• NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    I go back and forth, but I do think Sanders would have had good odds in 2020. We had the same “I can’t vote for the status quo” non-arguments going around and a semi-populist candidate arguing for all the things people desperately needed (a socioeconomic safety net, basically) at the height of COVID and civil unrest would have done well. That said, an old white guy who was “warm and safe and was in the same room as Obama a few times” was probably still the right play.

    But yeah. In 2024 when all people care about is “not the status quo” and “why eggs expensive”? A guy arguing for MORE government programs does not fair well against “Yo, what if we got rid of all taxes and government funding? Don’t ask where the money is going”

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      But yeah. In 2024 when all people care about is “not the status quo” and “why eggs expensive”? A guy arguing for MORE government programs does not fair well against “Yo, what if we got rid of all taxes and government funding? Don’t ask where the money is going”

      Bernie has better answers to that than Trump, though.

    • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      But yeah. In 2024 when all people care about is “not the status quo” and “why eggs expensive”? A guy arguing for MORE government programs does not fair well against “Yo, what if we got rid of all taxes and government funding? Don’t ask where the money is going”

      This is something I’ve always tried to get people to understand.

      If you’re running for office, and your opponent is saying monkeys flying out of your ass are terrorizing the city and causing a huge problem, you’d be right to want to write them off as an unhinged lunatic with no grasp on reality, because anyone can see there are no flying monkeys. Should be pretty cut and dry; ignore him and let him go back to giving sermons to pigeons in the park.

      But if 51% of the voting base believes that monkeys flying out of your ass are their top concern, you had better come up with a solution for the flying monkeys. Of course, you could try to appeal to reason and logic and point out that you have pants on and there are no flying monkeys. But if 51% of voters are hooked on the flying monkey problem, you’ll be making those appeals during your concession speech, while your opponent will suddenly point out that there are no flying monkeys because he managed to solve the problem on day one.

      That’s just the reality of running for office. Sometimes, feels win out over objective reality. There are a certain number of voters who fall into this category, and those voters were always out of reach. You cannot use logic to persuade someone to change a position they didn’t logic their way into to begin with.

      • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        You don’t need to concede to their belief and subsequent policies if they aren’t grounded in reality, like on immigration. You provide a counter narrative grounded in reality that actually address their needs and concerns, real or perceived.

        The Republican narrative on immigration is that immigrants are criminals, bringing crime and drugs into our country to kill our citizens, steal jobs, and exploit welfare, so we need mass deportations. None of that is based on reality.

        US citizens are responsible for smuggling in drugs. Immigrants are responsible for less crime per capita than US citizens, use much less welfare than citizens, and contribute far more than they use. The underlying fear is cost of living and safety. So a counter narrative that both points out the realities of mass deportation, aka concentration camps, and provides real solutions to the problems, would absolutely capture those voters and fracture the Republican base.

        Those real solutions would include legalization of illegal immigrants to stop companies from exploiting both them and citizens with a two-tier immigration system, increasing taxes on corporations and the wealthy to pay for universal social services, systemic solutions to addiction and homelessness, and increasing security to catch smugglers at points of entry. All of which are popular. You address their fears, improve their material needs, and point out how terrible the oppositions ‘solutions’ are, all without conceding to the Republican framing based on racist lies.

        In fact, many progressive policies are popular across the board, including Republicans and independents.

        Polls on campaign messaging

        How to Win a Swing Voter in Seven Days

        “The View” Alternate Universe: Break From Biden in Interviews, Play the Hits in Ads

        Polls on policy

        How Trump and Harris Voters See America’s Role in the World

        Majority of Americans support progressive policies such as higher minimum wage, free college

        Democrats should run on the popular progressive ideas, but not the unpopular ones

        Here Are 7 ‘Left Wing’ Ideas (Almost) All Americans Can Get Behind

        Finding common ground: 109 national policy proposals with bipartisan support

        Progressive Policies Are Popular Policies

        Tim Walz’s Progressive Policies Popular With Republicans in Swing States

        • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          You don’t need to concede to their belief and subsequent policies if they aren’t grounded in reality, like on immigration. You provide a counter narrative grounded in reality that actually address their needs and concerns, real or perceived.

