> Yet "tangled up in social issues" remains a popular misconception. Why?
Do you think declaring their preferred pronouns helped liberal politicians? Who did it ultimately help? Probably the Trump campaign.
Also, "defund the police" is easily the stupidest political slogan ever. It's bewildering. Did no one think "Reform the police" was a winner? And yet liberal politicians lapped it up.
"[We] made record investments in public safety, putting more police officers on the beat; today, violent crime is at its lowest in 50 years"
"Democrats provided funding for communities to hire more police."
"since day one, President Biden has been working to make sure police officers have the tools they need to protect their communities, including more police officers on the street. We need to fund the police"
"Democrats passed and President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan, with the largest ever federal investment infighting and preventing crime, reducing violence, and investing in public safety. That funding enabled cities and states to invest more than $14 billion in public safety and violence prevention, putting more police officers on the beat for accountable community policing."
Why is it that when looking for examples of what some are doing wrong, you're casting back over 5 years to an activist slogan that even then was treated as a poor expression rather than "lapped it up"?
It's almost like what you're here to do is actually reinforce the unproductive association rather than point the direction to a better way.
You want to talk about what's "bewildering"? What's bewildering is that your apparent confidence (or deliberately mislead?) confusing very online cheer-squad discourse from some corners over stated positions of most officeholders or candidates.
One could charitably assume that it's because you have some acquaintances or media follows who represent themselves or others as you've described and you've accidentally made parasocial promotion into an unfortunate wider partisan caricature. One could also warily assume you're an operative who is here to actively reinforce the associations you were ostensibly fighting against. Perhaps uncharitable, but hardly implausible these days.
The majority of liberal politicians are classic liberals who spend their campaign and policy time as you said you wanted, and it seems you haven't noticed.
"pronoun" doesn't appear in that 2024 D platform document. Also can't find it in a CBS news summary [1] of the Harris campaign. You know what does show up, though? Housing issues. Actual working class tax cut proposals. Child tax credits (pretty pro birth, very pro parent).
And those are what I think about when I think about liberal officeholders and candidates. Because that's what I see them talking about when I follow them and what's discussed in the media coverage I follow.
> fully exploited by Republicans in a media system that is largely theirs
Sounds like one answer to my question about why people don't recognize it when Democratic politicians do prioritize "housing, infrastructure and government services supporting people's economic activity of all kinds."
>Democratic politicians do prioritize "housing, infrastructure and government services supporting people's economic activity of all kinds."
Have they (notably and visibly in the public consciousness) managed to get results regarding such issues such as housing in areas where they are uncontested?
As an outsider looking in i'd say if i had to imagine a democrat voting area i'd imagine an urbanised area, more progressive but also consistently more expensive.
Do you think declaring their preferred pronouns helped liberal politicians? Who did it ultimately help? Probably the Trump campaign.
Also, "defund the police" is easily the stupidest political slogan ever. It's bewildering. Did no one think "Reform the police" was a winner? And yet liberal politicians lapped it up.