Vincent Oriedo, a biotechnology scientist, had just such a question. What lessons have been learned, he asked, from Harris’s defeat in this vital swing county in a crucial battleground state that voted for Joe Biden four years ago, and how are the Democrats applying them?
“They did not answer the question,” he said.
“It tells me that they haven’t learned the lessons and they have their inner state of denial. I’ve been paying careful attention to the influencers within the Democratic party. Their discussions have centred around, ‘If only we messaged better, if only we had a better candidate, if only we did all these superficial things.’ There is really a lack of understanding that they are losing their base, losing constituencies they are taking for granted.”
“We have set ourselves up for generational loss because we keep promoting from within leaders that that do not criticise the moneyed interests. They refuse to take a hard look at what Americans actually believe and meet those needs.”
Trump pretty much won on optics alone and positioning himself once again as looking out for people despite not being true at all. Dems didn’t want to address people’s issues with the economy and did the weird thing of tap dancing for right Dick Cheney voters who don’t exist.
Just stand for something, even if the risk of loss is high. It pays off in the end.
Every breakdown and postmortem i see make it pretty clear:
If you paid close attention and were well-informed, you voted for Kamala.
If you believe things aren’t true or didn’t pay close attention, you voted for Trump as a sort of totem for wealth and success, not because of a specific policy of his you like. He just represents making lots of money to you.
Any grappling with what went wrong or improvements needed within the DNC first needs to reckon with the reality that people aren’t seeing left-wing messaging and are instead exposed to a fake version of leftism pushed constantly by right-wing actors on social media.
The small concession is that Trump is almost undoubtedly going to trip over his dick, so we’ll probably end up with a blue wave of some sort in 2028. Nothing will change for the DNC and no lessons will be learned, so 2032 looks bleak as shit.
We need to understand that Dems are not going to fight for anyone besides their donors. They’d rather lose than take pointers from someone like Bernie
In a capitalist society, the role of government should be to protect citizens from corporations.
If nobody is willing to do that, what use are they?
deleted by creator
Three things are needed for this to work: labor, capital, and
governmentauthorized violence.The first got destroyed, and the second used the third to get bigger than ever.
So we went from a tricycle to a penny farthing and now we’re falling over.
That’s not how capitalism works… capitalists uses the state to secure, and concentrate power in their hands…
The government is a tool of the capitalist class in a capitalist society. Democracy was originally for the capitalists and their allies and now is a hedge against revolution.
Democracy means “rule by the people as equals”.
It doesn’t mean " western power".
To be against democracy as an ideology or concept is to be against having humans rights: to be able to decide how you will live and die and for what purpose the fruits of your labor is used.
So do we live in a democracy, banjo? Is there any correlation at all between what government does and what the people want?
I don’t know how anything you wrote is relevant to what I wrote.
You said:
Democracy was originally for the capitalists and their allies and now is a hedge against revolution.
Democracy isn’t a compromise with the rich. It is complete ownership by the people.
Democracy in its idealized form, of which I am a proponent of, is that, assuming you mean ownership of the means of production. In popular use, what many countries have is considered a democracy. To be pedantic, we elect representatives to the government by democratic means in most capitalist countries. We call this democracy. I think we should have the former, but I’m not interested in wasting my little social good will on pedantry and definitions with the average person.
Don’t worry too much, it’s the same in France. A whole side of the politic is in denial.
We have set ourselves up for generational loss because we keep promoting from within leaders that that do not criticise the moneyed interests
Evergreen quote-
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” - Upton Sinclair
People want real fucking change. One man stood up against a massive evil health insurance company and regular people from all sides of the political spectrum support him.
Dems could have won if they were willing to do the same and no one would even need to be hurt to do it.
Naturally, there are a host of other problems mentioned in this thread. The trouble is that there is too much free $peech from the ruling class in politics.
I think for people like me, the biggest fuck you was from Obama. He ran on hope and change. He ran on at least a public option. And he went into the office and literally shut down the ground operation that swept him into his position and then basically spent 8 years appeasing Republicans despite the fact that people wanted transformational change. That’s why they picked him over Clinton. He delivered Romneycare, bank bailouts, and drone wars.
