back to the Cuban support issue. Minority communities are often incredibly varied and diverse in their needs and expectations, down to a precinct level in a lot of cases. There has to be better micro-targeted research and outreach. It's just just enough to give people sweeping promises at this point, you have to let them know how you're going to specifically help them, and people like them.

    People were sounding the alarm on hispanics and florida in particular for some time and for whatever reason the Biden Campaign mostly ignored them.

    But we have to keep in mind that Obama won this state. Clinton did better in Miami than Biden did. Too often there's a tendency to write loses off as unwinnable in the first place and Florida was winnable.

    Hispanics in Florida are going to require specific outreach. While Hispanic might be the proper term, we need to start specifically talking about Cuban-Americans and other groups that don't automatically fit in to the Mexican-American based model we've seemed to be in love with.

    This actually applies to lots of ethnic groups, immigrant voters and first generation born citizens. Florida and voters identifying as Cubans are just going to be a big focus right now.

    Im not really sure what it looks like. We cant really win the "Castro destroyed my family's business (slaves)" people but idk maybe its not the usual "youre minorities here's minority specific stuff" amd more kitchen table issue emphasis for lack of a better term.

    I think you have to at least counter the socialism is responsible for your family fleeing Cuba. I don't know what it looks like either. Castro being a monster isn't something you're going to argue out of.

    If nominating Joe Biden didnt counter it Im not sure what will. I think you have to move tangentially to the issue. Have a counter narrative that's more appealing rather than trying to fight on that rhetorical geound at all.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
    durandal4532dispatch.oFencingsaxZonugalCaptain InertiaGiggles_FunsworthpainfulPleasanceKristmas Kthulhu
  • AiouaAioua Ora Occidens Ora OptimaRegistered User regular
    edited November 2020
    people should probably be more clear what they mean around the MJ discussion because "legalization" and "decriminalization" can both be wildly different policies depending on whether you're talking state/fed policies and just individual ideas of what those policies look like

    like, "decriminalization" can be anything from state and city level prosecutorial discretion (i.e. just not bothering to enforce the law), to legally removing penalties for possession but not allowing public sale, to the fed full-on descheduling MJ

    "legalization" is more clear, but it can be the rec setups we see in several states, or it could could be an onerous federal scheme that isn't necessarily much better than the status quo (e.g., machine guns are technically legal to own at the moment...), or it could be a federal scheme that tries to coerce states into making recreational MJ shops allowed nationwide

    Aioua on
    life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
    fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
    that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
    bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
    bowenLoserForHireXFencingsaxGiggles_FunsworthKristmas KthulhuCptKemzik
  • PhyphorPhyphor Building Planet Busters Tasting FruitRegistered User regular
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    I have a feeling a lot of the analysis of this election is going to ignore the fact that there’s still a ton of blue votes being counted late and the final results will look different than the current nominal ones. But by time the true results are in, the takes will have solidified.

    A giant pile of votes in California does not matter. The popular vote is completely irrelevant. Remove the libertarian candidate and assume those votes go heavily R and you lose GA, probably NC and maybe WI too. Maybe you still win but you're possibly looking at a 279-259 map and that is not a healthy victory margin

    EddyGiggles_FunsworthElvenshaepainfulPleasanceKristmas Kthulhu
  • SanderJKSanderJK Crocodylus Pontifex Sinterklasicus Madrid, 3000 ADRegistered User regular
    Mvrck wrote: »
    Another follow up thought: Post 2020 messaging on racial inequality needs to be revamped. Defund the police may be too charged, and I expect it was a huge motivator to the right. Don't get me wrong, it absolutely needs to be done, but messaging wise it needs to be something harder to argue against.

    One thing I've kinda wanted from the begining, is a renaming/rebranding. I just think it might help on a psychological level for self selection. Policing in its nature, name and historical context, is about control, authority. Refusing federal funds or giving extra to departments that remove the name Police and go with "Public Service", reduce the number of armed officers and force response, and instead have increased and expanded "Public Service Officers". No, you're not a cop. You're not a police officer. You're here for the benefit of the public and you are going to be reminded of it every day by your job title.

    We need enforcement officers, but we don't need everyone to be an enforcement officer.

    They will always rebrand your actions into state ruining socialism and anarchy, but I think the angle here should be "The person doing traffic stops, helping mentally ill people, and trying to find criminals should not be the same person" We want to split those jobs.

    This is a local fight though, police is financed on a city basis. This allows Democrats to have different messaging and different projects in different places. Having a general platform is harder for the same reason.
    It's an incredibly entrenched fight that will lose you suburb voters in the short-term if you are not incredibly careful though. You're basically breaking up a bastion of power held by people that hate you (Police votes R 80% ish or so), and they will fight, lie and use their illgotten authority any way they can.

