Democratic Party continues to fall

[Always in His Presence]

Voters' views of the Democratic Party and Republican Party set new records since the Quinnipiac University Poll began asking voters about the parties in November 2008.​

​

In today's poll, 31 percent of voters have a favorable opinion of the Democratic Party, while 57 percent have an unfavorable opinion. This is the highest percentage of voters having an unfavorable opinion of the Democratic Party since the Quinnipiac University Poll began asking this question.​

​

Forty-three percent of voters have a favorable opinion of the Republican Party, while 45 percent have an unfavorable opinion. This is the highest percentage of voters having a favorable opinion of the Republican Party since the Quinnipiac University Poll began asking this question.​

​

This marks the biggest favorability advantage the Republican Party (43 percent) has held over the Democratic Party (31 percent) since the Quinnipiac University Poll began asking these questions.​

​

Their lowest approval rating in the history of the poll.

And it is not getting better - the more they try to dehumanize Trump and the Republican Party - the lower their popularity goes.

 

[Fantine]

Voters' views of the Democratic Party and Republican Party set new records since the Quinnipiac University Poll began asking voters about the parties in November 2008.​

​

In today's poll, 31 percent of voters have a favorable opinion of the Democratic Party, while 57 percent have an unfavorable opinion. This is the highest percentage of voters having an unfavorable opinion of the Democratic Party since the Quinnipiac University Poll began asking this question.​

​

Forty-three percent of voters have a favorable opinion of the Republican Party, while 45 percent have an unfavorable opinion. This is the highest percentage of voters having a favorable opinion of the Republican Party since the Quinnipiac University Poll began asking this question.​

​

This marks the biggest favorability advantage the Republican Party (43 percent) has held over the Democratic Party (31 percent) since the Quinnipiac University Poll began asking these questions.​

​

Their lowest approval rating in the history of the poll.

And it is not getting better - the more they try to dehumanize Trump and the Republican Party - the lower their popularity goes.

Things can change quickly, and often do.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Things can change quickly, and often do.

Not until they have a realization that something needs to change

 

[Fantine]

Not until they have a realization that something needs to change

The planes are falling from the sky. The tariffs plunged the stock market. All while he lies about Biden sending condoms to Gaza and Hamas making condom bombs .
Have you reached bottom yet?

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Voters' views of the Democratic Party and Republican Party set new records since the Quinnipiac University Poll began asking voters about the parties in November 2008.​

​

In today's poll, 31 percent of voters have a favorable opinion of the Democratic Party, while 57 percent have an unfavorable opinion. This is the highest percentage of voters having an unfavorable opinion of the Democratic Party since the Quinnipiac University Poll began asking this question.​

​

Forty-three percent of voters have a favorable opinion of the Republican Party, while 45 percent have an unfavorable opinion. This is the highest percentage of voters having a favorable opinion of the Republican Party since the Quinnipiac University Poll began asking this question.​

​

This marks the biggest favorability advantage the Republican Party (43 percent) has held over the Democratic Party (31 percent) since the Quinnipiac University Poll began asking these questions.​

​

Their lowest approval rating in the history of the poll.

And it is not getting better - the more they try to dehumanize Trump and the Republican Party - the lower their popularity goes.

Well ya, they are a mess. And the pendulum has swung to the GOP. But I assure you that is only temporary. In just the first few days we have seen the Trump administration already turning upside down. And keep an eye on inflation.

 

[BCP1928]

Well ya, they are a mess. And the pendulum has swung to the GOP. But I assure you that is only temporary. In just the first few days we have seen the Trump administration already turning upside down. And keep an eye on inflation.

A good thing for the Dems. They will be purged of identity politics and come back stronger as a labor party. We'll need one after Trump gets through with us.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

The establishment democrats are trying to run in a lane that simply doesn't exist (or doesn't exist in a way that draws a huge fan base)

The "center-left but occasionally feigning some moderation" just isn't a great lane to run in, there's not a lot of people in that lane. And it's not terribly popular.

They've lost to Trump twice now that approach.

That lane isn't "left enough" for the progressive democrats to get excited and rally, and the areas where they try to appeal to moderates alienates a certain chunk of progressives, and vice versa.


Think of it sort of like the CNN scenario. I personally feel that CNN is a more reasonable news outlet (in terms of their tone and coverage) than either MSNBC on the left or Fox News on the right, yet that hasn't translated to viewership and their ratings and revenues, and they've financially taken it on the chin for the past 3-4 years now. Trying to split their time between the center left and the moderates hasn't been a winning strategy.

