2020 Dems "go all in on identity politics"

[Technocracy Timmy]

The Democrats shouldn’t be distracted by identity politics. They should instead be focused exclusively on the politics of the working class in the white rural areas of PA, MI, and WI and cater to their needs only. That is the answer.

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

The Democrats shouldn’t be distracted by identity politics. They should instead be focused exclusively on the politics of the working class in the white rural areas of PA, MI, and WI and cater to their needs only. That is the answer.

Considering that they are the swing states, their needs matter much more than what the Upper East Side or Orange County thinks. 

[Technocracy Timmy]

The Democrats shouldn’t be distracted by identity politics. They should instead be focused exclusively on the politics of the working class in the white rural areas of PA, MI, and WI and cater to their needs only. That is the answer.

Considering that they are the swing states, their needs matter much more than what the Upper East Side or Orange County thinks. 

I fully agree. The Democratic nominee needs to understand that they’re effectively running to be President of MI-WI-PA rural whites. Nobody else should be dealt with during their presidential tenure.

[Comrade Funk]

The Democrats shouldn’t be distracted by identity politics. They should instead be focused exclusively on the politics of the working class in the white rural areas of PA, MI, and WI and cater to their needs only. That is the answer.

Considering that they are the swing states, their needs matter much more than what the Upper East Side or Orange County thinks. 

Democrats are gonna win, let's say PA, by running up the score in SEPA (dreaded suburbanites). They ain't winning rural whites ever again.

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

The Democrats shouldn’t be distracted by identity politics. They should instead be focused exclusively on the politics of the working class in the white rural areas of PA, MI, and WI and cater to their needs only. That is the answer.

Considering that they are the swing states, their needs matter much more than what the Upper East Side or Orange County thinks. 

I fully agree. The Democratic nominee needs to understand that they’re effectively running to be President of MI-WI-PA rural whites. Nobody else should be dealt with during their presidential tenure.

That's the nature of the beast. Perhaps, the writers of the Constitution should have thought about that before setting up the Electoral College. Don't blame Midwestern rurals for their power. They never asked for it.

[Technocracy Timmy]

The Democrats shouldn’t be distracted by identity politics. They should instead be focused exclusively on the politics of the working class in the white rural areas of PA, MI, and WI and cater to their needs only. That is the answer.

Considering that they are the swing states, their needs matter much more than what the Upper East Side or Orange County thinks. 

I fully agree. The Democratic nominee needs to understand that they’re effectively running to be President of MI-WI-PA rural whites. Nobody else should be dealt with during their presidential tenure.

That's the nature of the beast. Perhaps, the writers of the Constitution should have thought about that before setting up the Electoral College. Don't blame Midwestern rurals for their power. They never asked for it.

Exactly so. The Founding Fathers intended for the electoral college to benefit midwestern whites of German descent. Not their fault. 

[Beet]

Best case scenario- ditch the Electoral College
Next best- play the game to the best of your ability
Worst- virtue signal successfully as kids are locked up in cages

[IceSpear]

Dems going full NPC in this thread. It will be interesting to see which candidates, if any, make a niche for themselves by bucking this trend. Sherrod Brown or maybe Biden would be best served by doing so.

Which Republican will buck the trend of white identity politics in the GOP, and will they manage to get more than 1% of the vote? That is the real question here.

[Santander]

Richard Spencer approves.

[H. Ross Peron]

The Democrats shouldn’t be distracted by identity politics. They should instead be focused exclusively on the politics of the working class in the white rural areas of PA, MI, and WI and cater to their needs only. That is the answer.

Considering that they are the swing states, their needs matter much more than what the Upper East Side or Orange County thinks. 

Democrats are gonna win, let's say PA, by running up the score in SEPA (dreaded suburbanites). They ain't winning rural whites ever again.

This is silly. The winning Democratic coalition in the Upper Midwest/Rust Belt included rural whites albeit at reduced margins.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Democrats shouldn’t be distracted by identity politics. They should instead be focused exclusively on the politics of the working class in the white rural areas of PA, MI, and WI and cater to their needs only. That is the answer.

