The message to Democrats is clear: you must dump neoliberal economics

"Progressive roots"?

I wouldn't be surprised if Tankies unironically liked Democrats better when they were the KKK.
- GIven that I've had Tankies try to tell me the fight for LGBT rights isn't worth it because it's a "distraction" and "actually racist to force other cultures to conform to Western Values"
  
  Yeah...

Thanks to idiot non voters there will not be a chance to dump these policies since there wont be another election

Man, you really need to touch grass. 4 years will pass, another election will be held, and you will be just wasting time dwelling into that thought.

Better prepare for the future
- Honestly regardless of whether or not orange Lucifer tries to cling to power post-2028, it benefits everyone involved to just assume that he won't and prepare accordingly.

Democrats:

Democrats: "Understood. We must try harder to win over the center-right."

"center right":
Honestly, we should have seen it coming with all the "nostalgia" for the Good Old Days of GWB.
- And here I am nostalgic for the good ol days of Obama.
- This was literally what the Harris campaign walked away saying.

This is BS. People saying Kamala was too liberal, or too centrist, she was riding too much on Biden achievements or not enough etc etc.

The real reason for this is that majority of people no longer get their news from MSM, they get their news from social media which are hevily slanted for trump. Not only GOP understands how influential those are, but they are helped with foreign entities who are free to use these media as well.

This also isn't just happening to US but also to Europe.

The fucking solution is to get your family off of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok etc. it is a cancer and essentially hacks their brain.

You might think that social media is great, because everyone can have a voice. This might be true for sites like Lemmy, but in other places what you post is irrelevant, because their algorithm controls what others see. It is very clever, because they can hide behind freedom of speech to not restrict the sites, while essentially still having full control of what it is shown and zero consequences.

With AI they don't even need people anymore they can generate content themselves and say it is a real user.

Why do you think companies involved in social media are also heavily invested with generative AI?

The fucking solution is to get your family off of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok etc. it is a cancer and essentially hacks their brain.

What you're implying here is that people aren't smart enough to navigate social media intelligently, without being duped by propaganda and group think, yet you are.

Protecting dumb people by hiding them from social media, is a bad fix for a symptom of other major problems. Fixing symptoms like this is never a good solution.

What we need is education massively overhauled, to the point it would be unrecognizable to what we have today. People should have the critical thinking skills and educational background to laugh there ass off and shrug off ~~right wing~~ propaganda, and never let it take hold.

This is a much bigger problem, and we're losing significantly, but it's what should be discussed instead of just hiding social media from people.
- The social media sites are known to collect vast information about us. The explanation is that it is meant for targeted ads, but the same information can be also used to know which buttons to press.
  
  You scroll between funny videos and once in a while you get something that maybe will anger you, or maybe scare and in any way impact what you will do.
  
  Just taking a recent example. To pro Palestinian people they received messages that Harris is bad for Palestine and we can show her and protest by not voting.
  
  Meanwhile the same social media was telling pro Israeli people that they should not vote for Harris, because she is pro Palestine.
  
  This is how they are getting desired outcome. And unlike MSM they can fine tune the message to specific category of people.
- Section 230 protection also needs to be removed. Let civil cases take care of misinformation and such. Currently content aggregators take no liability in what they choose to show in the their feed. Between sorting chronologically and machine learning, there is a line to be drawn.
- ”and shrug off ~~right wing~~ propaganda" FTFY

The message to Democrats is clear: (insert your agenda here)

Boring

You're right, what about all those educated working class liberals who want to willingly vote against their own self interests?

The Democrats need to work harder to attract those people
Based on the assumption that it was some economic issue, that lost them the votes, this article is pretty good.

It goes beyond just that. I think a Democratic presidential candidate could do well addressing elitist thinking in general. I think they could do quite well with a pledge not to appoint anyone to their cabinet or to a court that graduated from an Ivy League school. One of the reasons we keep seeing the same shitty approaches is that both parties recruit heavily from the same handful of schools. This they're recruited from the same social circles. I would suggest that candidates just flat out state that they'll be filling all their major spots with people who got their education at state schools.

Wait, so apparently Americans don't want neoliberal economic policies so they didn't vote for Kamala, but instead voted for Trump and his neoliberal economic policies?

This shit is stupid and old already. It reeks of people using unhealthy coping mechanism to deal with the idea that the average American shifted even further right.

Trump verbally promised to change the system. Harris said the system is doing great, you're doing great, anyone who says they aren't doing great doesn't understand the economic genius that is Biden's economy.

The predictable happened. Democrats were warned when Biden tried to take a victory lap on the economy in 2023. They ignored that warning and didn't attempt to pass legislation they knew was required. Even if they failed they could have been seen fighting for the people. We know they knew what the required legislation is because Biden suddenly promised national rent controls right before being forced to step aside. Then Harris silently kept them in her campaign but didn't highlight them again until a week before the election. When she was desperate.