And when people wonder why it’s so hard to get out the vote, I think this is a key reason why. I’m old enough to have gone to Obama’s rallies, knock on doors for his campaign as a volunteer, vote for him and watch with joy as he won.
Hope and change. After the George W Bush presidency and the war on terror, it finally seemed like it was time for the pendulum to swing back.
And then every issue they came to the table with a position already in the center in hopes of appealing to the republicans who would then hold their breath and kick their feet and then it would slide further and further to the right until they were holding up romneycare as a progressive victory while also getting completely destroyed in the court of public opinion for passing romneycare.
I knew a lot of people that were very excited for Obama the candidate and completely disillusioned by Obama the president.
And I await the apologists to come out and tell me how he had to do it this way, they only had a super majority for a few weeks. Sure if the republicans have the slimmest majority they rewrite the tax codes and give away trillions to the wealthiest, and if they are in the minority they still somehow get their policies passed. But when democrats have power, well you see, government takes time. They can’t possibly just have the bill ready and call for a vote, you see, that’s just not how it works.
You can only tell people so many times. Vote blue and we promise this time, this time, we will make it better. I know last time we didn’t, but it was because of the blue dogs, or Joe Lieberman, or Joe Manchin. Sure, we have no plan to get rid of those people or other spoilers and we will doggedly support them in every primary… but somehow this time will be different.
And I await the apologists to come out and tell me how he had to do it this way, they only had a super majority for a few weeks. Sure if the republicans have the slimmest majority they rewrite the tax codes and give away trillions to the wealthiest, and if they are in the minority they still somehow get their policies passed. But when democrats have power, well you see, government takes time. They can’t possibly just have the bill ready and call for a vote, you see, that’s just not how it works.
Every single time!
I still find it frustrating to hear this line every single time. Like somehow every single member of congress during that time was hyper focused on the ACA bill, couldn’t have pushed for their own legislation to be pushed forward.
I’ve had plenty of wake up calls, and every time I do, someone calls me weird for the dog whistles becoming fog horns.
I honestly wonder if at this point, candidates would be better off pursuing progressive legislation by running a Republicans.
Ideological purity doesn’t matter worth a shit to Republicans. See Republican voters loving the ACA while hating Obamacare. The party that is supposedly pro free market now openly endorses tariffs and regulation on business to advance a host of culture war bugbears. Republicans are not libertarians; the base especially isn’t ideologically opposed to government programs.
I could see a progressive running for the Republican nomination, a latter-day Teddy Roosevelt. And since the Republicans have become the party of the working class, while Democrats are the party of lawyers and big business, the attack lines write themselves. “Democrats are in bed with the insurance industry!” “Democrats want to pick your pocket instead of giving you healthcare!” “Democrats can’t pass a health plan without lining the pockets of their donors!”
The Republican party has proven itself to be much more susceptible to disruption from outside charismatic figures. The Republican base has far more control over the Republican party than the Democratic base does of the Democratic party. In 2016, the establishment Republicans tried to shoot Trump down, but their base overpowered them, and Trump took over the party. Bernie tried the same thing in 2016 and 2020, but the DNC was far more powerful and able to resist this outside takeover.
I really think that now may be the time for a return of progressive Republicans in the mold of Teddy Roosevelt. Promise to fix healthcare and break up big businesses left and right. Throw a bone to the right by promising to exclude illegal immigrants from the healthcare law (which they would never be eligible for anyway.) Hell, you could even write it so it didn’t exclude coverage for abortion and trans healthcare. If someone points that out, just lie and say that your plan does include these exclusions. It’s not like the truth on such things matters anymore. Sell it in simple terms the common man can understand.
I really do wonder if at this point, progressive candidates might gain more traction by running as Republicans. The Republican party is not ideologically libertarian, and it has proven far more receptive to outsiders and new ideas than the Democratic party.
And I await the apologists to come out and tell me how he had to do it this way, they only had a super majority for a few weeks.
