From a Former Republican: How the Democrats Could Win

JDCrimson

All-American
Feb 12, 2006
3,841
2,048
187
49
Trump started disruption of the supply chains with his tariff festival which started the importing of inflation. Please know that 80% of those tariffs are still in place. Biden is missing an opportunity to remove those as a political win. He is miscalculating that favoring China will cost him the polls. As a matter of fact, the tariffs are indirectly supporting China's zero tolerance Covid lockdown policy.

70% of our economy is driven by consumption with that consumption largely driven by the middle and lower class population. Democrats recognize that you have to keep money flowing into the pockets of these classes to keep consumption from drying up. If the upper class is not putting cash flow in the pockets of these class then who else is to do it? They see the government as filling that role. Hard to disagree with that approach. If you took away Social Security benefits from the economy, you would likely remove 2-3x from GDP.

So how is deliberately foregoing revenue any different from deficit spending? It's spending in either case. If you did your research, you would find the national debt has grown more under Republican administrations than Democratic administrations. Oh btw, deficit spending is a component of inflation in that you have to enlarge the money supply to cover your deficit spending.

I too feel politically homeless. There is a middle ground for government to work to promote decent society and fair chance for better opportunity. But the reality is our political regime has been infiltrated by criminals, opportunists, power grabbers, and lunatics. Obstruction where nothing works except for those so well off they don't need government is the political strategy of today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MobtownK

dayhiker

FB|BB Moderator
Dec 8, 2000
8,228
2,365
337
Pell City, AL
I'm sorry, but I just don't believe in protest votes. I just don't. You are very fortunate, in that GA seems to have turned purple. There are less-bad Republicans, just as there were less bad Democrats, back in the one party Democratic days. Sometimes, you're forced to vote for the man or woman, rather than a label. I understand folk who vote protest. I just don't do it...
The protest vote comment by me was maybe only partially true. I could not vote for Trump or Biden, so I voted L. I could not vote for Trump or Clinton, so I voted L. I wasn't wild about Obama or whoever the Republicans put up against him 2x, so I voted L.
 

CrimsonNagus

Hall of Fame
Jun 6, 2007
6,968
3,690
212
43
Montgomery, Alabama, United States
Unfortunately, most of us on TF, live in Alabama, where if you don't vote lockstep with the GOP, you are basically wasting your time (outside of amendments). Just look at the crap the state's democratic party is throwing out there to run against Ivy. They are not even pretending to try. Some will say that they have no chance so why waste the money and resources. Then just don't put anyone on the ticket and stop wasting our time.

If you oppose the GOP in AL, you basically have no where to turn. It's why I am done voting for now (except for the amendments and local issues), even in presidential elections because the Electoral College renders my vote pointless in this state. I had people on Reddit saying that I should have voted in the GOP primary yesterday even though I am 100% against both of those idiots. I see no difference between Mo and Britt, both of which will push for the same stupid agenda once they are in D.C. Britt is not going to be any different than Mo, she will vote with the party every time just like him, so why should I have wasted my time voting for either snake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crimson1967

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
80,171
30,072
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
Unfortunately, most of us on TF, live in Alabama, where if you don't vote lockstep with the GOP, you are basically wasting your time (outside of amendments). Just look at the crap the state's democratic party is throwing out there to run against Ivy. They are not even pretending to try. Some will say that they have no chance so why waste the money and resources. Then just don't put anyone on the ticket and stop wasting our time.

If you oppose the GOP in AL, you basically have no where to turn. It's why I am done voting for now (except for the amendments and local issues), even in presidential elections because the Electoral College renders my vote pointless in this state. I had people on Reddit saying that I should have voted in the GOP primary yesterday even though I am 100% against both of those idiots. I see no difference between Mo and Britt, both of which will push for the same stupid agenda once they are in D.C. Britt is not going to be any different than Mo, she will vote with the party every time just like him, so why should I have wasted my time voting for either snake.
One of the reasons to vote is for self-interest. She, with Shelby's backing and knowledge, will be more effective in gaining advantages for Alabama, just as Shelby was. OTOH, Mo showed an inability to work with anyone, not even sponsoring any bill. Shelby was instrumental in bringing much to Alabama and particularly Huntsville. Mo, at best, tagged along and said "me too." in the worst cases, he voted against Alabama's interests, because of his rigid idiology (sic)...
 

