A Democrat fears his party is losing its soul.

[elleng]

South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg preaches a smart message that leaders in his party need to hear, whether they want to or not.

'Many Democrats have celebrated recent polls showing that President Trump’s approval rating continues its waterfall-like decline, along with support for a Senate Republican health care plan that seems to have failed. South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, however, looked at those same polls and saw something different — something he rightly believes his fellow Democrats should be both worried about and working on. The source of his concern: Data showing that most Americans do not see Democrats as the party of ideas or solutions, or as representative of the middle class.

How bad is it? Well, a Washington Post poll taken last week found that only 37 percent of Americans, and only 32 percent of independents, think the Democratic Party “stands for something” other than opposing the president. “That’s a problem,” Buttigieg (BOOT-edge-edge) wrote on Twitter. . .

“Too many Democrats are looking at the failures of this administration and seem to think that criticizing the president alone will bring us back to power,” said Buttigieg, who has emerged in recent years as one of the most thoughtful voices in the Democratic Party. “But even if it does result in us winning back power, it leaves unanswered the question of what we would do with that power to address the challenges facing regular people.” He is absolutely correct. As a left-leaning independent, I struggle to see a coherent, potentially impactful vision from the national or even state Democratic Party. And I certainly don’t see leaders capable of connecting en masse with voters in, say, Indiana.

Buttigieg sees the problem clearly.

He worries about the state of a party that is too focused on the day-to-day drama and gamesmanship in Washington, D.C., and is often incapable of defending its policies in real-world terms. He watches the Sunday news shows, filled with party bosses from the coasts, and doesn’t understand why Democrats don’t select as their representatives lawmakers from red states, or mayors who are dealing with the potential impacts of budget cuts, Medicaid changes and immigration policy. “The party is losing its soul,” he said, bluntly. “This should be a party of ideas and a party that is all about standing up for regular people. There is so much of our party that is obsessing over the individuals on the political stage, rather than the individuals we serve.”'>>>

http://www.indystar.com/story/opinion/columnists/matthew-tully/2017/07/18/tully-democrat-fears-party-losing-soul/103793728/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

[kcdoug1]

1. Yes

The party must purge itself if the corporate center right puritans and become once again the party of the people! Run candidates not afraid to fight for every vote! Candidates who understand that no one is pre-destined to hold any public office

[elleng]

2. 'For instance, he talked about the smugness of upper-middle-class Democrats

who shake their heads and say that blue-collar workers, or people in struggling rural communities, are voting against their economic self-interest every time they vote Republican. Those folks, Buttigieg said, “can turn right around and say, ‘Hey, so are you.’ So lecturing people isn’t how you win friends and influence people. We have to have a better answer.”

The better answer, he said, “is that our party exists to support people going about their daily lives. Our party was founded to help the people, and if people don’t see that, then we have a lot of work to do.”'

[Blue_Tires]

12. Can we please drop the fucking notion

Last edited Tue Jul 25, 2017, 02:29 PM - Edit history (1)

that the only rural/blue collar folks that matter in the electorate are white people? When we buy into that narrative, the battle is already half lost and leads right into GOP hands...

And while we're at it, can anyone answer for me why the GOP never gets called out for being condescending and smug??

[elleng]

13. I do not think this is or was Pete Buttigieg's 'notion,' ever.

If it were, he would not be such a successful mayor.

It's never been MY notion, and of course it shouldn't be the Dem party's 'notion.'

'So lecturing people isn’t how you win friends and influence people. We have to have a better answer.”'

[Blue_Tires]

15. Fuck that shit... Rural/conservative whites have no issues

Last edited Tue Jul 25, 2017, 02:46 PM - Edit history (2)

lecturing the black community and telling us how to live our lives... But oh, right -- We don't dare ever call them racist lest they get offended...

The point of it is this was *NEVER* a fucking referendum by voters with so-called "economic anxieties", that's just the "official" approved narrative which has been repeatedly debunked.

And I give less than a rat's ass who says what -- If a rust belt voter's community is an economic shithole despite having an entrenched GOP congresscritter lifer, GOP control of both statehouses, and voting in a GOP governor the last 12 years, *and* then you catch #MAGA fever despite struggling and being unhappy, THAT IS CALLED VOTING AGAINST YOUR OWN INTERESTS, and such stupidity rightfully deserves to get called out (SEE: All the Trump voters scared shitless over losing Medicare and other safety net programs)... The GOP has never allowed anyone to police their national discourse, so why do the Dems have a laundry list of things we can't say?