Considering that they are the swing states, their needs matter much more than what the Upper East Side or Orange County thinks. 

Democrats are gonna win, let's say PA, by running up the score in SEPA (dreaded suburbanites). They ain't winning rural whites ever again.

That strategy failed badly.

"For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia, and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin." - Chuck Schumer in 2016

[IceSpear]

The Democrats shouldn’t be distracted by identity politics. They should instead be focused exclusively on the politics of the working class in the white rural areas of PA, MI, and WI and cater to their needs only. That is the answer.

Considering that they are the swing states, their needs matter much more than what the Upper East Side or Orange County thinks. 

Democrats are gonna win, let's say PA, by running up the score in SEPA (dreaded suburbanites). They ain't winning rural whites ever again.

That strategy failed badly.

"For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia, and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin." - Chuck Schumer in 2016

It worked pretty damn well in 2018 though.

[H. Ross Peron]

The Democrats shouldn’t be distracted by identity politics. They should instead be focused exclusively on the politics of the working class in the white rural areas of PA, MI, and WI and cater to their needs only. That is the answer.

Considering that they are the swing states, their needs matter much more than what the Upper East Side or Orange County thinks. 

Democrats are gonna win, let's say PA, by running up the score in SEPA (dreaded suburbanites). They ain't winning rural whites ever again.

That strategy failed badly.

"For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia, and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin." - Chuck Schumer in 2016

It worked pretty damn well in 2018 though.

Nope. In 2018, the Democrat still won back one blue-collar Democrat for every two suburbanites they won over.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Enough with this vague notion of "identity politics" and s***. All electoral politics involves identity. Stop denigrating real issues that people care about by hand-waving them away with this stupid buzzword.

[Grassroots]

Identity politics is a stupid talking point by the right to divide and distract from discrimination problems we have against women and minorities.

What discrimination problems? I'm sorry but I see no proof that there is any "discrimination" problems against women or minorities in this country.

It's quite clear that this is just fear mongering by democrats to drive up the vote among who they can scare and threaten the most.

Did you miss all those black men being shot by police, often enough when they were not threatening (or even trying to help) the police, and the officers not getting much in the way of punishment for their crimes? Or the whole need for a revised fair pay act as women are still under paid for the same work compared to men? How about all those hate crimes that have been on the rise? Folks with non-white sounding names not getting hired despite having equal qualifications?

Hmm... well I suppose having no heard about these things and many more is possible. But I don't know, might just be a case of trolling or selectively deciding that all of this pile of evidence is some nonsensical plot because space aliens or something. If its not that sort of thing, I'd recommend getting out a little more and meet some folks that don't look quite like yourself. And ask them about discrimination and what they've had to put up with. Because the Democrats don't need to scare anyone. When you're actually having to tell your kids how to behave to not have the cops called on you by some old white guy manager when you're looking to buy a shirt and how to act when he does and the police come in with guns drawn, that's the kind of fear that exists beyond any political campaign efforts.

1. Dems automatically run yards to assume racism. You do realize a lot of the police in these incidents are black? Also, the wage gap is a myth and no companies actually practice it anymore.

That second part of your first paragraph is very ignorant as well. Affirmative action has made it so that people are judged by their race and not their qualifications for decades, but somehow you still aren't satisfied with people of certain races being given unfair advantages? Are you completely blind?

2. Democrats scare inter city minorities into voting for them without actually doing anything to improve their condition. They play the flute of entitlements and welfare, and lock them into a repetitive cycle of false promises. Any minority who votes republican is yelled at by liberal whites for "voting against their own interests". It's obvious fear mongering, and it's one of the reasons why inter cities are in the condition they are currently in.

Identity politics is a stupid talking point by the right to divide and distract from discrimination problems we have against women and minorities.

What discrimination problems? I'm sorry but I see no proof that there is any "discrimination" problems against women or minorities in this country.