Until Democrats actually show, in their actions, that they're fighting for the working class, the beatings will continue. And no shutting down strikes and one vote on minimum wage isn't going to cut it. They need to be in the news every week on some aspect of the financial pain the working class feels, and repeats are not only okay, but necessary. A term has 208 weeks in it, that's enough to press several issues. They can also do a quarterly podcast, this entire idea of silently governing was proven inferior by FDR. Even Obama had the petition system which generated national conversations. People do not expect that a quiet government is doing something. In fact they are suspicious of it.
Trump’s economic policies aren’t neoliberal so much as mercantilist. He wants tariffs and trade wars. (There’s obviously also a dash of fascist policies where he wants companies to serve him.)
- Fascism was the rebranding of mercantilism. State supported industry with a blurry line between state and private actors and owners, all ultimately supported by imperial conquest and colonialism.
The average american doesn't know what neoliberal economic policies are, but the average american can feel the impact of neoliberalism on a daily basis. Convincing people you have a solution to what everyone knows is wrong (even if your solution is even more neoliberalism and blaming minorities, the old reliable) is what get people in booths.

Conversely, saying things are fine the way they are is the easiest way to lose an election.
- What killed Biden and Harris was the outright denial of what people were feeling.
  
  "The economy is hurting us!"
  
  "What are you talking about, Jack? We have the best economy ever! Look... inflation is only 3% (on top of 3%, on top of 9%), we're doing GREAT! Not a joke! I'm serious!"
1/3 of voting age Americans voted for Trump (that 3rd wants fascism)... 1/3 for Kamala, and 1/3 stayed home... A lot of the 1/3 that stayed home did so because they don't want neolib policy, and probably a lot of the 1/3 that voted for her also don't want neolib policy. There's very little to support the idea that anyone "shifted right"... They shifted home when they weren't given an option to vote against genocide and other neolib bullshit
- No there is not 1/3rd that wants Fascism. There is a small percentage that want a Christian Nationalist government, but most Trump voters just seriously think he did a better job with the economy. They don't have an economic education and they know it was easier to feed their families when he was president.
  
  Don't other people who should be your allies. Division of the working class works in the favor of the elites and extremists.
- No. The majority 40% didn’t vote, and roughly 30% votes for trump and Harris.
- No 1/3rd never votes and there's no point in trying to get their vote
The people that like trump like that shit. The people that vote dem, at most, tolerate it but the harder they lean in that direction the less enthusiastic their base is about voting for them

Simpson's Skinner meme, "no, it's the voters that are wrong"

Both can be true.

My message to the dnc

Fuck you we elected Bernie and you ran Hillary and then we elected Bernie and you gave us Biden. Fuck you.

Bernie lost the popular vote in the primaries twice. It's mostly white guys that want him, honestly, which isn't a popular sentiment but it's true.

He doesn't speak to the problems of marginalized communities who make up a large portion of the Democratic base.
They knew Bernie might actually improve the lives of Americans and our rich overlords shudder at the thought of that.
Who elected Bernie in 2020? Biden wiped the floor with him. Maybe more people should've voted for Bernie in the primary then.
- I mean, the commenter is overstating what happened in 2016 and 2020, but Biden did not, "wipe the floor," with him. Obama and the DNC convinced every centrist to drop out, consolidating the moderate vote around Biden, while Warren stayed in, splitting the progressive vote, and Bloomberg used his personal wealth to run anti-Bernie ads. Then Biden had to ask Bernie to help him craft a platform just so he could be electable. It's less that, "Biden wiped the floor with him," and more that, "the entire Democratic party lined up to block Bernie so Biden could limp over the finish line."
- that comment confused me as well. with hilary. yeah but 2020 honestly people wanted more of a conservative sure thing because some yahoos thought they would shake things up in 2016 by letting trump win. hmmm. I wonder what type of canidate will be in 2024 and whos fault it will be that its not a liberal enough canidate.

"Nothing will fundamentally change" + "there is not a thing that comes to mind."

Two killer statements.

To be fair Biden's "nothing will fundamentally change" is a lot better with context. "There's not a thing that comes to mind" is fucking inexcusable though.
- To be fair Biden’s “nothing will fundamentally change” is a lot better with context.
  
  To be fair, it became clear over the course of 4 years that it was correct at face value.

But who will pay for our campaigns if we don't lick the boot of oligarchs?

Before the 1980s that used to be the unions paying and funding campaigns. The reason Democrats started chasing and boot-licking oligarchs. Is because the unions stopped funding elections and campaigns at the rate they had been before the 1980s. If you can figure out why that was. There were two solid hints given. Then we could probably understand why they're seeking funding from oligarchs. And how we should probably go about changing that.