[elleng]

16. 'Fuck that shit... Rural/conservative whites have no issues.'

Nice talk; this will get the Democratic Party far (NOT.)

[Blue_Tires]

17. So please tell me what am I, as a black male

and one of the Democratic Party's most loyal voting blocs supposed to cede? Where am I supposed to yield ground? Am I supposed to denounce Obama the Clintons and Colin Kaepernick (who I don't even like, but anyway...)? Am I supposed to stop saying #BlackLivesMatter? You want me to drop KremlinGate? Should I just grin and bear it the next time I hear something racially insensitive or ignorant?

What, for the love of Christ; tell me WHAT you want me to do to get the all-powerful white working class to vote Democratic... I'm all ears because while Buttigieg is big on Sandersesque truisms and lofty generalities, he's actually kind of thin on hardcore details... Because while "...our party exists to support people going about their daily lives." makes for good copy, it isn't really saying anything.

(and FWIW, don't be so naive to think Buttigieg isn't playing some kind of long game here, either)

[elleng]

19. Continue as ever, I don't care what you do.

[Blue_Tires]

20. Well that was anticlimactic

so what the hell are we even talking about, then?

[elleng]

24. 'Our party exists to support people going about their daily lives. Our party was founded to help

the people, and if people don’t see that, then we have a lot of work to do.”

The mayor is right. His party has a lot of work to do to start winning more elections. The first step might be for its leaders in Washington to listen more to mayors in places like South Bend.'

[Blue_Tires]

25. Yes, and I'm asking for specifics

since he saw fit to point out the national party is devoid of ideas, I'd have thought he would have some himself...

[PufPuf23]

26. I do not thnk you as a black male should ceded anything nor yield any ground.

What might help is to support the issues of other voting blocks within the Democratic Party or close to the Democratic Party ideals or should be Democrats were they not brainwashed where you have no or little vested personal interest but egalitarian political philosophy.

Because another individual, Democratic or not, disagrees on a point or a specific politician makes them neither a racist or misogynist. They may be a racist and misogynist but it is wrong, divisive, and counter productive to treat those that disagree with you but are mostly in agreement as a category that is racist or misogynist,

[elleng]

27. Thanks for constructive suggestions, PufPuf23.

[PufPuf23]

29. Thank you Elleng.

The situation appears to be so intractable that one must look for the small things.

[elleng]

32. Yes indeed.

[emulatorloo]

33. Revival of "Latte Liberal" smear, recycled Bush-era GOP "Dems have no ideas!1!1"

Meme, and strawman arguments like Democrats "think that criticizing the president alone will bring us back to power"

I don't see anything attractive about Buttigieg's recycled right wing-memes. Of course YMMV.

[muriel_volestrangler]

45. Bullshit. You cannot say that Democratic voters vote against their economic self-interest,

because Democrats have better ideas how to run the country. It's better for everyone to have Democrats in charge, even for upper-middle-class people. Buttigieg is giving Republican economic ideas too much credit. I don't think he understands how bad they are.

[George Eliot]

3. Some seem to get it. Why don't the rest?

Probably because they'd rather have a TRUMP than a Sanders truth be told. Financially, TRUMP keeps the status quo.

[emulatorloo]

34. You are surrounded by Liberals and Progressives here. So stop the "they'd rather have Trump" BS

[George Eliot]

46. Why take it personally? The OP is talking about the establishment - DNC and elites within it.

I don't think you understand the point of the post. And there are lots of people here to are dug in to the establishment which is Pete's point. The establishment elite absolutely would rather see a Trump than a Sanders who threatens their wealth and security.

[emulatorloo]

47. "The (DNC) establishment elite absolutely would rather see a Trump than a Sanders".

That statement has zero basis in fact.

"And there are lots of people here to are dug in to the establishment"

Once again you are surrounded by left-liberals and progressives. Stop saying DU'ers want Trump.

You can repeat it over and over, it is still unsupportable bullshit.

[George Eliot]

48. :)

You're welcome to your opinion. But Buttigieg disagrees apparently.

[emulatorloo]

49. You're welcome to your opinion too. But not your own set of 'facts.'

[Squinch]

37. Those who voted against Sanders did so because they prefer Trump(R)? Seriously, what the fuck is

wrong with you?