Its On A Slab

1st Team
Apr 18, 2018
989
1,079
162
Pyongyang, Democratic Republic of Korea
The problem we have in this country is that we have a sizable number of operatives(and their followers) who view compromise and "working together" to solve problems as a sign of weakness, and an opportunity to exploit.

It's all about winning to these people. No matter how odious, evil, unconstitutional the means.

And the ideas they are pushing are just as bad. It seems like in every single case, the central issue is a private person's civil rights (reproductive rights, marriage equality, voter integrity, etc).

I am going to play the Godwin card. These are fascists.
 

Padreruf

Hall of Fame
Feb 12, 2001
6,919
7,978
287
71
Charleston, South Carolina
One of the reasons to vote is for self-interest. She, with Shelby's backing and knowledge, will be more effective in gaining advantages for Alabama, just as Shelby was. OTOH, Mo showed an inability to work with anyone, not even sponsoring any bill. Shelby was instrumental in bringing much to Alabama and particularly Huntsville. Mo, at best, tagged along and said "me too." in the worst cases, he voted against Alabama's interests, because of his rigid idiology (sic)...
From my experience Shelby was the reincarnation of Howell Heflin...he knew how to get money for the state and kept getting re-elected. That personna has been the essence of most successful southern Senators...keep a low profile and keep the money flowing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MobtownK

Chukker Veteran

Hall of Fame
Feb 6, 2001
10,289
4,402
287
I would say Republicans like to say Dems are obsessed with a hatred of Trump. Well excuse me, he’s truly detestable. The strong emotions directed at Trump could just as accurately be labeled a natural spinoff from a love of the Country and our democracy.

I also think conservative media has made issues of very fringe elements of Dems as if to portray all Dems are concerned with ridiculous notions. Two examples, I would imagine 98% of Dems favor locking up shoplifters.
I bet 98% of Dems have no desire to regulate Remington duck shotguns…
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
52,221
32,186
287
53
East Point, Ga, USA
I would say Republicans like to say Dems are obsessed with a hatred of Trump. Well excuse me, he’s truly detestable. The strong emotions directed at Trump could just as accurately be labeled a natural spinoff from a love of the Country and our democracy.

I also think conservative media has made issues of very fringe elements of Dems as if to portray all Dems are concerned with ridiculous notions. Two examples, I would imagine 98% of Dems favor locking up shoplifters.
I bet 98% of Dems have no desire to regulate Remington duck shotguns…
just like they memory holed shrub, they will memory hole trump. And then try to shift the blame for our country’s ills to the democrats. it happens over and over
 

Chukker Veteran

Hall of Fame
Feb 6, 2001
10,289
4,402
287
I don’t understand how wanting the endorsement from a politician who is clearly a criminal and is trying to dismantle our democracy isn’t a disqualifier for public service for any fair minded person.

Let’s ignore one side trying to end free elections, and roll up our sleeves and cooperate on the things we can agree on. Until and unless they achieve their main objective of permanent minority rule, in which case all bets are off.

One side says quit being so hyperbolic. The other says wake up, stop being Polly Anna.
 

CrimsonJazz

Scout Team
May 27, 2022
142
194
52
I’ve voted third party in the past, but came to conclusion it was just an exercise in esotericism. For now, it’s a binary choice.
Is it really esoteric to not want to vote for a bunch of establishment pigs who steal our money and use it to drop high explosives on helpless brown people? I don't belong on the fringe, either, so as far as I'm concerned the only way this becomes binary is in deciding whether or not to vote at all. Add to that the lack of faith in the security of our elections in general and we've got a recipe for historic levels of non-participation. I'm not saying that WILL happen, just pointing out that I won't be the least bit surprised if it does happen.
 

twofbyc

Hall of Fame
Oct 14, 2009
10,221
687
132
Up until around 2018, I was a Republican. I still believe in the classic Republican tenets -- small government, strong military, keeping governmental interference in the economy to a minimum, etc.

