2020 Dems "go all in on identity politics"

[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.

[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).

[Statilius the Epicurean]

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.

I agree with that. I don't think there's any fundamental difference of opinion here, my point is that having a hostile attitude to white people who don't respond to Democratic culture war messaging is counterproductive if you want to elect Democrats and build majorities. The voters we're talking about are open to voting Democratic and live in extremely important states for the Electoral College. It's insane to push them away for cultural reasons.

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.

Of course Obama talked about race during his runs (more in 2008 than 2012 though), but as a uniter who would usher in a post-racial feel-good America, not by calling McCain or his supporters bigoted, and only as part of a general message of change focused on the economy.

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.

That sort of Republican messaging works best when the swing voters they're targeting don't see a countervailing message from Democrats which is appealing. And yes, no-one is talking about appealing to Trump's base obviously, but voters which Democrats have won in two of the last four elections.

I agree that Democrats (obviously) need to build a broad coalition of voters, and talking about economic issues is the way to do so because those are consistently the most important issues to every group. Black and Hispanic voters care more about protecting Medicare than criminal justice reform or immigration. You'll win over more women by talking about how tax cuts for millionaires have ballooned the deficit which affects our children's futures etc..

[Statilius the Epicurean]

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.

Democrats literally won these voters back in an election which they ran on protecting Obamacare. I'm guessing if they're voters who hate government healthcare then the messaging about Republicans eliminating protections for pre-existing conditions wouldn't have cut through and Trump's caravan rhetoric would have worked.

Obviously midterm gains against an unpopular incumbent President don't automatically translate into the general (although the simplistic "popular vote was D+7 so D+3 = voters were R+4" is the same logic which leads idiots on this site to argue that since DeSantis won Florida is now R+7 and further to the right than Texas and Georgia. We're dealing with an incredibly elastic demographic). What it does show is that Obama/Trump voters are winnable and shouldn't be written off as irredeemably racist for a EC strategy based on the sun belt.