The Democratic Party seems to have no earthly idea why it is so damn unpopular
58 replies, posted
[QUOTE]A troubling new poll was just released showing that the Democratic Party is significantly [I]less popular[/I] than both Donald Trump and Mike Pence. My gut tells me that Democrats will ignore this poll, or blame it on bad polling, and continue down the same course they are currently on: being funded by lobbyists and the 1%, straddling the fence or outright ignoring many of most inspirational issues of the time, and blaming Bernie Sanders for why they aren’t in power right now.
As a general rule the Democratic Party doesn’t listen well and struggles to hear the truth about itself.
In case you’ve been living under a rock, Republicans now control the House, the Senate, the presidency, and the overwhelming majority of state legislatures and governorships. This new poll from Suffolk University illustrates just how that’s possible. Here are the base results of the poll with favorable/unfavorable ratings.[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/king-democratic-party-doesn-unpopular-article-1.2993659"]http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/king-democratic-party-doesn-unpopular-article-1.2993659[/URL]
[URL="http://www.suffolk.edu/documents/SUPRC/3_7_2017_tables.pdf"]http://www.suffolk.edu/documents/SUPRC/3_7_2017_tables.pdf[/URL]
(Poll he refering to)
[URL="http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/democratic-party-favorable-rating"]http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/democratic-party-favorable-rating[/URL]
(Huffington Post's Democratic Party favorability timeline also supporting his point)
And the sky is still blue, too. Between the ongoing support of Clinton through the presidential campaign, the disappointing choice of new DNC chairs, and the continued treatment of Senator Sanders this news is remarkably unsurprising. Their platform has shifted left considerably thanks to people like Sanders, but it feels their attitude refuses to change.
It's funny, because I'm pretty sure that a large chunk of democratic voters have become aware of the issues and are trying to amend them (especially those in "the bubble"), but the Democratic party as an institution is seemingly not doing a damn thing.
Finally, what people don't get is The Dems Favorbility is in a hole, Rural Dems (Former me) are angry is because they feel like that they don't listen to them.
[editline]12th March 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=paindoc;51949358]And the sky is still blue, too. Between the ongoing support of Clinton through the presidential campaign, the disappointing choice of new DNC chairs, and the continued treatment of Senator Sanders this news is remarkably unsurprising. Their platform has shifted left considerably thanks to people like Sanders, but it feels their attitude refuses to change.
It's funny, because I'm pretty sure that a large chunk of democratic voters have become aware of the issues and are trying to amend them, but the Democratic party as an institution is seemingly not doing a damn thing.[/QUOTE]
What people want in rural places is a coalition.
rename it to Progressive Party.
I'll admit that I don't know that much about American politics, but it seems to me that the Democrat's problem is that they have no really well-known/talented figures, beyond their past presidents/candidates.
Look at the GOP and they have a whole range of atleast well-known figures in both Congress and The Presidency (whether you like them or not), therefore the Democrats look really weak/divided by comparison.
This thread title isn't exactly the article headline.
Anyway, unsurprising. Both the Republican and Democrat parties have an extreme disconnect from their bases, but I feel it's worse on the Dems' side.
Yeah, Bernie Sanders should have been a massive wakeup call for them.
Just a bunch of out-of-touch old men, playing at running the country.
Way I see it, it's high time that you lot tore it all down.
Leftist ideals are very split in general. American democrats are still more authoritarian than libertarian when it comes to political ideals. Sanders was supposed to be the lib left socialist, which is an idea that differs from the main democrat party's beliefs. (Thanks DNC)
If the US could go away with the two party system, and do something like the UK has, I'm sure we'll have more ideals represented. I think the Republicans share most of the same beliefs, but Trump was still a wildcard when it came to traditional conservative beliefs.
so unpopular they won the popular vote by 3 million
[QUOTE=werrek;51949498]Leftist ideals are very split in general. American democrats are still more authoritarian than libertarian when it comes to political ideals. Sanders was supposed to be the lib left socialist, which is an idea that differs from the main democrat party's beliefs. (Thanks DNC)
If the US could go away with the two party system, and do something like the UK has, I'm sure we'll have more ideals represented. I think the Republicans share most of the same beliefs, but Trump was still a wildcard when it came to traditional conservative beliefs.[/QUOTE]
You mean two big parties and a bunch of little ones who do fuck all and have no voice? We are a two party system here as well.