The establishment Democrats (vie the leadership of the DNC) is basically the "CNN of politics" at this point.
Nobody on the right half of the spectrum likes them, they're too progressive for the centrists, and too centrist for the progressives.



Just think about it in terms of other aspects of the culture. Are there any super popular pundits/podcasters/personalities/etc... that are "center left on some things, and centrist on some others" that people really get excited about?


People can obviously have any negative views of the republican party they'd like, but I think one area where they're clearly superior to the democratic party (just in terms of pure political strategy) was the fact that they managed to consolidate. Apart from a 2 or 3 senators and a handful of house reps, all of the republicans got "in-line" with Trump (even the ones who criticized him heavily in the past).

The same isn't true on the democratic side of the fence. There's still very much a spirited "jockeying for power" that's happening within the ranks between the more centrist establishment figures like Pelosi and Schumer, and the much more progressive "new blood". Whereas, on the other side of the fence, everyone knows who the leader of the GOP is right now.

On paper, the leader of the DNC is a guy named Ken Martin (yeah, I had to look him up as well, never heard of him), and you have house and senate leaders like Jeffries and Schumer... but not sure if anyone would be able to definitely point out "here's the person who steers the ship for the Democrats", whereas, again, that's an easy answer to that question if asked about Republicans.

 

[BCP1928]

The establishment democrats are trying to run in a lane that simply doesn't exist (or doesn't exist in a way that draws a huge fan base)

The "center-left but occasionally feigning some moderation" just isn't a great lane to run in, there's not a lot of people in that lane. And it's not terribly popular.

They've lost to Trump twice now that approach.

That lane isn't "left enough" for the progressive democrats to get excited and rally, and the areas where they try to appeal to moderates alienates a certain chunk of progressives, and vice versa.


Think of it sort of like the CNN scenario. I personally feel that CNN is a more reasonable news outlet (in terms of their tone and coverage) than either MSNBC on the left or Fox News on the right, yet that hasn't translated to viewership and their ratings and revenues, and they've financially taken it on the chin for the past 3-4 years now. Trying to split their time between the center left and the moderates hasn't been a winning strategy.

The establishment Democrats (vie the leadership of the DNC) is basically the "CNN of politics" at this point.
Nobody on the right half of the spectrum likes them, they're too progressive for the centrists, and too centrist for the progressives.



Just think about it in terms of other aspects of the culture. Are there any super popular pundits/podcasters/personalities/etc... that are "center left on some things, and centrist on some others" that people really get excited about?


People can obviously have any negative views of the republican party they'd like, but I think one area where they're clearly superior to the democratic party (just in terms of pure political strategy) was the fact that they managed to consolidate. Apart from a 2 or 3 senators and a handful of house reps, all of the republicans got "in-line" with Trump (even the ones who criticized him heavily in the past).

The same isn't true on the democratic side of the fence. There's still very much a spirit "jockeying for power" that's happening within the ranks between the more centrist establishment figures like Pelosi and Schumer, and the much more progressive "new blood". Whereas, on the other side of the fence, everyone knows who the leader of the GOP is right now.

On paper, the leader of the DNC is a guy named Ken Martin (yeah, I had to look him up as well, never heard of him), and you have house and senate leaders like Jeffries and Schumer... but not sure if anyone would be table to definitely point out "here's the person who steers the ship for the Democrats", whereas, again, that's an easy answer to that question if asked about Republicans.

No, in order to save the Democrats, the woke monster will have to die. Only then can the "Bernie" wing rebuild the party.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

Who could have seen "It's the economy stupid" become "Drag queen story time stupid".

 

[Always in His Presence]

The planes are falling from the sky.

Trump must be some powerful guy - less than two weeks in office! One was flying too high and the other had a cataclysmic frailure. Wow! yeah, definately his fault.

The tariffs plunged the stock market.

The tariffs started less than 17 hours ago - as for the stock market - it's up from a month ago when Joe was in charge

All while he lies about Biden sending condoms to Gaza and Hamas making condom bombs .
Have you reached bottom yet?

No - but the Democratic Party is sure sinking fast - and the poll proves it.

 

[Fantine]

Trump must be some powerful guy - less than two weeks in office! One was flying too high and the other had a cataclysmic frailure. Wow! yeah, definately his fault.

