NYT: Pulling Democrats Back to Its the Economy, Stupid

[realmirage]

The Democrats’ stunning defeat in the presidential race and continued struggles in lower-level contests have jolted party leaders into concluding that their emphasis on cultural issues has all but crippled them by diverting voters’ attention from the core Democratic message of economic fairness.

But even as Democrats agree about the need to promote their agenda more aggressively for the middle class and voters of modest means, especially in parts of the country where the party has suffered grievous losses, they are divided over how aggressively to position themselves on the economic left, with battle lines already forming over the lightning-rod issue of foreign trade.

While the country has moved steadily to the left on such social issues as same-sex marriage and gender equity, it is increasingly apparent that Democrats cannot win in much of the country without a more coherent and overriding economic message.

The debate over what that message should be comes not only against the backdrop of Hillary Clinton’s astonishing loss to Donald J. Trump — a race decided by a handful of Rust Belt states that for decades had favored Democratic nominees — but also after the third campaign in the past four election cycles in which the party was routed across vast sections of the nation, leaving Democrats out of power in both chambers of Congress and in most governors’ mansions.

Oh, and THIS

“If we don’t have Democratic governors there to veto these maps after the 2020 redistricting, the next 10 years for us in Congress and state legislatures are going to be brutal,” said Gov. Terry McAuliffe of Virginia, the only Southern state that Mrs. Clinton carried last week.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/us/politics/democrats-economy.html?_r=0

[wildman76]

1. totally agree it is always about jobs

We can't force liberalism down people throats, we have to understand that jobs and economic security is must and we have to fight the urge that democrats are all the same, cause we are not,every part of the country cultural divides are not that important

[JHan]

2. Why share an article dated November 14th to justify your bias...

and inaccurate belief that "there was no economic message" . That was the canard before more exit polling data and analysis came through.

It needs to stop.

We can look at tactical mistakes, but stop spreading the myth we didn't address the state of the economy...or working class people.

"She detailed plans to help coal miners and steel workers. She had decades of ideas to help parents, particularly working moms, and their children. She had plans to help young men who were getting out of prison and old men who were getting into new careers. She talked about the dignity of manufacturing jobs, the promise of clean-energy jobs, and the Obama administration’s record of creating private-sector jobs for a record-breaking number of consecutive months. She said the word “job” more in the Democratic National Convention speech than Trump did in the RNC acceptance speech; she mentioned the word “jobs” more during the first presidential debate than Trump did. She offered the most comprehensively progressive economic platform of any presidential candidate in history—one specifically tailored to an economy powered by an educated workforce.

What’s more, the evidence that Clinton lost because of the nation’s economic disenchantment is extremely mixed. Some economists found that Trump won in counties affected by trade with China. But among the 52 percent of voters who said economics was the most important issue in the election, Clinton beat Trump by double digits. In the vast majority of swing states, voters said they preferred Clinton on the economy. If the 2016 election had come down to economics exclusively, the working class—which, by any reasonable definition, includes the black, Hispanic, and Asian working classes, too—would have elected Hillary Clinton president."

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/12/hillary-clinton-working-class/509477/

[wildman76]

3. iam not here to argue and be disrespected

Stop with the data and statistics ok those are only as good as the people who participate, I want to know when the last time a democratic running for president didn't visit Wisconsin, I wanted Hillary to win but she was more interested in super pac money and it showed.

[JHan]

4. Unless you are realmirage,

It wasn't directed to you.

Nothing in my post was disrespectful. I noted a tendency by the poster to share articles claiming the democrats did not have an economic message ------ we did.

"stop with the data and statistics" - because myths are better than "data and statistics"? We wouldn't want to believe myths in a post mortem exercise should we?

[wildman76]

5. ok sorry,

I misunderstood sorry ,I guess I have become more defensive since the election, all that I can tell you Is that numbers are not always truthful ,and you are correct people will believe in lies cause truth hurts more, Hillary had a economic message but trump lies was broadcasted more, through Facebook and twitter via Kremlin, I will miss Hillary very much, she's been through so much, and I am heartbroken over this election

[JHan]

7. I understand...

I hope we learn the right lessons.

I feel the hurt and pain and anger too..... and won't get over it soon. We need to do all we can do to heal and strategize..


Also...

.

[still_one]

8. Lol, that has happened to me a few times also

[Yo_Mama]

9. But exit polling seems to show that economics DID matter!!

http://www.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls

Look at financial situation (better today than four years ago):
Better today: Clinton 72%/Trump 23%
Worse today: Clinton 19%/Trump 77%
About same: Clinton 47%/Trump 45%

Condition of national economy:
Excellent: Clinton 83%/Trump 16%
Good: Clinton 76%/Trump 18%
Not good: Clinton 40%/Trump 53%
Poor: Clinton 15%/Trump 79%

Who would better handle economy:
Clinton: Clinton 95%/Trump 1%
Trump: Clinton 3%/ Trump 94%

Btw, on that last question, 46% of respondents answered Clinton, 48% answered Trump.

It's complete nonsense to say that exit polling showed that economics was not the major issue.

As for immigration, 70% of the voters thought illegal immigrants already working in the US should be offered legal status. Only 41% thought a US wall along the entire Mexican border was a good idea.

As for racism being a factor, 53% of respondents approved of Obama's performance as president, and only 45% disapproved. If he had been running this election, he probably would have won!!!!

[NoGoodNamesLeft]

6. Most people are not bothered by promoting cultural issues and defending equality

for all people. However, if the main focus is on things that the majority of people are not impacted by or cannot relate to then Democrats are at risk of losing them. That is what has happened with working class white voters. They aren't a minority race so that focus doesn't impact them one way or the other. Only a few would fall into the LGBT group, so that doesn't impact them personally. They aren't immigrants or of a religious minority, so that doesn't impact them. Many of them live in rural areas and are not seeing the same environmental problems seen in larger areas, so that doesn't hit home. Guns are important but Democrats are consistently painted as gun grabbers, so that's a reason to consider the other side. Democrats do call for raising the minimum wage, which is great for people who actually HAVE jobs...but all those people who DON'T, well...raising the wage of nothing is still nothing. They need JOBS. Create some online government jobs, get high speed internet in those areas and train these people to work from home. Give incentives to companies to hire people in those regions. Come up with a damn plan that actually impacts them TOO. It doesn't have to be ONLY them...but when you focus mostly on cultural issues instead of things that help EVERYONE your appeal begins to shrink.

[uponit7771]

10. Pulling democrats back to putting traitors in jail, stupid... works a little better than false

... senses of control