[QUOTE=Streecer;51949509]so unpopular they won the popular vote by 3 million[/QUOTE]
Out of roughly 189,000,000 the Democratic Party only had a 3 million more votes against probably the most publicly denounced Opponent in the past 50 years.
When you think that through it becomes apparent that the Democrats are pretty unpopular.
[QUOTE=The mouse;51949439]I'll admit that I don't know that much about American politics, but it seems to me that the Democrat's problem is that they have no really well-known/talented figures, beyond their past presidents/candidates.
Look at the GOP and they have a whole range of atleast well-known figures in both Congress and The Presidency (whether you like them or not), therefore the Democrats look really weak/divided by comparison.[/QUOTE]
I think the big problem the Democrat party has at the moment is the same one that the GOP has; they're completely out of touch with their voter base and what they want.
[QUOTE=Thlis;51949525]Out of roughly 189,000,000 the Democratic Party only had a 3 million more votes against probably the most publicly denounced Opponent in the past 50 years.
When you think that through it becomes apparent that they're pretty unpopular.[/QUOTE]
After near months of manufactured scandal, and the director of the FBI coming out and personally sticking his nose into the proceedings, AND the electoral college working in Trump's favour.
Trump's victory was a perfect storm, and by no means a sign of unpopularity for the dems. Trying to argue that they're unpopular when they WON THE POPULAR VOTE is probably the stupidest thing I've read in a while.
The democratic party already let me down back in 2010 when they had a supermajority and could pass whatever they wanted and they fucking choked and blew it. Voting for clinton was just picking the lesser evil. It made me feel sick to do it, if I had known she would win california by such a large margin, I would have voted for gary johnson just to give 3rd parties a better chance.
[QUOTE=Streecer;51949509]so unpopular they won the popular vote by 3 million[/QUOTE]
and only something like 60% of the eligible voting population actually bothered voting, so.
[QUOTE=Streecer;51949553]After near months of manufactured scandal, and the director of the FBI coming out and personally sticking his nose into the proceedings, AND the electoral college working in Trump's favour.
Trump's victory was a perfect storm, and by no means a sign of unpopularity for the dems. Trying to argue that they're unpopular when they WON THE POPULAR VOTE is probably the stupidest thing I've read in a while.[/QUOTE]
The fact that people vote for the Dems has literally no bearing whatsoever on whether or not they're actually trusted or respected. Of course people are going to vote for them when their votes are being held hostage because the only alternative is to vote for someone you agree with even less.
[editline]12th March 2017[/editline]
Also as previously mentioned, the turnout rate for this election was pretty awful anwyay.
What a horrible article. It's seriously just ignoring reality, like damn. The DNC isn't clueless about their unpopularity, that's why you saw just about every candidate for chair saying the same thing. That's why you saw them outline very similar strategies for how to win. That's why you saw Keith get brought on by Perez after the chair race and included in events with him. Are they still unpopular? Yeah, but it hasn't even been a fucking month. Just a ridiculous article, it's not like they're any more unpopular than three years ago. Not to mention that a party generally seems to have a higher unpopularity, and that the Republican Party is just as, if not more, unpopular. So how about we don't pretend they're clueless, recognize that they've acknowledged a number of problems, push them on issues they haven't, and see how it plays out instead of calling them clueless, which obviously isn't true. (Also, that's funny. Movements like Fight for $15 are totally establishment. Don't know why King thinks they aren't.)
Seriously, I'm as disappointed as anyone else is in the Dems. I went hard for Bernie and voted third party, but let's not ridiculously stick our heads in the sand. That's what the Democratic Party did to get into this position, and everyone doing that won't make things better.
