Progressive Activists are half as likely as the average Democrat to prioritize the economy and twice as likely to prioritize climate change.
Thanks propaganda. Climate change is an existential threat to the entire world.
It’s also a huge economic opportunity that America is pissing away to China.
Why don’t they own this messaging? 'We’re lining you up the next trillion dollar industry full of lucrative jobs that will be right where the market is heading for the next 20 years" is important, especially if you don’t have same-day relief available for rent and food costs.
That’s not propaganda, as much as it is the reality of human nature. When climate activists (with whom i am in violent agreement) stop letting utter pricks represent them everywhere, they might come closer to getting more people as allies. Strange, i know.
Propaganda is absolutely the reason climate change has been politicized. Thats not a debate.
Keep flogging the voters until morale improves, buddy. I’m sure it will stop failing for you soon.
Could age just as be easily titled “propaganda works”.
I don’t think that’s a good title for age; or an age.
Americans overwhelmingly—but, it turns out, mistakenly—believe that Democrats care more about advancing progressive social issues than widely shared economic ones.
Yeah. They don’t care about advancing any progressive issues at all.
I’m hoping you forgot the /s. They definitely could be far better, but to say they don’t care about any of it is just untrue, and reeks of ultra-leftist “all or nothing NOW” attitudes.
As far as the article quote goes, I think it needs tweaking. The attitude many people have that Democrats care about progressive issues is mainly reenforced by comparing them to their only serious political competition, which by comparison makes Democrats generally seem like the party of good Samaritans when they’re really just somewhat more reasonable than their opposition.
I’m hoping you forgot the /s. They definitely could be far better, but to say they don’t care about any of it is just untrue, and reeks of ultra-leftist “all or nothing NOW” attitudes.
How many more fucking decades does it take before we’re allowed to run out of patience?
It resets with each major setback. Until you prevent people from routinely electing the worst options for your goals, the second-worst option in what is basically only a two-party system is always gonna have someone else to shift the blame onto. Without an INCREDIBLY major change in attitude of the vast majority of the voting populace, there will DEFINITELY be a civil war if you try to immediately impose a full set of leftist ideals in full. Too many people are just not even open to that shit, let alone ready to embrace it.
What happens when there’s a setback that’s major enough to be considered potentially permanent - for instance, the recent election?
Without an INCREDIBLY major change in attitude of the vast majority of the voting populace, there will DEFINITELY be a civil war if you try to immediately impose a full set of leftist ideals in full.
Good thing Democrats aren’t interested in the slightest in implementing anything to the left of the current status quo then. You’re in no danger at all.
Seems fairly consistent with the messages coming from both campaigns. Harris ran on abortion and not inflation or promises of large scale economic change, while portraying Trump (correctly) as a threat to democracy. Trump ran on immigration and inflation, and portrayed Democrats as radical far left ideologues that are hell bent on turning your kids trans and your frogs gay or something.
The Atlantic is like the newspaper version of everything wrong with Democratic Party.