They will all be miraculously absent when Republicans change the senate rules to get rid of the filibuster.
I remember watching the debates during the Obama campaign and thinking “this guy is just as pro big business as the republicans”. The only candidate who was talking about the need to limit the political power of corporations/finance was Ron Paul.
Bernie to Trump pipeline
Actually the other way around. Ron Paul to Bernie pipeline. I was reading Corey Doctorow and Lawrence Lessig at the time and I was willing to vote for anyone who might limit corporate power/corporate funding of political campaigns. I will never understand why so many people were excited for Obama. He just always seemed like your standard change nothing and let the rich get richer polititian to me. Although, I will admit he is a very charismatic speaker.
Kamala was running on “Isn’t Trump a weirdo?”, but that was working so she stopped.
The DNC does not want to win if it means causing actual change.
They pivoted from “Trump is a weirdo” to “Dick Cheney likes us!” like the absolute morons they are.
It convinced 12Mil not to vote for her and 1Mil not to vote for Trump.
Courting Republicans is clearly a winning strategy for a Democrat! /s
I love how “We were too woke!”, and I"m like “Woke? Is that what you call having Thanksgiving with Penis Cheney?”
and drone wars
I’d have been fine with the US killing even more Al-Qaida and Taliban members, even those that happened to be US citizens fighting alongside their comrades in a combat zone. Every single one of them would be about right. And if you’re squeamish about drones, let’s be real, you are really just squeamish about warfare, because every other form of killing in warfare is just as brutal and most are far more indiscriminate.
Also, as soon as Trump got in the first time, he changed rules of engagement to take less account of civilian casualties.
iirc technically Obama reduced counting of drone strike civillian casualties, Trump just stopped counting all together.
Y’all stay on Obama’s dick.
Maybe you didn’t read that comment? I think you got it backwards.
People want real fucking change.
So they helped to elect Trump for a non-consecutive term lol
They want us to think real change is impossible.
Corporations and Republicans control the media. Putin deployed psyops on the social media of the bar room and bowling alley crowd. They controlled the narrative and will continue to control it until people wake up and realize they have become wage slaves who have a shit-hole standard of living.
While that’s true, choosing to vote for Trump, a third-party, or not at all is like saying, “I don’t like this ham sandwich and I don’t like my sandwich choices… so I’m going to eat this dog-turds-and-radioactive-glass-shards sandwich instead!”
This country is fucked.
Edit: Rather than respond below to every comment, thought I’d clarify a few things here.
- I never said Democrats didn’t fuck up. They certainly did.
- But - and this is important - we can’t ignore the roles that racism, sexism, and above all misinformation played. To pretend there was none, and that vast swaths of the electorate didn’t fall for it, would be disingenuous.
Democrats have moved to the right, and hurt themselves doing so. That is true. But they are still objectively superior to Republicans in every conceivable way. People who voted Republican voted for the Leopards Eating People’s Faces party because they were angry about Democrats being imperfect, and their faces will be eaten.
Democrats have moved to the right, and hurt themselves doing so. That is true. But they are still objectively superior to Republicans in every conceivable way. People who voted Republican voted for the Leopards Eating People’s Faces party because they were angry about Democrats being imperfect, and their faces will be eaten.
The problem you (people blaming voters) don’t seem to understand is, the Democrats moving right DIRECTLY demotivated voters and they stayed home because they were going to get right wing policy either way. They literally had no choice in multiple different avenues of how the country would be run so they said “fuck it if I got no choice for x y AND z, why vote?” maybe they still had a choice for a-w but maybe those specific policies didn’t matter to them personally and wouldn’t have affected their life.
This is A) the problem with having a shitty party platform and B) the problem with hyper-individualism that our country loves.
See, this is where you’re wrong. By every measure, the Democratic party platform was objectively better for humans living on planet Earth. Its problems were in degree (not being nearly progressive enough), not in focus (such as screaming incoherently about trans people).
But people didn’t know, because of the aforementioned misinformation and disinformation. Seriously, did you know that the party platform contains an entire section on protecting LGBTQI+ people and rights? Most progressive voters who sat this one out never read it. Here, see for yourself.
