Maybe do something to make life better for them instead of just relying on “yea we’ve done nothing but republicans actively hate you” because that just ends up with disenfranchised voters who don’t vote
I think you're exactly right.
People always seem to forgot even two party system is not a two bucket zero sum game. There is always that third pseudo party around, the sleeping peoples party. Losing voters to sleeping peoples party is exactly as good way to lose the election as is losing voters directly to the main rival party.
One can also win an election, not by stealing voters from the rival, but from the sleeping peoples party.
What? You mean do something other than just scream Republicans bad and scary?!?!
Fuck's sakes yes if we're talking about sliding into fascism.
Beat part is this works with black voters and non black voters too
A good chunk of Black Americans are conservative Christian and would absolutely be Republican if it wasn't for the overt racism. Same with Latinos.
Some of the people all of the time.
A Fox News poll earlier this month found Biden leading Trump in a hypothetical rematch among Black voters by a roughly three-to-one margin, 74 percent to 26 percent. That may seem high, but it’s down sharply from 2020, when Biden won 90 percent of Black voters, according to Democratic data firm Catalist.
Pretty stupid of that 16% to flip and support the greater evil. Republicans are trying to outlaw teaching that racism still exists, they are putting in their textbooks that slavery, "taught slaves many valuable skills," and are constantly implementing racist policies and campaigning with racist dog whistles. Democrats are the only viable way to defeat them, at least until we can implement RCV.
Well depending on how they count was there a flip or are the ratios different since certain amount of people have moved to the "not likely voter" category. So instead of flip, there is apathy among democratic voters.
Since they say among black voters, not among black population. Those are two different things and it matters which is it. All voting eligible persons, regardless of likelihood to vote, or just likely voters.
Since voter/not voter is not a fixed grouping, there is constant movement over that line.
Exactly this, very few people are switching to republican. They're just sick of the Democrats doing very little they care about. So they aren't going to vote. The Democrats seem to of abandoned any real platform and are just running on not being psychopaths who want to destroy the government. It's not exactly compelling.
There's a difference between saying Democrats should and could do more. And saying they've done nothing. People hate to talk about it. But under Biden some massive accomplishments have happened like the recent NLRB ruling. Something not on par with, but close to the ball park of passing civil rights. And it isn't isolated. They've done a lot within the system to help a lot of people.
When it comes to loudly pretending to have accomplished things. You can't get Republicans to shut up. When it comes to talking about things they've actually accomplished. Democrats stay quiet. It's a problem.
That's not to say that they are perfect, or wonderful, or free of issues. There's plenty of issues. They've done little to nothing to address the slavery problem in the United States. And despite passing and strengthening a few safety net programs, they've realistically done very little to improve at a baseline, the life of the average American. Something that most of us are sorely in need of. Quite the opposite and they've actually done just as much or more to help out the people who are part of the problem. But to say that they've done nothing , or at least nothing good is very disingenuous.
Disheartening and driving ourselves away from the process as f***** up as it may be, is the surefire way of not changing it.
But the thing is Democrats could change their strategy. Since frankly (I don't know why, seems stupid given how small and hard to catch segment it is) Democrat strategy is to chase the middle of "moderate Republicans and fence sitters".
When I would hazard a guess, if they instead adopted are strategy of exactly focusing on non-voters with democrat leaning would bring them lot of votes.
In general blaming the voter is a bad idea. It is way easier for party to qdapt to voter sentiments with their strategy, than it is for a party to change the emotional and mental state of millions of voters. In this case it is really the customer aka the voter is always right. If one can't convince voter to vote, it is the candidates fault. To play otherwise is to say millions of people ought to adapt to single or couple persons whims. It shouldn't be that way and in general it isn't that way.
Since in practice, if person is apathetic they won't vote. No amount of "but that is stupid of you" will fix it. Apathy is emotional matter, not matter of logic. As much as some consultant might try to assume humans are rational, no they aren't. Humans are inherently emotional beings and party wanting to succeed must adapt to that.