          The Republican narrative on immigration is that immigrants are criminals, bringing crime and drugs into our country to kill our citizens, steal jobs, and exploit welfare, so we need mass deportations. None of that is based on reality.

          Here’s where your argument begins to fall apart. The above statement is true. However, to those who feel this way, the only acceptable solution is “Get rid of them all”.

          US citizens are responsible for smuggling in drugs. Immigrants are responsible for less crime per capita than US citizens, use much less welfare than citizens, and contribute far more than they use. The underlying fear is cost of living and safety.

          Just sayin’…trying to tell US citizens that they’re the real bad guys is probably not going to go the way you think it does.

          So a counter narrative that both points out the realities of mass deportation, aka concentration camps, and provides real solutions to the problems, would absolutely capture those voters and fracture the Republican base.

          Harris tried countering bullshit with reality. Voters voted for the bullshit.

          Those real solutions would include legalization of illegal immigrants

          This will never, ever, ever, ever happen. If you believe that any candidate could ever win an election campaigning for full legalization and just opening up the floodgates, you are living in a bigger fantasy world than Trump is. Every state in the US went redder. US voters voted overwhelmingly in favor of “get rid of 'em all”. And you think that they’d vote for a policy that not only legalizes the ones that are already here, but rolling out the red carpet for even more of them, I have beachfront property to sell you. On Mars.

          In fact, many progressive policies are popular across the board, including Republicans and independents.

          How many elections does Trump have to win before you realize these polls don’t mean shit? If there is anything to learn from Trump’s time in office, it’s that people will gladly tell pollsters something completely different from what they actually end up voting for, if they bother voting at all.

          The only poll that matters is the one that happened on November 5th. About 150 million or so participated, and the voted overwhelmingly against these things.

          I mean sure, you could try to put up a candidate who believes this in 2028. But then you’ll be sitting there during Don Jr.'s inauguration speech wondering why we’re having the exact same conversation.

          • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            However, to those who feel this way, the only acceptable solution is “Get rid of them all”.

            And what evidence do you have for that? Because every poll about people’s beliefs on deportation does show the majority support it, yet in the same exact poll a larger majority supports legalization. So no, you are completely wrong that that’s the ‘only acceptable solution’. The biggest reason for the change in public support for deportation is that the Democrats stopped counter messaging and moved to the right, despite their position of legalization since Obama was always significantly more popular. People don’t know the reality because the Democrats never talk about it and share the data.

            https://news.gallup.com/poll/647123/sharply-americans-curb-immigration.aspx

            https://www.vox.com/policy/368889/immigration-border-polls-election-2024-trump-harris

            https://www.kff.org/racial-equity-and-health-policy/poll-finding/political-preferences-and-views-on-us-immigration-policy-among-immigrants-in-the-us/

            Harris tried countering bullshit with reality. Voters voted for the bullshit.

            No she didn’t. She ran on build the wall like Trump did in 2016. The major problem with that is, if people believe those lies about immigrants, and then the opposition (D) capitulates, all it accomplishes is further entrenching their beliefs in those lies. And if they believe in those lies, then they’ll go with the party that’s been running on those lies for far longer, the Republicans. That change in immigration policy only accomplished pushing people to the Republican party. It’s a losing strategy. There is no way to outflank the Republicans on issues by moving to the right. On the other hand, it’s incredibly easy to attack that message by bringing up how it means concentration camps and the incredible cost to the economy and Americans.

            Every state in the US went redder. US voters voted overwhelmingly in favor of “get rid of 'em all”.