It's quite clear that this is just fear mongering by democrats to drive up the vote among who they can scare and threaten the most.

I don't know, you tell me.





"Segregation is worse than it was decades ago and Cleveland, Ohio remains one of the most segregated cities in the USA".

White Dems:

.  .
  >
  -

"White people did this, minorities aren't responsible for anything at all."

"Republicans did this, even though we run inter cities".

"Republicans are the racist party, they totally race bait and we don't."

[Xing]

Of course it shouldn't be the only thing Democrats run on, but to me, whenever someone says "stop talking about identity politics and making everything about race!", I hear "talking about race makes me uncomfortable and I don't support slavery so it's not my problem!"

These are real issues, and Democrats should not abandon them for political expediency. Frankly, I'm tired of having to coddle white people who want to live in their "racism/sexism is dead" bubble (it's mostly white men who have never experienced it, and conclude that therefore it never happens), and get a little testy whenever anyone dares to suggest that some people have it bad because they're not white men, at least in part. If people would take an honest look at our immigration system (I'm helping my girlfriend deal with it right now, it's beyond horrible), our criminal "justice" system, the achievement gap in education, as well as who certain laws involving voting affect the most, it's not hard to see that we are not living in a post-racial society, and simply "not being racist" doesn't make all of these issues disappear.

This isn't to say that rural white voters in Pennsylvania are causing all of these problems, but if they aren't racist, they shouldn't be afraid of conversations about race taking place, especially given our history. I'll be very clear: If you attempt to derail any conversation about race/gender, or write it off as "PC culture" or "identity politics", you are part of the problem.

[TDAS04]

Excellent post, xingkerui.

This is what I fear will be the attitude of working class white men if the Democrats nominate, say, Kamala Harris:

“OMG, the Democrats nominated a minority woman from San Francisco.  They must be practicing the identity politics FOX News warned me of.  I’m not racist or sexist, it’s not fair.  I better vote for Trump, he won’t tolerate the war on folks like me.”

And it won’t matter how solid Harris’s record on economic issues actually is.

[pops]

Of course it shouldn't be the only thing Democrats run on, but to me, whenever someone says "stop talking about identity politics and making everything about race!", I hear "talking about race makes me uncomfortable and I don't support slavery so it's not my problem!"

These are real issues, and Democrats should not abandon them for political expediency. Frankly, I'm tired of having to coddle white people who want to live in their "racism/sexism is dead" bubble (it's mostly white men who have never experienced it, and conclude that therefore it never happens), and get a little testy whenever anyone dares to suggest that some people have it bad because they're not white men, at least in part. If people would take an honest look at our immigration system (I'm helping my girlfriend deal with it right now, it's beyond horrible), our criminal "justice" system, the achievement gap in education, as well as who certain laws involving voting affect the most, it's not hard to see that we are not living in a post-racial society, and simply "not being racist" doesn't make all of these issues disappear.

This isn't to say that rural white voters in Pennsylvania are causing all of these problems, but if they aren't racist, they shouldn't be afraid of conversations about race taking place, especially given our history. I'll be very clear: If you attempt to derail any conversation about race/gender, or write it off as "PC culture" or "identity politics", you are part of the problem.

My oh my, you're quite the bigot aren't you?

[Comrade Funk]

Excellent post, xingkerui.

This is what I fear will be the attitude of working class white men if the Democrats nominate, say, Kamala Harris:

“OMG, the Democrats nominated a minority woman from San Francisco.  They must be practicing the identity politics FOX News warned me of.  I’m not racist or sexist, it’s not fair.  I better vote for Trump, he won’t tolerate the war on folks like me.”

And it won’t matter how solid Harris’s record on economic issues actually is.

And dumb brogressives will believe the same crap and vote for Jill Stein again (or won't vote at all).

[Xing]

Of course it shouldn't be the only thing Democrats run on, but to me, whenever someone says "stop talking about identity politics and making everything about race!", I hear "talking about race makes me uncomfortable and I don't support slavery so it's not my problem!"

