By David M. Greenwald
Earlier this week I remarked to someone that this would be absolutely fascinating if I didn’t actually give a damn about the outcome. It is not very often in politics where you get a chance to learn lessons and probably still end up victorious—right now the Democrats and the left can do so.
I think at some point we will get a better sense for what happened this time when we have final data—I do think a lot of people got this wrong and a lot of people in the media deserve criticism for underestimating the ability of Donald Trump to turn out his base, and I think to a larger extent they underestimated just how large that base potentially is.
For Republicans I think the challenge will be how to continue to mobilize this base and how to do so in perhaps a more competent governance strategy and a less irresponsible manner.
In a way, I think Democrats and the left have a more difficult challenge of figuring out ways to reconcile their increasingly left and progressive activist base with the core of voters they have to attract in order to win elections—people in the center and center left.
Trump was such a unifying force for the left, even progressives were forced to swallow their policy preferences for a moment in order to attempt to defeat Trump.
My friend in Indiana is a good example of how fragile this might be. He is a lifelong very conservative Republican who voted for the Democratic ticket down the line. He did so because he saw Trump as 
many on the left do—as dangerous. But, as he pointed out, next time he could go back to being Republican or, if the Democrats want to stick with the Joe Bidens of the world, he could switch and become a Democrat. He is not going to be at home in a party led by the Nancy Pelosi’s or AOCs.
This was a point made by Virginia Democrat Abigail Spanberger in an interview with CNN this week.
“If we are classifying Tuesday as a success from a congressional standpoint, we will get [expletive] torn apart in 2022,” Spanberger said bluntly. “That’s the reality.”
For her, this week was a disaster as the House Democrats lost seats that they should have gained and lost “members who shouldn’t have lost.”
She pushed back on the progressives here.
Defund the police was a loser.
She said: “The number one concern in things that people brought to me in my [district] that I barely re-won, was defunding the police. And I’ve heard from colleagues who have said ‘Oh, it’s the language of the streets. We should respect that.’ We’re in Congress. We are professionals. We are supposed to talk about things in the way where we mean what we’re talking about. If we don’t mean we should defund the police, we shouldn’t say that.”
She added, “We want to talk about funding social services, and ensuring good engagement in community policing, let’s talk about what we are for. And we need to not ever use the words ‘socialist’ or ‘socialism’ ever again. Because while people think it doesn’t matter, it does matter. And we lost good members because of it.”
Bottom line: she blasted the left for advocating policies that might be popular in blue areas, but in the swing seats, these issues were losers.
Frankly, I am not putting my thumb on the scale in that debate. I do think that even though in California I castigated the state for not being near as liberal as some believe it to be (look at the ballot initiatives, not the Presidential race), we live in a bit of a bubble.
I actually think we can and should push for progressive policy reform, but to do so, we have to get back to organizing on the grassroots level—not at the 30,000 foot level.
Let me illustrate that point by contrasting a practice that has utterly failed versus one that has promise.
Mother Jones wrote an article this week about Democratic Senate candidates that raised eye-popping amounts of money and lost. And in some cases lost by a lot.
Mother Jones notes: “In nine of the top 10 most-expensive Senate races, the Democratic candidate raised more than his or her Republican opponent, collecting a combined $595 million. Democrats won just three of those races.”
In fact, if you look at the top six you see the exact problem. South Carolina—loss. Kentucky—loss. Maine—loss. Iowa—loss. Arizona looks like they will get a win, but it’s close and in Michigan it looks like they will get a win but it’s also close.
In short, dumping huge amounts of money into Senate races appears to not work. And I think I know why—because late money goes into media, not organizing, not ground campaigns, and in an age where people are pretty much immune to advertising and many don’t watch TV live and channel surf, advertising is less effective.
You want to win—you have to get on the crowd, organize.
The new hero of the left that is emerging is Stacey Abrams.
Two years ago she came within 55,000 votes of the governor’s mansion but she has built “a well-funded network of organizations that highlighted voter suppression in the state and inspired an estimated 800,000 residents to register to vote.”
“You have to build the infrastructure to organize and motivate your base, and you have to persuade people,” said Jason Carter, a Democrat who was the party’s candidate for governor in 2014. “Stacey built that infrastructure, and Donald Trump’s presidency energized that infrastructure, and it opened up voters to persuasion who were previously not open, particularly in the suburbs.”