But I can't stomach the recent tolerance for disinformation, conspiracy theories, outright lies, violence against governmental institutions, and marginalizing populations perceived as weak. So I no longer consider myself a member of the party.

I also can't stomach the glassy-eyed utopianism of much of the Democratic party. So I'm now politically homeless.

The Democratic Party is blowing a chance to have power for a generation. They're doing it by hating Donald Trump and his minions so much that they define themselves as being, "not them."

The problem there is they don't define what they are.

Polls show that the country as a whole is still center to slightly center-right. They're not comfortable with unrestricted third-trimester abortion. They're not comfortable teaching that anyone has inherent character traits based on skin color. They're not comfortable with no police, jails, or prison and no prosecution for minor shoplifting. They're not comfortable with not prosecuting a threat to society because of his skin color and past injustices suffered by people who share nothing with the perp other than skin color. They don't think that the best schools can stay the best by allocating admission by lottery. Merit matters. They believe that the brightest and hardest-working students can take the best education and do the most with it. They're not comfortable with people with a history of violence or mental instability having access to 50-round magazines. They're also not comfortable with the specter of Federal regulation of their Remington over/under duck shotgun. They don't believe that the solution to inflation is more spending.

They understand that when you pump $9 Trillion into the economy (3 covid relief packages of roughly $3 Trillion each), you're going to get inflation. My goodness, $9 trillion is almost $26K for every man, woman and child in the country. It's over $100K for a household of 4. And we're gobsmacked that inflation follows? What did you expect was going to happen?

They understand that when you restrict the supply of a commodity (like oil refining capacity), and demand for the commodity (gasoline) goes up, you're going to get rising prices.

They understand that the money for road maintenance has to come from somewhere. If you embark on a federal gasoline tax holiday, are you still going to maintain the roads? With what money?

Enough with the rant. Here's what Democrats could advocate that would be consistent with their principles, and would pass muster with the electorate as a whole:

- Abortion only up to the point of viability outside the womb. 5 months, give or take -- defer to medical consensus on the time frame. Before that, it's mother's choice. After that, you're ending a human life, and there's a presumption of murder.

- We teach our history, warts and all. We also teach that we've learned from that history, and our future is not dictated by our past or our skin color or anything other than our merits.

- We allocate seats at the best schools the way we always have -- by academic ability and achievement.

- We enforce the laws on the books. If we don't want to enforce them, we repeal them, not ignore them.

- We restrict people with a history of violence of any kind from possession of firearms. I don't understand the fixation on domestic violence, however it might be defined. Why not dispense with qualifiers, and for these purposes say that violent tendencies, no matter your relationship with the intended victim(s), disqualify you from gun ownership? Same thing for people with a history of mental instability.

We might be willing to talk about restoration of access after a period of good behavior / mental health, but it's a long time -- 10 years strikes me as about right, but I'm open to talks on the specifics.

- We act like the adults in the room on fiscal matters, and don't go effectively trying to buy votes with borrowed money.

- We have a well-articulated policy on fossil fuels, energy, and transportation infrastructure. If we want to encourage non-fossil fuel energy, we say that. We also acknowledge that there is no free lunch and the policy will entail higher gasoline, natural gas and electricity prices, and we will live with that for the sake of the planet. We also state how we plan to pay for road maintenance -- Teslas put about the same wear and tear on the roads as Toyota Camrys. We meter energy used to charge vehicles and tax it at the source just like we do gasoline.

OR

- We say that, for the time being, fossil fuels are literally the energy that drives the economy and our daily lives. We throw off restrictions on refining capacity, get the lower gasoline prices we want, and live with the fact that it will delay clean energy until clean becomes less expensive than fossil.

- We advocate the original Obamacare. We state that everyone must have health insurance. No exceptions. Can be through a private health insurance company. Can be through a government program into which participants will pay. But everyone has to have it. Again, no exceptions.

Bottom Line: I truly believe the Democratic party has gotten so blinded by its hatred of Donald Trump that it has lost sight of what it is. It should define itself by what it is, not what it isn't.

