The democrats have an elitism problem, their party doesn’t appeal to the average American even though their policies do. The candidates they run tend to appeal more to college educated persons but far less to those who don’t hold post-secondary degrees. Their policies also often times don’t do enough to actually help the average person and lack universality which is desperately needed as the economy continues to get worse and every day life continues to get harder. They refuse to acknowledge this and continue to lose as a result.
The democrats have an elitism problem, their party doesn’t appeal to the average American even though their policies do. The candidates they run tend to appeal more to college educated persons but far less to those who don’t hold post-secondary degrees.
People love simple answers to problems. Unfortunately, the problems we’re facing are incredibly complex and don’t have simple realistic answers. Simply looking solutions have complicated consequences that aren’t immediately obvious. The average American (that doesn’t hold post-secondary education) typically doesn’t understand this. So when a problem is explained and a solution that addresses it is presented, it usually leaves them confused.
Their policies also often times don’t do enough to actually help the average person
…not enough help, I agree.
and lack universality which is desperately needed as the economy continues to get worse and every day life continues to get harder.
You lost on me on this one. Universality? As in a living minimum wage that would benefit not only those struggling on the poverty line, but also help billionaires?
They refuse to acknowledge this and continue to lose as a result.
This is where I more strongly disagree. This goes back to my first point.
We’re facing very complex problems that don’t have simple answers. However, the other side is providing simple to understand solutions. The problem is those simple solutions are horrendous, and aren’t actually solutions. Example:
Americans are struggling with low wages. The other side says its because of foreigners and moves to arrest and deport them. Simple right? Except you and I both know the low wages has nothing to do with immigrants, and instead on corporate America and captured politicians keeping wages low while productivity continues to rise.
If the other side simply gives simple “common sense” solutions that a typical American understands (even if its wrong), then that will be appealing to them instead of a realistic complex solution which promises far fewer benefits. What are Democrats to do here that can counter the infinite depth of lies of the other side?
What are Democrats to do here that can counter the infinite depth of lies of the other side?
Actually do something. The implementations of the right solutions are complex, but the solutions themselves are pretty simple to understand. Tax the wealthy invest in public services and infrastructure pass election reform fucking kill the filibuster already there are mountains of things that need to be done and democrats don’t care enough to do most of it. Republican lies only work as much as they do because they only need to sound better than the paper-thin Democrat excuse of “we’re trying but it’s complicated” when most people aren’t seeing results because the Democrats aren’t trying. If the DNC really wanted to improve things, they’d listen to people like Bernie and AOC who are calling for real change.
the solutions themselves are pretty simple to understand.
…and…
Tax the wealthy invest in public services and infrastructure
Sure that sounds great, but realistically what would it take to do that? Thank you for providing a great example of why “simple” is anything but. To do this there would need to be a massive coordination of candidates that all speak at the same time during an election cycle with talking points about improving the lower and middle class while also appeasing powerful entrenched interested. The statements would have to be powerful enough attract the “simple solution” Americans but not specific enough to reveal the actual mechanism of taxing the wealthy. At the same time the other side could promise the world without any strings attaching them to accountability to deliver on those things. To move to the next step the Democrats would need to get elected in a powerful enough majority to actually vote enough and not be blocked. That right there is likely the first impossibility.
Second, the newly elected Democrats would have to mostly change their policy on taxation to do that massive tax increase on the wealthy. This starts a clock of about 1.5 years until the midterms because powerful entrenched interests will use their power and money to obliterate Democratic representation in the House. Further, with the filibuster now gone, the protection for the newly implemented wealth tax legislation can be overturned by newly elected officials from the other side, and now because the Democratic benevolent duplicity is revealed, the powerful entrenched interests will throw their weight behind weak Democratic candidates or for other side for the next 20 years.
Your post reminded me of the saying (paraphrasing from memory) “to every complicated problem there is an answer that is easy, simple, and wrong.”