And so, while the Democrats failed to flip Florida and North Carolina (it appears anyway), Georgia just may go blue for the first time since 1992.
The Democrats have been competitive nationally since 1992. In fact, they will have won seven of the last eight popular votes. But they have lost ground everywhere else—House, Senate, State Legislatures, Governor’s offices—why? Because for the last 50 to 60 years the Republicans have mobilized on the ground—in the churches, in local organizations, while Democrats increasingly have moved to attempt to raise big money and flood the airwaves and, as you saw this time, it does not work.
You want to push progressive causes? Start at the local level. Build a movement from the ground up.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Support our work – to become a sustaining at $5 – $10- $25 per month hit the link:
I doubt many people voted for Joe Biden. There’s nothing there, he’s an empty suit. All he had to do was hide in his basement in order to limit the gaffes because the vote came down to you were either for Trump or against Trump. Same as the Democrat primaries, there was no way Democrats could put forward Sanders because he’s a Socialist and they knew Trump would tear him up. So Democrats were either for Bernie or against him.
To some extent what you say is true with respect to Biden. But it overlooks his strengths that made him probably the perfect anti-Trump – he’s a moderate, he’s empathetic, he’s kind and he will at least attempt to bring people together initially. He wasn’t a lot of people’s first choice, but part of the point of my piece was to point out the difference between California progressives and swing state and swing district voters for whom Sanders would have been a non-starter and for whom Biden was a viable alternative to Trump.
Absolutely why I voted for Biden in both the Primary and the General Elections. I wanted Trump out. I know people who told me they wanted Trump out but they wouldn’t vote for Bernie. I knew if Bernie was on the ballot against Trump he would get crushed.
Biden polled best against Trump. So that was enough. I mostly tuned out the campaign as I think most of America did. The election was a referendum on Trump and the campaign went on far too long. I think most Americans made up their minds long ago.
As for Biden hiding out I don’t blame him. Those claims against Biden by Trump didn’t fly with me because I have been doing the same as has much of senior citizen America during the pandemic.
Empty suit no more Biden will soon be President of the United States. America will see Biden’s mettle. One of the first things I would do if I were him would be to set up a meeting with McConnell and Pelosi to see where consensus can be reached.
Decent Americans voted against Trump. Decent Americans hate treason, racism, misogyny and mendacity. Others voted for a traitorous, lying, embezzler and murderer, a president who endorsed his sponsor Putin’s bounty on American troops by ignoring it, who allowed a quarter million of our citizens to die for his ego, who separated families forever to just boost his stock with xenophobes and neo-nazis.
If there is a lesson here to learn, surely it is to nip such antisocial, antidemocratic movements in the bud instead of giving them a pass on hate and stupidity before we are left with no peaceful solutions or no solutions, at all.
Anecdotal, but I witnessed it… @ the VAC, Sat-Tues, there were a number of new registrations… part of the process is to ask if they want to choose a party affiliation… half chose Democrat… half chose NPP…
Republicans lost a lot of folk to NPP over the last 10 years… Republicans currently are #3 in CA registrations… suspect this is happening in other states… Democrats are losing registrations to NPP [and, they are smart enough to allow NPP’s to vote in their primaries (CA)… Republicans aren’t so smart…]… but they are losing registrations more slowly…
I assume everyone has heard ‘the word’…
I’ll not place any bets until all votes are counted, all state-mandated, or legitimately requested (seems standard is ~ 1% in most states) recounts are done, and all potential legal challenges are adjudicated… and if all that takes longer than noon, Jan 20, 2021… neither Trump nor Pence will be in office, and by law, Nancy Pelosi may become an interim president… this has happened before… the very first presidency…
For many years, early in US history (no telegraph, phone, internet, etc.) there was a real lag between voting and official results… Congress “got that” and so established elections in early November, inauguration in mid-late March… due to weather, ‘road conditions’, distance, etc., Washington was not inaugurated until ~ mid April… technically, Geo Washington was not the first person to act as ‘President’, albeit on an interim basis…
History repeats… POTUS alreafy has claimed victory… think 1948…
What word? That the old guard, corrupt Democratic liars have replaced the boorish, left-baiting sociopath? That word?
