The eagerness to find a 'demographic' on which to hang this loss is no surprise. That would provide a nice explanation for this failure - and a focus for whom to pander for the mid-terms. But, no. To paraphrase a comment I made on one of the many other 'What? How? Why?' columns posted this week, the Opposition took its first giant false step with Obama's reference to the working class as 'bitter clingers' in 2008 - setting the stage for ugly animosity long before Trump entered the scene.
As Carville said, "It's the economy, stupid." And, . . . It's the vilification. It's the condescension. It's the contempt. It's the censorship. It's the deceit. It's the betrayal. It's the petulance. It's the bullets. There is NO self-respecting 'demographic' who wants any of this. Simply put, this behavior turned Trump into a martyr and his followers into disciples.
Which route should the democrats take now? Stop the antagonistic attitude - and find a positive, productive message - clearly stated - that doesn't require naming and blaming your Opposition.
I remember pointing out to people who hated Bill Clinton that he did something that no republican president had been able to do for 40 years, turn control of the House of Representatives over to the Republicans in 1994.
Well, they didn't get it. Some are starting to get it. I have hope for the future. I and others like me are taking this moment to shift the party to the middle and focus on issues that help the average American via a color-blind lens. (I am a Democrat and have totally gotten it for many years but I was certainly in a minority.)
I can't listen to this host. Aside from his obvious bias, which I'm fine with on many other podcasts, he's very annoying. Take that whole persona back to NPR please.
Not sure the dems can repeat the DLC post-Citizens United with all the PAC money from Soros, et al, plus the merging of some of the traditional dem issues with fringe issues like climate hysteria and the Palestinian cause. It's almost like the were heavy smokers or drinkers in '70'-'80's, were able to quit for 30-40 years, but fell off the wagon and are back to the bad habits.
If Trump represents traditional democratic values why not support the policies and help the people. It shouldn’t matter which party if good policy and governing. This is an opportunity for bipartisan cooperation which may be the only way to save the democrat party.
I gave up on hoping this podcast would stay balanced when I heard Eli Lake describe a critic as an "anti-Trump extremist" for doing not much more than pointing out that a man trailing 34 criminal convictions would wind up in jail.
If Harris had won, would your podcast have been Resistance or Opposition with advice for the Republican Party or would it have been congratulations and wishing America success under the incoming leadership? I would estimate that at least 50% of your readership/listenership voted for Donald Trump. Probably more than that. Maybe as your survey suggested, you need some solid conservatives on your staff.
I read Eli Lake ! Now it is my turn -- the democrat party has shown itself to what it is -- Identity Driven and Sponsored by the Elite Universities ! Out of touch with the American People who already make our country great ! Led by the appeaser Joe Biden the democrat party has left our country militarily weak and impotent ! The failure of it's leadership to distance itself from the squad of anti semites was a disgrace ! The democrat party has only one issue : ABORTION but even that they distort -- yes it brought a lot of women to the voting booth who voted for pro choice issues that were on the ballot and against pro life issues on the ballot BUT they voted for trump not harris ! The 2024 election spoke just like the 1968 election ! As to some of the things that trump said and the response of the democrats reminds me of the 1964 election when Johnson ( the so called anti war candiddate who said " American Boys should not be doing what Asian boys should be doing") -- well we know the results of that -- it can be seen clearly on a piece of black granite near the mall in DC -- years later Goldwater said " back in '64 you were told that a vote for me would be a vote for war and you voted for me and I lost and you know what happened " ! So the democrats called trump a fascist who was the greatest threat to our democracy ever -- yeah that went over real well as did Liz Cheney and her war criminal father's support -- so the democrats will regroup but will they have learned anything --- and we wait and see what a trump presidency will actually do -- JD is not the heir apparent so let us see who else in the GOP emerges for 2028 -- I already see Elise Stefanik and Tom Cotton
This pod is good, but it is based on a false narrative. I don't know who is doing the narrating, it sure doesn't sound like Bari Weiss. He says "Welp, that was a walloping" and that "there is no doubt about it, they have lost the nation". As I write this, the NY Times has Trump getting 50.3% of the vote with nearly 5% of the votes yet to be counted. And since most of those are in California, Trump will likely not win a plurality of the vote. Here is Nate Silvers's estimate:
Trump is going to win by around 1.5% of the national popular vote. That is the smallest winning margin of the popular vote since 1968, though Bush and Trump both won an election while losing the popular vote.
I get it that Trump easily won the Electoral College. And that is especially damning for the Democrats because he was such a flawed candidate. I strongly hope the Democrats abandon the idiocy of the far left and work to earn the votes of the working class. However, the mainstream media, and apparently The Free Press, are greatly exaggerating the magnitude of Trump's win.
Fair comment, and you may certainly argue that the election would have gone the other way if the Dems had engaged in an actual primary process rather than summarily appointing a straw woman candidate and ordering voters not to believe their lying eyes (and ears) on pain of being labeled a racist, sexist, etc.
But it is worth noting that: (1) the Republicans seem to have held the House and gained seats in the Senate, (2) the Republicans had significant gains amongst a number of facially surprising demographic groups; and (3) a number of progressive referenda were defeated in state-level popular votes (even in midnight blue California).