[QUOTE=Dr.C;51949555]The democratic party already let me down back in 2010 when they had a supermajority and could pass whatever they wanted and they fucking choked and blew it. Voting for clinton was just picking the lesser evil. It made me feel sick to do it, if I had known she would win california by such a large margin, I would have voted for gary johnson just to give 3rd parties a better chance.[/QUOTE]
i voted Johnson because i knew my state would go clinton regardless of who i voted
[QUOTE=Octavius;51949622]What a horrible article. It's seriously just ignoring reality, like damn. The DNC isn't clueless about their unpopularity, that's why you saw just about every candidate for chair saying the same thing. That's why you saw them outline very similar strategies for how to win. That's why you saw Keith get brought on by Perez after the chair race and included in events with him. Are they still unpopular? Yeah, but it hasn't even been a fucking month. Just a ridiculous article, it's not like they're any more unpopular than three years ago. Not to mention that a party generally seems to have a higher unpopularity, and that the Republican Party is just as, if not more, unpopular. So how about we don't pretend they're clueless, recognize that they've acknowledged a number of problems, push them on issues they haven't, and see how it plays out instead of calling them clueless, which obviously isn't true. (Also, that's funny. Movements like Fight for $15 are totally establishment. Don't know why King thinks they aren't.)
Seriously, I'm as disappointed as anyone else is in the Dems. I went hard for Bernie and voted third party, but let's not ridiculously stick our heads in the sand. That's what the Democratic Party did to get into this position, and everyone doing that won't make things better.[/QUOTE]
Can we also take a moment to note just how bad of a comparison it is to compare a party against an individual figure, like Trump or Pence, and not another party, such as the Republican party? It's an apples to orange comparison, to compare public figures to political institutions. Both sides of the divide tend to hate their respective political parties, especially the more progressive or conservative sides. If you're a conservative, odds are really high that you approve of your public figures, but there's a fair chance you disapprove of the Republican party and its ilk, hence why a number of Republican leaders, most notably Eric Cantor, got thrown out in their respective primaries. Similarly, if you're a progressive, odds are fairly high you approved of Obama or Biden, but obviously that didn't extend to the Democratic party infrastructure and the like.
I could bet my life that you could poll on people's approval of the Republican party, and compare it to approval of Bernie Sanders; Hillary Clinton; Barack Obama; Joe Biden, or anyone else, and get a similar result. Because people always loathe the institutions, and less so the figures that stem from those institutions.
[QUOTE=sYnced;51949377]rename it to Progressive Party.[/QUOTE]
But remain Democratic Corporatist/Centrists (who by way still control DNC) want Party go even further to center-right despite all members and voters pleased them go centre-left.
And they want to be as [I]Reactionary[/I] Party by this point.
[QUOTE=werrek;51949498]Leftist ideals are very split in general. American democrats are still more authoritarian than libertarian when it comes to political ideals. Sanders was supposed to be the lib left socialist, which is an idea that differs from the main democrat party's beliefs. (Thanks DNC)
If the US could go away with the two party system, and do something like the UK has, I'm sure we'll have more ideals represented. I think the Republicans share most of the same beliefs, but Trump was still a wildcard when it came to traditional conservative beliefs.[/QUOTE]
What is your basis for claiming that American democrats are authoritarian? Outside of the party line regarding gun control, there is little to no regulation of personal behavior or choice so far as I can tell. That's the GOP's bag, with its stance on drugs, women's healthcare, gay rights, religious rights (of non-Christians), etc.
[QUOTE=werrek;51949498]Leftist ideals are very split in general. American democrats are still more authoritarian than libertarian when it comes to political ideals. Sanders was supposed to be the lib left socialist, which is an idea that differs from the main democrat party's beliefs. (Thanks DNC)
If the US could go away with the two party system, and do something like the UK has, I'm sure we'll have more ideals represented. I think the Republicans share most of the same beliefs, but Trump was still a wildcard when it came to traditional conservative beliefs.[/QUOTE]
I find it weird that people seem to insist that the US Dems are authoritarian and the GOP are libertarian when the opposite tends to be what happens in practice - the GOP has a fucking hard on for social control because 'Christian morals', whereas the Democrats tend to strip away that control for equality. GOP adds regulations to prop up dying industries like fossil fuels, Democrats add regulations to assist startup industries and stop environmental destruction.
