Curious to know what the Salience Bros/popularists would have to say about this polling. Doesn't this strongly suggest that Dems *should* talk about these things a lot more?
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Inferring causality from a crosstab is dicey. Familiarity with the names of individuals is highly related to how closely one follows news and sources one consumes. Bluesky Democrats will know who Abrego Garcia and Khalil are and hate Trump. Doesn't mean telling others will make them Bluesky Dems.
Agreed. It would be good if NYT had discussed this issue & showed how heard/not heard stories relates to party ID, in addition to Trump approval. If you look at just Democrats who have/havent heard the stories for example, I'm guessing much smaller diff in Trump approval. https://bsky.app/profile/nstenhouse.bsky.social/post/3lpgvu7lvic27
It doesn't *necessarily* mean this, but it certainly suggests that it's worth a try, and suggests that "we can't make this issue salient" is not a very serious way to think about the moral and political imperatives of this moment.
When you find a poll where a significant number of Dems. are not worried about immigration, then I will agree. The GOP has turned immigration into a race & crime issue. Even a significant number of Dems. are supporting stronger borders and mean-spirited immigration policies. Race & Crime. Period
I think it’s mostly hardcore maga types that fall for the immigrants are all criminals stuff. The incoherent low frequency/swing voters that agree w/ anti immigration stances think immigrants are making them poorer.
Not sure it will make a difference. Talking more won't reach willfully ignorant. The willfully ignorant don't care until it impacts/interferes with their daily lives... ie tariffs making it more expensive at Walmart or Dollar General or local ER closing.
to be fair, it doesn't necessarily follow either way from this survey; it could just reveal what information ecosystems respondents are plugged into. (Hearing about P'Nut the squirrel was probably highly correlated with Trump vote—that doesn't mean he should have talked about it more.)
At the very least it abstracts away so much that its practical value is really dubious.
On one hand -- I agree, media bandwidth, mindshare, even our own side's motivation aren't infinite. The economy is already destroying Trump and figures to get worse. Basing strategy around it isn't crazy.
But movement on immigration disapproval (esp. around Van Hollen trip) at least suggests Dems can change opinions on the margins.
Maybe more importantly, economy is "automatically salient." No need to tell people (beyond a certainly point) prices are up and that it's Trump's fault.
Thus immigration disapproval is likely more responsive to "investment" of messaging capacity.
It's not like marginal voters check out at Walmart, see the bill up 35%, and think "But Democrats tell me Ábrego García is an important issue so I guess I'm more OK with high prices."
Immigration is about race and crime (fear) in America. Even Dems. voters view immigration that way. The Republicans have done a good job of scaring the hell of white people, from all parties, when it comes to immigration. Race and fear works in American politics.
Tax cuts to weathy, subsidies for corporations cuts to all social welfare programs that help 70% of americans one way or another, no healthcare regulations, he stopped bidens lowered prescription drug costs, housing, food costs high, education cuts. On and on.
If those who don't watch the news or pay little attention to it, will not hear the Dems. if they talk about it more.
Dems. voters, for the most part, are well-educated, college grads. voters...who are highly likely to vote in all types of elections. Low information voters are less likely to vote.
And we know they will not. With the exception of Chris Murphy, AOC and Bernie, we don't even know what they're FOR. One thing we DO know, Cory Booker just confirmed Jared Kushner's FELON father to be America's ambassador to France. The only Dem to do so, btw.
I wonder if you’ll see a split where local Democrats running for Congress are more direct and less consultant-strategy driven than the national party. Being direct with local voters, and translating the National noise to local consequences, is what will rebuild the “brand.”
What it tells me is that people who vote trump aren't listening to Democrats at all. Democrats talk, but they aren't heard in right wing media. They aren't given airtime.
Dems are too busy obsessing over how far into Nazism they should go to court the vote of imaginary millions of "yes I voted for the hate-shrieking rapist, but if you just throw Trans people under the bus and get a little more hateful, maybe next time I'll vote for you!"
Exactly, when they say they’re offended it means we must’ve done something offensive and we should immediately delete or retract, and then apologize, and then take our beating for the shame of having to had deleted or retracted the original outrage, because we are guilty of the very grave offense.
copy the image and paste as post. before clicking post, click on box for alt text. in the new window for alt text go to 3 dots menu upper right hand corner. sub menu opens, scroll down to Google lens, and click. wait for cursor to appear, highlight text. the source will appear in right hand side bar
On android - save image, open in photos. "Copy text" or goggle lens icon will accomplish the same thing. this specific image has been used so many times I had to use lens. All instances of use are in a pull up tab below image
Dems should always be polling this way. It serves both its traditional purpose, but also has some potential to spark participant curiosity and break through the propaganda/misinformation bubble.
I think Dems should seek to educate and not just try to work with the small amount of information so many voters seem to have. Bring up what is not being covered on Fox, and talk about what it means and what is at stake.
Comments
On one hand -- I agree, media bandwidth, mindshare, even our own side's motivation aren't infinite. The economy is already destroying Trump and figures to get worse. Basing strategy around it isn't crazy.
1/
Maybe more importantly, economy is "automatically salient." No need to tell people (beyond a certainly point) prices are up and that it's Trump's fault.
2/
It's not like marginal voters check out at Walmart, see the bill up 35%, and think "But Democrats tell me Ábrego García is an important issue so I guess I'm more OK with high prices."
3/3
cc. @democrats.org
https://bsky.app/profile/gregsargent.bsky.social/post/3lpjueliygs25
Dems. voters, for the most part, are well-educated, college grads. voters...who are highly likely to vote in all types of elections. Low information voters are less likely to vote.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Dickinson
The DNC exists to protect the careers of elected Democrats. That is LITERALLY the only reason it exists.
https://bsky.app/profile/opiniontoday.bsky.social/post/3lpigafr6gb22
They should talk about ALL of this un-American fucking bullshit
And they should be blaming Republicans for ALL of it - while talking about their plans to unfuck all of this fascist insanity…