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

[daeler]

The Democratic party needs to focus on what voters want, Lower prices on energy and housing, lower spending in government, lower taxes on the middle class, less war, less tariffs.

Just not running on the other side is worse.

 

[gbg3]

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.

I found this to be a quite interesting part of one paragraph in the OP. I wonder if many members of the LGBT community also feel they don't need Democrats' focus in an election. I suspect (just like most people) they just want to live their lives - with their current equality and see no reason for a "focus" to be put on them. I suspect many within that community don't need or want any unique or special focus in that they are just people perfectly content living their lives.

I agree putting a focus on smaller or even much smaller portions of the population, like the Trans community, Trans women wanting to compete in women's sports, and illegals - puts Dems behind, ignores the majority of the population, and erodes rights of others (often large majority groups). And what then happens in this scenario are Dems try to tell the large majority groups what their priorities and concerns should be rather than listening to/hearing the large majority groups, to learn what it is they do care about/are concerned about. For example, telling the huge bunch of middle income working people with families that they actually want high taxes on their salaries in order to pay for more social welfare programs (meant to support and target only the poorest, including many illegals), isn't a narrative that is easily sold or bought.

 

[gbg3]

Its weird that none of them bother to log in here

I have to admit this made me smile and chuckle.

 

[OrphanSlug]

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

Exactly my point, well said.

In 2024 Democrats already banked on being the anti-Trump answer back then, and the result was a spectacular failure taking down the infamous blue wall with it. Trump even made gains with various minority groups to the point that key counties in key states flipped red. Areas of the nation that Obama won handily and Biden sorta held, but that Hilary and Harris both lost. To that end Trump ended up with a higher EC in 2024 against Harris than he did in 2016 against Hilary plus the popular vote in 2024.

But with Harris and Democrats specifically, it is well documented they forgot all about the working class. Champions for minorities notwithstanding, ultimately they forgot about people having to make decisions on what bills are paid and what food they can buy. Trump, like it or not hardcore Democrats, swiped enough of that vote.

Our collective question is does the Democratic Party have a real answer to that or are they simply banking on likely historic midterm results?

I am concerned about it being the latter and nothing else.

And why? Shit show absentee unifying message based leadership.

 

[StillBallin75]

Pretty much agree with everything except the "identity politics" stuff.

Given that the fash have unleashed a relentless assault on minority and marginalized groups, any person with any principles needs to pair a vigorous defense of the working class with clear messaging on standing up for Palestinians, LGBTQ folk, immigrants, minorities etc. If someone is afraid to do any of the latter because they fear backlash, then I will automatically distrust them to deliver on the former.

 

[ElChupacabra]

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.

Agreed.

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.

Disgaree. This is a gutter issue best left for the MAGAverse to cannibalize itself over. It has the potential to go all sorts of sideways and there's likely little political gain from it since.

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.

Agreed. I think the focus on kitchen-table issues should be the focus, but I don't think they should completely forget about advocating for minority group rights.

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.

Largely agree. There still needs to be a distinction though, since that's the space Trump has gained ground in. It also can't come at the expense of losing support among their current base either.

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.

Agreed on the "younger leaders" point, and how they reach out needs to be more creative as well since it's not just about being on everything, but messaging. The challenge with the younger Democrats is they are far more idealistic than the more centrist type Democrats some seem to want over progressive types.

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.

There's a part of me that would rather this country go through this MAGA experiment, so if it fails badly, it serves as a template of what not to do.

 

[ElChupacabra]

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

Accurate until the "party of Marxism" nonsense, which just isn't accurate by a long shot. Political parties tend to change over time as does their base; something we've seen throughout our history. Even your comment about Democrats being the party of the "foreign migrant workforce" is off considering the position of the GOP on immigration before they went hardline against it.

 

[Fletch]

Accurate until the "party of Marxism" nonsense, which just isn't accurate by a long shot. Political parties tend to change over time as does their base; something we've seen throughout our history. Even your comment about Democrats being the party of the "foreign migrant workforce" is off considering the position of the GOP on immigration before they went hardline against it.

DEI, CRT and using the term equity instead of equality are all Marxist ideals. Plus you now have an actual communist representing the democrat party in NYC mayoral race. But keep your head in the sand if you like.

 

[ElChupacabra]

DEI, CRT and using the term equity instead of equality are all Marxist ideals.

They're not. What has been often the case is using these kind of labels to attempt to dismiss ideas. This country has a long history of doing this.

Plus you now have an actual communist representing the democrat party in NYC mayoral race. But keep your head in the sand if you like.

Is he an actual communist? I'll take it you have a copy of his membership card?

 

[Fletch]

They're not.

They are

Is he an actual communist? I'll take it you have a copy of his membership card?

Yup.

When Zohran Mamdani hailed Kerala communist leader as 'kind of Mayor New York City needs'

Zohran Mamdani in 2020 shared a post by CPIM's Puducherry committee congratulating Arya Rajendran for becoming the youngest mayor of a city anywhere around the world and now many Americans are branding him a communist over this "endorsement" of Left-leaning politics

www.theweek.in

 

[trixare4kids]

That is precisely my point. I know what the Democratic party has been associated with but I've yet to hear any Democrat get that across on any interview segment that I've seen. There is too much there to effectively communicate and it needs to be consolidated into a few talking points.