But because the Democratic party wasn’t progressive enough (in some people’s eyes), they sat out the election, and someone who is a thousand times worse in every respect is going to be president tomorrow.
I take that personally. I have a trans son and a gay daughter, and their lives will be so much worse, starting tomorrow. And to protect them, I’m actively trying to figure out how to leave this country, because a lot of people didn’t care enough to protect my kids.
In 1930’s Germany, the Jewish people (and Gypsies, and - again - gay and trans people, and so on) who survived when that country descended into fascism are the ones who got the fuck out first. That is the reality that this purity bullshit has created for people like my kids.
If the electorate doesn’t know a party’s platform, that’s the party’s problem. It’s literally their job to scream it from the rooftops.
And all I saw was democrats, like motherfucking Henry Cuellar, throwing the LGBTQ under the bus. Especially trans people.
If the electorate doesn’t know a party’s platform, that’s the party’s problem. It’s literally their job to scream it from the rooftops.
They did. Harris campaigned constantly, and contrary to the constant and incessant media narrative, she went into plenty of specifics.
It was all drowned out by Trump noise, and the media was 100% complicit.
And all I saw was democrats, like motherfucking Henry Cuellar, throwing the LGBTQ under the bus. Especially trans people.
Yes, Cuellar is an asshole, no argument there. But he was by no means the only Democrat on the campaign trail. Again, the media wouldn’t fucking give Democrats the time of day, because the 24-hour Trump clown show got the ratings.
We also shouldn’t dismiss the problem of sexism, some of it internalized. Back in 2008, I had the misfortune of meeting a woman who wasn’t sure who to vote for. She wanted to vote for McCain at the time, but was hesitant because she didn’t want a woman to be vice-president. (The fact that Sarah Palin was immensely unqualified didn’t matter, but the fact she had a vagina did.) That attitude is still a lot more common than people who live in largely progressive areas realize.
not in focus (such as screaming incoherently about trans people)
why is “trans people” always the example the centrists bring up, like its some sort of totem. Trans peoples rights are not exactly on very many peoples top 10 list of concerns, and I doubt many people could even name the rights trans people are fighting for and dems are supposedly helping with. Trans people are 1% of the population. If thats all we have for a convincing argument we’re doing politics wrong.
Bite me. I’m no fucking centrist. And maybe if you’d actually read my comment, you’d understand why trans issues are important enough for me to mention.
Edit: In light of this instant and predictable attack on my kids, I cordially invite anyone who is okay with Trump in office to “teach Democrats a lesson” to fuck themselves sideways with a pineapple.
If only someone, or a group of like minded thinkers, had predicted this exact social course and offered another course that actually has ideological solutions for capital interests fucking over everything in their quest for more money and power!
I think a lot of the core of the Kamala base is just as out of touch as the Democratic establishment. The fact that the establishment can’t understand this outcome just demonstrates their ineptitude.
People are hurting, a lot. Real wage growth has been stagnant, people are having trouble making ends meet, the wealthy are richer than ever leaving the working class with less and less.
What do the Democrats do to actually improve peoples material conditions? Absolutely nothing. The CHIPS act and IRA are great for longer term problems, but does nothing to put more food on people table. Kamala had the gall to ignore the problem all together. The economy is great, look at the stock market! And her big economic plan? Tax breaks for small businesses and your first home purchase. That’s it. That’s their fucking cornerstone economic policy. That’s not gonna help the vast majority of people.
Then on the other hand you have trump. He tells everyone it’s the brown peoples fault everything sucks, so we will get rid of them (and, by implication, your problems). It’s their fault egg prices are high, just get rid of them and things will go back to the way things were. Of course the rich are the real problem, not immigrants or trans people or any other conservative boogie man, but Trump acknowledged the pain many working class Americans are under.