It should offer the middle 2/3 (geographically and ideologically) of the population ideas they can support.

And it shouldn't let itself get dragged into litmus-test arguments that only thin slivers of the population truly support or are affected by.

If it does, I think it can win. If it doesn't, well, James Carville has already advised (his words, not mine), "Woke got it ass kicked. It's not a winning message."
Advocating for original Obamacare is not and never was roundly supported by the overwhelming majority of independents, or any Republicans at all.
The reason is simple; neither party will give up the golden teat. As long as money calls the shots, none of what you proposed has any chance whatsoever of becoming reality unless or until the corrupting influence of money is either extremely minimized or removed from our legislative processes completely.
I don’t disagree with anything you said; I have fought the battle against the opponent to all of it. It will take an overwhelming majority of Americans acting to make any of it happen.
I harbor no illusions concerning the chances of that happening
 
  • Like
Reactions: crimsonaudio

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
32,035
19,655
287
52
Four all beef patties, 6 feet under: the McCPR
The biggest thing standing in the way of the Democrats has nothing at all to do with THEM.
It's called "barring a rare miracle of something like 9/11, the party in power usually gets beaten up pretty badly in the midterms."

And then the party that wins ALWAYS mistakes this as some sort of endorsement for their most insane ideas. Something about the voters "waking up" and "taking back the power themselves," all of which are cliches right up there with "we got took to the woodshed" and "this is a must-win game" (who the hell ever heard of a must LOSE game other than the 1919 White Sox?).

I've told here before about reading Ed Rollins's book ("Bare Knuckles and Back Rooms") and all the stuff he saw up close in campaigns. It's a hilarious read even if a bit dated (1996). One of his stories was about the GOP buying into the notion that 1980 was a "realignment election" where Democrats were moving into the GOP (as a reminder there was a group called Reagan Democrats who went R-R-B and then jumped back to Clinton). They were setting up an office to add seats in 1982 and Rollins told them (paraphrasing) "if history is any guide, we'll be lucky just to hold serve." I'm not saying you don't try, but folks in politics convince themselves after winning that everyone is with them and voted FOR them and everything they said.

In all honesty, the most American thing in politics is going to the voting booth and voting AGAINST whomever has made us mad. The only ballot for President in my entire life I ever cast FOR a candidate was when I was 19 and pulled the lever for the first President Bush. (Even then - I gulped in fear of what if something happened and Quayle took over; fortunately, that has never happened).

Barring a Van Tiffin kick from 52 yards miracle, the Democrats are going to lose:
- 30 seats if folks are really upset about 1/6
- 40 seats if folks think it's time to move on
- 50 seats if folks blame gas/inflation on Biden
- 60 seats if a recession hits before October

The Senate is a bit different - the Ds have the good fortune this time to only be defending 14 of 34 seats. But what are their odds of increasing their margin even if they hold serve?

I guess on a great night they could add NC, WI, and PA to the mix, but this also assumes Kelly, Warnock, Bennett, Masto, and Hassan all win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crimsonaudio

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
80,171
30,072
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
The biggest thing standing in the way of the Democrats has nothing at all to do with THEM.
It's called "barring a rare miracle of something like 9/11, the party in power usually gets beaten up pretty badly in the midterms."

And then the party that wins ALWAYS mistakes this as some sort of endorsement for their most insane ideas. Something about the voters "waking up" and "taking back the power themselves," all of which are cliches right up there with "we got took to the woodshed" and "this is a must-win game" (who the hell ever heard of a must LOSE game other than the 1919 White Sox?).

I've told here before about reading Ed Rollins's book ("Bare Knuckles and Back Rooms") and all the stuff he saw up close in campaigns. It's a hilarious read even if a bit dated (1996). One of his stories was about the GOP buying into the notion that 1980 was a "realignment election" where Democrats were moving into the GOP (as a reminder there was a group called Reagan Democrats who went R-R-B and then jumped back to Clinton). They were setting up an office to add seats in 1982 and Rollins told them (paraphrasing) "if history is any guide, we'll be lucky just to hold serve." I'm not saying you don't try, but folks in politics convince themselves after winning that everyone is with them and voted FOR them and everything they said.

