Winning in November may require quick wit, thick skin, and short memory

[struggle4progress]

I will never understand why anyone would have voted for Trump, but the Trump voters are likely to be a heterogeneous group: some will be dedicated racists; some, anti-government ideologues; some, cynical and corrupt manipulators; some, simply fools; some, low-information individuals of good will; some, highly partisan folk who just wanted the Republicans to control the government but sincerely believed it would be an improvement; &c

Our objection should be to learn, as quickly as possible, to distinguish those who might move to our side (even temporarily, in the hopes of saving the country from ruin) from those who cannot be persuaded by any rational means. There is no one-size-fits-all solution to our current crisis. A complete collapse of the center will be catastrophic for everyone, because it will require enormous time and effort to rebuild: we must work diligently to restore the ideal of political comity and compromise, while avoiding unnecessary polarization. This is a tricky game, because excessive aversion to conflict is fatal to the essential project of holding the moral high ground

We therefore face a situation where our politics must be conducted with almost military precision: wherever possible, we must form alliances with whoever is principled, whether or not we always agree with them; when the enemy is strong, we must lull them into complacency; when we are evenly matched, we may convince them to step back or to blunder forward into untenable ground; and when they are weak, we can overrun them. Sometimes it is appropriate to confront and sometimes it is better to vanish and organize in the shadows. In every case, we want them to have very little reliable information about our strength and position, while we continue to organize

Hope is needed, but it is not enough. The work must be pursued as diligently as any other job. It becomes critical not to love our own views too much, while not setting our views aside completely. We will not all agree on everything. And, as always, success is only ever limited: we cannot hope to succeed completely, but we can hope to succeed enough, if we work at it

[mnhtnbb]

1. I really do believe we are descending into darkness

if the Democrats cannot regain control of the House and Senate in November.

It is imperative that we do everything possible to motivate good people of conscience to vote.

[bronxiteforever]

8. +1 the GOP needs to be devastated at the polls

For years to come because of what they have done.

[JI7]

2. yes, but it's also important to get out as many Democrats as possible. deal with Russia Hacking,

Republican suppressing the vote of minorities etc.

in fact the above are even more important.

[BumRushDaShow]

3. The one thing that should be added however

is a plan (or set of plans) for next steps. If some modicum of control is returned after the November elections, then there needs to be a consensus set of items for next steps.

What often happens is that the focus is so strongly on getting that control, then the agenda for what you do with it (or can potentially do depending on how widespread or narrow that control is), often becomes muddled or falls flat or even descends into back-biting, as each "partner" in the effort then wants to accelerate their agenda ahead of the others.

IMHO, the "consensus agendas" should be multifaceted - i.e., state/local parties who are working to gain or regain control of their state/county/local governments, should have a plan regarding what to do with that. Similarly at the congressional level - there should be a "first 100 days" or whatever (I think that was done back in 2007 when Democrats regained the House after 12 years).

If this is not done, the effort will be squandered and you-know-who will be working quadruplely hard to take back over. And this time, there will be massive interference by foreign entities that will attempt to scuttle any semblance of bringing order back to our system of government.

[struggle4progress]

4. At a state level, we should push for non-partisan redistricting commisions

to avoid gerrymandering

At a federal level, we need electoral college reform

[BumRushDaShow]

5. And along that line

I understand there is a focus on gaining (or regaining) governors so that they are in place during the 2020 census.

I saw a thread mentioning the DNC focusing on certain states to do just that and I know here in PA, we need to also make sure that we get Governor Wolf (D) re-elected this year so that he can serve as a firewall while we establish some type of commission (there are several pieces of legislation being worked on at the moment to do this and it would also involve a state Constitution change to do such) and to keep the most egregious ALEC legislation from moving anywhere here.

[True Blue American]

6. There is a group of Democratic Governors

Putting money into that right now, covering 4 states.

https://www.daytondailynews.com/news/national-govt--politics/20m-democratic-buy-targets-states-key-redistricting/wk9CddEL0Epyt5YM6YAvZM/

[Kurt V.]

7. Great post

[Tom Rinaldo]

9. We celebrate Jones winning in Alabama and Lamb in PA, and we should

Neither of those victories would have been possible without mobilizing our core Democratic voters plus winning back some whites who voted for Trump. We can not govern and defend social justice without Democrats winning in some districts with a "centrist" electorate.

We could never have passed Obamacare if the Democratic Coalition in the U.S. Senate didn't at one point have 60 members.

In 2008 President Obama won the electoral votes of 29 states. Between them they elect 58 U.S. Senators.
In 2012 President Obama won the electoral votes of 22 states. Between them they elect 44 U.S. Senators.
In 2016 Hillary Clinton won the electoral votes of 20 states. Between them they elect 40 U.S. Senators.

In all three elections the Democrat also won the District of Columbia which has no U.S. Senators.
In all three elections the Democrat running won the popular vote handily.

Control of the U.S. Senate is a critical part of governing on a national level, even if Democrats do win the White House. The importance of holding the Senate is magnified now far more so than it was even in 2008. That is because the nation has now been plunged into a period of unified Republican control of Congress - which has allowed Republicans to cause deep damage through their control of Congress including but not limited to stacking the courts with far right judges. It includes but is not not limited to their passing a massive tax bill that gives to the rich and steals from virtually everyone else while putting our government into an ever deepening fiscal hole that makes it essentially impossible to find the funds needed for a sane progressive agenda for America. A return to a status quo deadlock of the Federal Government now would still leave us worse off than we were in the last year of George W. Bush's Administration.

The ugly reality that so often gets ignored on this board is that, because of the way the U.S. Constitution is written, Democrats need to win a sizable portion of white voters, and in some states a near if not actual majority of them, in order to elect enough Democratic Senators in order to actually move on a national agenda that counters the Republicans and furthers causes dear to all of us here. Winning truly matters. Fighting for the right things is not enough when losing results in massive suffering. I say that knowing full well that most whites have real prejudices, whether they want them or not, and that some of us (I'm White) seem perfectly content to view the world through at least partially racist lenses.

I've stated this here before: I do not believe that the Democratic Party should alter a syllable of our national platform or of our Congressional agenda in order to appeal to, let alone appease, racist voters. That is non negotiable. I only take issue with those who say "fuck 'em" to everyone out there who voted Republican in the 2016 election. A number of the voters needed to allow Doug Jones to win his Senate seat from Alabama, and for Conor Lamb to win his Congressional seat from PA CD 18, voted for Trump in 2016. I see no purpose in making excuses for why they did so. I see a purpose in preventing them from doing so again, either for Trump or for Republicans in Congress who support Trump. I see a purpose in winning more elections, because I see the purpose of taking power away from Republicans.

If we can engage some of those voters around some issues which we proudly fight for - because it happens to be the right thing to do to fight for those issues - and they end up voting Democratic as a result, I'll take those votes. I'll take those votes while continuing to work through the Democratic Party to end all racial injustice in America. Hopefully we can convert some of those fore mentioned voters on that front also, but in the meantime we have work to do in Congress for all Americans, and to do so we must win back control of our government.