Now you can think to yourself, how would anyone believe that? Think about someone who’s working two jobs to make ends meet, they’re surrounded by Fox news, all their family is Republican. They were raised in the public education system (half the country can’t read at a 6th grade level) and can’t parse the details of domestic economic policy, but Trump says it’s the brown peoples fault. Finally they felt seen and acknowledged. They remember the Trump stimulus checks. They remember the tax break (even if it’s temporary, they won’t look too closely and notice it’s permeant for the rich).
You know how Democrats win? By bringing back the party of FDR and really championing the working class. Thanks to citizens united we will never see that again, but it’s quite easy to understand their loss against trump. There’s only one issue, and thats class conflict. Until the Democrats stop serving their corporate donors they will never win again as it’s too easy for Republicans to acknowledge working class pain and scapegoat marginalized people.
You know how Democrats win? By bringing back the party of FDR
At this point, I’d expect them to bring back Japanese internment camps and nothing else. I’d say redlining too, but that would involve having a housing program to be discriminatory with.
Wouldn’t surprise me either. Just understand that my point wasn’t that we should go back to the regressive social ideas of that era, but more so that we should return to supporting/expanding the welfare state at the expense of reducing the wealth of billionaires.
Just understand that my point wasn’t that we should go back to the regressive social ideas of that era, but more so that we should return to supporting/expanding the welfare state at the expense of reducing the wealth of billionaires.
Absolutely. I just can’t trust Democrats to do it anymore.
Because the Democrats jave just been a controlled opposition party since Regan.
Redlining was mainly a private-sector thing involving loan availability and insurance premiums. It wasn’t primarily to do with housing programs.
Redlining was an official policy of the Federal Housing Authority under Homer Hoyt.
Not reading all that. I’m apart of Kamala’s base of 75 million. I guess I’m out of touch and super wealthy according to you.
The fact that you so proudly claimed to not want to read yet decided to respond anyway makes you pretty out of touch. That last bit is just icing on the cake since they never claimed that.
You’re certainly out of touch if you won’t even read the explanation as to why you lost.
But I expect little else from the Khive.
Cry more
k then I’m not ready any of yours past “Im not reading all that”. Or any of your other comments either.
Too bad RCV is moving so slowly
Oh man that would be incredible. I’d actually be vaguely satisfied with my choices on the ballot.
Can’t imagine why politicians would be hesitant to mess with a system that put them in power.
RCV was on like 5 ballots last election and failed in each one. The VOTERS didn’t want it.
Neither centrists nor republicans want RCV, yeah. Republicans might lose and centrists might lose the ability to run as second worst to republicans.
In Nevada they tied RCV to independents being able to vote in primaries, instead of being its own bill. The carrot and stick approach upset a lot of people, including me.
Doesn’t matter anymore. I was gonna type “but genocide Joe” every time trump fucks over in some way the people who had a chance to vote for Kamala. But in the end, unity is far more important, division is how putin disarticulated his opposition.
I was gonna type “but genocide Joe” every time trump fucks over in some way the people who had a chance to vote for Kamala.
That would be a great demonstration that you have learned nothing.
I learned that Joe should have dropped out earlier and allowed proper primaries. You will miss “genocide joe” ;)
I learned that Joe should have dropped out earlier and allowed proper primaries.
Then type that instead.
Doesn’t matter, you’ll be lucky to vote again.
DISINFORMATION, not misinformation.
You’re missing the lesson too, ironically.
The voters didn’t like what the Democrats were offering them, they wanted change, and they wanted it badly enough that they went ahead and ate that dog-turd-and-glass-sandwich.
You’re saying “they shouldn’t have eaten that, the sandwich the Democrats were offering was better.” Okay, well, they did it anyway. So you’re wrong. The Democrats were wrong. They’ve been wrong multiple times now. They’re doing the “Am I so out of touch? No. It’s the voters who are wrong.” Meme.
America’s a democracy. The voters aren’t wrong, as much as you might personally disagree with their choice. If you want a different government you have to offer them one that they’ll vote for. That may require some compromises, but that’s part of democracy.
I hope that they get it this time. This is the second time in recent memory that they’ve made this mistake. Even Biden’s election was closer than it should have been. I really hope that the DNC gets its head out of its ass and cleans house, but articles like this are disheartening.
