Deciding to Win: A Common Sense Renewal of the Democratic Party
decidingtowin.org
Deciding to Win: A Common Sense Renewal of the Democratic Party
1–10 of 14 posts
Re: Deciding to Win: A Common Sense Renewal of the Democratic Party
#2The phrase "common sense" is a bad smell to me.
Re: Deciding to Win: A Common Sense Renewal of the Democratic Party
#3The phrase "common sense" is a bad smell to me.
Because of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Sense ?
Re: Deciding to Win: A Common Sense Renewal of the Democratic Party
#4Most of the advice sounds a bit like they should become the new Republican Party.
Which makes sense bc the old one is pretty much dismantled at this point.
Re: Deciding to Win: A Common Sense Renewal of the Democratic Party
#5The phrase "common sense" is a bad smell to me.
Understandable to (to me) an acceptable placeholder for expressing a sentiment of re-evaluation.
There are so many failings of the Democratic party leadership, but I'd put near the top the failure to message and to let the opposition define the language and terms of concern.
My hopes are tempered that they can figure things out, and more importantly, deliver the goods. The good old "both sides are the same" only holds true in the fact that party leadership is beholden to the economic elites.
Re: Deciding to Win: A Common Sense Renewal of the Democratic Party
#6> Donald Trump and the Republican Party are damaging our economy and threatening our democracy.
The very first words in the very first sentence illustrate the problem. Since ~2016, the Democratic party has (mostly) defined itself as anti-Trump party, with some gender/identity issues mixed in.
Trump firmly believes there is no such thing as bad press. Giving him endless attention is playing into his hand. Choosing to play his game.
This piece makes some good points on how the Democratic party should shift policy to start talking about things voters actually care about, but first they need to tone down the anti-Trump rhetoric and stop feeding his hype machine.
Re: Deciding to Win: A Common Sense Renewal of the Democratic Party
#7The phrase "common sense" is a bad smell to me.
Because of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Sense ?
No, Paine is an OG, he's fine.
It is more that if somebody says "X is common sense" it is not really a statement about X but rather a statement that "(not X) is not common sense".
If you look at the names endorsing that document the first one is
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Carville
who was associated with Clinton's winning 1992 campaign and the losing campaigns of Kerry in 2004 and the other Clinton in 2008 and other people to the right of the Democratic party. It's true that this contingent can point to a few presidential wins but both Clinton and Obama were accompanied with a long-term erosion of the Democratic presence in congress and especially in state houses -- a time when Democrats have been winning at fundraising and losing at everything else.
Jurgen Habermas points out that a viable political system has to have public participation but also expert guidance on many issues. For instance, AI, advanced manufacturing, and climate change all require more than "common sense" to get on top of.
It would be good for the Democratic party to agree that cis lives matter, stop using words like "LatinX", etc. That document is not saying though that the Democrats should make a break with long-term trends that have eroded people's trust in institutions.
Re: Deciding to Win: A Common Sense Renewal of the Democratic Party
#8Most of the advice sounds a bit like they should become the new Republican Party. Which makes sense bc the old one is pretty much dismantled at this point.
That was kinda Clinton's plan all along. For better and for worse he continued Reagan's legacy and made the Democratic party more palatable to donors than Republicans. Problem is that they now win national elections by just a hair when they do win, and downballot there has been a long term trend of losing state-level elections and a struggle to maintain any ability to be effective in the Senate.
Re: Deciding to Win: A Common Sense Renewal of the Democratic Party
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Sense ?
No, Paine is an OG, he's fine. It is more that if somebody says "X is common sense" it is not really a statement about X but rather a statement that "(not X) is not common sense". If you look at the names endorsing that document the first one is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Carville who was associated with Clinton's winning 1992 campaign and the losing campaigns of Kerry in 2004 and the other Clinton in 2008 a…
I feel like most of my exposure to the term "common sense" has been people trying to justify with rhetoric positions that don't actually stand up to detailed logical discussion.
The "expert guidance" thing is an interesting point, our american system seems to make the existence of this dependent on the whims of the executive who is elected for completely unrelated issues.
I suspect that if you presented a simple poll question: "should donald trump have (more?) expert guidance available", the vast majority of people would say yes.
Of course, donald trump is famously not someone who would ever try to get access to or listen to expert guidance and everyone voting for him knew this and he was still elected.
Re: Deciding to Win: A Common Sense Renewal of the Democratic Party
#10> Donald Trump and the Republican Party are damaging our economy and threatening our democracy. The very first words in the very first sentence illustrate the problem. Since ~2016, the Democratic party has (mostly) defined itself as anti-Trump party, with some gender/identity issues mixed in. Trump firmly believes there is no such thing as bad press. Giving him endless attention is playing into his hand. Choosing to…
Yeah, it feels like a "vote against him" rather than a "vote for me" position.
The republicans tried that for a while before trump and had little success.