Everyone bemoans government inefficiency and slowness without understanding that “that’s the point”. Legislation in a democracy is hard and compromise is necessary. The slowness is a feature not a bug. Yes it means some good things will be delayed, or not implemented as well as some may like, but a lot of bad shit is avoided as well.
All the democratic policies always came with means testing. I always supported all their stuff but it rarely helped me or people I know because of the means testing.
The democrats have an elitism problem, their party doesn’t appeal to the average American even though their policies do. The candidates they run tend to appeal more to college educated persons but far less to those who don’t hold post-secondary degrees. Their policies also often times don’t do enough to actually help the average person and lack universality which is desperately needed as the economy continues to get worse and every day life continues to get harder. They refuse to acknowledge this and continue to lose as a result.
People love simple answers to problems. Unfortunately, the problems we’re facing are incredibly complex and don’t have simple realistic answers. Simply looking solutions have complicated consequences that aren’t immediately obvious. The average American (that doesn’t hold post-secondary education) typically doesn’t understand this. So when a problem is explained and a solution that addresses it is presented, it usually leaves them confused.
…not enough help, I agree.
You lost on me on this one. Universality? As in a living minimum wage that would benefit not only those struggling on the poverty line, but also help billionaires?
This is where I more strongly disagree. This goes back to my first point.
We’re facing very complex problems that don’t have simple answers. However, the other side is providing simple to understand solutions. The problem is those simple solutions are horrendous, and aren’t actually solutions. Example:
If the other side simply gives simple “common sense” solutions that a typical American understands (even if its wrong), then that will be appealing to them instead of a realistic complex solution which promises far fewer benefits. What are Democrats to do here that can counter the infinite depth of lies of the other side?
Actually do something. The implementations of the right solutions are complex, but the solutions themselves are pretty simple to understand. Tax the wealthy invest in public services and infrastructure pass election reform fucking kill the filibuster already there are mountains of things that need to be done and democrats don’t care enough to do most of it. Republican lies only work as much as they do because they only need to sound better than the paper-thin Democrat excuse of “we’re trying but it’s complicated” when most people aren’t seeing results because the Democrats aren’t trying. If the DNC really wanted to improve things, they’d listen to people like Bernie and AOC who are calling for real change.
…and…
Sure that sounds great, but realistically what would it take to do that? Thank you for providing a great example of why “simple” is anything but. To do this there would need to be a massive coordination of candidates that all speak at the same time during an election cycle with talking points about improving the lower and middle class while also appeasing powerful entrenched interested. The statements would have to be powerful enough attract the “simple solution” Americans but not specific enough to reveal the actual mechanism of taxing the wealthy. At the same time the other side could promise the world without any strings attaching them to accountability to deliver on those things. To move to the next step the Democrats would need to get elected in a powerful enough majority to actually vote enough and not be blocked. That right there is likely the first impossibility.
Second, the newly elected Democrats would have to mostly change their policy on taxation to do that massive tax increase on the wealthy. This starts a clock of about 1.5 years until the midterms because powerful entrenched interests will use their power and money to obliterate Democratic representation in the House. Further, with the filibuster now gone, the protection for the newly implemented wealth tax legislation can be overturned by newly elected officials from the other side, and now because the Democratic benevolent duplicity is revealed, the powerful entrenched interests will throw their weight behind weak Democratic candidates or for other side for the next 20 years.
Your post reminded me of the saying (paraphrasing from memory) “to every complicated problem there is an answer that is easy, simple, and wrong.”
Everyone bemoans government inefficiency and slowness without understanding that “that’s the point”. Legislation in a democracy is hard and compromise is necessary. The slowness is a feature not a bug. Yes it means some good things will be delayed, or not implemented as well as some may like, but a lot of bad shit is avoided as well.
All the democratic policies always came with means testing. I always supported all their stuff but it rarely helped me or people I know because of the means testing.