Summary

Historians suggest Democrats might have fared better against Donald Trump by embracing the economic issues championed by Senator Bernie Sanders, who has long pushed for a focus on “bread-and-butter” concerns for working-class voters.

Despite Kamala Harris’s progressive policies, polls showed Trump was favored on economic issues, particularly among working-class and Hispanic voters.

Historian Leah Wright Rigueur argued that Sanders’ messaging on economic struggles could be key for future Democratic strategies.

Sanders himself criticized the party for “abandoning” the working class, which he said has led to a loss of support across racial lines.

  • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Still not great from a messaging perspective. Better ways to reach people who aren’t politics nerds or policy wonks:

    Medical care will be affordable, so you can go see your doctor any time you or your family need to. If your kid gets sick, you can be there for them and help them get better without worrying about how to pay for care. You’ll get paid better, no more of the “boss gets a dollar, I get a dime” crap. No more stress about setting aside a college fund for your kids. They’ll be able to go to school, guaranteed. Strong American morals mean we’re not going to send our tax money to fund war and atrocities on the other side of the planet. If you lose your job, the government will have your back with enough money to survive on until you get back on your feet, no questions asked.

    Goddamn, why can’t Democrats say this stuff, instead of word salad like, “Launch a National Health Equity Initiative to address health challenges that disproportionately impact Black men.” WTF does any of that even mean?

    • Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      JFC, I’m not messaging, it’s not my job to “message”. Someone said somethings that are not true and I’m listing policies that refute that claim in the very limited format allowed here.