I've been reading your columns pretty regularly, agreeing with some and not with others. But this one just left me shaking my head thinking, how can Marty be highlighting this excuse for not looking in the mirror to see the real reasons Harris lost the election. I find it very hard to believe that "the groups" have sufficient power to have much impact on what happened in this last election--other than giving the Trump campaign a few juicy culture war moments to play over and over again in their ads. Besides, the majority of voters agree with most of the policy positions these groups hold, at least those focused on reproductive and civil rights. (Hardly anyone is talking about defunding the police these days except the Trump campaign that will soon be taking the hatchet to the FBI and other federal law enforcement arms they don't like.)
I thought your previous column on the election impact of ignoring working class economic concerns was good but this one just made me shake my head and sigh. If only it were "the groups"--Dems would have a much easier path back to victory.
Instead, it's Democratic policies that over and over again augment corporate power, as illustrated in this article
and multiplied many times over in industry after industry, that are the primary driver behind the disaffection of the non-college educated (read working class). But most Democratic leaders can't/won't name the corporations driving these voting trends because they'd be calling out their donors. Instead they appoint the very same corporate leaders and lobbyists to cabinet positions. And elites wonder why the non-college educated don't vote in their own self interest? Maybe we should be asking why the Democratic Party doesn't act in it's own self-interest when it continues to uplift the power of corporate America rather than responding to the needs of the voters it hopes to represent. I expect this won't change your opinion about "the groups" but I really don't think focusing on cutting them out of the national political conversation will help the Democrats--it'll only alienate significant portions of what's left of the Democrat's once reliable base.
I've been reading your columns pretty regularly, agreeing with some and not with others. But this one just left me shaking my head thinking, how can Marty be highlighting this excuse for not looking in the mirror to see the real reasons Harris lost the election. I find it very hard to believe that "the groups" have sufficient power to have much impact on what happened in this last election--other than giving the Trump campaign a few juicy culture war moments to play over and over again in their ads. Besides, the majority of voters agree with most of the policy positions these groups hold, at least those focused on reproductive and civil rights. (Hardly anyone is talking about defunding the police these days except the Trump campaign that will soon be taking the hatchet to the FBI and other federal law enforcement arms they don't like.)
I thought your previous column on the election impact of ignoring working class economic concerns was good but this one just made me shake my head and sigh. If only it were "the groups"--Dems would have a much easier path back to victory.
Instead, it's Democratic policies that over and over again augment corporate power, as illustrated in this article
(https://barnraisingmedia.com/sonja-trom-eayrs-dodge-county-incorporated-review/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=The%20brutal%20cost%20of%20cheap%20food&utm_campaign=Newsletter%20for%2011%2F21%2F24)
and multiplied many times over in industry after industry, that are the primary driver behind the disaffection of the non-college educated (read working class). But most Democratic leaders can't/won't name the corporations driving these voting trends because they'd be calling out their donors. Instead they appoint the very same corporate leaders and lobbyists to cabinet positions. And elites wonder why the non-college educated don't vote in their own self interest? Maybe we should be asking why the Democratic Party doesn't act in it's own self-interest when it continues to uplift the power of corporate America rather than responding to the needs of the voters it hopes to represent. I expect this won't change your opinion about "the groups" but I really don't think focusing on cutting them out of the national political conversation will help the Democrats--it'll only alienate significant portions of what's left of the Democrat's once reliable base.