[palmotea]

> I'll get downvoted by both sides but this is what a winning political party policies look like for most of Americans not in NYC or in SF Bay Area, LA, SD, Seattle, Portland:

I don't agree on all the specifics, but I think that's the absolute right way to be thinking about this. If you actually want to make things better, you need to have empathy for people who aren't like you. Despite their self-image, I don't think liberals are actually any better at empathy than anyone else.

> -Having no stance on DEI, LGBTQ, or other cultural issues that serve only to divide and distract

This is a key point. The focus on those issues is probably the only reason the plutocrat/big business Republicans even have a chance.

[tastyface]

"This is a key point. The focus on those issues is probably the only reason the plutocrat/big business Republicans even have a chance."

The right spends *far* more money and airtime on these issues than democrats actually do: https://abcnews.com/US/trump-spends-millions-anti-trans-ads-...

In other words, it is largely a moral panic manufactured by the right. If democrats give in, the right will concoct a new one, ad infinitum, until democrats and republicans are indistinguishable.

[palmotea]

> In other words, it is largely a propaganda push by the right.

Who cares? It works, and why does it work?

I tell you why: it works because the Democrats give them the ammunition.

Edit: I see you edited the line I quoted to:

> In other words, it is largely a moral panic manufactured by the right. If democrats give in, the right will concoct a new one, ad infinitum, until democrats and republicans are indistinguishable.

I don't think that's true, it's just a story to discourage effective change to keep some faction happy.

Democrats used to be able to win in so-called red states, because they used to be able to adapt to local conditions. Following your line of thinking just means they'll keep losing.

[abandonliberty]

Abortion used to be a Catholic issue until a Republican strategist saw an opportunity.

The point is to get citizens fighting each other on things that are personally important so we're too busy to fight for things that are nationally important, like corruption or the decay of democracy.

Both parties suck because the system is broken, and both parties benefit from perpetuating it -- along with those who fund them.

[UncleMeat]

When North Carolina passed the first bathroom bill in 2016, what should have happened in your mind?

[tastyface]

Well, I'll just say this: I was a "vote blue no matter who" voter following Trump 1, but after seeing the complete limpness of democratic leadership in Trump's proto-fascist America, I'm not sure I could actually stomach voting for a politician like Newsom, who basically quacks like a republican circa 10 years ago. What would be the point? When ICE is pulling my neighbors from their homes, will he step in to protect them? When the executive order gets signed to federalize polling stations, will he bother to do anything about it? I am far from the only person who feels this way.

If democrats acquiesce to republicans, they will likely lose even more people than they already have while gaining absolutely no one from the maga camp. I think the real strat is to go full Mamdani across the board. Unapologetic, compassionate leftism focused on the economy and quality of life; no one thrown under the bus as a cynical ploy to scrap together a few undecided votes.

[palmotea]

> Well, I'll just say this: I was a "vote blue no matter who" voter following Trump 1, but after seeing the complete limpness of democratic leadership in Trump's proto-fascist America, I'm not sure I could actually stomach voting for a someone like Newsom, who is basically a republican circa 10 years ago. I am far from the only person who feels this way.

It's not about who you would vote for.

> If the democrats acquiesce to the republicans, they will likely lose even more people than they already have, while gaining absolutely no one from the maga camp. I think the real strat is to go full Mamdani across the board. Unapologetic, compassionate leftism.

To be perfectly honest: I don't think you have the strategic sense to productively participate on a topic this. I kinda get the impression you're going for wish fulfillment.

You're not going to get it all. If you try to get it all, you'll lose. Your wish fulfillment candidate could win parts of California and New York, but those aren't the places you need to think about. Think about not crashing and burning in a Nebraska Senate race.

[tastyface]

Why do you think you have the strategic sense to productively participate on a topic like this? Who even are you? What are your sources?

As for me, I look at polling results almost every day. My sense is that nothing I said is extraordinarily controversial among the voters who actually matter. People care about the economy, period. Outside of hardcore MAGA enclaves -- which will never change their vote -- the culture war bullshit is massively unpopular.

[palmotea]

> Why do you think you have the strategic sense to productively participate on a topic like this?

In short: I'm talking about compromises, not fantasies of partisan purity.

> Who even are you? What are your sources?

Someone who has lived in places where Democrats used to win, but no longer do.

[asacrowflies]

The Epstein files are full of emails of them explicitly manufacturing it as you say.

[UncleMeat]

What focus on these issues? Harris did everything she could to run from trans rights issues and the most we got from Biden was reinterpreting Title IX based on the finding in Bostock.

[abandonliberty]

>Despite their self-image, I don't think liberals are actually any better at empathy than anyone else.

I can see how you think this, since othering and dehumanizing responses rise to the top when people ask how Republicans can support this administration.

Who benefits from amplifying those voices?