Only way out of apathy isn't fear, it just makes apathy deeper. The way out is hope, promise of prosperity and then delivering on that promise. Since to not do so is to cause betrayed expectations and doubly deep apathy.
The reason Democrats have this strategy goes back to 1980. If you know about what happened then. You know why things are largely the way they are now.
The nation at large overwhelmingly voted for a fascist. I don't mean just slightly. I mean like nearly every state in the nation voting for the fascist heavily. Even traditional Democrats at the time voted for the fascist. And it scared the ever-loving shit out of democrats.
Combine that with the massive destruction, the fascist wreaked against labor groups. And the massive consolidation of resources and wealth he enabled. Basically gutting and taking away much of labor's power for the last 40 years.
It used to be that labor unions were one of the biggest groups to reckon with in elections. Providing massive funding and support. When the fascist broke their power. Suddenly that massive influence and resource all but dried up. They were still around. But the new ultra wealthy donor class became increasingly more important to both parties. Because if either of them went without the ultra wealthy donors. The other party would eat their lunch.
The damage was so bad. That we got Bill Clinton and his third way Democrats. Which I will say Clinton often gets a much worse rap than he deserves. But he still continued the trend of damage to the working class and society despite the good things he did too.
Voters are definitely to blame in this, however. Not completely. But they have not shown any conviction or solid stance on much of anything for the last half century. Bouncing mindlessly between one party and the other. Even as one collapse into chaos and the other deteriorated dangerously so. We as voters lost a lot of influence of course when the ultra wealthy class took over funding. But they still have to rely on us to get elected. It's why they focus so heavily on demoralization and apathy. It's easier to damage things when less of us vote or are engaged.
And no hope isn't the way out of this. Determination and conviction is. You can hope in one hand shit in the other end. As they say see which one fills up first. It's going to take us getting collectively pissed and ready to engage. Not just in voting but in running for office as well. We are tired of the people they keep running for us. But we've always been able to run our own people. We're just going to have to fund and canvas for them. Not sit back and let the parties do their thing. Because that helps no one but then.
But under Biden some massive accomplishments have happened like the recent NLRB ruling. Something not on par with, but close to the ball park of passing civil rights. And it isn’t isolated. They’ve done a lot within the system to help a lot of people.
This is a big deal! Thank you for bringing it to our attention:
the Board ruled that when a majority of a company’s employees file union affiliation cards, the employer can either voluntarily recognize their union or, if not, ask the Board to run a union recognition election. If, in the run-up to or during that election, the employer commits an unfair labor practice, such as illegally firing pro-union workers (which has become routine in nearly every such election over the past 40 years, as the penalties have been negligible), the Board will order the employer to recognize the union and enter forthwith into bargaining.
The Cemex decision was preceded by another, one day earlier, in which the Board, also along party lines, set out rules for representation elections which required them to be held promptly after the Board had been asked to conduct them, curtailing employers’ ability to delay them, often indefinitely.
Taken together, this one-two punch effectively makes union organizing possible again, after decades in which unpunished employer illegality was the most decisive factor in reducing the nation’s rate of private-sector unionization from roughly 35 percent to the bare 6 percent at which it stands today.
I guess this explains the rise in labor organizations and strikes recently.
Definitely! I'm quite left. Heavily socialist. And outside of a few social policies. Democrats really do nothing for me. But it's crazy how little the actual things they accomplish and get recognized. The national labor relations board change was kind of Earth shattering. I've been plenty displeased with biden's current Israel Gaza response. Though I think it was expected and understandable to an extent. But he's been far better than a lot of a thought he would.
God I hate that we have this two party system
There is very clearly a party that wants your children to be ground up in a meat processing plant. The both sidesing on lemmy is goofy.
What? Is this a joke?
