As my father-in-law that fought in the Pacific in WW2 told my 7-year-old son, in war there are no good guys and there are no bad guys, there is just us and them. The problem with your analysis is making the Democrats good guys and Republicans bad guys, the two major parties are just two sides of the same coin. Yes, Joe Biden was better than Donald Trump, but that's a damn low bar. The us and them in this war is regular people vs extreme wealth, and both parties are owned by extreme wealth. The narrative needs to be progress, for regular people, nothing for extreme wealth. No more choosing between dumb and dumber. Frankly, the nine million people that didn't vote for either candidate are not the problem, they are the future.
I don't think the problem is so much that Dems' messaging was bad. Compelling and accurate narratives were out there to be found, for people who looked. The Harris campaign made the narrative case.
Trump won because ~7 million Biden voters decided to stay home. They stayed home because Fox News and other GOP-aligned media supplied whatever excuse they personally needed to justify staying home.
The right-wing machine has a comforting lie for every grievance or complaint under the sun. For every gripe one might have, there are five well-funded right-wing liars out there offering a self-indulgent and comforting excuse. Lots of people were looking for excuses to do nothing, and right-wing media made sure those excuses were in abundant supply.
This country is awash in far-right propaganda. It doesn't matter what Dems' message is if nobody hears it, or if they've already been inoculated against it by comforting lies.
I think a key difference between now and pre-2016 is that now the discourse and the media landscape is largely controlled by the right. The online mediasphere is disproportionately right-wing. Do the dems have the platforms to “flood the zone”? What zones and who’s listening?
I disagree with the unfocused approach. Think of what happened with the court cases against Trump. Rather than focus on one really good case (probably the documents or Georgia), they went after simultaneous cases, on top of E. Jean Carroll and the New York Trump org. case. What happened?
For various reasons, some of the stronger cases started to crumble, which diluted the conviction in the weaker/less important and politically salient cases and helped create a narrative of judicial persecution that undeniably helped Trump win the nomination and maybe helped in the general. This will happen with the strategy you outline here. Democrats will go after everything he says and does as a major scandal. But some of them will miss.
People will pick up on the fact that sometimes when people cry wolf the wolf never appears. That will weaken the case against the genuine bad things. It only takes one or two misfires to create a narrative of hysteria and Trump Derangement Syndrome. Noble lies don't work.
How many lies did Anthony Fauci tell during Covid? Unfortunately, it was more than zero, which destroyed his credibility at a time when he needed to be completely honest. This will happen to democrats if they follow your strategy.
As my father-in-law that fought in the Pacific in WW2 told my 7-year-old son, in war there are no good guys and there are no bad guys, there is just us and them. The problem with your analysis is making the Democrats good guys and Republicans bad guys, the two major parties are just two sides of the same coin. Yes, Joe Biden was better than Donald Trump, but that's a damn low bar. The us and them in this war is regular people vs extreme wealth, and both parties are owned by extreme wealth. The narrative needs to be progress, for regular people, nothing for extreme wealth. No more choosing between dumb and dumber. Frankly, the nine million people that didn't vote for either candidate are not the problem, they are the future.
I don't think the problem is so much that Dems' messaging was bad. Compelling and accurate narratives were out there to be found, for people who looked. The Harris campaign made the narrative case.
Trump won because ~7 million Biden voters decided to stay home. They stayed home because Fox News and other GOP-aligned media supplied whatever excuse they personally needed to justify staying home.
The right-wing machine has a comforting lie for every grievance or complaint under the sun. For every gripe one might have, there are five well-funded right-wing liars out there offering a self-indulgent and comforting excuse. Lots of people were looking for excuses to do nothing, and right-wing media made sure those excuses were in abundant supply.
This country is awash in far-right propaganda. It doesn't matter what Dems' message is if nobody hears it, or if they've already been inoculated against it by comforting lies.
I think a key difference between now and pre-2016 is that now the discourse and the media landscape is largely controlled by the right. The online mediasphere is disproportionately right-wing. Do the dems have the platforms to “flood the zone”? What zones and who’s listening?
I disagree with the unfocused approach. Think of what happened with the court cases against Trump. Rather than focus on one really good case (probably the documents or Georgia), they went after simultaneous cases, on top of E. Jean Carroll and the New York Trump org. case. What happened?
For various reasons, some of the stronger cases started to crumble, which diluted the conviction in the weaker/less important and politically salient cases and helped create a narrative of judicial persecution that undeniably helped Trump win the nomination and maybe helped in the general. This will happen with the strategy you outline here. Democrats will go after everything he says and does as a major scandal. But some of them will miss.
People will pick up on the fact that sometimes when people cry wolf the wolf never appears. That will weaken the case against the genuine bad things. It only takes one or two misfires to create a narrative of hysteria and Trump Derangement Syndrome. Noble lies don't work.
How many lies did Anthony Fauci tell during Covid? Unfortunately, it was more than zero, which destroyed his credibility at a time when he needed to be completely honest. This will happen to democrats if they follow your strategy.