• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

My thoughts on what Democrats need to do to become relevant again

Gozaburo said:
I mean, this has literally been measured. High IQ people tend to be more left leaning.

Now I'll be the first to say that a midwit is more dangerous than a retard, but if the subject is "who has a claim to intellectualism" it is objectively the liberals lol.
Click to expand...
That is like when the Democrats fact checking themselves.
They researched it and they found that they are intellectual superior.
Well of course lol
 
Buster Keaton said:
That is like when the Democrats fact checking themselves.
They researched it and they found that they are intellectual superior.
Well of course lol
Click to expand...
The leader of the GOP thinks windmills cause cancer.
 
Buster Keaton said:
That is like when the Democrats fact checking themselves.
They researched it and they found that they are intellectual superior.
Well of course lol
Click to expand...

No, like they've measured IQ categorized by political leaning.

Unless you're saying that IQ has a liberal bias.

That would be funny.
 
I'm just going to sit here and watch the carnage.

🍿
 
The Brad Dad said:
I have a force multiplier of arm floaties if you don't. Don't make me pull out the slip'n'slide.
Click to expand...
I AM ONE OF AN ELITE GROUP CHAUFFERRED TO SCHOOL IN A HIGH PERFORMANCE, COMPACT, BUS


YOU ARE RELEGATED TO A LONG UNWEILDLY BUS THAT MAKES A STOP EVERY 2 BLOCKS.

WHILE YOU FIGHT WITH THE 6TH GRADERS FOR THE LAST SEAT ON THE BUS, I FIGHT TO GET MY SECOND TWINKIE OF THE MORNING OPEN, FOOL.


OH, YOU DRIVE TO SCHOOL? HOW WAS LISTENING TO YOUR GIRLFRIENDS FAVORITE BOY BAND WHILE SHE TALKS ABOUT CHEERLEADER PRACTICE? SO. ****ING. OWNED.


LUCE,
WARD OF THE STATE
 
Gozaburo said:
I mean, this has literally been measured. High IQ people tend to be more left leaning.

Now I'll be the first to say that a midwit is more dangerous than a retard, but if the subject is "who has a claim to intellectualism" it is objectively the liberals lol.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that the Liberals are intellectually superior to everyone?
Is that political eugenics?
I understand that the Left believes that they intellectually superior, but that is just another one the their many delusions
 
Buster Keaton said:
Are you saying that the Liberals are intellectually superior to everyone?
Is that political eugenics?
I understand that the Left believes that they intellectually superior, but that is just another one the their many delusions
Click to expand...

To everyone? Almost certainly not, but if we're comparing people who identify as 'Liberal' and people who identify as 'Conservative' then yes, liberals without-a-doubt have a higher IQ.

Eugenics isn't necessary. MAGA is inherently dysgenic enough that it has a self-defeating eugenic effect.
 
Buster Keaton said:
Are you saying that the Liberals are intellectually superior to everyone?
Is that political eugenics?
I understand that the Left believes that they intellectually superior, but that is just another one the their many delusions
Click to expand...
The only thing keeping MAGAs from getting laid is MAGAs.
 
Obviously the bottom end of the social-economic scale will identify with the Democrats and I just don't think their IQ is all that high. But I'm just guessing.
 
dseag2 said:
These are only my thoughts and, as always, open for constructive conversation.

Democrats need a charismatic leader. Say what you will about the Repubs, but they are in lockstep with dear leader Trump. We'll see how the Epstein situation plays out, but I think in the long run the hoopla will die down. There is no clear leader in the Democratic party, so they can't come up with a clear message. They are rudderless and need to get their shit together. Don't ask me who that leader should be. They have time so it could be someone we haven't even thought of.

Democrats should ride the tide of the Epstein debacle, but when it subsides they need to have a long-term plan. I know Democrats are not currently in power, but I've yet to hear a peep about what they stand for. I'm aware that MAGAs don't stand for anything except cruelty and "owning the Libs" but that doesn't seem to matter in the scheme of things.

