Quote:
Originally Posted by jt217
Like, we just had a whole hudge long presidential campaign where neither of the campaigns were representing sound economic policy. How ****ed up is that? What does that even mean?
I agree, but Trump was at least speaking to the economic issues facing a lot of those voters in the Rust Belt. Granted, his plan was, "I'm going to bring your jobs back," and the farthest he went into detail was basically tariffs that economists said would cost the US like 7M jobs, but when it comes to getting votes, "I'm going to bring your jobs back," >>>>> "Your jobs are never coming back, we'll do retraining for some new tech jobs."
The move for the Dems was to hit hard on: "We're going to create NEW manufacturing jobs in new industries, because under my administration America will be a leader in tech/green/whatever. We'll give tax breaks to companies creating these jobs and keeping the manufacturing right here in PA/MI/OH/WI/MN/wherever we are today."
Quote:
Originally Posted by jt217
And if the clinton campaign really purposefully ignored WI/MI because they recognized it was close and they were trying to distract Trump, then they all need to stop what they're doing. Like they all need to just quit because they're so bad at it. Like, whatever is left of the democrat party should be barring anyone associated with the clinton campaign from everything. Debbie whatshername****ingwhater, Donna Brazilnuts, just leave and don't come back. If in four years bill or hilary wants to campaign for the nominee, just tell them to **** off.
I agree with the second half, but I still think if you're up like 2 points instead of 7 points in your internal polling, but the opponent isn't campaigning there, that going there and letting him know you think it's close may not be the best move. It's debatable, is all I'm really saying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dessin d'enfant
Then you need to take ideas from Obama, not Bernie/Warren. Millenials certainly can embrace a middle of the road dem especially as they get older.
I don't know about that. Millenials are woke on income inequality, the system being rigged, all of that. They aren't going to vote for a radical white nationalist who says it, but in a hypothetical 2016 Obama/Romney rematch, I would predict lower turnout from millenials. It's been a long time since hope, change, and yes we can. I think Obama was a fantastic president, but I also didn't see enough from him on some of the things he ran on.
I don't think millenials flocked to Sanders because of Democratic socialism, I think they flocked to him because of Citizens United, income inequality and corruption.
The 2020 candidate needs to be someone who millenials can get behind, who they believe is not bought and paid for already. Dems can't just trot out a center-left establishment shill who gives a good speech but isn't all that inspired on getting money out of politics and helping the lower and middle class.
I mean, said candidate may beat Trump, but they'll lose four years later unless they're running against LePage or some alt-right nutjob.
The Democratic party needs to be the champion of the working lower/middle class. Otherwise, it's in trouble.