Ya THINK ?!???!!! 🙂
A certain Vanguard commenter pointed out the stunning stupidity of using that phrase months ago.
Um . . . duh.
Too late.
It being – being too honest?
The issues were losers everywhere and winners everywhere — I think you only care where it matters in winning races for your side. If that’s what you meant, I’ll agree.
More on this four-years-late introspection later, the sky is blue, and it’s beautiful outside!
I’m always fascinating by what portions of a piece people pick up on. For instance, here Alan Miller focused exclusively on the Virginia Congresswoman’s remarks.
ADD perhaps?
You know, that’s a really offensive and completely out of line remark that holds absolutely no basis in . . . . . OH! Look at the pretty pink pony!
TDS perhaps?
I think you mean Trump is deranged: “If you count the legal votes, I easily win. If you count the illegal votes, they can try to steal the election from us. If you count the votes that came in late, we’re looking to them very strongly, but a lot of votes came in late.”
Both are true
What of it? What kind of a comment is that even? You wrote something, I focused on something you wrote, and you criticized what I commented on, like a wink-wink dog-whistle to those who share you views. I am not impressed.
“It being – being too honest?”
It being, in my opinion, pathologic fear of the word “socialism” without bothering to consider the differences between social policies and socialism…two very different meanings of the same root word.
POTUS has obviously read Dylan Thomas… “do not go gently into the good night”… neither will the ‘Trumpians”…
To them, the election was “rigged”… and they will NEVER give up on that premise… call out the “Proud Boys”, Mr Trump!
There is absolutely no evidence that the POTUS has ever read Dylan Thomas or any other work of fiction above the fifth grade reading level. The person who wrote Trump’s “Art of the Deal” observed that he, in fact, doesn’t read.
A couple of days ago, Matt Taibbi wrote:
Taibbi is a lefty, a well-respected journalist for decades, a Democrat, and no fan of Trump.
The truth hurts, doesn’t it?
A politician lies. You mean his lips are moving.
Taibbi is a polemicist who hates Biden. He hasn’t practiced journalism for many years. The comparison between Trump and Biden on honesty is another of these false ‘both sides’ garbage arguments we’ve been hearing for four years now. It’s intellectually lazy.
Not defending his opinion on Biden which is an opinion, Taibbi wrote an outstanding book a few years ago on Eric Garner’s death, I would rate his journalism more highly than you have ascribed.
Me, too. (whatever a polemicist is)
Uh, huh.
Me, too. I was also too lazy to look up ‘polemicist’.
” OH! Look at the pretty pink pony!”
Ya got me pardner. I spewed my Gordon’s and Schweppes on that one.
(No, I don’t think it cures Covid, but I worry a lot less!)
Keep masked up and distanced so we can all fight in person someday!
No there’s something to look forward to after the pandemic!
The ‘pandemic’, whether viral or other (political?), will be with us always… human (or inhuman) nature… inquisition, holocaust, Trumpism, etc.
Pandemic, sometimes, endemic, yeah, always… it is what it is…
Here is a Trump loyalist’s point of view and I suspect he does speak for most if not all Trump supporters: We need to figure out how to talk to people who have decided to cut themselves off from a sense of shared community where people can disagree but still live next to each other. This is not a political question, because there is no policy concern, only feelings; and, therefore no argument that can make a difference.
I’ll try again. Here is a Trump loyalist’s point of view and I suspect he does speak for most if not all Trump supporters: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/07/us/trump-supporters.html We need to figure out how to talk to people who have decided to cut themselves off from a sense of shared community where people can disagree but still live next to each other. This is not a political question, because there is no policy concern, only feelings; and, therefore no argument that can make a difference.
Yep… pretty much captures the mentality… POTUS thrives on being the ‘center of attention’… like major drugs… we’ll see how this plays out…
Maybe start by not flipping off Trump supporters.
I forgot the name of this rhetorical trick, basically ‘using an unlikeable dimwit as the example so you can criticize the whole’, and you bought it hook, line and sinker, even stating “I suspect he does speak for most if not all Trump supporters”. Srsly??? Those people don’t sound like any of the Trump supporters I know. Do you actually know a Trump supporter? Clearly, the NYT picked a poorly educated, unlikable, attention-seeking dimwit so he would willingly talk, not realizing that they were making fun of him and using him, not trying to get to know him.
Oh, great. Now Biden Derangement Syndrome is going to be a ‘thing’, too. Hoo-F-ing-ray 😐
BDS
But that’s already taken:
“The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS) is a Palestinian-led[6] movement promoting boycotts, divestments and sanctions against Israel.”
Maybe start by not flipping off Trump supporters.
I forgot the name of this rhetorical trick, but it’s basically ‘using an unlikeable dimwit as the example so you can criticize the whole’. It’s a variation on the Motte Bailey Fallacy. And you bought it hook, line and sinker, even stating “I suspect he does speak for most if not all Trump supporters”. Srsly??? That’s a ridiculous assertion. Those people don’t sound like any of the Trump supporters I know. Do you actually know a Trump supporter? Clearly, the NYT picked a poorly educated, unlikable, attention-seeking dimwit, so he would willingly talk, not realizing that they were making fun of him.
Actually, yes… they report being physically ill over the ‘news’… not wanting to vote or see ‘news’ (even Fox) for next 4 years… real… not healthy, but real…
Oh, that wasn’t supposed to get posted. Not sure how that happened. That was an unfinished draft. Oops.
The “Vanguard Folly”: asking one person a question, having it answered by someone else whom it wasn’t directed at 😐
Guilty, as charged… mea culpa…
Actually though, while I was finishing the post, you (as above) reported also on what I was writing about, another example of BDS or Biden Derangement Syndrome. I really don’t understand people getting so emotionally wrapped up in the Presidency – speaking to both TDSers and BDSers (or is it HDSers?).
I don’t understand it either… my spirituality lies elsewhere…
Fortunately, the one who is having ‘fits and coniptions’, as they did re: Obama and particularly, Michelle (really? almost all ‘first ladies’ have been cool, including Melania, and definitely Michelle, Barbara, Laura, etc., no matter how I felt about their husbands) is not a part of my household… my spouse finds relief in the current outcome, although I keep reminding that “the fat lady hasn’t sung, yet”… I believe POTUS will not be ‘done’ until late Dec, early Jan… not going to be a gracious ‘exit’… might be wrong, but willing to bet it will not be a pleasant couple of months…
I agree as to both TDS, and BDS… also a sign of RCI… a related syndrome… may all ‘get their heads out’… a likely cure… at least a ‘therapeudic’…
Alan, I think you dismiss the emotional foundation of Trump supporters and seem to believe that the “typical” Trump supporter comes from a rational position. There is nothing rational about supporting a cruel bully. That doesn’t mean we can’t or shouldn’t take Trump supporters seriously as fellow Americans. They feel righteously and that is why 70Million people wanted to double down on a disastrous presidency. We have to take that seriously and you as a person don’t seem to think that is necessary. I get it.
I believe there is no such thing as a ‘typical’ anyone supporter. I believe that the fact that people do says a lot about them. Those of you who dismiss these voters on such shallow terms are ignoring or incapable of understanding what is really going on politically. Instead of demonizing them, seek to understand them.
A lost art, it would seem. Remember the days when you could date someone from ‘across the aisle’, and it didn’t matter? Today, no one would be caught dead with “Satan”.
The point of my comments was exactly that, to not demonize but to understand. While no two individuals are exactly alike, there has to be some commonality between many of the 70million Trump supporters. If there is not one similarity, then there could never be a political understanding since politics has to do with how groups, nations, make policy. No person, Trump included, can appeal to 70million people who have nothing in common with each other. Why are you so argumentative?
I agree with this statement, plus the Democrats need to step away from “free trade”, but focus trade agreements on gaining environmental and labor objectives through use of tariffs (instead of tariffs just to benefit friends and constituencies, or delaying the inevitable.) I read an Atlantic article by the person who I assume invented the concept of “defunding the police”, and it was clear that we wanted to eliminate the police force, rather naively in my view. I think the real phrase should be “refocus the police” with the social services, etc. And although my definition of “socialism” looks a lot like the current successful European economics, we can’t use that word simply because of the legacy of red baiting in this country that didn’t occur in Europe.