I suspect that history will prove that the rumors of the death of the Democratic Party have been greatly exaggerated (so sayeth the Twitterati after pretty much all elections these days), but these trends should be enough to make Democrats reconsider some of their core hubristic beliefs: (1) that they are always on the right side of history; and (2) that using the "inevitability of demographics" to justify ignoring the concerns of a large swath of voters may not always be a winning strategy.
Silas - the answer to the question (What now?) does not lie in the statistics exactly. So let's say Nate Silver is correct (finally about something) and the popular vote is really, really close and let's even say, Kamala wins it by a fraction of a percent. The reality that the statistics emulate does not change: Trump did better with everyone, everywhere, all at once. The reality necessitates a course correction for Dem's, and the super fascinating question is whether those at the control levers of the party will allow a course correction. Your very "hope" that Dem's abandon the far left could well be silenced, negated and cancelled by an establishment which invited into its ranks a shadow establishment which did not earn it privileged position, but surely will not give it up for nothing.
That Trump was able to win with all of his baggage, all of the media and other institutions against him, and Roe vs. Wade as a headwind, shows how unpopular the Democrats really are.
It was not a landslide but it clearly showed the Biden administration incompetence and the multitude of irrational leftist culture warrior positions is not acceptable to a majority of our nation.
Here’s a thought. Rather than resistance or opposition how about cooperation? D’s would be able to lower the temperature and wipe the slate clean and be able to share in the success of the country. I know it’s a pipe dream but it would be nice.
Whoever emerges to lead democrats to success in 2028 will be large unknown today, just like and Clinton was in 1988 and Obama was in 2004. One thing is for sure - the neoliberal path that Clinton started and Obama followed is over.
“Democrats spent a decade telling Americans that Trump was an existential threat, yet Americans didn’t care.” Bari, you still don’t get it. Americans would care if Trump was an existential threat, they just don’t believe it. Stop painting us as stupid.
I... think that's actually her point? I certainly took it as "the people don't care what the Democrats have to say about Trump-because they don't believe it."
If you took the time to actually watch the Trump press conference, rally, podcast for yourself, you soon realized that MSM was lying to you. It made you wonder - why? Made you wonder - if they take the time and effort to lie about all of this, what else do they lie about?
The eagerness to find a 'demographic' on which to hang this loss is no surprise. That would provide a nice explanation for this failure - and a focus for whom to pander for the mid-terms. But, no. To paraphrase a comment I made on one of the many other 'What? How? Why?' columns posted this week, the Opposition took its first giant false step with Obama's reference to the working class as 'bitter clingers' in 2008 - setting the stage for ugly animosity long before Trump entered the scene.
As Carville said, "It's the economy, stupid." And, . . . It's the vilification. It's the condescension. It's the contempt. It's the censorship. It's the deceit. It's the betrayal. It's the petulance. It's the bullets. There is NO self-respecting 'demographic' who wants any of this. Simply put, this behavior turned Trump into a martyr and his followers into disciples.
Which route should the democrats take now? Stop the antagonistic attitude - and find a positive, productive message - clearly stated - that doesn't require naming and blaming your Opposition.
I remember pointing out to people who hated Bill Clinton that he did something that no republican president had been able to do for 40 years, turn control of the House of Representatives over to the Republicans in 1994.
excellent. the democrats just don't get it.
Well, they didn't get it. Some are starting to get it. I have hope for the future. I and others like me are taking this moment to shift the party to the middle and focus on issues that help the average American via a color-blind lens. (I am a Democrat and have totally gotten it for many years but I was certainly in a minority.)
i was a pary of that minority as well 'though less hopeful than you. it was good for mr to read your message.
I can't listen to this host. Aside from his obvious bias, which I'm fine with on many other podcasts, he's very annoying. Take that whole persona back to NPR please.
Not sure the dems can repeat the DLC post-Citizens United with all the PAC money from Soros, et al, plus the merging of some of the traditional dem issues with fringe issues like climate hysteria and the Palestinian cause. It's almost like the were heavy smokers or drinkers in '70'-'80's, were able to quit for 30-40 years, but fell off the wagon and are back to the bad habits.
If Trump represents traditional democratic values why not support the policies and help the people. It shouldn’t matter which party if good policy and governing. This is an opportunity for bipartisan cooperation which may be the only way to save the democrat party.
I gave up on hoping this podcast would stay balanced when I heard Eli Lake describe a critic as an "anti-Trump extremist" for doing not much more than pointing out that a man trailing 34 criminal convictions would wind up in jail.
How about _loyal opposition_? Loyal to the constitution. Opposition to any idiocy of the administration.
If Harris had won, would your podcast have been Resistance or Opposition with advice for the Republican Party or would it have been congratulations and wishing America success under the incoming leadership? I would estimate that at least 50% of your readership/listenership voted for Donald Trump. Probably more than that. Maybe as your survey suggested, you need some solid conservatives on your staff.
Their egos won't let them choose any path but resistance.
