Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

Showing Original Post only (View all)

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)
Thu Dec 22, 2016, 12:17 AM Dec 2016

"More outreach to rural areas of purple states" and "Change the message" are 2 different arguments. [View all]

Some seem to conflate two different arguments.

Obama has spoken about the importance of doing outreach to rural areas of purple states like Iowa so as to minimize the losses in those areas in order to carry the state. There are Democrats (not all of whom are white, by the way) in rural areas of purple states, and they (like any other group) are more likely to vote if they're the target of GOTV efforts. I, for one, think that's totally valid.

And then there's the argument that Democrats don't have a strong economic message (never mind the evidence to the contrary), or that they need to substantially alter their overall message.

Now, some may subscribe to both arguments, and that's fine. But let's not conflate the two.

21 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Outreach is fine. Changing the message is non-negotiable. Also, Iowa is no longer purple. It's red. LonePirate Dec 2016 #1
Will be a long time Truth321 Dec 2016 #2
That may be. Iowa was super close in 2000 and 2004, whereas Obama won it with relative ease. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #3
Meanwhile, states like AZ and TX may turn purple or even solidly blue. LenaBaby61 Dec 2016 #16
The ONLY change anyone has suggested is to make it more economically progressive Ken Burch Dec 2016 #5
Clinton's economic message was the most progressive ever in terms of major party candidates. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #10
In any case, nobody is calling for the party to be LESS antiracist Ken Burch Dec 2016 #11
Agreed. Absolutely. Justice Dec 2016 #18
I think just about all Democrats would welcome a more economically progressive message. LonePirate Dec 2016 #15
I suspect that you're right. Iowa has gone dark Vogon_Glory Dec 2016 #17
I wonder how many white Iowans are for that methanol subsidy but against gov't assistance for others LonePirate Dec 2016 #20
I guess there's some validity in that feeling radical noodle Dec 2016 #4
Tip O'Neill actually had a story about why "stroking" voters is a good idea: Ken Burch Dec 2016 #7
There's no doubt some need GOTV and some don't. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #8
also, the dems should be considering focusing on areas that have more people who would vote dem La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #6
There are a lot of people in rural areas(particularly in the South and the Mountain West) Ken Burch Dec 2016 #9
Yes, the new coalition maybe more south and south west La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #12
If Texas goes blue, Republicans are in deep trouble. Garrett78 Dec 2016 #13
She lost Texas by smaller numbers than in a long time La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #14
Great OP but so many replies just keep making same old arguments Justice Dec 2016 #19
Much of the conflating is done by those who want to change the message. They call it outreach. kcr Dec 2016 #21
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»"More outreach to rural a...»Reply #0