[nathan_compton]

It would be perceived as pandering bullshit from either of them.

What the democrats need is an aggressive economic policy that actually will manifestly improve regular people's lives. If they cannot articulate such a thing and credibly convince the voter that they will fucking fight for it, they will never win.

[spiderfarmer]

I don’t care about the US anymore but it seems to me it’s always up to the Democrats to be responsible, while Republicans can literally end democracy and turn the country into a pay to play kleptocracy where you can even be intimate with children without consequences or backlash.

[ModernMech]

> If they cannot articulate such a thing and credibly convince the voter that they will fucking fight for it, they will never win.

People say this but Democrats lost by like 1% in 2024. If that had gone the other way by 1%, people would be talking about what political geniuses they are (as has happened in the past). Winning in this environment just means playing long enough that the noise goes your way eventually, and then everyone talks about what a political mastermind you are. Or if it goes against you then you're forever lost in the political wilderness. Until the next election when it eventually, randomly goes your way again.

[BanAntiVaxxers]

She can articulate the policy at the shooting range while eating some grits. And drinking some Keystone Light. That is when they will be receptive to the ideas.

[bilbo0s]

That won't do anything.

No one at a gun range is changing their vote.

Both parties already know which voters change their votes depending on the situation. The data's already told strategists in both parties that the hotspots are, generally speaking, a few counties in a few states in the midwest, Pennsylvania, and more and more Arizona. So they don't really need to do more than pay lip service to any others. Because the data's already told them that the others won't change their votes in any case.

[LtWorf]

But the democrats are right wing as well…