Summary
Historians suggest Democrats might have fared better against Donald Trump by embracing the economic issues championed by Senator Bernie Sanders, who has long pushed for a focus on “bread-and-butter” concerns for working-class voters.
Despite Kamala Harris’s progressive policies, polls showed Trump was favored on economic issues, particularly among working-class and Hispanic voters.
Historian Leah Wright Rigueur argued that Sanders’ messaging on economic struggles could be key for future Democratic strategies.
Sanders himself criticized the party for “abandoning” the working class, which he said has led to a loss of support across racial lines.
There doesn’t need to be orchestration.
If that’s true, then the bill failed by a slim margin. It almost passed, and had the support of the majority of the democratic party, including passing the House of Representatives. This is an important detail.
It didn’t “almost” do anything. Manchin blocked it for you. If by some miracle a progressive had won Manchin’s seat, some other centrist in another state would rotate in to vote no.
There are always enough Manchins.
Ah, that’s orchestration, which you just said was not happening. You are insinuating that most of them are neoliberals who simply put forward a chosen sacrificial scapegoat in some sort of planned scheme to deceive the American public. Strong claims require evidence, otherwise they are simply convenient ideas we can adopt to oversimplify a messy world and make ourselves feel better.
Nope. All it takes is for some moneyed interest to buy just enough Manchins. They buy whoever’s cheapest.
And you make excuses for them.
No, not excuses, simply doubt. Manchin has a long record in the Senate as a moderate, Clinton-style dem. He’s even voted against abortion rights. Rather than corruption, I think he’s just semi-conservative, he even voted with Trump around 50% of the time during his first term. That is not typical for a democrat, it’s quite unusual actually.