Democrats should focus on kitchen-table rather than fringe issues. As a member of the LGBT community, I don't need Democrats' focus in an election. I want to keep my current equality and my status as legally married and if Dems focus on smaller populations like LBGT and Trans it will continue to put them behind and my own rights will erode. All I need is for Democrats to win on larger issues and reverse any anti-LGBT laws that may have been put in place by MAGA. In my view, no Democrats needs to fall on the sword for me and they don't need to shove Pride down anyone's throat.

Democrats should once again prove that they are for the common man. They really lost the plot during the last election, where they gave up votes to many audiences, including Blacks and Latinos. Mamdani is ahead because he had a concrete plan for everyday citizens of NYC, and even if can't implement them he is no worse than Trump with his empty promises. At least Mamdani has new ideas.

There is a dire need for younger leaders in the Democratic party. Spineless people like Schumer need to go. IMO we need more Jasmine Crocketts who will call it as they see it, along with Wes Moores and Josh Shapiros. The young leaders can reach younger audiences through technology and Social Media and encourage them to get out and vote. That's what the Repubs did with the podcasters. The oldsters don't have a clue.

Sorry for the long-winded opinion, but I don't want to see Democrats win the 2026 mid-terms just because America has FAFO'd. I want to see them become a strong party again, with the ability to win Presidential elections. Again, open for constructive conversation and recommendations. Snarky MAGA comments won't be responded to.
Click to expand...
Your post reminded me of many years ago, when I lived in Colorado heard former Gov. Dick Lamm talking in the 1970s about democrats in the context of working class folk, many of whom now seem to like Trump. He listed democrats/liberals’ achievements: unemployment insurance, worker’s compensation, the right to organize, safety rules on the job, etc. One of the things that I think democrats should stress is this part of their record, and contrast it with say, what Trump and the GOP have done, removing worker protections in various contexts. Yes, these benefits represent old news, things we take for granted, but their simply asking which party people believe will respect and protect them in this context could be effective.

Dems can’t dominate the culture wars, which have Republicans leading some working class whites away from them, and in my view voting against their economic interests by being distracted by cultural issues. They should focus on their strengths.
 
Gozaburo said:
I mean, this has literally been measured. High IQ people tend to be more left leaning.

Now I'll be the first to say that a midwit is more dangerous than a retard, but if the subject is "who has a claim to intellectualism" it is objectively the liberals lol.
Click to expand...
Its weird that none of them bother to log in here
 
Gozaburo said:
I mean, this has literally been measured. High IQ people tend to be more left leaning.

Now I'll be the first to say that a midwit is more dangerous than a retard, but if the subject is "who has a claim to intellectualism" it is objectively the liberals lol.
Click to expand...
The problems arise when common sense would serve you better than intellectualism.
If they are more higher education trained, they lack the common sense that allows them to both connect with an audience, and solve problems from that viewpoint. Meanwhile claiming that people should believe you because ' I smart ' doesn't play well with the gen pop.
 
Cope said:
The problems arise when common sense would serve you better than intellectualism.
If they are more higher education trained, they lack the common sense that allows them to both connect with an audience, and solve problems from that viewpoint. Meanwhile claiming that people should believe you because ' I smart ' doesn't play well with the gen pop.
Click to expand...
I think the term you are looking for is 'Educated Dunce.'
 
Cope said:
The problems arise when common sense would serve you better than intellectualism.
If they are more higher education trained, they lack the common sense that allows them to both connect with an audience, and solve problems from that viewpoint. Meanwhile claiming that people should believe you because ' I smart ' doesn't play well with the gen pop.
Click to expand...

Like I said, overeducated midwitism is as-dangerous if not more dangerous than <85 IQ.

Fletch said:
Could be. But at least we agree they dont log in here.
Click to expand...

Fair.
 
Less than 50 posts in the thread and already off the rails... someone make popcorn.

But to the point, there is plenty going for Democrats and plenty going against them headed into these midterms.

