The contentions, while making an accounting like sense, are overly broad to the point of being useless. And leaving out the actual facts on the ground this cycle: inflation, crime, immigration, and debt growth: the analysis sort of looks like an answer, searching for a question. Yes, I do agree that the D’s have made a rather large tacti…
The contentions, while making an accounting like sense, are overly broad to the point of being useless. And leaving out the actual facts on the ground this cycle: inflation, crime, immigration, and debt growth: the analysis sort of looks like an answer, searching for a question. Yes, I do agree that the D’s have made a rather large tactical error by becoming the party of the rich & educated. But that is more of a result of what they have chosen to prioritize (climate, CRT, gender) than an actual purposeful appeal to the rich & educated. Those bigger parts of the pie (non-rich/non-college) aren’t concerned with those issues, and likely never will be to any measurable extent. That is the real problem with the current D’s, and I don’t see them changing anything, other than maybe lying about their real intentions.
The contentions, while making an accounting like sense, are overly broad to the point of being useless. And leaving out the actual facts on the ground this cycle: inflation, crime, immigration, and debt growth: the analysis sort of looks like an answer, searching for a question. Yes, I do agree that the D’s have made a rather large tactical error by becoming the party of the rich & educated. But that is more of a result of what they have chosen to prioritize (climate, CRT, gender) than an actual purposeful appeal to the rich & educated. Those bigger parts of the pie (non-rich/non-college) aren’t concerned with those issues, and likely never will be to any measurable extent. That is the real problem with the current D’s, and I don’t see them changing anything, other than maybe lying about their real intentions.