The tariffs started less than 17 hours ago - as for the stock market - it's up from a month ago when Joe was in charge

View attachment 360545

No - but the Democratic Party is sure sinking fast - and the poll proves it.

Hiring freeze and huge air traffic controller shortage. FAA head left in a huff. And he thinks the problem is DEI!

 

[Always in His Presence]

Hiring freeze and huge air traffic controller shortage. FAA head left in a huff. And he thinks the problem is DEI!

In less than 6 days? Come to reality - the cause of the crash was the helicopter flying 200 feet above what it was instructed to and the plane was a cataclysmic mechanical error.

No matter how much you desire it to be Trump's fault - it is not - and that reasoning is why the Democratic Party is sinking popularity faster than a stone in the ocean.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

No matter how much you desire it to be Trump's fault - it is not

Nor is it the fault of DEI. "Common sense" tells us that. Rigth?

 

[Always in His Presence]

Nor is it the fault of DEI. "Common sense" tells us that. Rigth?

Unknown - are all candidates of equal quality, education? If yes - then certainly not.

 

[Landon Caeli]

The Democratic party needs to crack in half! The View types and Sqad types can represent a new party of its own... The traditionals like Bill Maher can represent another party or take full control of the current Democratic Party name.

.. It should not be allowed to carry on as is, with so much variation, and no clear common agenda. It's a mess!

 

[ThatRobGuy]

No, in order to save the Democrats, the woke monster will have to die. Only then can the "Bernie" wing rebuild the party.

I don't know if that alone would do it.

It could certainly help them bring a few moderates back over which could make it a tighter race, but even if we pretend that there was no "drag queen stuff", no DEI initiatives, etc...

That doesn't remove the whole "establishment Dems vs. progressive Dems" aspect.

With or without the "woke stuff", there would still be considerable bickering between the two factions over the Israel/Gaza funding, Wall Street regulatory matters, and attitudes toward campaign funding.

If we hit the rewind button about a decade, we've "seen how that movie ends", as the saying goes, with regards to what it would look like for the "Establishment v. Progressive showdown, minus the woke stuff"

It was Hillary vs. Bernie in the democratic primary. The absence of "woke stuff" still wasn't enough to bridge the gap for the progressive faction to overtake the establishment club. Hillary got the nod, and a bunch of butt-hurt Bernie fans stayed home and/or supplied Trump with "middle finger to the establishment" vote.


While removing the woke aspects certainly should be done anyway (advocating for something that only appeals to college humanities majors, but it wildly unpopular with 70% of the rest of the country, is never a good political approach regardless)

If the progressive wing of the party wants to overtake the establishment, they almost need their own "Left leaning version of Trump", someone who speaks like a "normal dude", conveys a "middle finger to the establishment", isn't afraid to hurt peoples feelings every once in a while, and have a personality that's big enough, that it makes them "bigger than the party" so to speak, to the point where they can flip off the "mainstays" of the party in ways that are so "entertaining", that big portion of the general public loves it, and so much so, that those very same people they flipped off have no choice but to come crawling back (tail between their legs) and get in good with the person. (Like Ted Cruz had to do)

Bernie checks one or two of those boxes, but not all of them.

If he was eligible to run, I'd say someone like a Cenk Uygur would be your best bet. If he were allowed to, and he publicly spoke to the likes of Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi the way Trump spoke to Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz in the primaries, then the Progressive dems may have something going.

(Cenk even has his own catchy catch phrases, and comes up the occasional insulting nicknames for other members of the Democratic party)

But as noted, he wasn't born in the US, so is ineligible, but that's the kind of person they need to find if they want to try to replicate Trump's political success (in terms of rallying a loyal base)

 

[BCP1928]

I don't know if that alone would do it.

It could certainly help them bring a few moderates back over which could make it a tighter race, but even if we pretend that there was no "drag queen stuff", no DEI initiatives, etc...

That doesn't remove the whole "establishment Dems vs. progressive Dems" aspect.

With or without the "woke stuff", there would still be considerable bickering between the two factions over the Israel/Gaza funding, Wall Street regulatory matters, and attitudes toward campaign funding.

If we hit the rewind button about a decade, we've "seen how that movie ends", as the saying goes, with regards to what it would look like for the "Establishment v. Progressive showdown, minus the woke stuff"

It was Hillary vs. Bernie in the democratic primary. The absence of "woke stuff" still wasn't enough to bridge the gap for the progressive faction to overtake the establishment club. Hillary got the nod, and a bunch of butt-hurt Bernie fans stayed home and/or supplied Trump with "middle finger to the establishment" vote.


