The only lesson is that unreliable voters can be ignored.
People only ever emulate the winning individual, side, or group.
There is no "They lost so next time they will cater to me." There is a "I didn't vote, so next time they will ignore me."
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
The only lesson is that unreliable voters can be ignored.
People only ever emulate the winning individual, side, or group.
There is no "They lost so next time they will cater to me." There is a "I didn't vote, so next time they will ignore me."
What you call unreliable voters, the rest of us call the American people. If you think you can rely on a voter, you've already lost. You are taking your supporters for granted, just as Hillary did, just as Kamala did. Didn't work out well for either of them.
'I'm not Trump' is not a winning strategy. Not for Hillary, not for Kamala, not for the DNC.
If you want to win elections, you have to look at what VOTERS actually WANT. And voters want radical reform. The unfortunately aren't informed enough to realize they'll get more reform for their vote in congressional, state, and local elections than in a presidential vote. But they still want radical reform from their presidential candidate, for better or for worse.
There are an awful lot of valid reasons not to like Donald Trump, but lack of reform in his messages not one of them. His very slogan, 'Make America Great Again', implies change.
People are angry. People see a system that works very well for the 1% and tolerable at best for the rest of the country, and they want that to change. They want a country that works for them. It's a reasonable ask. And since they aren't getting it, they want reform.
If DNC wants to win elections, they need to put forward some new ideas, which won't necessarily be popular with big business but will be popular with voters. Bernie would have mopped the floor with Trump had he not been squeezed out. There's a few younger more charismatic Democrats who could bring about some real positive change. They always get sidelined in favor of the milquetoast boring status quo candidate.
Look at Obama as an example. Young, charismatic, and a campaign based on reform. He didn't deliver nearly enough reform but he generally left things better. It was enough to get Biden elected...
Biden was really the only one that ran on a campaign of "I'm not Trump". Both Harris and Clinton had independent platforms that had nothing to do with saying they are not Trump. They weren't coming into the mess Trump had made so their policies didn't have to focus on reversing what he had done (which is essentially all Biden ran on and did). I don't think this argument is that strong because the 2 candidates that lost actually had a fair bit of reform in their platforms with much more fleshed out plans and details than anything Trump was offering to do.
Don't worry too much, it's the same in France. A whole side of the politic is in denial.