That’s because they’d rather bash MAGA Trump.
The party is bankrupt.

 

[Buster Keaton]

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.

That is just supremacist hate.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/supreme is

 

[Buster Keaton]

The Democrats are angry that the people who they hate won't vote for them.

 

[Groogrux]

There IS no mystery. The Democratic Party is generally associated with more progressive policies. It supports social and economic equality, favoring greater government intervention in the economy but opposing government involvement in the private noneconomic affairs of citizens. Democrats advocate for the civil rights of minorities, and they support a safety net for individuals, backing various social welfare programs, including Medicaid and food aid. To fund these programs and other initiatives, Democrats often endorse a progressive tax. In addition, Democrats support environmental protection programs, gun control, less-strict immigration laws, and worker rights.

Oh, and yes, Trump is a total disaster as president which SHOULD be enough, but.....

No, progressive policies support EQUITY instead of equality.

 

[Gozaburo]

That is just supremacist hate.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/supreme is

I am an open IQ supremacist.

I think intelligent people should govern over low agency rubes. It’s good for them.

 

[dmpi]

I am an open IQ supremacist.

I think intelligent people should govern over low agency rubes. It’s good for them.

It's the capitalistic way. Intelligence brings you wealth and power. You get to rule with your money.

 

[Blue Dog]

When not if the Democrats take back the WH and Congress, they should kill the filibuster and pass as much legislation possible knowing in two years they will lose the HoR.

Let the GOP try rescinding the legislation if it’s popular.

 

[Gozaburo]

It's the capitalistic way. Intelligence brings you wealth and power. You get to rule with your money.

Not really how it works. Billionaire Jeff Bezos isn't 10,000 times more intelligent than the smartest software engineer at google who makes $500k/yr or whatever. In fact, the software engineer is probably more intelligent in terms of raw computing power.

Capitalism rewards people who are highly intelligent, cunning, and morally apathetic. I'd grant the aforementioned personality type is probably who composes the elite class no matter what the economic system is, but capitalism in particular tends to empower some of the worst parts of these traits.

Also more generally - the state should never be subordinate to capital. That's retarded.

 

[dmpi]

Not really how it works. Billionaire Jeff Bezos isn't 10,000 times more intelligent than the smartest software engineer at google who makes $500k/yr or whatever. In fact, the software engineer is probably more intelligent in terms of raw computing power.

Capitalism rewards people who are highly intelligent, cunning, and morally apathetic. I'd grant the aforementioned personality type is probably who composes the elite class no matter what the economic system is, but capitalism in particular tends to empower some of the worst parts of these traits.

Also more generally - the state should never be subordinate to capital. That's retarded.

There's really no such thing as intelligence. What people have are skill and talents. Some of these skills and talents are highly valued by society and thus the people who process them are highly compensated. And yes, Bezos isn't 10,000 time more intelligent, but a software engineer is just a software engineer. Bezos is a highly creative multi-faceted type of guy, he's got organizational and management skills and he works all day and all night. He's a natural for succeeding in the capitalist system. Also let go of that notion that successful people are without morals, boundaries and limits. That just a story you tell yourself so the world as you see it will make sense to you.

 

[Gozaburo]

There's really no such thing as intelligence.

Objectively false.

What people have are skill and talents.

Sure, but all skills and talents have a barrier to entry. Not everyone can be a rocket scientist, regardless of how many books they try to read.

Bezos is a highly creative multi-faceted type of guy, he's got organizational and management skills and he works all day and all night. He's a natural for succeeding in the capitalist system.

He's a visionary and highly talented, but he's uber wealthy because of how capitalism structures markets to become exponential at the 1%. Things function much like your 401K would. Makes sense and it isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it has nothing to do with intelligence.

Also let go of that notion that successful people are without morals, boundaries and limits. That just a story you tell yourself so the world as you see it will make sense to you.

All great men of history were some combination of cunning, narcissistic, driven, and dubiously amoral. You need this people of course - our history books and national mythologies revere them - but money alone doesn't make a great man.

 

[tshade]

Democrats claiming intellectual superiority is always hilarious.

??? sure----let me know when it happens

 

[tshade]

No, progressive policies support EQUITY instead of equality.

ok-------even better

 

[Deuce]

The Democratic party needs to focus on what voters want, Lower prices on energy and housing, lower spending in government, lower taxes on the middle class, less war, less tariffs.

Just not running on the other side is worse.

No, they need to focus on fundamentally overhauling a broken system. Universal healthcare, taxpayer funded college tuition, mandatory paid parental leave, higher minimum wage. Make work pay again. Make families raisable again.

 

[aociswundumho]

There IS no mystery. The Democratic Party is generally associated with more progressive policies. It supports social and economic equality, favoring greater government intervention in the economy but opposing government involvement in the private noneconomic affairs of citizens.

Wrong.

Gun control, hate speech laws, "misinformation" laws, covid mandates, opposition to school choice for parents, and probably more I can't think of at the moment.

 

[tshade]

Wrong.

Gun control, hate speech laws, "misinformation" laws, covid mandates, opposition to school choice for parents, and probably more I can't think of at the moment.

Those are "Public" , not private