While removing the woke aspects certainly should be done anyway (advocating for something that only appeals to college humanities majors, but it wildly unpopular with 70% of the rest of the country, is never a good political approach regardless)

If the progressive wing of the party wants to overtake the establishment, they almost need their own "Left leaning version of Trump", someone who speaks like a "normal dude", conveys a "middle finger to the establishment", isn't afraid to hurt peoples feelings every once in a while, and have a personality that's big enough, that it makes them "bigger than the party" so to speak, to the point where they can flip off the "mainstays" of the party in ways that are so "entertaining", that big portion of the general public loves it, and so much so, that those very same people they flipped off have no choice but to come crawling back (tail between their legs) and get in good with the person. (Like Ted Cruz had to do)

Bernie checks one or two of those boxes, but not all of them.

If he was eligible to run, I'd say someone like a Cenk Uygur would be your best bet. If he were allowed to, and he publicly spoke to the likes of Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi the way Trump spoke to Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz in the primaries, then the Progressive dems may have something going.

(Cenk even has his own catchy catch phrases, and comes up the occasional insulting nicknames for other members of the Democratic party)

But as noted, he wasn't born in the US, so is ineligible, but that's the kind of person they need to find if they want to try to replicate Trump's political success (in terms of rallying a loyal base)

No, there has to be a much more fundamental restructure than that. Even if some reconciliation could be achieved between "establishment" and "progressive" Democrats it would just amount to re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. A tough-talking figurehead won't do it, either. What has to happen is that the issues that divide the working class have to be put aside--probably along with the 'educated elite' branch of the party, and an authentic labor party created.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

No, there has to be a much more fundamental restructure than that. Even if some reconciliation could be achieved between "establishment" and "progressive" Democrats it would just amount to re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. A tough-talking figurehead won't do it, either. What has to happen is that the issues that divide the working class have to be put aside--probably along with the 'educated elite' branch of the party, and an authentic labor party created.

Perhaps we're talking past each other here, but that's similar to what I was suggesting...

I mentioned Cenk as an example (though, he can't run) precisely because he spends more time focusing on middle class economics, and less on "culture war" stuff. Not sure if you're familiar with him.

I would disagree about the "tough talking figurehead" aspect you mention. Clearly it works. Trump is living proof of that.

If you would've asked a conservative fundamentalist devout evangelical back in 2008...
"Hey, would you ever vote for a guy who had his own vodka brand, ran bikini pageants, been married 4 times and cheated on all of them, and owned casinos, and attended Clinton family weddings", the overwhelming odds are they'd have said no.

If nothing else, Trump's political success has shown us that people will become more flexible on certain standards that used to be rigid, if the person is willing to tell off the people they don't like on their behalf.

Let's not forget, one of Trump's main appeals to his base is that he agitates the people who they find to be insufferable.

 

[QvQ]

This won't make the Democrats any more popular, threatening to fight Trump in the streets.
The leaders of the Democratic party are calling for more riots, civil insurrection

Jeffries said"We are going to fight it legislatively. We are going to fight it in the courts. And we're going to fight it in the streets."

WATCH: Hakeem Jeffries Vows To Fight Trump Agenda 'in the Streets'

House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.) on Friday blasted President Donald Trump's agenda, vowing that Democrats will "fight it in the streets."

freebeacon.com

 

[BCP1928]

Perhaps we're talking past each other here, but that's similar to what I was suggesting...

I mentioned Cenk as an example (though, he can't run) precisely because he spends more time focusing on middle class economics, and less on "culture war" stuff. Not sure if you're familiar with him.

I watch Young Turks occasionally

I would disagree about the "tough talking figurehead" aspect you mention. Clearly it works. Trump is living proof of that.

We'll see about that when he stops walking the tough talk and starts doing the job that his big backers paid him to do.

If you would've asked a conservative fundamentalist devout evangelical back in 2008...
"Hey, would you ever vote for a guy who had his own vodka brand, ran bikini pageants, been married 4 times and cheated on all of them, and owned casinos, and attended Clinton family weddings", the overwhelming odds are they'd have said no.

If nothing else, Trump's political success has shown us that people will become more flexible on certain standards that used to be rigid, if the person is willing to tell off the people they don't like on their behalf.

Let's not forget, one of Trump's main appeals to his base is that he agitates the people who they find to be insufferable.

Which is why they have to go.