People love to complain about Democrats begging for oligarchs money without understanding why. Which helps the oligarchs. And gives them even more control over the DNC than they would have otherwise. I'm not saying we should accept the oligarch funding and ownership. But until we come to terms with why that came to be and address it appropriately. It won't end anytime soon.
- It sounds like you're saying we need to bribe our politicians to get them to represent us. Is that what you're getting at? Because I fundamentally disagree with that concept.
A campaign for someone people wants will pay for itself. Everything will be provided and the press will be free if it wishes to remain clicked and watched

This billion dollar campaign frenzy every 4 years is an industrial complex that needs to die

They shouldn't have existed ever. Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein. My spelling may be off.

They should stay in their current path and fade off into obscurity

Who do you think would occupy that power vacuum? Because, just like spreading open your butthole in outer space while in orbit, shit will blow out.

Hahaha, good one. I'm sure that's exactly what's going to happen.

Next time there should be a populist movement to write in a progressive candidate. Why couldn’t a populist candidate overrun the DNC like Trump did with the RNC?

Whenever a populist candidate pops up, the dnc does everything it can to crush them.
My state didnt even have spot where I could write someone in.
Because Trump does represent a lot of the policies that Republican party support. Christian nationalism, low taxes for the rich, white supremacy.

It was apparent when the Alaskan governor ran for VP. (I forgot her name.) It consolidated behind Trump because he was a buffoon who could be manipulated to get their main aims to be fulfilled.

None in the DNC would want anyone other than a establishment candidate to be theirs. This was true when Hillary was nominated, when Biden was nominated and also when Harris was nominated.

Biden would have lost too if not for the previous 4 years of Trump. With Harris promising to continue putting finger in her ears and walking the same path which might have given respite if people could have let it continue 4-8 years. But who knows if they would have lived to see those days.
Because it's hard for actually intelligent people to worship a moron.

Edit: actually you're right.. we could have had Bernie.
It would be relatively easy to take over the DNC (and the state and local parties), but very few people outside the establishment know how politics within the party works

Look, this chap has all fair points and your favourite deity knows I’d be the first to “put an end to” neoliberalism, but again, it’s all opinion. I haven’t seen anything telling us:

who voted, and for whom
and why
and whether leopards are already eating faces

Best we got are some anecdotes about some Latino voters discovering that Trump considers them brown people too, but I’d be far more interested in actual hard numbers. Anyone who knows some?

The party must return to its progressive roots. A new economy is needed with new rules and new roles

As in slavery is a great way to bring culture to those black slaves?

You are a strong contender to clinch the gold medal if the Olympics had mental gymnastics.
- They're referring to the roots of the Democratic party, as the more conservative and slave supporting party. The Democratic party is old, and until relatively recently was the further right party in the US. Which also helps explain why the Republicans are red, traditionally a left color, and Dems are blue, traditionally a right color. While it's not really relevant to modern politics, and bringing it up like they just did is more of a historical bit of trivia, it's not really mental gymnastics, it's more of an "akshually" moment. The Democratic party does not have progressive roots, its roots are deeply, deeply conservative and right wing, and should be acknowledged.

Harris and Biden aren't even neoliberal lol. The message was also not clear because the margins of victory were small. We know Trump is going to tank the economy like last time. It's a fact. All of his idiot supporters will keep claiming some sort of perceived benefit because of all the other horrible shit he's going to do that don't affect in the positive whatsoever, but they will PERCEIVE a win.

The message was also not clear because the margins of victory were small.

Yes, but remember: Their opponent was Trump. They should've cinched this election.
- You can always rely on Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
  
  The post mortem is still on-going but there are two conclusions that ring true for me (so far anyway):
  
  Harris failed to reach middle-Americans: she didn't make many statements about how she was going to tackle inflation and help the average American. Instead she spent WAY too much time trying to secure Republican endorsements.
  
  As a result, voters stayed home. Many of middle America aren't politically active. In the same way, they don't see themselves being affected by Trump's policies (for right or for wrong). Many of these voters did vote for Obama but couldn't be bothered to vote for Harris.
  
  Trump is the first Republican president to win a plurality of votes what 20 years? Trump ran a campaign of "ImMiGrAnTs ArE tHe PrObLeM!1!1!1". He was so unhinged that voters should have voted against him. The numbers so far show that he won a similar number of votes as he did in 2020 so it's looking like his base came out to vote but Democrats didn't.
  
  Republicans fall in line.
  
  Democrats fall in love.
  
  We need better candidates.
- I guess it doesn't matter at this point but it's always weird to me that opponents can't seem to acknowledge that Trump is a formidable political opponent. He's good at talking to and engaging some groups of Americans which is why he managed to win twice.