My two cents, for what they're worth. Voters hate lefty rhetoric, but love most lefty policy. Activists love the rhetoric, and are often surprisingly indifferent to policy on the ground. (Ahem, DSA?).
I'm not sure what this means, as a practical matter. We can't fire the voters and replace them with better ones. The activists are self-firing as they go to law school. But their replacements have seemed mostly the same. But maybe things are looking up? AOC and especially Bernie seem to please most activists, but don't evoke disgust among voters. I don't know how much of this is superior rhetoric or ineffable charisma. If rhetoric, it can be copied. The WPF seems to have its feet on the ground.
I think it's true, left econ/welfare policies are well-regarded, but that doesn't translate into votes. Possible explanations: voters don't believe the DP will come through, or those who stand to benefit the most don't vote.
I suspect Bernie's popularity is founded on his consistency and unblemished character and old-man gravitas. People may not agree with him on everything, but they think they know him.
Max. thanks for bringing the name of Michael Berube back to my consciousness. I had completely forgotten about him. My dim recollection is of hearing him in the same early 2000s period when I first heard the name Max Sawicky.
I think his analysis is spot on, and I don't see the contradiction you do between his scourging of Bernie's latest attacks on the DP's moving away from working class politics and his statement that the economic populist critique of the DP has merit. Berube is absolutely right that Biden had no firmer friends in his hour of need last summer than Bernie Sanders and AOC.
Also, as you point out in your reply to Ziggy:
"I think it's true, left econ/welfare policies are well-regarded, but that doesn't translate into votes. Possible explanations: voters don't believe the DP will come through, or those who stand to benefit the most don't vote."
Indeed. When Kamala talked about her housing program, it looked to many like "pie in the sky". Why didn't Kamala ever say, when asked "why haven't you done it the past four year", "we never had a solid majority in Congress. Give me a solid Democratic Congress to work with and these things will be done." That would have fired up Wall Street even more and some Wall Street money is still vital to Dems. Right you are, Bernie Sanders, but when you talk about "taking on the billionaire class" isn't that pie in the sky, too?
The problem, one that many leftists make, is that they assume that their articulation of pro-working-class policies will always resonate with the working class. They neglect that policy is not the only dimension of politics. There are other dimensions. There is the dimension of attitude. Trump seems to fight and working class people think a fight is necessary. I don't believe his bullshit for a minute, but where is the fight on the Democratic side? Staying "above the fray" isn't a working class attitude. It's elite condescension.
We need to be pushing politics BY the working class as well as FOR the working class.
When will Dems learn to fight even one tenth as dirty as Republicans do? Republicans never hesitate to throw every imaginable form of bullshit at the wall in the hope that a tenth of it will stick, while Dems seem to avoid most retaliation because it's unseemly. Get into the fray!
My two cents, for what they're worth. Voters hate lefty rhetoric, but love most lefty policy. Activists love the rhetoric, and are often surprisingly indifferent to policy on the ground. (Ahem, DSA?).
I'm not sure what this means, as a practical matter. We can't fire the voters and replace them with better ones. The activists are self-firing as they go to law school. But their replacements have seemed mostly the same. But maybe things are looking up? AOC and especially Bernie seem to please most activists, but don't evoke disgust among voters. I don't know how much of this is superior rhetoric or ineffable charisma. If rhetoric, it can be copied. The WPF seems to have its feet on the ground.
I think it's true, left econ/welfare policies are well-regarded, but that doesn't translate into votes. Possible explanations: voters don't believe the DP will come through, or those who stand to benefit the most don't vote.
I suspect Bernie's popularity is founded on his consistency and unblemished character and old-man gravitas. People may not agree with him on everything, but they think they know him.
Max. thanks for bringing the name of Michael Berube back to my consciousness. I had completely forgotten about him. My dim recollection is of hearing him in the same early 2000s period when I first heard the name Max Sawicky.
I think his analysis is spot on, and I don't see the contradiction you do between his scourging of Bernie's latest attacks on the DP's moving away from working class politics and his statement that the economic populist critique of the DP has merit. Berube is absolutely right that Biden had no firmer friends in his hour of need last summer than Bernie Sanders and AOC.
Also, as you point out in your reply to Ziggy:
"I think it's true, left econ/welfare policies are well-regarded, but that doesn't translate into votes. Possible explanations: voters don't believe the DP will come through, or those who stand to benefit the most don't vote."
Indeed. When Kamala talked about her housing program, it looked to many like "pie in the sky". Why didn't Kamala ever say, when asked "why haven't you done it the past four year", "we never had a solid majority in Congress. Give me a solid Democratic Congress to work with and these things will be done." That would have fired up Wall Street even more and some Wall Street money is still vital to Dems. Right you are, Bernie Sanders, but when you talk about "taking on the billionaire class" isn't that pie in the sky, too?
The problem, one that many leftists make, is that they assume that their articulation of pro-working-class policies will always resonate with the working class. They neglect that policy is not the only dimension of politics. There are other dimensions. There is the dimension of attitude. Trump seems to fight and working class people think a fight is necessary. I don't believe his bullshit for a minute, but where is the fight on the Democratic side? Staying "above the fray" isn't a working class attitude. It's elite condescension.
We need to be pushing politics BY the working class as well as FOR the working class.
Consider this substack from Brian Beutler on the subject of Hakeem Jeffries' handling of the Matt Gaetz eithics report. It has relevance here as well. https://www.offmessage.net/p/no-trumps-cabinet-is-not-a-distraction?utm_campaign=email-post&r=3izek&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
When will Dems learn to fight even one tenth as dirty as Republicans do? Republicans never hesitate to throw every imaginable form of bullshit at the wall in the hope that a tenth of it will stick, while Dems seem to avoid most retaliation because it's unseemly. Get into the fray!