so much for draining the swamp

[Dill]

(11-12-2016, 08:12 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: You're right that Clinton lost because people stayed home, but let's keep in mind that the Democrats were the party of the working class for a long time. They don't feel like they are being represented by the Democrats any longer, that they aren't being listened to. They feel like the politicians elected to represent them are paying more attention to "special interests" (I hate that term, lobbyists are only special interests when they are lobbying for something a politician doesn't like) then they are to them. It's no coincidence that Michigan and Wisconsin, states that hadn't gone red since the 80s, went for Bernie in the primaries. That warning sign went ignored.

I'm not a Bernie fan. His anti-establishment rhetoric is ironic given that he is an old, white, cultural Jew that has been in politics since the New Deal (yes, I am being hyperbolic). But, we can't deny that his message was getting the Democratic party back to its roots. Back to what won over those union members in the industrial areas in the first place. Let's be frank, the Democrats have focused more on social issues than economic. I have been one avoiding looking at this election as a repudiation of anything, but if there were one I would agree with it was that it was a repudiation of that. Yes, it is extremely important that we work to ensure the rights and liberties of all of our people are protected. Civil rights is a hallmark of progress, but I think why so many people are sneering at the idea of it is because their economic concerns are being left behind in this push forward. We need to make sure that we focus our efforts on the economic concerns more.

We also need to stop lumping voters into groups. We need to focus on issues. There are issues that certain groups care about more, sure, but in all we need to stop courting the black vote, the Latino vote, the LGBT vote. We need to focus on the issues. We need to find the issues that all of the people care about and explain how we can help them.

That makes a lot sense, Belsnickel. I like your idea about shifting to "issues," though in fact courting those demographic groups was originally about issues.  You are probably right that what I would call addressing the universal rights of these aforementioned demographics has come to be (or to be perceived) as pleading for special interests.  Hard to speak of the "black vote" without implying a "white vote," and hard to work hard publicly for one without seeming to neglect the other.