But it does matter because if it’s not something Democratic politicians are actually saying, then even if it’s true that that weighs them down, it’s not something that can be changed by a decision in Washington.
But it does matter because if it’s not something Democratic politicians are actually saying, then even if it’s true that that weighs them down, it’s not something that can be changed by a decision in Washington.
It can't be changed by a decision in DC but it's a symptom of a larger problem: the fact that the Democratic Party is the party of the highly educated professional class that created and spread this language in the institutions they predominate in.
And we can analyze that and talk about the implications of that and how it came to be, sure. But if we’re discussing how to get better electoral outcomes, don’t you think it’s better to focus on the things that are actual choices, not the things that no leader could change even if they wanted to?
Let’s do it all
Sure. I’m just telling you, having traveled to towns in Pennsylvania seven times last year to canvass, called voters in every swing state, and grown up in a rural area, I don’t think the fact that Dems in universities sometimes use jargon was any kind of proximate cause for our electoral outcome.
Actual choice they can make: fire all the consultants and pollsters. I’m not saying strategists can’t be useful… I’m saying the ones the Dem Party is currently relying on are crap.
On that, at least, I think we all agree!
Like, if a kid asks what he could have done differently after he got turned down when he asked someone to the prom, the first answer isn’t “Well you should have been taller. Fix that.” That doesn’t help them. This kind of internecine flagellation is a mug’s game, and a divisive one too.