    Steam: SanderJK Origin: SanderJK
    Commander ZoomFencingsaxGiggles_Funsworth
  • OmnomnomPancakeOmnomnomPancake OttawaRegistered User regular
    edited November 2020

    sent to dms

    OmnomnomPancake on
  • Inkstain82Inkstain82 Registered User regular
    Phyphor wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    I have a feeling a lot of the analysis of this election is going to ignore the fact that there’s still a ton of blue votes being counted late and the final results will look different than the current nominal ones. But by time the true results are in, the takes will have solidified.

    A giant pile of votes in California does not matter. The popular vote is completely irrelevant. Remove the libertarian candidate and assume those votes go heavily R and you lose GA, probably NC and maybe WI too. Maybe you still win but you're possibly looking at a 279-259 map and that is not a healthy victory margin

    It’s not just in California, it’s not just in presidential races, and all wins are good wins

    durandal4532Netscape
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Phyphor wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    I have a feeling a lot of the analysis of this election is going to ignore the fact that there’s still a ton of blue votes being counted late and the final results will look different than the current nominal ones. But by time the true results are in, the takes will have solidified.

    A giant pile of votes in California does not matter. The popular vote is completely irrelevant. Remove the libertarian candidate and assume those votes go heavily R and you lose GA, probably NC and maybe WI too. Maybe you still win but you're possibly looking at a 279-259 map and that is not a healthy victory margin

    Yeah we really do not need another round of "look at the popular vote, we nailed this thing but for x"

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
    Kristmas Kthulhu
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    Phyphor wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    I have a feeling a lot of the analysis of this election is going to ignore the fact that there’s still a ton of blue votes being counted late and the final results will look different than the current nominal ones. But by time the true results are in, the takes will have solidified.

    A giant pile of votes in California does not matter. The popular vote is completely irrelevant. Remove the libertarian candidate and assume those votes go heavily R and you lose GA, probably NC and maybe WI too. Maybe you still win but you're possibly looking at a 279-259 map and that is not a healthy victory margin

    Yeah we really do not need another round of "look at the popular vote, we nailed this thing but for x"

    It will never not be relevant that the majority of the US wants Democratic policy-makers to win elections. It doesn't mean that we can point to it as evidence that we do not have work to do, but it remains extremely important to point out that a majority of the US is fighting to be represented, because the narrative consistently paints the country as "center-right" and convinces a lot of people that it's not really worth fighting in their red state.

    Take a moment to donate what you can to Critical Resistance and Black Lives Matter.
    Phoenix-DFencingsaxshrykeRingoGiggles_FunsworthTofystedethNetscapeNobeardCptKemzik
  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    edited November 2020
    Hahnsoo1 wrote: »
    Also, I think it’s probably worth noting that the problem is largely among men.
    While it's hard to say whether this is a Trump effect (Lots of women, especially non-white women, hate Trump), my gut feeling is that non-white men want what they see as "equality"... and that means being able to be as misogynist as white men already are in aggregate. They want a seat at that male dominance table, not overthrow it. If you take a look at the membership of organizations like the Proud Boys, they have their token BIPOC members and quite a few Latino men.

    This is a common problem throughout history, yes. Often people say they don't like the system, but really, they just hate that they aren't (part of) the in-group in charge. And when/if they get there, they tend to pull up the ladder behind them as fast as they possibly can.

    Commander Zoom on
    steam_sig.png
    Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
    Hahnsoo1FencingsaxAngelHedgieRingoGiggles_FunsworthGnome-InterruptusNobeardKristmas Kthulhu
  • Inkstain82Inkstain82 Registered User regular
    Phyphor wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    I have a feeling a lot of the analysis of this election is going to ignore the fact that there’s still a ton of blue votes being counted late and the final results will look different than the current nominal ones. But by time the true results are in, the takes will have solidified.

    A giant pile of votes in California does not matter. The popular vote is completely irrelevant. Remove the libertarian candidate and assume those votes go heavily R and you lose GA, probably NC and maybe WI too. Maybe you still win but you're possibly looking at a 279-259 map and that is not a healthy victory margin

    Yeah we really do not need another round of "look at the popular vote, we nailed this thing but for x"

    We equally don’t need an “oh no we thought we would win 40 house seats but we only won 20” and then two weeks later it turns out we did win 40

    FencingsaxRingojmcdonaldNetscape
  • jungleroomxjungleroomx Never pre-order anything. Registered User regular
    What do Dems need to do?

    Slough off the dead weight. We need people who are a bit more energetic and appealing like AOC and less... well... the people who have been in DC since the 90's who still run things like the 90's.

    I think in a perfect world, every single incumbent in the legislature with double digit years there should get primaried, but I don't think our bench is deep enough.

    "Oh god, you're so tough, with your fucking open nose and throat" - Bill Burr to Joe Rogan, after Joe said masks were for "pussies."
    Commander ZoomEddyCojo MojoRingoGiggles_FunsworthKalgarethpainfulPleasanceKristmas KthulhuA Kobold's KoboldKraintvideobobbo
Sign In or Register to comment.