Democrats Discard Washington Platform in Bid for House Control

[RandomGuy]

DALLAS — House Democrats, looking to wrest control of the chamber from Republicans in November, are discarding the lessons of successful midterms past and pressing only a bare-bones national agenda, leaving it to candidates to tailor their own messages to their districts.

It is a risky strategy, essentially putting off answering one of the most immediate questions facing the Democratic Party after its losses in 2016: What does it stand for? The approach could also raise questions among voters about how Democrats would govern.

Democrats say they have answered that question with a recently adopted slogan, “For the People,” a skeletal, three-point platform and a longer version, called “A Better Deal.” But with anti-Washington sentiment simmering; a deep divide between the party’s moderates and its left flank; and the brand of the party’s longtime leader, Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, toxic in large sections of the country, they have concluded that a unified campaign framework emanating from Capitol Hill would do more harm than good.

And as Tuesday night’s election results made clear, the primary season drawing to a close has made the search for a unifying message that much more difficult, elevating self-described democratic socialists like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in New York and Rashida Tlaib in Michigan to argue policy with a Trump-voting populist like Richard Ojeda in West Virginia and a centrist like Conor Lamb in Pennsylvania.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/15/us/politics/democrats-house-midterm-campaign.html

[Chucho]

Need to teach them how to keep leads going into closing time and not blame their shortcomings on everything but their platform, tbh.

[RandomGuy]

Need to teach them how to keep leads going into closing time and not blame their shortcomings on everything but their platform, tbh.

Goes doubly so for Republicans, who make up "voter fraud" boogeymen to gin up support for voter disenfranchisement.

[Chucho]

Goes doubly so for Republicans, who make up "voter fraud" boogeymen to gin up support for voter disenfranchisement.


Gotta have that ace in the pocket to counter "muh russia" and the other absurd conspiracy theories since Dems and their fanbase have a funny habit of calling victory and then lose. Boogeymen for children, conspiracy theories for batshit crazy sore losers it seems.

[RandomGuy]

Gotta have that ace in the pocket to counter "muh russia" and the other absurd conspiracy theories since Dems and their fanbase have a funny habit of calling victory and then lose. Boogeymen for children, conspiracy theories for batshit crazy sore losers it seems.

aaah there is the difference.

Republicans push the myth of voter fraud, in order to cheat at the election. This claim is provably, laughably false.

"muh Russia"... is supported by the intelligence community.

There is the difference in a nutshell. Wishful thinking and lies... versus facts and evidence.

Thanks for pointing that out. :D

[Chucho]

aaah there is the difference.

Republicans push the myth of voter fraud, in order to cheat at the election. This claim is provably, laughably false.

"muh Russia"... is supported by the intelligence community.

There is the difference in a nutshell. Wishful thinking and lies... versus facts and evidence.

Thanks for pointing that out. :D


Yeah...so far its really amounted to "some Russians placed some paid ads on social media and that influenced the swing in the elections". Yeah, maybe the Dems are the children since they can be influenced by social media ads. Thanks for pointing that out.

[Chucho]

And Russians cost them Ohio...:rollin

[Winehole23]

can you beat a horse with no horse?

"we're not them" didn't work so well for the Dems two years ago.

[Winehole23]

why is it the Dems have lost 1200 seats nationwide in the last 10 years, and what are they doing about it?

[Winehole23]

changing slogans every few months?

pitiful

[RandomGuy]

Yeah...so far its really amounted to "some Russians placed some paid ads on social media and that influenced the swing in the elections". Yeah, maybe the Dems are the children since they can be influenced by social media ads. Thanks for pointing that out.

Weak sauce.

Russian steal Democratic data analytics in late September.

Early October sees a sudden shift in Trump campaign strategy.

38,000/123,000,000

You may want to actually read up on Russian efforts. Coordinating messages and efforts with the Trump campaign made their usually scattershot BS mildly more effective.

[RandomGuy]

why is it the Dems have lost 1200 seats nationwide in the last 10 years, and what are they doing about it?

Organizing. Training. Volunteering.

[RandomGuy]

changing slogans every few months?

pitiful

Lead the way man. Ideas?

[Chucho]

Weak sauce.

Russian steal Democratic data analytics in late September.

Early October sees a sudden shift in Trump campaign strategy.