These are real issues, and Democrats should not abandon them for political expediency. Frankly, I'm tired of having to coddle white people who want to live in their "racism/sexism is dead" bubble (it's mostly white men who have never experienced it, and conclude that therefore it never happens), and get a little testy whenever anyone dares to suggest that some people have it bad because they're not white men, at least in part. If people would take an honest look at our immigration system (I'm helping my girlfriend deal with it right now, it's beyond horrible), our criminal "justice" system, the achievement gap in education, as well as who certain laws involving voting affect the most, it's not hard to see that we are not living in a post-racial society, and simply "not being racist" doesn't make all of these issues disappear.

This isn't to say that rural white voters in Pennsylvania are causing all of these problems, but if they aren't racist, they shouldn't be afraid of conversations about race taking place, especially given our history. I'll be very clear: If you attempt to derail any conversation about race/gender, or write it off as "PC culture" or "identity politics", you are part of the problem.

My oh my, you're quite the bigot aren't you?

Great job refuting my arguments and showing in detail which parts of my argument were laden with bigotry. If only every Atlas user had the ability to make such snappy comebacks.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

These are real issues, and Democrats should not abandon them for political expediency.

So you think Democrats should try to win the discourse at the cost of more Republicans being elected who will actually cage and deport immigrants, prevent black people from voting, restrict abortion rights etc.? How will that actually help oppressed identities?

simply "not being racist" doesn't make all of these issues disappear.

What makes the issues less acute is electing a Democratic President who can enact policies to help people in office, not lecturing people about what racism is.

See, Republicans have figured out that talking about cutting Medicare and giving tax cuts to millionaires doesn't win them elections, so they don't mention it when campaigning and instead run on culture war nonsense. Then once in office they can quietly slash and burn the safety net.

When Democrats learn this message and focus on bread and butter issues where they have the edge, like running solely on healthcare this midterm, they win; when they run on calling the Republican a racist, like Clinton in 2016, they lose. Or 2014, when the Democratic message to the electorate was about access to birth control and a Republican "war on women", when most voters didn't care.

Excellent post, xingkerui.

This is what I fear will be the attitude of working class white men if the Democrats nominate, say, Kamala Harris:

“OMG, the Democrats nominated a minority woman from San Francisco.  They must be practicing the identity politics FOX News warned me of.  I’m not racist or sexist, it’s not fair.  I better vote for Trump, he won’t tolerate the war on folks like me.”

And it won’t matter how solid Harris’s record on economic issues actually is.

And in the real world Obama swept the rust belt twice because voters responded strongly to his populist economic message against McCain and Romney, despite the fact that he was black.

[Technocracy Timmy]

Excellent post, xingkerui.

This is what I fear will be the attitude of working class white men if the Democrats nominate, say, Kamala Harris:

“OMG, the Democrats nominated a minority woman from San Francisco.  They must be practicing the identity politics FOX News warned me of.  I’m not racist or sexist, it’s not fair.  I better vote for Trump, he won’t tolerate the war on folks like me.”

And it won’t matter how solid Harris’s record on economic issues actually is.

And in the real world Obama swept the rust belt twice because voters responded strongly to his populist economic message against McCain and Romney, despite the fact that he was black.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Really populist there buddy.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Excellent post, xingkerui.

This is what I fear will be the attitude of working class white men if the Democrats nominate, say, Kamala Harris:

“OMG, the Democrats nominated a minority woman from San Francisco.  They must be practicing the identity politics FOX News warned me of.  I’m not racist or sexist, it’s not fair.  I better vote for Trump, he won’t tolerate the war on folks like me.”

And it won’t matter how solid Harris’s record on economic issues actually is.

And in the real world Obama swept the rust belt twice because voters responded strongly to his populist economic message against McCain and Romney, despite the fact that he was black.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Really populist there buddy.