A primary benefit for Democrats is in the modern era it is rare for a single party to have the Presidency and Congress and then continue to keep the House at the first midterm. Not saying this is foolproof but generally speaking political momentum and voter sentiment tends to make way for vulnerable districts to flip one way or the other. But that does not necessarily mean support for the party in the minority position in Congress but rather negative sentiment for those in charge. Too many people in this nation, especially in key districts and states, vote based on who they do not like.

What is going against Democrats, and frankly harming their "relevance," is they are still relatively leaderless and their central messaging is speaking about their opposition. Solutions? Not so much. But MAGAs do something, Trump signs, and while the response is predictable what we do not have is the response that is inspiring. The middle class, "kitchen table issues," no one looks at Democrats as being all that interested in that demographic. Defensive posturing and messaging maybe, but really a champion for the worker? Not a chance.

What, 4 to 6 (or more) threads in the past week talking about approval for Democrats being at multi-decade lows? There is a reason for that sentiment. Outside of the left leaning base everyone else is not interested in the next round of identity politics, over-governance, "democratic socialism," and ultimately messaging that is in itself divisive. More importantly, that left leaning base goes out of their way to remind everyone who is most important to them and by consequence who cannot be.

It is going to upset many, but for Democrats to become relevant again they are going to have to find a way to be inspiring behind common view the majority can agree to and putting aside divisive identity politics that eats into that unity.

The only question, aside from the natural political pendulum of party control over government in this nation, is will Democrats do that and engage the majority again.

I have my doubts, even though I largely vote for Democrats (a few exceptions, more local level, here and there) because I cannot be a Republican on the national stage these days. But I know why they won, and I question if Democrats at the base level will ever see it.
 
OrphanSlug said:
Less than 50 posts in the thread and already off the rails... someone make popcorn.

But to the point, there is plenty going for Democrats and plenty going against them headed into these midterms.

A primary benefit for Democrats is in the modern era it is rare for a single party to have the Presidency and Congress and then continue to keep the House at the first midterm. Not saying this is foolproof but generally speaking political momentum and voter sentiment tends to make way for vulnerable districts to flip one way or the other. But that does not necessarily mean support for the party in the minority position in Congress but rather negative sentiment for those in charge. Too many people in this nation, especially in key districts and states, vote based on who they do not like.

What is going against Democrats, and frankly harming their "relevance," is they are still relatively leaderless and their central messaging is speaking about their opposition. Solutions? Not so much. But MAGAs do something, Trump signs, and while the response is predictable what we do not have is the response that is inspiring. The middle class, "kitchen table issues," no one looks at Democrats as being all that interested in that demographic. Defensive posturing and messaging maybe, but really a champion for the worker? Not a chance.

What, 4 to 6 (or more) threads in the past week talking about approval for Democrats being at multi-decade lows? There is a reason for that sentiment. Outside of the left leaning base everyone else is not interested in the next round of identity politics, over-governance, "democratic socialism," and ultimately messaging that is in itself divisive. More importantly, that left leaning base goes out of their way to remind everyone who is most important to them and by consequence who cannot be.

It is going to upset many, but for Democrats to become relevant again they are going to have to find a way to be inspiring behind common view the majority can agree to and putting aside divisive identity politics that eats into that unity.

The only question, aside from the natural political pendulum of party control over government in this nation, is will Democrats do that and engage the majority again.

I have my doubts, even though I largely vote for Democrats (a few exceptions, more local level, here and there) because I cannot be a Republican on the national stage these days. But I know why they won, and I question if Democrats at the base level will ever see it.
Click to expand...
A decade ago there was a Blue Wall that would seal Hillary's victory. PA, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin--the rust belt of working class democrats--were an electoral lock. Well, that wall collapsed and in 2024, the democrats lost them again. Why? Because the democrats have stopped appealing to them. Worse, they now mock those people as too stupid to be worthy of their party. The democrats used to be the Party of the poor and the working class. Now they are the party of Marxism, the coastal elites and the foreign migrant workforce that they need to cut their hedges and fold their sheets. Thats not a winning coalition
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom