Man, I love James Carville --- this is a good read on the current state of Dems

[hawkifann]

African Americans poll pretty moderate to conservative on a lot of things, and still vote nearly 90% Democrat. There was no reason to assume that his homosexuality had to be a disqualifying thing for AAs. Especially because as a moderate (well, by 2019 standards) he was actually pretty well positioned for African American voters, who tend to like their Democrats moderate and haven't exactly flocked to line up between the white ivory tower intellectual socialists in the past.

I really think the attacks on Pete's African American appeal were disingenuous, as they started before anyone even know who he was. I suspect they came out of Biden or Booker's camp. I think they pretty much spoke it into existence. I do think it is a concern now, but I'm not so sure it had to be.

The Black vote is not going to go to Trump, there's no worry about that, but there is plenty of risks that those voters stay home.

 

[ottumwan in tx]

what? All the tattered American flags and crying bald eagles on my feed would dispute that.

those are probably dems posing as righties

 

[ottumwan in tx]

Maybe they should stop focusing on Trump and spend more time spreading a different message. One that may resonate with voters. All they’ve manage to do is to put a spotlight on the widening gulf between different groups of Americans.

this. but they won't. see Carville above. he says repeatedly he doesn't know what is happening here.

 

[naturalmwa]

Painting the democrats as a bunch of socialist nut jobs and touting MAGA. Dem's, as is normal, are spending it taking down each other down....not the same.

One of the advantages of being the incumbant.

The ads I saw in Iowa weren’t negative. Most ads just feature a positive reason to vote for that candidate. Many others explain why they should be the one to beat Trump. But I think your point is valid that much of that money will be wasted because obviously all the ads from the candidates who don’t win are for not.

 

[Nole Lou]

The Black vote is not going to go to Trump, there's no worry about that, but there is plenty of risks that those voters stay home.

Exactly. And I think it's a legit concern. I'm just not convinced is had to be a concern, if the Democrats didn't launch the premise themselves so early.

And honestly...f-- Carville for further perpetuating it here. With his standing, he's basically rubber stamping the idea as truth. And what's to be accomplished by that?

I mean he's right, an unmotivated AA vote is a disaster for the Democrats in the general, but what does Carville want to happen? He can't bitch about it loud enough that Biden gets his faculties back. Warren has already put way too much on tape to move center now. Booker is out.

Unless Biden pulls his act together, something that is wholly outside the area of strategy or money that anyone can possibly control and is more on the order of a medical miracle, then Pete is the ONLY person standing with a chance to frame the message exactly like Carville says he wants. All he does is further damage Pete by essentially telling AAs that they shouldn't vote for him.

If this is what Carville believes, why shouldn't he be propping up Pete instead of calling him unelectable?

Again, everything he says here I think is accurate, but it also smacks of an old man who would rather be right than improve the outcome. And is bitter that people didn't take his advice a long time ago and throw in with Booker or someone.

 

[ottumwan in tx]

Exactly. And I think it's a legit concern. I'm just not convinced is had to be a concern, if the Democrats didn't launch the premise themselves so early.

And honestly...f-- Carville for further perpetuating it here. With his standing, he's basically rubber stamping the idea as truth. And what's to be accomplished by that?

I mean he's right, an unmotivated AA vote is a disaster for the Democrats in the general, but what does Carville want to happen? He can't bitch about it loud enough that Biden gets his faculties back. Warren has already put way too much on tape to move center now. Booker is out.

Unless Biden pulls his act together, something that is wholly outside the area of strategy or money that anyone can possibly control and is more on the order of a medical miracle, then Pete is the ONLY person standing with a chance to frame the message exactly like Carville says he wants. All he does is further damage Pete by essentially telling AAs that they shouldn't vote for him.

If this is what Carville believes, why shouldn't he be propping up Pete instead of calling him unelectable?

Again, everything he says here I think is accurate, but it also smacks of an old man who would rather be right than improve the outcome. And is bitter that people didn't take his advice a long time ago and throw in with Booker or someone.

the truth is they are pleased with the economy and trump and jobs

 

[rocketclone]

Something I do not understand is how Bernie and AOC have become so powerful in the Dem party. Most of the dems I know, and there are a lot of them, don't share their views.

In fact, in a decent conversation over lunch, we agree on most things.

The dems should have booted the Democratic Socialist out of their caucus and said you are on your own.

 

[ottumwan in tx]

Something I do not understand is how Bernie and AOC have become so powerful in the Dem party. Most of the dems I know, and there are a lot of them, don't share their views.

In fact, in a decent conversation over lunch, we agree on most things.

The dems should have booted the Democratic Socialist out of their caucus and said you are on your own.

It has got to have something to do with the media. I think the media just says they are popular. because the media is communist/socialist. not they really are popular.

 

[ICWestfan]

Ha ha. I like Carville but he lost me at " the fate of the world" and the quit reading when he said the Dems recruited and ran strong house Candidates in 2018. Those strong candidates are now the face of the party and include AOC, Ilian from MN, the gal from MI, and so on. That's your party right there.

 

[ottumwan in tx]

Ha ha. I like Carville but he lost me at " the fate of the world" and the quit reading when he said the Dems recruited and ran strong house Candidates in 2018. Those strong candidates are now the face of the party and include AOC, Ilian from MN, the gal from MI, and so on. That's your party right there.

he conveniently forgot about the number of repubber governors and senate folks. there was supposed to be a blue wave of all those branches, and it did not happen.

 

[Nole Lou]

Something I do not understand is how Bernie and AOC have become so powerful in the Dem party. Most of the dems I know, and there are a lot of them, don't share their views.

In fact, in a decent conversation over lunch, we agree on most things.

The dems should have booted the Democratic Socialist out of their caucus and said you are on your own.

I do think it's rather disastrous. The crazy thing is that those "new faces of the Democratic party" didn't win any competitive districts, or contribute to the Democrat majority. They all won in seats that have been democratic since 1940 and would elect a banana peel with a D next to their name. They are exactly the OPPOSITE of who the Democrats should be pushing forward...the Democrats that actually took back Republican seats, or won in districts that Trump carried in 2016. And there were plenty.

But to be fair, it's hard to pin it on the democrats themselves. They've actually tried pretty hard to reign in the "squad". It really falls on the media, who wants the "Trump of the left", and that's exactly what AOC gives them. Trump has been huge for views and clicks since the day he announced, and the media can't help themselves. People like Trump and AOC generate clicks from both sides.

And the Twitter activist/grifter side smells money when they see it too, just like they did with Trump.

Once the media makes those folks stars, now it puts the Democrats in a tough position...when somebody generates dollars, you have to walk very carefully around them. If you're some joe schmoe running for state office, you know damn sure that you'll get 1000x the press if AOC appears at your event, so it's a deal with the devil.

I'm pretty sure that if it wasn't for that money factor, the actual Democrats in power would love to see the AOC/squad element fade back if not disappear. I don't think they chose for it to go that way...they just didn't see it coming and/or have the intestinal fortitude to hold them in check.

 

[ICWestfan]

he conveniently forgot about the number of repubber governors and senate folks. there was supposed to be a blue wave of all those branches, and it did not happen.

He did make reference to the 52 Senators from small pop states so I'm guessing his next brilliant idea will be a Senate based on population. You know, 1 for Iowa, ,4 for Cali and so on.

 

[hawkifann]

He did make reference to the 52 Senators from small pop states so I'm guessing his next brilliant idea will be a Senate based on population. You know, 1 for Iowa, ,4 for Cali and so on.

I didn't read it that way. I think he was pointing out the political reality. The Dems can't just win from the urban centers while looking down on the dumb rural hicks. That's what he was pointing out.

 

[BelemNole]

Something I do not understand is how Bernie and AOC have become so powerful in the Dem party. Most of the dems I know, and there are a lot of them, don't share their views.

In fact, in a decent conversation over lunch, we agree on most things.

The dems should have booted the Democratic Socialist out of their caucus and said you are on your own.

AOC is big on Fox News. Other than that what power does she hold?
Bernie is "powerful" because a lot of people voted for him in the last primary and there is no clear front-runner this cycle. Other than that he's not powerful.

 

[joelbc1]

Carville is a damned political genius. Been the smartest pol in the room for 3 decades. If the Dems want to rally and win, they better listen to him!
He was dynamite on MSNBC a couple of days ago! He said if Liz Warren would get back on track, forget “free stuff” and talk to America about her days of going to college and law school, she would win the Presidency. Right now, James is one frustrated Democrat.

 

[joelbc1]

"The fate of the world depends on the Democrats getting their shit together and winning in November": Give me a break, James.

Sounds about right to me, mark. Carville not only understands....he knows. That is why he is the smartest pol n the room year in Nd year out.

 

[JWolf74]

Ha ha. I like Carville but he lost me at " the fate of the world" and the quit reading when he said the Dems recruited and ran strong house Candidates in 2018. Those strong candidates are now the face of the party and include AOC, Ilian from MN, the gal from MI, and so on. That's your party right there.

That's the face of the party if all you ever take in is Fox News and right wing radio.

 

[86Hawkeye]

The Black vote is not going to go to Trump, there's no worry about that, but there is plenty of risks that those voters stay home.

I don’t think anyone predicts Trump to “win” the black vote. The contention is that he will increase the percentage of black vote he got in 2016.

 

[gohawks50]

What happens if the Obamas endorse and campaign for the Democratic nominee?

 

[markfromj]

Sounds about right to me, mark. Carville not only understands....he knows. That is why he is the smartest pol n the room year in Nd year out.

Sarcasm, I hope.

 

[eightno2002]

those are probably dems posing as righties

well, one is my dad so pretty sure your wrong.

 

[rocketclone]

I do think it's rather disastrous. The crazy thing is that those "new faces of the Democratic party" didn't win any competitive districts, or contribute to the Democrat majority. They all won in seats that have been democratic since 1940 and would elect a banana peel with a D next to their name. They are exactly the OPPOSITE of who the Democrats should be pushing forward...the Democrats that actually took back Republican seats, or won in districts that Trump carried in 2016. And there were plenty.

But to be fair, it's hard to pin it on the democrats themselves. They've actually tried pretty hard to reign in the "squad". It really falls on the media, who wants the "Trump of the left", and that's exactly what AOC gives them. Trump has been huge for views and clicks since the day he announced, and the media can't help themselves. People like Trump and AOC generate clicks from both sides.

And the Twitter activist/grifter side smells money when they see it too, just like they did with Trump.

Once the media makes those folks stars, now it puts the Democrats in a tough position...when somebody generates dollars, you have to walk very carefully around them. If you're some joe schmoe running for state office, you know damn sure that you'll get 1000x the press if AOC appears at your event, so it's a deal with the devil.

I'm pretty sure that if it wasn't for that money factor, the actual Democrats in power would love to see the AOC/squad element fade back if not disappear. I don't think they chose for it to go that way...they just didn't see it coming and/or have the intestinal fortitude to hold them in check.

Kudos to you.

What would happen if they push them into their own caucus? I cant imagine much push back.

 

[rocketclone]

That's the face of the party if all you ever take in is Fox News and right wing radio.

This is simply not true. The libs networks have them on a lot

 

[joelbc1]

Sarcasm, I hope.

Not in the least. A brilliant politician. He genuinely is.

 

[SalAunese]

James Carville is about as partisan as it gets. He's failing to mention that Jill Stein's numbers didn't even come close to the Johnson/McMullan numbers (nearly 4% of the vote) and it's quite possible without the latter, Hillary may not have won the popular vote either.

 

[hawkifann]

James Carville is about as partisan as it gets. He's failing to mention that Jill Stein's numbers didn't even come close to the Johnson/McMullan numbers and it's quite possible without the latter, Hillary may not have won the popular vote either.

Wait, what? He's partisan????

 

[IowaHawkeyeFBnBB4Life]

“We’re losing our damn minds”: James Carville unloads on the Democratic Party

Why the longtime Democratic strategist is “scared to death” of the 2020 election.

By Sean Illing@seanillingsean.illing@vox.com Feb 7, 2020, 9:50am EST

James Carville is “scared to death” of the November 2020 election.

In a rant on MSNBC that went viral on Tuesday evening, the longtime Democratic strategist vented his concerns about the party’s prospects for beating Donald Trump, taking particular aim at the party’s leftward lurch.

“Eighteen percent of the population controls 52 Senate seats,” Carville said. “We’ve got to be a majoritarian party. The urban core is not gonna get it done. What we need is power! Do you understand? That’s what this is about.”

His diatribe took place against the backdrop of an Iowa caucus that had fallen into chaos and amid a rancorous ongoing debate among Democrats over the party’s direction. He took particular aim at Sen. Bernie Sanders, whom he fears could lead the party to defeat in November.

Carville’s lament distills a concern among the Democratic Party’s establishment: Will ideological purity and playing to the base cost the Democrats victory in November? For Carville at least, “We have one moral imperative and that’s to beat Donald Trump.” That his comments went viral speaks to the sense of urgency among Democrats, even as it only fuels the debate over the direction of the party.

I spoke with Carville this week by phone. We discussed where he thinks the Democrats went wrong, what it will take to build a majoritarian party in this climate, and why he doesn’t have a lot of confidence in the current field of candidates.

A lightly edited transcript of our conversation follows.

Sean Illing
Why are you “scared to death” about the 2020 election?

James Carville
Look, the turnout in the Iowa caucus was below what we expected, what we wanted. Trump’s approval rating is probably as high as it’s been. This is very bad. And now it appears the party can’t even count votes. What the hell am I supposed to think?

I’ll just say it this way: The fate of the world depends on the Democrats getting their shit together and winning in November. We have to beat Trump. And so far, I don’t like what I see. And a lot of people I talk to feel the same way.

Sean Illing
What’s gone wrong? Who’s responsible?

James Carville
I don’t know. We just had an election in 2018. We did great. We talked about everything we needed to talk about and we won. And now it’s like we’re losing our damn minds. Someone’s got to step their game up here.

Sean Illing
What does that mean?

James Carville
In 2018, Democrats recruited really strong candidates, really qualified candidates. And the party said, “This is what we’re going to talk about and we’re going to keep talking about it.” And you know what happened? We ****ing won. We didn’t get distracted, we didn’t get deflected.

Sean Illing
You know people are going to read this and say, “Carville backed Clinton in 2016. So did the Democratic establishment. They blew it in 2016. Why should I care what any of them think now?”

James Carville
People will say anything. And first of all, Clinton won the popular vote by almost three million. And secondly, the Russians put Jill Stein in front of Clinton’s campaign to depress votes. And thirdly, the New York Times a week before an election, assured its readers that the Russians were not even trying to help Trump. And then they wrote 15,000 stories about Hillary’s emails.

But back to Sanders — what I’m saying is the Democratic Party isn’t Bernie Sanders, whatever you think about Sanders.

Sean Illing
A lot of threads there. First, a lot of people don’t trust the Democratic Party, don’t believe in the party, for reasons you’ve already mentioned, and so they just don’t care about that. They want change. And I guess the other thing I’d say is, 2016 scrambled our understanding of what’s possible in American politics.

Are we really sure Sanders can’t win?

James Carville
Who the hell knows? But here’s what I do know: Sanders might get 280 electoral votes and win the presidency and maybe we keep the House. But there’s no chance in hell we’ll ever win the Senate with Sanders at the top of the party defining it for the public. Eighteen percent of the country elects more than half of our senators. That’s the deal, fair or not.

So long as McConnell runs the Senate, it’s game over. There’s no chance we’ll change the courts and nothing will happen, and he’ll just be sitting up there screaming in the microphone about the revolution.

The purpose of a political party is to acquire power. Alright? Without power, nothing matters.

Sean Illing
What’s the answer?

James Carville
By framing, repeating, and delivering a coherent, meaningful message that is relevant to people’s lives and having the political skill not to be sucked into every rabbit hole that somebody puts in front of you.

The Democratic Party is the party of African Americans. It’s becoming a party of educated suburbanites, particularly women. It’s the party of Latinos. We’re a party of immigrants. Most of the people aren’t into all this distracting shit about open borders and letting prisoners vote. They don’t care. They have lives to lead. They have kids. They have parents that are sick. That’s what we have to talk about. That’s all we should talk about.

It’s not that this stuff doesn’t matter. And it’s not that we shouldn’t talk about race. We have to talk about race. It’s about how you deliver and frame the message. I thought Cory Booker’s “baby bonds” plan was great and the kind of thing the party could connect to people’s actual lives.

We have one moral imperative here and that’s beating Trump. Nothing else matters.

Warren’s day care plan just like I love Booker’s baby bonds. That’s the kind of stuff our candidates should explain and define clearly and repeatedly for voters and not get diverted by whatever the hell is in the air that day.

Here’s another stupid thing: Democrats talking about free college tuition or debt forgiveness. I’m not here to debate the idea. What I can tell you is that people all over this country worked their way through school, sent their kids to school, paid off student loans. They don’t want to hear this shit. And you saw Warren confronted by an angry voter over this. It’s just not a winning message.

The real argument here is that some people think there’s a real yearning for a left-wing revolution in this country, and if we just appeal to the people who feel that, we’ll grow and excite them and we’ll win. But there’s a word a lot of people hate that I love: politics. It means building coalitions to win elections. It means sometimes having to sit back and listen to what people think and framing your message accordingly.

That’s all I care about. Right now the most important thing is getting this career criminal who’s stealing everything that isn’t nailed down out of the White House. We can’t do anything for anyone if we don’t start there and then acquire more power.

Can I say one more thing about the cultural disconnect?

Sean Illing
Sure.

I stopped reading at “the fate of the world depends on the Democrats winning”. What a line of bullshit and that’s being nice about it.

 

[swagsurfer02]

I think their platform should be free healthcare and college to illegals and also voting rights to prisoners.

 

[naturalmwa]

plus they are increasingly showing support for trump due to the booming economy and jobs. for AA and Hispanics and all. it's really a "perfect storm" happening here

 

[naturalmwa]

Hmm...I don't know about that. Do you know how many pro-life Democrats there were 25 years ago? The Democrats can purge with the best of them.

I think there have been plenty of fractures in the Republican party in the last several decades. I definitely agree with you that the GOP has gotten pretty good (probably because they've dealt with it 2-3 times now) and pivoting as necessary to make the politics of it work. I have to say, this is pretty much the first time around for Democrats going through this kind of internal chaos in the 40 years or so I've been watching so yeah it's not surprising that they're flailing a bit.

I’d wager most Ds are pro life today. They just think everyone should have the right to decide that for themselves without government interference.

 

[joelbc1]

I stopped reading at “the fate of the world depends on the Democrats winning”. What a line of bullshit and that’s being nice about it.

No, it really isn’t, Iowa. Not that much of a stretch at all.

 

[joelbc1]

I’d wager most Ds are pro life today. They just think everyone should have the right to decide that for themselves without government interference.

That would be my mindset. I know no one who favors abortion over life, but their are circumstances....and people and their physicians have their privacy. Abortion restriction is government at its “big brother” best...you can’t deny it. Real conservatives, like Barry Goldwater feel this way.

 

[markfromj]

Not in the least. A brilliant politician. He genuinely is.

Yes he is. But “the fate of the world “? Lol.

 

[markfromj]

I’d wager most Ds are pro life today. They just think everyone should have the right to decide that for themselves without government interference.

This post illustrates why “pro-life” is a meaningless phrase.

Let’s be honest with terms: You are either pro-choice or anti-choice. I am the latter.

 

[joelbc1]

This post illustrates why “pro-life” is a meaningless phrase.

Let’s be honest with terms: You are either pro-choice or anti-choice. I am the latter.

But, “ small unobtrusive government” right?

 

[hawkedoff]

If someone posted his comments here without trying his name to it they would be called a trumpster

Carville is completely right

 

[tarheelbybirth]

Folks might want to go back through the past and look at how the "electable" candidates have fared. Clinton v Trump, McCain v Obama, Gore v Bush43, Bush41 v Clinton...of all of them, McCain would be the only remotely radical choice and he sold out to the wingnuts to get the nomination. "Electability" is an illusion.

 

[hawkedoff]

Folks might want to go back through the past and look at how the "electable" candidates have fared. Clinton v Trump, McCain v Obama, Gore v Bush43, Bush41 v Clinton...of all of them, McCain would be the only remotely radical choice and he sold out to the wingnuts to get the nomination. "Electability" is an illusion.

Like Obama?

Hillary Clinton was not electable at all.
Obama is the most charismatic candidate we have had since Bill Clinton
Bill Clinton could have easily won a third term
McCain was not that great and then picked Sarah Palin....what an idiotic move

The electable people in each of your examples above are the ones that actually won.

Trump whether you like it or not is incredibly electable. He will likely win this fall. There isn't a single Democrat that has any sort of charisma except Bernie and he is nuts

 

[Tiny Hands Trump]

talking about open borders and decriminalizing illegal immigration. They’re talking about doing away with nuclear energy and fracking. You’ve got Bernie Sanders talking about letting criminals and terrorists vote from jail cells. It doesn’t matter what you think about any of that, or if there are good arguments — talking about that is not how you win a national election. It’s not how you become a majoritarian party.

Also known as "How we lost Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio"

He is 100% right on this.

Dems need to be pushing for nuclear power (and for investment in fusion research) hard if they are serious about global warming. The other alternative energy sources just don't have the capacity to create the amount of energy we need.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

Like Obama?

Hillary Clinton was not electable at all.
Obama is the most charismatic candidate we have had since Bill Clinton
Bill Clinton could have easily won a third term
McCain was not that great and then picked Sarah Palin....what an idiotic move

The electable people in each of your examples above are the ones that actually won.

Trump whether you like it or not is incredibly electable. He will likely win this fall. There isn't a single Democrat that has any sort of charisma except Bernie and he is nuts

Obama came out of nowhere in 08...the idea that he was "electable" prior to his run through the primaries didn't exist. H. Clinton was the mainstream choice that year...she was the "electable" one. And B. Clinton was unknown prior to the primaries in '92. There were a number of Dem hopefuls with a national reputation. Incumbents have a built-in advantage and will almost always be considered "electable".

What's interesting is that if you ask Dem voters who they would choose if they had a magic wand and could put that person in the WH, their choices change.