38,000/123,000,000

You may want to actually read up on Russian efforts. Coordinating messages and efforts with the Trump campaign made their usually scattershot BS mildly more effective.

Mildly enough to swing the campaign you and everyone who claimed victory too early will maintain.

The Russians "influenced" an election "mildly"? It had nothing with the Demo candidate, who was leading by 10 points in some polls, alienating a giant portion of the audience by name calling near the final stretch of the campaign and then ignoring that audience in those important areas she didn't bother to stop by and they wonder how Trump "Stole" those areas.

You give the Russian "mild influence" too much credit and not enough to the flawed candidate making stupid remarks and being cocky. It did about as much, if not less, than the Candidate's own actions/words and the lunacy that most people find a turn off from Far Leftists.

[Spurminator]

Russian disinformation certainly had some influence on the vote. It's a non-starter of a discussion with Trump voters, though, because the vast majority were not influenced. Most people had other reasons for voting for Trump (or against Clinton), so they don't want to hear how Russia changed the election. Just like they don't want to hear about how they're racists even though actual Nazis are winning nominations as Republicans.

[Winehole23]

Organizing. Training. Volunteering.I don't see it.

In the last election cycle -- what was the figure? -- something like half a billion went to a handful of consultants,

[Winehole23]

Lead the way man. Ideas?Not my bailiwick, I haven't done the research on what's hot with voters and what's not.

You can't beat a horse with no horse -- Dems can either connect with the voters by promoting policies they actually care about, or by promoting a demagogue who promises to own the Trumpalos.

https://www.isidewith.com/polls/economic
https://www.isidewith.com/polls/social

[RandomGuy]

Mildly enough to swing the campaign you and everyone who claimed victory too early will maintain.

The Russians "influenced" an election "mildly"? It had nothing with the Demo candidate, who was leading by 10 points in some polls, alienating a giant portion of the audience by name calling near the final stretch of the campaign and then ignoring that audience in those important areas she didn't bother to stop by and they wonder how Trump "Stole" those areas.

You give the Russian "mild influence" too much credit and not enough to the flawed candidate making stupid remarks and being cocky. It did about as much, if not less, than the Candidate's own actions/words and the lunacy that most people find a turn off from Far Leftists.

Trump "stole" those areas after getting the data analytics from the Russians.


Donald Trump 2016 Campaign Drastically Changed Strategy After Russians Hacked Clinton Campaign Analytics

But in a second revelation that journalist and Russia scandal expert Marcy Wheeler called “by far the most alarming and potentially important detail” in the indictment, Mueller revealed for the first time that the Russian cyber-spies stole more than internal emails. The hackers also stole important campaign analytics, the type of data used to target voters and decide where to place advertising and send the candidate on campaign stops.

“In or around September 2016, the Conspirators also successfully gained access ... related to the DNC’s analytics.

As Trump’s own senior communications adviser, Jason Miller, said on October 7, 2016, “our data-driven campaign is shifting resources from over-performing markets to new battlegrounds (within) the battlegrounds. Buy is growing.”

https://www.inquisitr.com/4986410/donald-trump-2016-russians-hacked-clinton-campaign-analytics/

About two weeks after Russian intelligence stole data analytics from the DNC, the Trump campaign pulled ads from "battleground" states, and shifted that to the states that they eventually won in.

I guess we will get to see what Mueller has to say about that at some point, but if you think "shitposting" was the tipping factor, you are likely underestimating the effect that having your opponents playbook can have, IMO.

(shrugs)

Hillary was unpopular. No shit. Trump was, and is even more so now.

He was a shitty candidate, but what the Republicans said they wanted.

Now he is a shitty president, and we all have to deal with that.

[RandomGuy]

Not my bailiwick, I haven't done the research on what's hot with voters and what's not.

You can't beat a horse with no horse -- Dems can either connect with the voters by promoting policies they actually care about, or by promoting a demagogue who promises to own the Trumpalos.

https://www.isidewith.com/polls/economic
https://www.isidewith.com/polls/social

I think that is what is happening with the tack to the left. It might actually get progressive policies that are generally winners.

[Spurtacular]

We hear this every time that the Democrats are projected to take the house back.

[Winehole23]

lol we. who do you speak for besides yourself?

I thought you were a political independent.

my bad.

[RandomGuy]

We hear this every time that the Democrats are projected to take the house back.

Wow. Really?

What other time are you referring to?