God I hate that we have this two party system
It's created by first-past-the-post, I believe most of our national problems would be immediately solved by RCV. It encourages politicians to work together, makes third parties viable, and would provide much needed competition on both the right and left.
Eroding support????? The dems have actually been doing work for once. What are you gonna do, vote for the other party that definitely wants you dead or at the very least abused and subjugated?
Jfc
Or not vote, which is much easier given all the GOP suppression efforts. No voting by mail in some states, removing places to vote in certain communities so you have to drive much farther and wait in longer lines, no 24 hour voting so you have to take off work, strict ID requirements that cost money some folks don’t have, etc.
It’s by design.
What are you gonna do, vote for the other party that definitely wants you dead or at the very least abused and subjugated?
You seem to forget there is a third option, the most likely option in such case. Just not turning up to vote at all.
Sigh, no they haven't been, but we'll have proof soon enough one way or the other. Not that the press will mention it again after it's debunked... again.
You're right. The article talks about a drop from 91 to 88%, which is small. Small numbers like that though can shift tight elections.
Biden won Georgia by 12,000 votes & over 3 million Georgians are black so a drop 3 percent could be huge. 12,000 is .04% of 3 million. Registered voters does not equal total population but a small drop could change the Senate or who's in the white house.
FTA:
"After a lot of hand-wringing in recent years, elections next month in Mississippi and Virginia — two Southern states with large Black populations — will offer one final, robust read going into 2024 on the extent of the slippage among Democrats’ most reliable bloc of voters."
Mississippi means NOTHING. They will not vote for a Democratic president and it has nothing to do with how strong or weak the black vote is there. They aren't a Democratic state.
Source, every election since 1980. Carter broke it open in the South in 1976, but that was because he was from Georgia. The only Democratic win in Mississippi in my lifetime.
Virginia has a similar problem, but they have been voting blue since 2008, it would be super easy to see them revert to form.
This isn't about carrying the state, it's about using the election to understand black viters' engagement and sentiment. A weak showing among black voters could indicate deeper issues more broadly.
I'll say what I've been saying, I wish Biden had been primaried. He's looking less and less like a guaranteed winner and having someone else viably in the race could have helped.
The Israel situation is not helping (in the near term, at least).
The Israel situation is not helping (in the near term, at least).
Yep. This is a issiue sensitive to many black folk in the USA as well. Democrats unwavering support for the police and more or less indifference to the worsening economic conditions for the black community at large will not help either.
Biden will also likely more formally deploy troops into the middle east after some sort of golf of Tonkin esque incident takes place in the Mediterranean.
More talk of war on terror after a pretty difficult recovery from the pandemic is not music to anyone ears, especially not the working class Black people who have a really hard time these last few years.
Biden is not the man who will get these people back on board.
When Obama won Virginia it surprised me. Same thing when Biden won Georgia. Everything is impossible until it's possible.
Both states have seen large migrations recently, making them more liberal.
You're welcome, said California home prices.
Tripe and Drivel.
How so?
You just can't draw the article's statements as even a reasonable conclusions without ignoring a whole host of things. They're largely comparing a general election to a midterm election, Rs show up for midterms more reliably than Ds, a drop is basically expected. Even compared to the previous midterm, that was with a very polarizing R in office, so we'd also expect a higher D turnout than one with a D in office. Plus add in consideration for the effects of voter suppression that's been building basically specifically targeted at the group in question.
This article is just bait created by someone who is either ignorantly or purposely misrepresenting the actual study's implications.
On the one hand, the article has a point as applied to very tight elections, especially considering that if you swing a couple tens of thousands of votes in a few swing states and we're knee deep into a second trump term. On the other, it's a fucking politico article and their writing is all geared towards creating a horse race and stoking fears and anxiety so that you keep reading politico, and so any nuance beyond "DEMOCRATS ARE IGNORING WARNING ALARMS AND THEY AREGOING TO LOSE THE NEXT ELECTION! ⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️" is intentionally drowned.
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News