US Politics

[Surrealplaces]

The problem with centrists is that many people perceive them (often not unfairly) as being fake and only taking positions to appease various factions of the electorate. Conventional wisdom is that swing voters are reasonable people who shy away from extreme, ideological positions, and are inclined to support a candidate who holds similar views. In reality, swing voters are low propensity, uninformed, and often take extreme, but inconsistent positions on issues. They generally don't vote unless they're won over by a charismatic, exciting candidate. That's why they can vote for both Obama and Trump. I think the best the Dems can do is have a wide open primary and hope that someone unexpected catches fire, as (Bill) Clinton and Obama did in 1992 and 2008 respectively. They really need to avoid nominating someone who comes off as fake, focus group-tested, and establishment-picked. If candidates who look good on paper won, we'd have just finished the glorious two-term tenure of President Jeb Bush.

Maybe centrist isn't the right term, when I say centrist I mean someone not framed as being far to the left. In the US someone seen as a solid liberal has less of a chance of winning than someone seen as a solid conservative. We've seen this even with Obama, Clinton and Biden, as democrats, but not really very liberal in the grand scheme of things. There are more conservatives than liberals in the US, but there's that middle area where people can be swayed - as you pointed out with the case of many of the same people voting for both Obama and Trump. Although it feels like today the political climate is different than it was in 2008, and more people seem to be dug into one side or the other.

I agree that the candidate can't be someone who just sits in the middle for the sake of not offending someone, but also can't be seen as too liberal, I mean we're still talking the about the US.

Anyhow, I'm looking forward to the leadership race to see who stands out.

 

[Silence&Motion]

Maybe centrist isn't the right term, when I say centrist I mean someone not framed as being far to the left. In the US someone seen as a solid liberal has less of a chance of winning than someone seen as a solid conservative. We've seen this even with Obama, Clinton and Biden, as democrats, but not really very liberal in the grand scheme of things. There are more conservatives than liberals in the US, but there's that middle area where people can be swayed - as you pointed out with the case of many of the same people voting for both Obama and Trump. Although it feels like today the political climate is different than it was in 2008, and more people seem to be dug into one side or the other.

I agree that the candidate can't be someone who just sits in the middle for the sake of not offending someone, but also can't be seen as too liberal, I mean we're still talking the about the US.

Anyhow, I'm looking forward to the leadership race to see who stands out.

I also think we need to distinguish between a centrist image and true centrism in terms of policy positions. Hillary Clinton arguably was pretty far to the right within the Democratic party based on policy issues, but opinion surveys show that the electorate perceived her as being very liberal (even to the left of Obama). I definitely think there is political skill in being able to present yourself as everything to everyone. Just look at how Carney has been able to move the Library party very far to the right (relative to Trudeau) while completely marginalizing the NDP. And Doug Ford has managed to move to the left (on some issues) while maintaining iron control over the right. But then you have people like Keir Starmer, who attempts to move to the right to win over more voters and just ends up turning off the left without picking up any new voters (and ending up with a -44% approval rating in the process). My guess is that voters are willing to forgive people like Carney and Ford, because they basically trust that they're both acting according to principles. But Clinton and Starmer seem like they're just cynically chasing votes.

All this said, I would really be interested to see what would happen if the Dems nominated Beshear. I don't think he can win the primaries, but he would be the first red state Dem nominee since Gore in 2000, which was such a different time.

 

[Surrealplaces]

I also think we need to distinguish between a centrist image and true centrism in terms of policy positions. Hillary Clinton arguably was pretty far to the right within the Democratic party based on policy issues, but opinion surveys show that the electorate perceived her as being very liberal (even to the left of Obama). I definitely think there is political skill in being able to present yourself as everything to everyone. Just look at how Carney has been able to move the Library party very far to the right (relative to Trudeau) while completely marginalizing the NDP. And Doug Ford has managed to move to the left (on some issues) while maintaining iron control over the right. But then you have people like Keir Starmer, who attempts to move to the right to win over more voters and just ends up turning off the left without picking up any new voters (and ending up with a -44% approval rating in the process). My guess is that voters are willing to forgive people like Carney and Ford, because they basically trust that they're both acting according to principles. But Clinton and Starmer seem like they're just cynically chasing votes.

All this said, I would really be interested to see what would happen if the Dems nominated Beshear. I don't think he can win the primaries, but he would be the first red state Dem nominee since Gore in 2000, which was such a different time.

Beshear is one of the ones I'm keeping an eye on. I haven't really seen much of him yet, but I'm sure we'll see more. His name comes up a lot on social media, but I haven't seen much of him on the mainstream news. Being a democratic governor in a died in the wool red state requires some good political skills, so it'll be interesting to see how he fairs in a leadership run.