            Because the Democratics did practically nothing to galvanize their voter base of the working class, causing tens of millions to be apathetic and stay home. You can’t simultaneously say polls are BS and then cite public opinion which we know about from polling. Polling is used to understand public sentiment, exactly why the exact wording of them matter. Not only am I going off of public opinion, I’m also going off the morality of being against mass deportations. If slavery was popular I wouldn’t say the party should run on slavery because it’s popular.

            How many elections does Trump have to win before you realize these polls don’t mean shit?

            Shows you didn’t look at a single poll. People want progressive policies. The Democrats don’t run on progressive policies. So you’re blaming the fact that they’re losing when they run without progressive policies to justify that progressive policies wouldn’t cause them to win. That makes no sense and goes against all the data that shows otherwise.

            Again, these right-wing fabrications not based on any evidence and its what the Republican party has run for for years. It is a white nativist sentiment. There is plenty of evidence that disprove those sentiments.

            Economic Impact

            Myth : Immigrants are a drain on the U.S. Economy and Reducing Immigration would make our economy stronger.

            Fact : The United States needs immigrants to stay competitive and drive economic growth, Particularly as our economy starts to reopen, individuals who create jobs are absolutely critical to our recovery. Immigrants are innovators, job creators, and consumers with an enormous spending power that drives our economy, and creates employment opportunities for all Americans. Immigrants added $2 trillion to the U.S. GDP in 2016 and $458.7 billion to state, local, and federal taxes in 2018. In 2018, after immigrants spent billions of dollars on state and local, and federal taxes, they were left with $1.2 trillion in spending power, which they used to purchase goods and services, stimulating local business activity. Proposed cuts to our legal immigration system would have devastating effects on our economy, decreasing GDP by 2% over twenty years, shrinking growth by 12.5%, and cutting 4.6 million jobs. Rust Belt states would be hit particularly hard, as they rely on immigration to stabilize their populations and revive their economies.

            Taxes and Essential Services

            Myth : Immigrants are a burden to essential services like schools, hospitals, and highways.

            Fact: Immigrants make significant contributions to our economy on virtually every front - including on tax revenue, where they contribute $458.7 billion to state, local, and federal taxes in 2018. This includes undocumented immigrants, who contribute roughly $11.74 billion a year in state and local taxes, including more than $7 billion in sales and excise taxes, $3.6 billion in property taxes, and $1.1 billion in personal income taxes. These billions of tax dollars fund our schools, hospitals, emergency response services, highways, and other essential services. These revenues would increase by $2.18 billion annually if undocumented immigrants were given legal status as part of an immigration reform package. Additionally, immigrants make enormous contributions to Social Security. If current legal immigration levels were cut by 50%, the Social Security fund would lose $1.5 trillion in revenue over the next 75 years.

            IRI

            There are 45 million immigrants living in the United States. Making up 14 percent of the national population, immigrants are a vital part of the social, economic, and cultural life of all American communities.

            The economic role of immigrants has frequently been misunderstood. On the one hand, immigrants are a big and important part of the economy. And, on the other hand, immigrants are disproportionately concentrated in low-wage jobs. Both things are true at the same time.

            Other sources:

            They didn’t do this due to public opinion, again legalizing illegal immigrants is far more popular than deportation, despite the Democratic Party not doing any counter messaging against the right-wing narrative. They moved to the right at the expense of voters, it gained them zero voters.

      • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        8 days ago

        That is why trump and vance were so adamant about no fact checking during the debates. All they had to do was say “nuh uh. I saw it on the news” and the moderators couldn’t really do much.

        Which gets back to the underlying problem of Democrats not actually having a way to communicate with voters. Because even when Fox was saying “Just to be clear for legal reasons, there is no evidence of Haitian immigrants eating dogs” it was followed with “now let’s see what else god emperor trump has to say”.

        Whereas Democrats? We had people who were more interested in attacking Biden than trump (even after he stepped down) and who mostly just said “ha ha, trump says stupid shit.”

        Because, yeah, logic can’t beat vibes. But we also weren’t putting out the vibes the way we were in 2020.