If your goal is a short term win, yeah. For long term you’re better off messaging to those who would actually be democrats, rather than appealing to those who buy into the newest snake oil and don’t care who it hurts so long as it’s not them.
Biggest issue here is that you’ve misrepresented or misunderstood what I stated. Mine wasn’t a discussion about “appealing to” those folks. If we’re already politically aligned on some set of goals (ex: limit Trump’s damage to the USA), I don’t have to appeal to them, they’re already with me on that issue as long as I don’t slam the door shut in their faces.
Next issue is that if you insist on dropping the ball on the short-term, you’ll never achieve what you want in the long term. On the other hand, getting wins along the way, short-term or not, will definitely get you closer to that long-term win you’re after. Build, build, build. Hold the line when something breaks, then get back to building. You absolutely will fail if you insist on building a skyscraper in a single day.
Turning folks away at a time when you’re politically disadvantaged simply because you think you know which ones will “actually be Democrats” is also terribly, terribly naive (or narcissistic or both). You’re not psychic and neither am I. People DO change their political perspective all the time and you can’t always predict who is going to change, who is going to stick with it.
And besides, a big reason the right is in the position it is in now – FULL CONTROL of the federal government, largely in control of state & local government top to bottom across the country – is because they were willing to welcome folks into their house party. It didn’t matter if folks only aligned on one topic. It didn’t matter if it was only going to be a series of short-term wins. Those short-term wins added up, and added up, even if people eventually walked away. Trump and his cronies have almost absolute power now, in part because they courted the latino vote in key areas. Do you honestly think they care about the latino vote long-term now that you’re seeing what they’re doing to those communities?
The ideological purity test being touted here is the losing strategy. Short-term. Long-term. Full-term.
If your goal is a short term win, yeah. For long term you’re better off messaging to those who would actually be democrats, rather than appealing to those who buy into the newest snake oil and don’t care who it hurts so long as it’s not them.
Ironically, that’s a rather short-sighted take.
Biggest issue here is that you’ve misrepresented or misunderstood what I stated. Mine wasn’t a discussion about “appealing to” those folks. If we’re already politically aligned on some set of goals (ex: limit Trump’s damage to the USA), I don’t have to appeal to them, they’re already with me on that issue as long as I don’t slam the door shut in their faces.
Next issue is that if you insist on dropping the ball on the short-term, you’ll never achieve what you want in the long term. On the other hand, getting wins along the way, short-term or not, will definitely get you closer to that long-term win you’re after. Build, build, build. Hold the line when something breaks, then get back to building. You absolutely will fail if you insist on building a skyscraper in a single day.
Turning folks away at a time when you’re politically disadvantaged simply because you think you know which ones will “actually be Democrats” is also terribly, terribly naive (or narcissistic or both). You’re not psychic and neither am I. People DO change their political perspective all the time and you can’t always predict who is going to change, who is going to stick with it.
And besides, a big reason the right is in the position it is in now – FULL CONTROL of the federal government, largely in control of state & local government top to bottom across the country – is because they were willing to welcome folks into their house party. It didn’t matter if folks only aligned on one topic. It didn’t matter if it was only going to be a series of short-term wins. Those short-term wins added up, and added up, even if people eventually walked away. Trump and his cronies have almost absolute power now, in part because they courted the latino vote in key areas. Do you honestly think they care about the latino vote long-term now that you’re seeing what they’re doing to those communities?
The ideological purity test being touted here is the losing strategy. Short-term. Long-term. Full-term.