One strategy might be to let Trump make such a mess that voters will be purged of Trumpism. Democrats won't get any credit for making things "less bad." It would be "detachment with love."
Interesting idea Ben but it seems to me the Trump voters have truly drunk the koolaid and believe anything he tells them ( and tells them over and over again). Even with evidence to the contrary. I agree with “strap in”.
You're on point about the hardcore MAGA constituency--maybe 30% of his support. However, exit interviews as well as the outcome of many focus groups and "voter on the street" comments explicitly indicate that many who voted for Trump understood his craziness but just wanted "change," often referring back to their living costs. According to the NY Times focus groups: "There were plenty of things that they didn’t like about Mr. Trump — his behavior and tweets most of all — but those didn’t matter as much." One example: “My grocery bill is through the roof,” said Jules, a Virginia independent." Those are the voters I'm looking at.
I have been feeling the same way mostly out of anger at our country and discouragement about what can really be done to stop him. The economic disaster is one thing but he intends to undo the basic pillars of democracy (see justice department and plans for the military in the country) Just hoping a handful of republican senators are willing to sacrifice their access to power for the country is a thin hope as we have seen. Finally, I think my current feeling toward the country (you voted for it, now you have to live with it) might be very similar to how well-to-do German social democrats felt in 1933-4-how did that pancake taste? I am not saying there is an effective alternative, but it is an interesting thought experiment to consider what, in hindsight, we expected the Germans to do.
Trump voters were of two kinds in this election, with some overlap: those who like him because "he hates who I hate" and those who thought they were better off during his first term and blamed Biden and the Ds for the rising cost of living. It would seem logical then that, if Trumps policies cause a steep rise in inflation (as I think they will), he will lose most of the latter. But that's not how Trump operates. He will blame the Fed/the Ds/woke corporations/the elites -- he always has someone else to blame -- for what is going wrong and expand the base of "he hates who I hate." The chaos of failure often plays into the hands of dictators.
Yes, Tim, Trump is the master of deflection. Like any good huckster, he speaks with such conviction that it MUST be true. However, once again, he can't fool all the people all the time. There were many who were skeptical but voted Trump. Just a few percent of those who will see him as the king with no clothes is all that is needed to make a big difference in outcomes. Of course, I'm the guy who predicted that he wouldn't win in the first place!
I'm very sympathetic to Last's arguments and your approach. this is in part due to my lagging sympathy with the working class voters. Harris at least offered tangible policies that would have directly benefited the working class, while trump offered them bupkis. In that sense, they deserve what they get by allowing Trump to be Trump. That said, I'm concerned about a few things. One is that Democrats still need to stand for something and be the loyal opposition to mitigate the 1933 analogy that David Dinklage notes. Another is that we need to protect truly vulnerable citizens from the ravages of Trumpism. In reality, there will only be a few tangible opportunities in the next two years to subvert Trumpism. Beyond what you mentioned, it would be important to use strategically the filibuster rather than adopting the recent Republican strategy of filibustering everything. In short, Dems should pick a few fights that the party must stand for (such as health care), but let the economic chaos (i.e., tariffs, deportations) begin.
Peter--I agree, both your concern about David Dinklage's 1933 reference and your final point. which is what I was trying to get at with "we should pick those spots strategically.... Analyze the entire playing field in real-time." ACA and health---yes, most of the rest--let her rip.
I'm still at a loss to understand how 13 million Biden voters decided not to vote for Harris. Someone wiser than myself will hopefully discover why this happened. I think Trump should be allowed to fail, with the exception to stop some of his cabinet nominations.
Interesting idea Ben but it seems to me the Trump voters have truly drunk the koolaid and believe anything he tells them ( and tells them over and over again). Even with evidence to the contrary. I agree with “strap in”.
You're on point about the hardcore MAGA constituency--maybe 30% of his support. However, exit interviews as well as the outcome of many focus groups and "voter on the street" comments explicitly indicate that many who voted for Trump understood his craziness but just wanted "change," often referring back to their living costs. According to the NY Times focus groups: "There were plenty of things that they didn’t like about Mr. Trump — his behavior and tweets most of all — but those didn’t matter as much." One example: “My grocery bill is through the roof,” said Jules, a Virginia independent." Those are the voters I'm looking at.
I have been feeling the same way mostly out of anger at our country and discouragement about what can really be done to stop him. The economic disaster is one thing but he intends to undo the basic pillars of democracy (see justice department and plans for the military in the country) Just hoping a handful of republican senators are willing to sacrifice their access to power for the country is a thin hope as we have seen. Finally, I think my current feeling toward the country (you voted for it, now you have to live with it) might be very similar to how well-to-do German social democrats felt in 1933-4-how did that pancake taste? I am not saying there is an effective alternative, but it is an interesting thought experiment to consider what, in hindsight, we expected the Germans to do.
Trump voters were of two kinds in this election, with some overlap: those who like him because "he hates who I hate" and those who thought they were better off during his first term and blamed Biden and the Ds for the rising cost of living. It would seem logical then that, if Trumps policies cause a steep rise in inflation (as I think they will), he will lose most of the latter. But that's not how Trump operates. He will blame the Fed/the Ds/woke corporations/the elites -- he always has someone else to blame -- for what is going wrong and expand the base of "he hates who I hate." The chaos of failure often plays into the hands of dictators.
Yes, Tim, Trump is the master of deflection. Like any good huckster, he speaks with such conviction that it MUST be true. However, once again, he can't fool all the people all the time. There were many who were skeptical but voted Trump. Just a few percent of those who will see him as the king with no clothes is all that is needed to make a big difference in outcomes. Of course, I'm the guy who predicted that he wouldn't win in the first place!
I hope you're right.
I'm very sympathetic to Last's arguments and your approach. this is in part due to my lagging sympathy with the working class voters. Harris at least offered tangible policies that would have directly benefited the working class, while trump offered them bupkis. In that sense, they deserve what they get by allowing Trump to be Trump. That said, I'm concerned about a few things. One is that Democrats still need to stand for something and be the loyal opposition to mitigate the 1933 analogy that David Dinklage notes. Another is that we need to protect truly vulnerable citizens from the ravages of Trumpism. In reality, there will only be a few tangible opportunities in the next two years to subvert Trumpism. Beyond what you mentioned, it would be important to use strategically the filibuster rather than adopting the recent Republican strategy of filibustering everything. In short, Dems should pick a few fights that the party must stand for (such as health care), but let the economic chaos (i.e., tariffs, deportations) begin.
Peter--I agree, both your concern about David Dinklage's 1933 reference and your final point. which is what I was trying to get at with "we should pick those spots strategically.... Analyze the entire playing field in real-time." ACA and health---yes, most of the rest--let her rip.
I'm still at a loss to understand how 13 million Biden voters decided not to vote for Harris. Someone wiser than myself will hopefully discover why this happened. I think Trump should be allowed to fail, with the exception to stop some of his cabinet nominations.