←back to thread

1796 points koolba | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0.238s | source
Show context
drawkward ◴[] No.42063854[source]
It's the economy, stupid:

-Inflation is not prices; it is the rate of change in prices. Low inflation doesn't imply low prices. -Aggregate statistics don't necessarily explain individual outcomes.

The Dems failed on this count massively, and have, for maybe the last 40 years, which is about the amount of time it took for my state to go from national bellwether (As goes Ohio, so goes the nation) to a reliably red state. This cost one of the most pro-union Senators (Sherrod Brown) his job.

replies(37): >>42063943 #>>42064224 #>>42064690 #>>42066206 #>>42066419 #>>42066536 #>>42066822 #>>42066913 #>>42067069 #>>42067564 #>>42067838 #>>42067963 #>>42068126 #>>42068182 #>>42068271 #>>42068402 #>>42068430 #>>42068606 #>>42068733 #>>42069182 #>>42069400 #>>42069554 #>>42069652 #>>42070319 #>>42070599 #>>42070710 #>>42070781 #>>42070796 #>>42071522 #>>42071614 #>>42072387 #>>42072420 #>>42073867 #>>42075648 #>>42079964 #>>42080368 #>>42088729 #
UncleOxidant ◴[] No.42066822[source]
> The Dems failed on this count massively

What was their failure here? The failure to explain to the economically illiterate that while inflation is now about where it was prior to covid that prices won't be going down (unless there's some sort of major recession leading to deflation)?

replies(19): >>42066848 #>>42066861 #>>42066959 #>>42066984 #>>42067112 #>>42067177 #>>42067270 #>>42067493 #>>42067618 #>>42067754 #>>42067895 #>>42068013 #>>42068042 #>>42068079 #>>42068425 #>>42069294 #>>42069341 #>>42069886 #>>42087968 #
crazygringo ◴[] No.42066984[source]
Yup, there's nothing they could have done. That's the tragedy of it.

You can't just educate people in a campaign that the President doesn't cause inflation, when it's the result of a global pandemic. They just don't listen and don't care. The different campaign messages get tested among focus groups. The ones that try to teach economics or explain inflation perform terribly.

This isn't a failure of Democrats at all. This is just pure economic ignorance among voters.

replies(8): >>42067092 #>>42067104 #>>42067176 #>>42067263 #>>42067571 #>>42067706 #>>42067787 #>>42067798 #
drawkward ◴[] No.42067092[source]
To paraphrase Rumsfeld: "You go to elections with the populace you have."

If the Dems don't/won't/can't account for it by changing their messaging, devising better or more readily understood platforms, then it is on them. You have to meet people where they are, not where you think they should be.

replies(5): >>42067206 #>>42067401 #>>42067956 #>>42068437 #>>42070254 #
1. dclowd9901 ◴[] No.42067401[source]
There is no competing message to be had. The people believe that whoever is in charge is bad because their lives are terrible. They just ping pong between parties without caring to investigate policies.

You can’t appeal to voters like this apart from not being the person in charge.

replies(1): >>42067608 #
2. nightski ◴[] No.42067608[source]
The election was close. I don't believe this at all. It's simply being tone deaf. Not to mention the strong democrat support in the mid terms (when inflation was arguably worse).
replies(2): >>42068105 #>>42069262 #
3. ZeroGravitas ◴[] No.42068105[source]
Just a guess but midterms probably emphasised the educated vote which seems to have swung Dem recently.
replies(1): >>42068621 #
4. vundercind ◴[] No.42068621{3}[source]
The college educated have been trending strongly toward Democratic affiliation since some time between ‘04 and ‘11, depending on your source.
5. dclowd9901 ◴[] No.42069262[source]
The election wasn’t close at all? I’m not sure what you mean by this. Trump won both the popular and handily won the EC.

I’m willing to put money down right now that the next president is a Democrat. Not by virtue of messaging or campaigning but just because people will still be suffering and the dems will be the opposite of the status quo.