• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    1 day ago

    What?

    Did you literally just download the PDF and search for those three things, see 0, and then close it?

    Because even just skimming thru any of the 193 pages would show you none of it’s is about specific policy positions, largely because with 4 years to the next presidential election, that would be entirely useless…

    Like, we do not want the DNC picking policy, that’s what the candidate we vote for in primaries do.

    A large organization like the DNC dictating policy for politicians to follow and using their influence as a party to get those people elected is what got us here in the fuckign first place

    The paper is going to seem boring and it’s not going to have what you think, be cause it wasn’t written for us, and it wasn’t written up to be a list of reasons why Kamala lost, be ause everyone reading it would be very aware of why that happened.

    The point of the paper was what a nonbiased organization could do to fix shit.

    So (again, fucking obviously) it’s not going to list policy positions to push.

    • Sunforged@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      24 hours ago

      Your take that a political party should not address policy is laughable. You are not a serious person.

      • zaperberry@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        Putting aside the rest of their comment; the DNC is not a political party. Their job is to (edit: help Democrats) win elections and whip members to be in line with general policy messaging.

        They’re more like the advertising arm of the party itself.

        • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          20 hours ago

          Even if the semantic you’re drawing wasn’t completely stupid (it is), the advertising arm would benefit a lot from aligning itself with the voter base

          • zaperberry@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            17 hours ago

            The semantics were only drawn because the person I responded to misconstrued a comment and then talked down to the poster based on that. If you think it’s stupid to call that shit out then go off, I guess.

            To your point: yes, they would. People have been yelling that for a while. Unfortunately, like the RNC, they’ve shown that they prioritize maintaining the cushy status quo for a small group of people. Dems lose. Voters get mad. The DNC raises hundreds of millions of dollars again the next go around and the game continues.

    • chortle_tortle@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      24 hours ago

      Under the section “Strong Ground Games Make the Difference”

      Specific issue connection: The campaign connected workplace concerns like healthcare costs, scheduling stability, and wage protections directly to political choices. [p 36]

      Under “Where Organizing Efforts Fell Short in 2024”

      Messaging Misalignment. National Democratic messaging under the White House’s stewardship, created tensions with key constituencies. Climate change and green energy transition messaging created anxiety among workers in traditional industries worried about job losses. The focus on social issues over economic issues alienated socially conservative voters who prioritized kitchen- table concerns. The “Bidenomics” framing emphasized macro statistics rather than the micro realities voters experienced daily and specifically tied President Biden - by name - to actual economic anxiety. [p 36]

      Organizational Decline in Key States. Shrinking investment in industrial states has reduced Democrats’ organizing capacity. Ohio’s organizing density dropped significantly as manufacturing declined. Younger members of organized groups show less partisan loyalty than previous generations. [p 36]

      Abortion as a Crosscutting Issue

      Brown hit Moreno hard on abortion in the final weeks, noting how 57% of Ohio voters had just enshrined abortion rights in the state constitution. Slotkin ran a multimillion-dollar ad campaign hammering Rogers on his abortion voting record. This issue allowed Democrats to peel off suburban women and moderate Republicans who might have been open to voting Republican down-ballot [p 37-38]

      So clearly we at least dabbling in conversations about specific issues. But I think the more important counterpoint is you can’t have a conversation about the loss of Kamala Harris without mentioning Genocide.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        24 hours ago

        So clearly we at least dabbling in conversations about specific issues

        Well, I do want to thank you for somewhat asking questions.

        But those are not single issues, they are normal facets of society that constantly exist and will definitely still be an issue in four years.

        Israel’s current government even just still being in power in 2028 isn’t guaranteed.

        All those other issues, will be issues in 2028, and 2033, and literally every single election after.

        And besides all of that, you’re examples still aren’t pushing policy decisions.

        And as it mentions in big bold letters on literally every single page:

        Disclaimer: This document reflects the views of the author, not the DNC. The DNC was not provided with the underlying sourcing, interviews, or supporting data for many of the assertions contained herein and therefore cannot independently verify the claims presented

        Like, you’re blaming all of the DNC, how did you get those quotes and not see the giant red texts on every page?

        How are you missing the point of, well, everything about this?

        • chortle_tortle@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          23 hours ago

          And besides all of that, you’re examples still aren’t pushing policy decisions.

          Which was my point. You can have conversations about what happened without pushing policy decisions. I’m not sure why that’s difficult for you.

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            21 hours ago

            Because, they’re not gonna have the question:

            Should we support genocide?

            Which would be the equivalent to your quotes…

            And they’re not gonna say:

            Should we support Israel’s genocide on Palestinians

            Because that is a single topic that may not be present in 2028, because Israel might actual get an election before then themselves, and there’s no way the current government wins an election.

            I don’t understand what you want here, or why you keep blaming the DNC when literally every page in big red letters says:

            Disclaimer: This document reflects the views of the author, not the DNC. The DNC was not provided with the underlying sourcing, interviews, or supporting data for many of the assertions contained herein and therefore cannot independently verify the claims presented

            Like, we can have this discussion, but you need to understand the big bolded red letters on every page and talk about the one single guy who wrote this and personally decided what to include…

            Do you get that part?

            The big bolded red lettered part?

              • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                10 hours ago

                Disclaimer: This document reflects the views of the author, not the DNC. The DNC was not provided with the underlying sourcing, interviews, or supporting data for many of the assertions contained herein and therefore cannot independently verify the claims presented

                Can you at least let me know that you understand blaming the DNC is completely illogical?

                • chortle_tortle@mander.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  6 hours ago

                  Repeatedly posting the disclaimer like it absolves the DNC says so much about who’s still behind this dumpster fire of an organization.

                  Copy past it a few more times bud, maybe then it will they won’t be a joke.