The GOP likes to shout about small government up until they're holding the reigns. Then up is down and left is right.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;51950321]What is your basis for claiming that American democrats are authoritarian? Outside of the party line regarding gun control, there is little to no regulation of personal behavior or choice so far as I can tell. That's the GOP's bag, with its stance on drugs, women's healthcare, gay rights, religious rights (of non-Christians), etc.[/QUOTE]
High taxation is inherently authoritarian. It rests on the assumption that the government is entitled to your property. They are also extremely regulation heavy on private business.
As far as I can tell, the GOP only wants more control when it comes to drugs.
[QUOTE=sgman91;51950363]High taxation is inherently authoritarian. It rests on the assumption that the government is entitled to your property. They are also extremely regulation heavy on private business.
As far as I can tell, the GOP only wants more control when it comes to drugs.[/QUOTE]
They're pretty staunchly anti-abortion. They are super against gay marriage too.
[QUOTE=sgman91;51950363]High taxation is inherently authoritarian. It rests on the assumption that the government is entitled to your property. They are also extremely regulation heavy on private business.
As far as I can tell, the GOP only wants more control when it comes to drugs.[/QUOTE]
I'd be willing to call the GOP more libertarian if they actually did cut spending greatly to match their tax cuts. As of right now they just thrust their spending onto the future. Necessitating either taxes or defaulting. The latter option is just unthinkable, so what we'd have is higher taxes in the end (interest.)
We're getting into some spooks regarding their entitlement to "private" property and regulations. But Republicans are most certainly willing to play along with crony capitalism as well.
I'd also consider really stark regulations on what I can put into my body pretty horrible, not really an "only." Taxations and regulations, according to most people, are acceptable under the social contract. Preventing people from imbibing stuff like marijuana? not so much. And ofc, there's the other issues mentioned above, and the imposition of US hegemony around the world.
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51950387]This is all taxation. Then all taxes are authoritarian?[/QUOTE]
If you were to look at authoritarianism as a scale, then I don't see why not. It's the idea that the government has the right to forcefully take your property against your will. At the lowest level, you have tiny amounts of taxation like the US under the Articles of Confederation and at the highest level you have countries that force you to give up all property to the state (like Cuba did to many people after the revolution).
[QUOTE]Abortions? Muslims? Undocumented? Contraceptives? LGBT rights?[/QUOTE]
Abortion: It depends on how you look at it. If you see the unborn as someone with rights, then it's not authoritarian to protect its rights.
Muslims: What are you specifically referring to?
Undocumented: It seems odd to me to apply the level of authoritarianism of a society's government to people who exist outside of the country or who are not citizens.
Contraceptives: Does the GOP want to ban contraceptives?
LGBT rights: I assume you mean the right of same-sex marriage (I can't think of any other rights that aren't given to LGBT peoples). In this case, both groups want equal amounts of control. Democrats aren't saying that we want to take away government control of marriage. They're just changing what marriage should be defined as by the government.
Also note that authoritarianism is the act of forcing people to do things. Failing to create or protect rights may be wrong, but it's not authoritarian.
Lol this stupid war on the Democratic party is going to be the end of the Left in America if they keep it up.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51950413]I'd be willing to call the GOP more libertarian if they actually did cut spending greatly to match their tax cuts. As of right now they just thrust their spending onto the future. Necessitating either taxes or defaulting. The latter option is just unthinkable, so what we'd have is higher taxes in the end (interest.)[/QUOTE]
I would agree that there's a gap between republican ideals and what republican politicians actually do, but even failing to meet their ideals, I still think they end up much lower than democrats.
[QUOTE=sgman91;51950440]I would agree that there's a gap between republican ideals and what republican politicians actually do, but even failing to meet their ideals, I still think they end up much lower than democrats.[/QUOTE]
Taxation makes Democrats worse than constantly trying to limit people's civil rights?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.