Left vs right or democrat vs republican — that framing is a distraction in this political reality. The war is between the 99% and the 1%. It’s the working class vs the billionaire class. Your republican neighbor may be a MAGA religious crazy, voting against his financial interests, but he’s been successfully manipulated by a corrupt party controlled by billionaires. Your other neighbor may ‘vote blue no matter who’, ignoring or ignorant to the fact that most democrats at the state and federal level are also influenced or bought by corporate interests and the 1%. These neighbors are clearly not the same, but they are both supporting the interests and agenda of a billionaire class that is oppressing them.
That is not to say that republicans or religious extremism are not threats — they very much are — but they have been allowed to gain power due to a broken and corrupt system of government.
The system is broken because unlimited money gets funneled into politics. It’s destroyed our checks and balances, as well as the incentive structure for our judges and our representatives — most of whom no longer have a primary interest in representing the 99% of us. We are being taxed, robbed, poisoned, oppressed and enslaved by our own government, without even proper representation to show for it.
We cannot expect that our elected representatives will act in our best interests; they require our constant input and scrutiny of their actions. Either we as a people become more involved with politics at all levels of government, or we start a revolution. The problem of corruption in all levels of our government will not be solved by the corrupted. A continuation and increase of wealth inequality will destroy this country.
The corporate-backed fascist MAGA-America regime starts tomorrow, but we are not powerless. The 99% has power. We must come together, organize, educate, exercise empathy and patience with one another, and take action; we can take back control. We have to.
Nothing will happen until there is a major crisis of some kind. Life is way too easy for most people. Occupy was a failure for this reason. You need Great Depression style suffering or better yet early 20th century labor conditions in order to get any ball rolling. Great Society was nothing really.
The 99% has power only if we seize it.
Neoliberalism is done, it’s fucked. The liberals wanted and thought they could pull another Bernie and people would just go with it, fuck that.
You clearly have no idea what neoliberalism is if you think it has anything to do with liberals or, even more, with Bernie Sanders.
Reading comprehension is hard, but I believe you can get there someday.
The left is fucked overall, they have splintered and hate each other more than they hate trump. Meanwhile the right is united.
This election in particular, the American left has become toxic. If you’re even slightly left or right of any other leftist and you may as well be a nazi to them. No leftist was left enough for the other leftists. “No, I’m the true left, and fuck the rest of you, you’re fascists!” Was basically what every leftists was yelling at each other while not voting, and allowing trump to win. If you’re left and you stood aside and didn’t vote, fuck you.
The left doesnt exist in America my dude. Read what the other commenters that replied to you said, I agree with them. There is neoliberalism and fascism. Thats why Bernie was and is still popular.
Run on healthcare, stopping the genocide, run on raising wages, and anything really to help workers and people and you win easily.
Bullshit. Run on healthcare and ending genocide in Palestine. Those two issue alone would catapult a candidate into office. The Left has a lot of unfortunate infighting. That doesn’t mean we would reject a good candidate over small differences.
There was no leftist candidate running for POTUS…
Neoliberals will say the most racist things and then act like you have a moral imperative to never criticize their policies.
I think it’s just a vocal minority that is overrepresented online causing the issues, but I promise that’s why most of my extended family votes for Trump.
The Democrat aristocracy do not care about winning.
They only care about marketing the disaster of their losses so that they can launder billions of dollars in “vote blue” spam campaigns.
All those donations are going somewhere - to “consultancy firms”. To “ad agencies”. And then they get to enjoy kickbacks from this mutual relationship.
THEY DON’T NEED TO WIN TO RAKE IN BILLIONS.
and so they don’t even try.
Honestly I think this article is completely wrong. I’m convinced modern elections are 100% based on vibes and so better messaging and a better candidate would have meant a great deal.
But to add to that - Trump and his idiot base had been messaging and memeing for four years starting with Covid and masks and then inflation and ‘I did that’ stickers of Biden at the gas pump. Biden had barely done any messaging even up until the point he dropped out which, in the social media era, should be obviously big fucking warning signs of a losing campaign.