 

[trtcttc]

Beshear is one of the ones I'm keeping an eye on. I haven't really seen much of him yet, but I'm sure we'll see more. His name comes up a lot on social media, but I haven't seen much of him on the mainstream news. Being a democratic governor in a died in the wool red state requires some good political skills, so it'll be interesting to see how he fairs in a leadership run.

he had some public appearances last cycle. Hopefully he’s better in 2028 but he wasn’t a breakout star the way Obama and Clinton was. If he had the background and Buttigieg oratory skills, he’d win.

 

[Mountain Man]

I'm amazed at the lack of a charismatic, intelligent candidate on the left in the US. Not since Obama has there been someone who can really inspire people, the Dems just seems to think someone's time is due, regardless what the country thinks.

 

[CalgaryTiger]

Dems have fallen into the NDP hole: We have such great ideas; people will vote for them.

Completely missing the tonal change in the country and wondering why they don't get enough votes to win. They need to play the game that's underway not the game they wish they were playing.

 

[Surrealplaces]

Completely missing the tonal change in the country and wondering why they don't get enough votes to win. They need to play the game that's underway not the game they wish they were playing.

That's what I fear has happened in the US. Maybe it's just a temporary thing and it'll switch back, but I feel like there's been a change of attitude in general. I know I've mentioned this before, but it reminds me of 1930's Germany. I'm not expecting a holocaust or anything that severe, but it reminds me of the way a general public can have a gradual change in mentality, and people don't see it happening until it's too late. Unfortunately those mentality changes often don't swing back until things get really bad.
I might be worrying for nothing, but if history has taught us anything, these things happen when people never think it'll happen to them or their country.

 

[trtcttc]

That's what I fear has happened in the US. Maybe it's just a temporary thing and it'll switch back, but I feel like there's been a change of attitude in general. I know I've mentioned this before, but it reminds me of 1930's Germany. I'm not expecting a holocaust or anything that severe, but it reminds me of the way a general public can have a gradual change in mentality, and people don't see it happening until it's too late. Unfortunately those mentality changes often don't swing back until things get really bad.
I might be worrying for nothing, but if history has taught us anything, these things happen when people never think it'll happen to them or their country.

The biggest change has been around crime and immigration. On crime, a large part of it is just the prevalence of social media. Previous incidents you'd hear described by the police or the news anchor, we can now see videos of. On immigration, the shift in sentiment is pretty rational. Even in Canada, it has shifted significantly in just 3/4 years. A large part of that is previous governments changed our society in fundamental ways with immigration when people feel like they never voted for that. There wasn't a national conversation in Canada about TFWs, and refugees, and it was considered discriminatory to discuss culture and integration, or even how not all refugee claims are legitimate. The shift in blue cities, which are still blue just lighter blue, is probably entirely on crime and immigration. Where migrants are housed in hotels and being that they are low income with limited employable skills, end up engaging in criminal activity. This is the biggest driver for left to right shift of young people, and they're the ones most online and setting the tone of online discourse.

 

[CalgaryTiger]

Where migrants are housed in hotels and being that they are low income with limited employable skills, end up engaging in criminal activity. This is the biggest driver for left to right shift of young people, and they're the ones most online and setting the tone of online discourse.

I don't think this is true. Immigrants are not the source of crime people think they are.

This also isn't an online discourse thing. It is pretty real and tangible. A lot of people, young people included, have been left behind and for the first time in American history and worse off than the previous generations. Why that has happened isn't a simple explanation, but they were told something simple and why wouldn't you believe that?

 

[trtcttc]

I don't think this is true. Immigrants are not the source of crime people think they are.

This also isn't an online discourse thing. It is pretty real and tangible. A lot of people, young people included, have been left behind and for the first time in American history and worse off than the previous generations. Why that has happened isn't a simple explanation, but they were told something simple and why wouldn't you believe that?

Immigrants are not the source of most crime because they are a small portion of the population. But people have lower tolerance for criminal migrants because they are not "supposed" to be here. By adding people, undeniably there will be addition of crimes. And when the people being added are low income migrants vs economic immigrants of our point-based immigration system, the propensity of crime is higher. Especially if they cannot find regular employment.

I meant online discourse as in young people drive the general "feeling" we get, not that it is not real or tangible. Similar to climate change, people just aren't voting for "values" anymore. Democrats take unpopular positions. Even in healthcare, the majority of Americans have private insurance. Are those expensive? yes. Is the coverage poor in some cases? Sure. But most of the Democrats message is not on lowering cost of treatment but expanding coverage to poor/unemployed people. People might believe healthcare as a right in principle, but if you have private insurance it really makes no difference to the individual if medicare/medicaid is expanded and what not.