2016 Postmortem

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts) Fri Dec 2, 2016, 04:50 PM Dec 2016

If we change NOTHING, how do we make any sort of a comeback in '18 and '20? [View all]

We ALL want the party to do better next time than this time.

We ALL want the party to keep defending historically oppressed groups(and, if anything, to defend said groups with increased vigor).

But why the fixation with preserving the exact status quo at all cost?

What good does it do to fight for staying exactly like we are now?

I strongly believe that all of us here are committed to keeping the anti-oppression agenda(and that anyone here who wants that watered-down should just leave). That part has never been in any serious question.

So why all this fear-based insistence on trying to stifle any real discussion?

83 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If we change NOTHING, how do we make any sort of a comeback in '18 and '20? [View all] Ken Burch Dec 2016 OP

It says a lot that no one is replying. The losing mindset realmirage Dec 2016 #1

lots of people responded. nt La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #54

The Only People Saying Change Nothing... mattocaster6 Dec 2016 #2

I think the senate and house republican wins were actually motivated by 'contain Hillary' NRQ891 Dec 2016 #17

After the election in 2008... Blanks Dec 2016 #28

Was it really the fault of the message, or are their structural issues at work also? guillaumeb Dec 2016 #3

Exactly. It makes little difference who we run if the system is rigged stopbush Dec 2016 #5

Voters on both sides seem certain that the system is rigged. guillaumeb Dec 2016 #6

Gerrymandering results in one thing the house yeoman6987 Dec 2016 #41

True. But gerrymandering results in more state level GOP lawmakers guillaumeb Dec 2016 #45

False. Kingofalldems Dec 2016 #48

Same way as always, let the Repkes f**k it up then come in to clean up rzemanfl Dec 2016 #4

Ken, do you belong to your local county central committee? WhiteTara Dec 2016 #7

But, but.. isn't that what this website is for? to discuss stuff? pangaia Dec 2016 #8

You're right. WhiteTara Dec 2016 #9

yeah and local level politics is part of the discussion JI7 Dec 2016 #10

yes, but only when spoken to lol - nt NRQ891 Dec 2016 #18

I did in Juneau Ken Burch Dec 2016 #22

Your ideas will fall on fertile ground WhiteTara Dec 2016 #24

it worked in california JI7 Dec 2016 #11

Einstein said, the definition of insanity is NRQ891 Dec 2016 #12

I don't know. Laffy Kat Dec 2016 #13

it's not that simple NRQ891 Dec 2016 #15

And Trump had less baggage, how? nt Laffy Kat Dec 2016 #19

he didn't - but it was the people who didn't vote for either, that decided the election NRQ891 Dec 2016 #20

Nah, it was the hundreds of thousands of minority voters who were forced to cast Eliot Rosewater Dec 2016 #27

Wow--welcome to DU! ismnotwasm Dec 2016 #29

'it was the head of the god damn FBI a week before the election releasing a letter' NRQ891 Dec 2016 #36

You need to get your stories straight ismnotwasm Dec 2016 #44

care to elaborate where I'm wrong? NRQ891 Dec 2016 #46

No time ismnotwasm Dec 2016 #56

' I'm not big on back and forth crap' NRQ891 Dec 2016 #57

Agree. Welcome. nt Laffy Kat Dec 2016 #62

He had less political baggage. Exilednight Dec 2016 #74

You are really on those negatives ismnotwasm Dec 2016 #30

you can't tell voters in a secret ballot that they have to ignore *legitimate* negatives! nt NRQ891 Dec 2016 #31

You nailed it. She was weak because she couldn't overcome the lies. Obama managed to do it Exilednight Dec 2016 #73

We don't need to do a thing to change any of that because Hillary isn't running anymore. DanTex Dec 2016 #37

no, she isn't. but the party needs to learn from it NRQ891 Dec 2016 #38

Almost everything you mentioned is specific to Hillary Clinton. DanTex Dec 2016 #40

The Democratic Party must overhaul their computer security yeoman6987 Dec 2016 #47

For sure. DanTex Dec 2016 #49

That talking point right there is part of the problem... NoGoodNamesLeft Dec 2016 #26

yes nt NRQ891 Dec 2016 #39

It's just a guess, but I wonder if those who voted for both Obama and Trump Nay Dec 2016 #43

That's an excellent point and absolutely could be the case with some people NoGoodNamesLeft Dec 2016 #55

Agreed that we shoudn't try to appease bigots or appeal to bigotry Ken Burch Dec 2016 #64

2017 Proving Ground: Virginia Governor and legislative elections 4139 Dec 2016 #14

WashPost: "Trump win shakes up 2017 race for Virginia governor" 4139 Dec 2016 #16

change for change sake isn't a great idea dsc Dec 2016 #21

We must fight to change the party, since they didn't change anything after the 2014 disaster jfern Dec 2016 #23

People who think the enemy is the Democratic Party, need to change. boston bean Dec 2016 #25

people aren't saying the Democratic party is the enemy NRQ891 Dec 2016 #42

Let's try being unashamedly partisan for a change. dawg Dec 2016 #32

THIS! LuvLoogie Dec 2016 #33

Yet that'd work. ismnotwasm Dec 2016 #35

yup. La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #51

Regroup. Reform the line. All in. LuvLoogie Dec 2016 #34

All of us here are committed to keeping the anti-oppression agenda. La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #50

Where did you ever get this idea? stone space Dec 2016 #52

there is a poster of DU who used to constantly justify domestic violence La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #53

Not true. Some here at DU want them deported and their families ripped apart. stone space Dec 2016 #58

Not true. Some folks here support Zimmerman. The Zimmerman supporters even have their own group here stone space Dec 2016 #59

"All of us here are committed to keeping the anti-oppression agenda." BainsBane Dec 2016 #60

The only part I would call for changing Ken Burch Dec 2016 #65

If we change nothing, we will continue to be defeated by Republicans. Tatiana Dec 2016 #61

We're going to get destroyed in 2018 because we're in denial about 2016 LittleBlue Dec 2016 #63

2018 was always going to be difficult for the democratic party yeoman6987 Dec 2016 #66

That's about the 5th time you posted that in the last few weeks. Kingofalldems Dec 2016 #68

Message auto-removed Name removed Dec 2016 #78

She didn't fail on economics no matter how much you'd like to spin it that way. And we all know bettyellen Dec 2016 #67

I haven't posted a single thread since endorsing Hillary a week before the convention Ken Burch Dec 2016 #69

And I think we need to face the fact that if HRC had a penis, she would have won handily. bettyellen Dec 2016 #70

I believe Hillary would have had the exact same showing if she had been male. Ken Burch Dec 2016 #71

HA ha ha no. blows my mind you could say sexism cost her no votes. bettyellen Dec 2016 #79

Not none, but certainly not much among people to her left. Ken Burch Dec 2016 #80

Circular argument. bettyellen Dec 2016 #81

Why is it so important to get people to believe it was racism and sexism and nothing else? Ken Burch Dec 2016 #82

No one said nothing else- but it was NOT economics, get over it. bettyellen Dec 2016 #83

I doubt nothing will change treestar Dec 2016 #72

If Trump and the GOP really make good on economic populisim they will be very hard to beat. hollowdweller Dec 2016 #75

It is more than just a possibility, if he starts to add 35% tarriffs it WILL start a trade war still_one Dec 2016 #76

I highly doubt the status quo will survive the next round of elections. democrank Dec 2016 #77