I read Eli Lake ! Now it is my turn -- the democrat party has shown itself to what it is -- Identity Driven and Sponsored by the Elite Universities ! Out of touch with the American People who already make our country great ! Led by the appeaser Joe Biden the democrat party has left our country militarily weak and impotent ! The failure of it's leadership to distance itself from the squad of anti semites was a disgrace ! The democrat party has only one issue : ABORTION but even that they distort -- yes it brought a lot of women to the voting booth who voted for pro choice issues that were on the ballot and against pro life issues on the ballot BUT they voted for trump not harris ! The 2024 election spoke just like the 1968 election ! As to some of the things that trump said and the response of the democrats reminds me of the 1964 election when Johnson ( the so called anti war candiddate who said " American Boys should not be doing what Asian boys should be doing") -- well we know the results of that -- it can be seen clearly on a piece of black granite near the mall in DC -- years later Goldwater said " back in '64 you were told that a vote for me would be a vote for war and you voted for me and I lost and you know what happened " ! So the democrats called trump a fascist who was the greatest threat to our democracy ever -- yeah that went over real well as did Liz Cheney and her war criminal father's support -- so the democrats will regroup but will they have learned anything --- and we wait and see what a trump presidency will actually do -- JD is not the heir apparent so let us see who else in the GOP emerges for 2028 -- I already see Elise Stefanik and Tom Cotton
What do you bet that Democrats have rethought their stupid position on killing the filibuster?
They never killed the filibuster when they could have.
This pod is good, but it is based on a false narrative. I don't know who is doing the narrating, it sure doesn't sound like Bari Weiss. He says "Welp, that was a walloping" and that "there is no doubt about it, they have lost the nation". As I write this, the NY Times has Trump getting 50.3% of the vote with nearly 5% of the votes yet to be counted. And since most of those are in California, Trump will likely not win a plurality of the vote. Here is Nate Silvers's estimate:
https://x.com/NateSilver538/status/1856331742392545748
Trump is going to win by around 1.5% of the national popular vote. That is the smallest winning margin of the popular vote since 1968, though Bush and Trump both won an election while losing the popular vote.
I get it that Trump easily won the Electoral College. And that is especially damning for the Democrats because he was such a flawed candidate. I strongly hope the Democrats abandon the idiocy of the far left and work to earn the votes of the working class. However, the mainstream media, and apparently The Free Press, are greatly exaggerating the magnitude of Trump's win.
Fair comment, and you may certainly argue that the election would have gone the other way if the Dems had engaged in an actual primary process rather than summarily appointing a straw woman candidate and ordering voters not to believe their lying eyes (and ears) on pain of being labeled a racist, sexist, etc.
But it is worth noting that: (1) the Republicans seem to have held the House and gained seats in the Senate, (2) the Republicans had significant gains amongst a number of facially surprising demographic groups; and (3) a number of progressive referenda were defeated in state-level popular votes (even in midnight blue California).
I suspect that history will prove that the rumors of the death of the Democratic Party have been greatly exaggerated (so sayeth the Twitterati after pretty much all elections these days), but these trends should be enough to make Democrats reconsider some of their core hubristic beliefs: (1) that they are always on the right side of history; and (2) that using the "inevitability of demographics" to justify ignoring the concerns of a large swath of voters may not always be a winning strategy.
Silas - the answer to the question (What now?) does not lie in the statistics exactly. So let's say Nate Silver is correct (finally about something) and the popular vote is really, really close and let's even say, Kamala wins it by a fraction of a percent. The reality that the statistics emulate does not change: Trump did better with everyone, everywhere, all at once. The reality necessitates a course correction for Dem's, and the super fascinating question is whether those at the control levers of the party will allow a course correction. Your very "hope" that Dem's abandon the far left could well be silenced, negated and cancelled by an establishment which invited into its ranks a shadow establishment which did not earn it privileged position, but surely will not give it up for nothing.
That Trump was able to win with all of his baggage, all of the media and other institutions against him, and Roe vs. Wade as a headwind, shows how unpopular the Democrats really are.
It was not a landslide but it clearly showed the Biden administration incompetence and the multitude of irrational leftist culture warrior positions is not acceptable to a majority of our nation.
Here’s a thought. Rather than resistance or opposition how about cooperation? D’s would be able to lower the temperature and wipe the slate clean and be able to share in the success of the country. I know it’s a pipe dream but it would be nice.
Whoever emerges to lead democrats to success in 2028 will be large unknown today, just like and Clinton was in 1988 and Obama was in 2004. One thing is for sure - the neoliberal path that Clinton started and Obama followed is over.
“Democrats spent a decade telling Americans that Trump was an existential threat, yet Americans didn’t care.” Bari, you still don’t get it. Americans would care if Trump was an existential threat, they just don’t believe it. Stop painting us as stupid.
I... think that's actually her point? I certainly took it as "the people don't care what the Democrats have to say about Trump-because they don't believe it."
Read beyond the headline
If you took the time to actually watch the Trump press conference, rally, podcast for yourself, you soon realized that MSM was lying to you. It made you wonder - why? Made you wonder - if they take the time and effort to lie about all of this, what else do they lie about?