[LovingA2andMI]

4. THIS Is The Guy To WATCH in 2020....

Personally, we think Pete Buttigieg could take us (Dems) back to the White House in 2020. However, they are way TOO MANY Dems that have no idea who this guy is. He's the REAL DEAL. Learn about this guy, quick. He's like a Millenial Generation Obama 2.0 (but he's Caucasian --- #FYI) -- Straight Shooter and Smart As A Whip Too.

[elleng]

9. I supported him as Chair,

recognizing his achievements (already,) and his appeal.

[pnwmom]

5. LOL. Why doesn't the party select representatives from RED states? Because then the

self-proclaimed progressives will complain that they're Dino's -- Democrats in name only -- too centrist to satisfy the more progressive wing of the party.

Also, people in cities and on the coasts are just as "regular" as people in the midwest and in rural areas. It's insulting to imply that they aren't.

[Blue_Tires]

11. You're not allowed to mention that in a Dem-bashing thread...

[Proud Liberal Dem]

23. Yup

They used to complain ad nauseum about "Blue Dogs" ruining their dreams and called for them to be primaried or defeated because they believed them to be every bit as bad as the Republicans running against them, even though Dean's 50-state strategy is also something that they also continuously exhort the Democratic Party to return to as well.

[Drunken Irishman]

28. Thank you. Democrats are running a pretty liberal candidate here in Utah for Chaffetz' seat.

She talks about socialism on twitter as being misunderstood.

I'd vote for her if I lived in that district. She's definitely more to the left than any recent House candidate in Utah (maybe since 1996 when Rocky Anderson ran against Merrill Cook and lost).

Thing is, she has an even worse chance of winning against a weak candidate of Republicans than people would've thought at the beginning of the race for that very reason. The Democrats MIGHT have been able to win this seat if a Matheson would've run. But I don't like Matheson, and I know many liberals here don't, either. He was part of the Blue Dog Caucus and the only reason a Dem served in any national office from Utah the last 30 years.

[pnwmom]

43. But being part of the Blue Dog caucus meant that he helped give the Dems a majority when we had it.

And having some Blue Dogs is probably the only way we'll get that back, so we reject those people at our peril.

[joet67]

6. The party is lost, and wandering in the woods.

Not that anyone cares what I think anymore. I personally know a fella that left the party over this pat weekend. I can't go that far, but certainly I am more than a little frustrated with my party of nearly 60 years now. It barely resembles a labor party. People need more than just assistance programs. 😨

[democrank]

7. The anti-left, anti-Independents, many times antl-rural Democrats, like some on this site

will continue to oppose most constructive dialogue about changes needed in our party. To them, almost all criticism is rejected and falls into the category of trashing, bashing or attacking.

Yesterday CNN offered a discussion about a similar poll taken to gauge voter's opinions about the Democratic Party, and the results were the same as the one mentioned in this thread.

During the past few months, many DUers have attempted to begin a discussion about all the state and federal seats (around 1,000) we have lost in the last DECADE or so. Since these losses can't be blamed on either Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump, the anti-left, anti-Independents Democrats usually stay away from those threads.

It is my belief that if our party insists on the same leaders with the same "message", the map will stay majority red. If that happens, our platform will do us no good. I'd like to see a big shake up, one that energizes our party, those who have left it and those who might consider joining.

[elleng]

8. Right. :-( Seeing 'snark' here

now.

[Blue_Tires]

22. not snark, just pure anger in my case...

[Blue_Tires]

14. Of course, that "1000 SEATS!!!!1111111!!"

Gets thrown in my face daily on Twitter by some smug bro, and I always ask said bro how many state/local campaigns on any level has he or she worked or volunteered for... And invariably I get muted or blocked after that -- So maybe this is a bigger problem than what's happening to the party on a national level.

People need to get off their asses and hustle... It's not gonna happen on social media or behind some blog, and complaining that the national Dems haven't concocted the secret sauce that will flip some state legislature in the south isn't going to help... Nobody seems to want to realize that there IS NO MAGIC BULLET -- Bernie Sanders could be fucking president today and the party would still have problems with congress, the state houses, and in lily-white districts...

[Proud Liberal Dem]

21. +1000

This!

[emulatorloo]

30. We lost seats because Dems stood up and voted for the ACA and were then demonized by the Kock Brothe

Last edited Tue Jul 25, 2017, 04:21 PM - Edit history (2)

Brothers for those votes and other Dem votes to rescue the economy. Now voters are finally catching up and realize the Koch Bro bullshit was bullshit.

