Summary

In the 2024 election, Democrats excelled with highly engaged voters but lost ground with less-engaged voters, particularly younger, working-class, and non-college-educated individuals.

Vice President Kamala Harris won among voters who closely follow politics by 5 points but trailed Donald Trump by 14 points among less-engaged voters.

Democratic strategists highlighted failures in outreach, reliance on narrow data models, and ineffective messaging.

Critics noted the party’s brand is often defined by extreme voices, while Republicans capitalized on dissatisfaction with the economy and national direction, resonating with everyday frustrations.

  • Eldritch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    23 hours ago

    The Democratic party could not even prosecute a guy who tried to murder Congress. So the thinking goes - Why the fuck would someone vote for them when they do fuck all?

    It was never the Democrats job to do that. It was congress’s. Democrats did try. And they absolutely could have done better in many areas. I’m not defending them on that. But we need to also recognize that a large portion of Congress was flattered and extremely impressed that Trump was able to sic so many people on them. That they had no choice but to eagerly and gladly defend him while sucking up for him. Conservatives love an authoritarian. And without a few conservatives. Democrats were and never did accomplish much of anything.

    • wagesj45@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      17 hours ago

      The chief executive of the US has been a Democrat for 4 years, and it was absolutely their responsibility to prosecute (or ensure prosecution happens to) anyone that broke the law, or to at least protect the country. The norm has been for Presidents to maintain a firewall between themselves and prosecutorial decisions, but that’s not constitutionally mandated as far as I can tell.

      • Pips@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        It’s a norm because prosecution is both an executive and judicial function. It straddles both branches and you want it to be neutral in exercising prosecutorial discretion. When the chief executive steps in to direct prosecution, it has a strong tendency to become political and lead away from democracy.

        • wagesj45@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 hours ago

          When the chief executive steps in to direct prosecution, it has a strong tendency to become political and lead away from democracy.

          Seems like the same happens when we cling to that norm too closely, as well.

          • Pips@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 hours ago

            To be clear I’m just talking about federal prosecutors. State and local tend to be political and, as a result, that tends to be where you see way more corruption. Ironically, it’s also why state AGs will have policies that are entirely different from the governor’s: they’re a separate political office.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      21 hours ago

      No, it fucking wasn’t Congress’ job – at least, not just Congress’ job. It was the DOJ’s job. And guess who appoints the motherfucking Attorney General?

      • Eldritch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Wow starting off contradicting yourself. It’s an interesting argument Style. Not sure how it’s going to work though.

        All right so I’m not going to defend Merrick garland. I wish that he had done better too. Unfortunately he is kind of what you want. Someone who will try to stay out of the way and seem impartial at least. We’re going to see first hand what having a blindly ideological and engaged Department of Justice will look like and why it’s a bad thing very soon.

        That said Merrick Garland did not appoint the judge that sabotaged the case. Merrick Garland and the Democrats did not appoint the Supreme Court Justices who sabotaged the case. And it’s neither the executive branch or a political party’s place to act as a balance or check to the whole f****** judicial branch of government. Even with that whole checks and balances crap is b*******. It was the congress’s job. The Congress which Democrats never solidly controlled in any meaningful sense unfortunately. Especially due to Senators Manchin and the sinema.

        There are plenty of actual things to blame Democrats for. That they didn’t put on the sort of performative play that we would have liked to have seen is way at the bottom of the list.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          15 hours ago

          That said Merrick Garland did not appoint the judge that sabotaged the case. Merrick Garland and the Democrats did not appoint the Supreme Court Justices who sabotaged the case.

          The primary way the case was “sabotaged” was by granting long delays to credulously consider every bullshit motion Trump made, which ultimately resulted in Trump successfully running out the clock until he could gain power again and kill it for good.

          And guess what: that was only successful ENTIRELY BECAUSE Merrick motherfucking Garland DIDN’T EVEN OPEN A GODDAMNED INVESTIGATION UNTIL A FULL YEAR AFTER THE COUP ATTEMPT, DIDN’T APPOINT SPECIAL COUNSEL UNTIL 11 MONTHS AFTER THAT, AND DIDN’T GET AN INDICTMENT UNTIL HALFWAY THROUGH 2023!!!

          The fix was in from the very beginning, and it was precisely when Biden appointed a Republican stooge to slow-walk the whole godforsaken thing!

    • dugmeup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      23 hours ago

      What I am trying to say is, it doesn’t matter whose job it was. People vote for a leader. It was up to the leaders to make it happen. That happened to be the president. It’s nothing more complex than that.