EDIT - which is not to say I don’t think the Dems need to change in other ways because they absolutely do.
Seriously those gas station “I did that” stickers were an actual grass roots movement, and it’s part of why Trump won.
A lot of people vote based on their wallets. If you’re worse off after 4 years, then why vote for the incumbent?
The Dems need to learn. Cheap food/gas/essentials, less outsourcing, less importing cheap labor, and lose the smugness. That’s what they need to do to win, and I don’t think that would mean abandoning much.
Less importing cheap labor means higher prices. Welcome to math. Americans expect no effort and lives of luxury because they’re at the center of an empire - except of course the ruling class increasingly reaps the rewards, and the money doesn’t recirculate into the economy due to how it’s structured, so we just slip into poverty. Neither major party will fix this, by design.
True, but the voters still want both low prices and good paying jobs, and the Dems promised neither. That’s my point.
Biden’s campaign actually spent months claiming they had stopped inflation (though the inflation, particularly “price inflation”, basically all happened during/under his admin, though as a result of Fed policy, supply chain issues, whatever degree of corporate price gouging, etc.).
Except we weren’t worse off after 4 years because 4 years ago we had Covid, and now we don’t.
We still have covid-19. Sure, fewer people are dying from it now, and yes, we have a vaccine, but most US Americans aren’t getting the regular booster shots required for continued protection against covid. It still kills people. It still causes brain damage and organ damage.
Overall, US Americans just stopped caring about it and stopped taking measures to avoid it.
It’s not about prices bro. It’s about culture
Elaborate
A lot of people talking politics online are younger or trump era folks (post-2016). I can tell you right now, policy don’t mean shit in this country. It’s about culture wars and racism. Romney ran on almost identical policies Trump has ran on THREE times. Deregulation, immigration, lower taxes, agency cuts. Typical Republican shit.
Difference is, Romney didn’t dog whistle enough, he was your average Republican. And Obama beat him comfortably. Trump campaigns almost entirely on culture war nonsense and has a HUGE propaganda machine behind him. But his campaign policy is no different from any other Republican.
Do you honestly think if Trump didn’t lean into racism, xenophobia and bigotry that he’d be successful in politics and gotten this far. You think racist rednecks would storm the Capitol for some billionaire 1 term generic Republican? Come on people. Use your brains. It’s Republican politics 101, always fight culture wars until that specific fight runs out of steam (post 80s gay panic).
Yes, Biden lost because of stickers, not because the economy of the average voter is in shambles
deleted by creator
No, you’re missing the point - the Dems lost because Biden hadn’t built up any trust with average voters regarding the economy over the last four years.
Any informed voter would know the Dems will be better for them than the GOP who has never been more interested in funneling money to their rich benefactors. But the average voter is not informed.
“The things Harris said, like she was going to give $25,000 for people to buy their first home, there were a lot of people said she was giving their money away to people who didn’t deserve it. It cost her votes. We were trying to tell her that.”
What’s the answer to that? On the face of it, this says that the electorate don’t want public money spent on helping other people who need help. How do you achieve anything other than conservatism with such an electorate? The only thing I can think is that you have to promise to help more of the electorate, and that the money will be come from the very rich. In other words, the only counter to conservatism is a commitment to actual wealth redistribution, and to going up against the selfish interests of the super-rich. That’s not yet even socialism, but it’s still further to the left that the Democratic Party is willing to go. For now, its leadership would rather lose elections to fascists than challenge billionaires.
A few conservative pundits attacked it from the “undeserving” angle. The actual base didn’t give a damn. The actual base thought it was a useless and tone-deaf figleaf of a policy. It was a wonkish policy only a milquetoast centrist could love - a market subsidy that had a long litany of provisos and qualifications. And one that economists stated would just serve to bid house prices up even higher.
The voters didn’t reject progressive wealth redistribution. They rejected half-baked meaningless gestures.
Giving everyone 25K means housing prices go up by 25K. It was a very bad idea and would benefit the billionaire class.