In all honesty, the most American thing in politics is going to the voting booth and voting AGAINST whomever has made us mad. The only ballot for President in my entire life I ever cast FOR a candidate was when I was 19 and pulled the lever for the first President Bush. (Even then - I gulped in fear of what if something happened and Quayle took over; fortunately, that has never happened).

Barring a Van Tiffin kick from 52 yards miracle, the Democrats are going to lose:
- 30 seats if folks are really upset about 1/6
- 40 seats if folks think it's time to move on
- 50 seats if folks blame gas/inflation on Biden
- 60 seats if a recession hits before October

The Senate is a bit different - the Ds have the good fortune this time to only be defending 14 of 34 seats. But what are their odds of increasing their margin even if they hold serve?

I guess on a great night they could add NC, WI, and PA to the mix, but this also assumes Kelly, Warnock, Bennett, Masto, and Hassan all win.
All good analysis. One factor you neglected is depressed turnout in midterms. In midterms, the extreme partisans turn out. The members of the party in power and, particularly, independents, just yawn. The wild card happened yesterday. When the ripples die down, if they do, we'll know more...
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: selmaborntidefan

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
32,035
19,655
287
52
Four all beef patties, 6 feet under: the McCPR
All good analysis. One factor you neglected is depressed turnout in midterms. In midterms, the extreme partisans turn out. The members of the party in power and, particularly, independents, just yawn. The wild card happened yesterday. When the ripples die down, if they do, we'll know more...
This wasn't intended to be a complete breakdown but yeah, you're right about that, too.

The midterms - like the primaries - bring out the highly agitated, highly engaged, and highly motivated.

One thing I recall reading years ago in a book about the Bork hearings ("Battle for Justice" by Ethan Bronner). Richard Shelby was a Democrat who had just beaten Denton and taken office and because he was conservative, he was inclined immediately to vote for Bork for the court. Shelby was questioned by the American Conservative Union and basically made two points: 1) if there was no skeleton in Bork's closet, he'd vote for him; 2) as a Southern Democrat, it was important to be seen as on the opposite side of the issue as Ted Kennedy. But then J. Bennett Johnston (D-LA) took Shelby aside and gave him an elementary lesson in politics. He basically told him (this page is not available for free viewing online) that he had barely won his Senate seat (7,000 votes), he had won largely because of the black vote, and if he voted for Bork, he could expect to be primaried in 1992...because folks would forgive him voting against Bork since a conservative of some stripe was going to wind up on the court anyway BUT...if he voted in favor of Bork, it would so alienate the black vote that they'd turn out and vote for anyone who ran against him in anger over the vote. For those who don't recall, Shelby wasn't exactly leading the parade, but he DID vote against Bork because of retail politics.

The hard partisans are a large part of the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TIDE-HSV

Crimson1967

Hall of Fame
Nov 22, 2011
16,754
6,995
187
In 1992, Shelby was primaried by Chris McNair, a black Jefferson County Commissioner, whose daughter was killed in the 16th Street church bombing.

Two years later, he was a Republican.
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: TexasBama

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
32,035
19,655
287
52
Four all beef patties, 6 feet under: the McCPR
In 1992, Shelby was primaried by Chris McNair, a black Jefferson County Commissioner, whose daughter was killed in the 16th Street church bombing.

Two years later, he was a Republican.
Depends on the definition of “primaried,” which usually is taken to mean you lost. He DID have a primary, of course, but he won nearly 2/3 of the vote (which does sort of make Johnstown’s comment interesting).

I defer to others on intra-Alabama politics, though.

This can be viewed either way, partly because promising to run an opponent in a primary is a common pressure tactic from the hard left and right.

Me? I seriously doubt a SCOTUS nomination five years earlier affects much given the average attention span of the average voter. MAYBE if the election is the next year one can make that argument. Hell, the selection of the VP should make a huge difference in how one votes for President but it never has, not large scale.

Thanks for the info btw.
 

Latest threads

Shop the TideFans.shop !


Your purchase through our TideFans.shop links helps support the site! Thanks!