Every DUer here recognizes the need to make changes to the party.

However if one omits context as above, or clings to the discredited narratives like Trump won because of "economic anxiety", then one is operating on false premises.

As we know from the exit polls and subsequent analysis, voters whose top concerns were either Jobs or the Economy voted for the Democratic candidate. Voters whose top concerns were either terrorism or immigration voted for Trump.

Discussions about moving ahead need to be fact-based.

[Squinch]

36. Demonized not just by the Koch brothers, but also by other Democrats.

[emulatorloo]

38. Yes indeed

[LakeArenal]

10. I feel like almost all politics has lost it's soul.

Democrats had, under Pelosi and democratic control of Congress, a chance to end the war and bring about single payer. Dem politicians had it right there. But the Dems who were in control voted against both and it wasn't until Obama that we ended the war and got the hard-fought watered down ACA.

To me, that's when Democrats failed the people. It's been a slide down since then. Too many corporate dollars then. That has only gotten worse as well.

[emulatorloo]

39. Revisionist history. Dems had a razor thin margin in the Senate and that included traitor Lieberman

who was always willing to fuck things up for Democrats.

Agreed Pelosi House put through fantastic legislation.

Which then died in the Senate because of Republican obstruction and a few GOP-friendly "Dems" like Lieberman.

Lieberman is why there is no Public Option or Medicare for over 55 in the ACA.

[LakeArenal]

40. Why revisionist? Your last sentance is what I said.

Leiberman is one of the ones I was talking about. There were other gop-friendly Dems as well.

A thin margin is still a margin.

[emulatorloo]

41. My mistake then.

I've seen some claim that we had an absolutely bullet proof majority in the Senate. Apologies for assuming that's what you were saying.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

18. How exactly does he propose to take politics out of........politics?

And why does he seem to think that Democrats are the ones "too focused" drama and gamesmanship? Gah. Does he not know what Democrats stand for and/or what the Democrats have done whenever they've been in power? Does he even remember about the ACA that Democrats passed- at a horrific political price- back in 2010? Does he remember how President Obama helped stabilize a deteriorating economy and presided over a fairly peaceful and prosperous 8 years for everybody in our country? Was it as good as it could have been? Maybe not but he, like Clinton before him, left the place in a MUCH better place than where he found it. Is he factoring in Republican obstructionism? I hate Democratic naysayers whom seem to completely ignore all of the evidence in front of their faces that the Democratic Party is doing it's best to help people when they have the power to do so, but are too often undercut by the Republicans and their constant legal and legislative maneuvering. What the hell does he suggest Democrats do to get their message out? Hit voters over the head by a 2 X 4 to get them to pay attention to them?

[Blue_Tires]

42. Like I said, just vague truisms and navel-gazing...

So he gets to say something without saying something, and he gets to distance himself from the national party, which I'm starting to suspect was his whole motivation in the first place...

[emulatorloo]

31. Why are we recycling the BushBot "Democrats have no ideas!!!" meme?

It was bullshit then and it was bullshit now.

[Squinch]

35. Democrats who don't understand the need for party discipline are what is most wrong with Democrats.

Even facing even odds on the demise of our Republic, assholes still gotta insist on purity for all, and let everyone else know how wrong they are.

The party has the best platform in history, but some assholes still gotta fire in a circle.

[Blue_Tires]

44. So tell me more about this lack of ideas and messaging...

Last edited Tue Jul 25, 2017, 05:59 PM - Edit history (1)

Wow... It's almost like the ideas and message were here all along, but for whatever reason everybody wanted to talk about everything BUT the fucking issues...

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[Eliot Rosewater]

52. RIght now on DU, this poster and this nonsense attacking the D party stands but If

I say ... ....oops, better not, get banned.

Fuck, we are so done if this shit is allowed HERE

[Blue_Tires]

50. Here's the fundamental problem:

Link to tweet

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/i-dont-know-how-to-explain-to-you-that-you-should_us_59519811e4b0f078efd98440

Link to tweet

[Eliot Rosewater]

51. People believe the D party doesnt stand for anything but to oppose shithead because

some of us keep SAYING that over and over.

Gee.

Since we know it is a LIE and untrue, I wonder why we keep seeing it HERE!

I know what the agenda is of this shit attacking the D party, why dont others here especially the owners?