That literally proves my point. Obama managed to win ordinarily Republican voters with socially conservative views by painting his opponents as out of touch rich guys responsible for the great recession. If Democrats are winning those voters they're getting majorities like the one we saw a couple of weeks ago.

Oh, and this midterm Democrats won 15/21 Obama-Trump House districts, 8 of them pickups, on a swing from R+8 to D+3 over all of them (Obama was D+6 in 2012).

[Xing]

These are real issues, and Democrats should not abandon them for political expediency.

So you think Democrats should try to win the discourse at the cost of more Republicans being elected who will actually cage and deport immigrants, prevent black people from voting, restrict abortion rights etc.? How will that actually help oppressed identities?

simply "not being racist" doesn't make all of these issues disappear.

What makes the issues less acute is electing a Democratic President who can enact policies to help people in office, not lecturing people about what racism is.

See, Republicans have figured out that talking about cutting Medicare and giving tax cuts to millionaires doesn't win them elections, so they don't mention it when campaigning and instead run on culture war nonsense. Then once in office they can quietly slash and burn the safety net.

When Democrats learn this message and focus on bread and butter issues where they have the edge, like running solely on healthcare this midterm, they win; when they run on calling the Republican a racist, like Clinton in 2016, they lose. Or 2014, when the Democratic message to the electorate was about access to birth control and a Republican "war on women", when most voters didn't care.

Excellent post, xingkerui.

This is what I fear will be the attitude of working class white men if the Democrats nominate, say, Kamala Harris:

“OMG, the Democrats nominated a minority woman from San Francisco.  They must be practicing the identity politics FOX News warned me of.  I’m not racist or sexist, it’s not fair.  I better vote for Trump, he won’t tolerate the war on folks like me.”

And it won’t matter how solid Harris’s record on economic issues actually is.

And in the real world Obama swept the rust belt twice because voters responded strongly to his populist economic message against McCain and Romney, despite the fact that he was black.

When did I say that Democrats should only run on these issues? I said that they shouldn't, but that they shouldn't ignore these issues either. It's not like Obama ignored racial issues during his first election, not did he only focus on economic issues. He won in part because he was a charismatic candidate who connected well with voters, not because he ignored race.

Republicans are going to label Democrats as "PC" whatever they do, so instead of getting cowed into never letting certain issues see the light of day, Democrats should stand their ground and try to appeal to a broad coalition of voters, not just rural white voters in the Midwest, many of whom would vote for Trump even if he bombed Los Angeles and bragged about it. Yes, some focus on economic issues is a must, but the only people Democrats are going to "offend" if they have the gall to actually talk about other issues are snowflakes who will search for any excuse possible to vote Republican.

[Technocracy Timmy]

Excellent post, xingkerui.

This is what I fear will be the attitude of working class white men if the Democrats nominate, say, Kamala Harris:

“OMG, the Democrats nominated a minority woman from San Francisco.  They must be practicing the identity politics FOX News warned me of.  I’m not racist or sexist, it’s not fair.  I better vote for Trump, he won’t tolerate the war on folks like me.”

And it won’t matter how solid Harris’s record on economic issues actually is.

And in the real world Obama swept the rust belt twice because voters responded strongly to his populist economic message against McCain and Romney, despite the fact that he was black.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Really populist there buddy.

That literally proves my point. Obama managed to win ordinarily Republican voters with socially conservative views by painting his opponents as out of touch rich guys responsible for the great recession. If Democrats are winning those voters they're getting majorities like the one we saw a couple of weeks ago.

Oh, and this midterm Democrats won 15/21 Obama-Trump House districts, 8 of them pickups, on a swing from R+8 to D+3 over all of them (Obama was D+6 in 2012).

He did not win them over with his economically populist message. They’re opposed to basic healthcare reform via Obamacare. READ the article for God’s sake lol. Trump won these voters over with his immigration rhetoric and promise to repeal and replace Obamacare. The gains in a D+8 midterm do not automatically translate to the next presidential election otherwise Romney would’ve won in 2012, Dole would’ve won in 1996, and Mondale would’ve won in 1984.