What should have been done was capping rent and building more houses.
It wasn’t “give everyone 25k”
Be more disingenuous.
Indeed only people who use it to buy a house. If everyone has 25K more, then housing prices go up by 25K.
How did you transmute “25k for families that haven’t missed a bill payment in 2 years and who are buying their first home” into “everyone getting 25k to buy a home”?
Do you just disagree with whatever endgame you imagine she’s reaching for, and are speaking to that? Like that policy is just shorthand for something like “everyone gets free money” and that would be bad, so her policy is bad?
deleted by creator
How do you transmute giving everyone free money into fixing a housing crisis?
The solution is extremely obvious, and has been done many times: government funded social housing.
Giving people more money to buy a house does not create houses out of thin air. It does not fix a supply shortage, it only exacerbates the crisis.
Making it non-viable for housing to be an investment asset would be more effective. Social housing is perpetually underfunded, and big centralized schemes invariably lead to social problems because of the ineffectiveness of central planning and the failure to involve the actual people living in the housing in the design of the projects. Also, the vast sums of money involved become pork for the big construction firms.
The shortcoming of that is the decades of decline as you destroyed the largest store of wealth people had up to that point.
First time buyers have had bonuses across the U.S. for years. It absolutely has nothing to do with house prices being higher. Texas does it, Tennessee, Florida, California… Probably everywhere
And the point is by offering up X dollars you increase the aberage price of homes rather than making them more affordable.
You know, I was being facetious, I didn’t actually want you to be more disingenuous…
Capitalism doesnt work, the end. Need a new and better system, not keep contributing to said system
In the meantime, other societies manage it better than we do. Maybe do more of that while we’re coming up with an entirely new economic system?
Are… you lost?
Removed by mod
Capping rent makes more housing less likely. Are you suggesting government built housing?
Not allowing one or two private equity firms to own a lions share of the market would help.
Government built housing is how the UK solved the problem last time. Then Thatcher sold it off and there hasn’t been any real interest in doing it again despite all the same problems coming back.
iirc its not so much a lack of interest as we literally banned local municipalities from building more (not straight up but we banned the mechanism by which they were doing it)
Yeah that will do it
That’s why you only cap rents on buildings that have existed for some time.
Businesses do not plan for 30 years or more in the future. If landlords can’t make an acceptable rate of return within 30 years, they’re not going to build a new house or apartment building.
So you can attach rent control provisions to buildings that are over a few decades old, and it will have zero impact on the financing and construction of new housing. It will only affect buildings after they’ve long since been built and paid for.
You do have to worry about rent controls discouraging landlords from keeping buildings maintained. But that’s why good rent control doesn’t cap rent, but simply limit the rate of increase. If a landlord can afford to keep a building maintained today, they will be able to keep it maintained in the future, even if rent increases are capped to the rate of inflation.
If anything, smart rent controls like this actually encourage the construction of new housing. By limiting rent increases on old buildings, you encourage landlords to knock them down and replace them with bigger and newer buildings that can be rented at any rate. In unregulated markets, landlords can increase profits by colluding to suppress the construction of new housing stock. Why invest the money in new buildings if you can just increase the rents on existing buildings by conspiring to prevent new buildings from being built? Smart rent controls mean that if landlords want to see their profits increase at any rate higher than inflation, then they will need to actually build new housing units.
Can ypu provide an academic source that supports your claim regarding “smart rent controls” or are you just pulling this from the ether?
I would suspect that once you knock down a building you’ll replace it with luxury housing as you’ll profit much faster as construction is remarkably expensive. I suspect the results of ypur idea is many times fewer affordable homes being available in the long run as landlords are continually looking to make back their latest investment.
Non profit housing, be it through companies owjed by the municipality or cooperatives who provide housing to their members are very effective means to limit rents and provide housing.
In many European countries it used to be normal for a large part of the rental market to be in the hand of such entities or even housing built to be buyed to own by lower middle class families.
Incidently rents started exploding after a lot of these got privatized in the 80s to 00s.
deleted by creator