[elleng]

58. I think you're misstating the problem,

many think the Dem party hasn't communicated what it stands for adequately.

[emulatorloo]

60. Agreed, but recycling and deploying old GOP talking points against Dems does not move us forward.

[Eliot Rosewater]

61. It is designed to harm the party. I know what is happening and who is doing it,

but most here wont acknowledge that including the owners here.

We are doomed if we dont start screaming at threads like this one, threads like this one should not be allowed here.

If we still havent learned who is who, what they are doing, then we really dont deserve to survive.

Come on, fuck, this isnt that hard...and I am not talking directly to you, but to everybody here.

[vi5]

53. "a party that is too focused on the day to day drama and gamesmanship in Washington"

This is a large part of it, and a large part of that is what seems to be an obsession with winning the cable news cycle rather than what will actually work and appeal to people. Too many seem more intent on getting Morning Joe or David Brooks to say nice things about them the next day than they are with any long term plan or approach. There's too much of a reliance on "Well, if this happens then that will happen and then this other thing should happen and THEN.......THEN we'll really get things done!"

We even saw it with the ACA and what seemed like a misguided belief that by pushing through what was essentially a Republican healthcare plan that THEN the media would just be all over themselves praising Democrats for being "bipartisan" in their approach to Healthcare.

[Blue_Tires]

54. But as cynical as it sounds, you DO need to

"win" the cable news cycle... What do you think "the people" are watching at dinnertime?

[vi5]

59. Not cable news....

Maybe the evening network news which is less rabidly partisan in most cases

Cable news ratings and the number of people who actually watch those stupid shows are so far out of proportion to their influence in Washington.

And that's not even factoring in the fact that most people who DO watch that stuff already lean Republican and aren't going to vote for Dems anyway.

The bottom line is that audience is small and it's not Dem friendly, so putting so much emphasis on THAT versus what actual people want and need, and counting on that forum to report things honestly is just a losing strategy.

[Eko]

55. There are two worlds out there.

One is a world of fear, reality shows and utter stupidity and disdain, the Dad if you will. The other is reason, science, compromise, and logic or the Mom. Dad will take you out and shoot guns and ride big trucks and make you feel like a bad ass, mom wants you to eat a balanced meal and have health care. In a world of the History channel monster quest which one do you think is winning? IF and WHEN the Democratic party becomes the history channel monster quest I, am,fucking, out. Dont ask me to be that, dont ask me to push that, dont ask me to be a part of that. I Will Never Be a part of that, ever. You guys can take your "appeal" to them and shove it where the sun dont shine. I will take fading away into obscurity as a party before I ever do that. At least I will do it with honor and not selling out.

[tonyt53]

57. What is being lost in this thread and following discussion is one fact. Most Democrats are moderates

I know many on here can't comprehend that, but like it or not, it is a fact. Most Democrats do not want something for free. We don't want tax cuts that hurt people.

What killed HRC was the inability of the Democratic Party to appeal to average middle class white voters - who are mostly moderates. One line in our platform is all they got. Because of that, many didn't bother to vote in the election instead of voting for trump. Many people that didn't feel the platform was far enough left voted for a third party candidate. Those that didn't vote didn't help elect trump. Those that voted third party did though. Without appealing to moderates, the Democratic Party will fail again.

[alarimer]

62. Too many bankers and not enough labor unions.

You almost never see Democrats walking a picket line anymore. No, that's for dirty socialists.

By throwing in with the big banks over homeowners. By extending the war on drugs. By turning welfare into block grants in the name of "reform". Why they can't see that these have been losing policies, I have no idea. We STILL have Senators who think asset forfeiture is a good idea (never mind the big old conflict of interest where cops get to keep the money they seize). They thought those things would help them win and sometimes it did.

I still maintain the biggest problem is simply not being "real", by listening too much to consultants and focus groups, by being bland and BORING in the name of appealing to moderate, suburban Republicans. That is a turnoff to people who need and want REAL change. REAL CHANGE, not some bullshit "better deal involving job retraining (retraining makes no fucking difference if there are no jobs, or if there are only jobs that pay shit. Talk about tone deaf.)

What wins is a defense of the social safety net, making sure rich people pay their fair share of taxes and emphasizing the fact that we are a country that takes care of those unable to care for themselves. We have compassion and empathy and the other side just does not. Why don't Democrats like to tell it like it is? Blame the Republicans for being the total horse asses that they are. They are just plain MEAN.