If you have a candidate

[DownriverDem]

that can't win statewide, how do you get folks to understand? It will hand the Senate seat to a repub.

[Fiendish Thingy]

1. Cryptic, coded.

Incomprehensible.

[DownriverDem]

2. I'm talking

about the Michigan Senate race.

[Fiendish Thingy]

3. Go on...nt

[Cirsium]

5. What about it?

What about the Michigan Senate race? Who is this candidate that can't win statewide?

[Ocelot II]

4. What is this about?

[Cirsium]

6. The candidates

The Democratic candidates for Senate in Michigan: Abdul El-Sayed, Mallory McMorrow, Haley Stevens.

[MIButterfly]

7. Mallory McMorrow dropped out this week

[Cirsium]

10. Right, thanks

I forgot that. It is between Abdul El-Sayed and Haley Stevens. I wonder which one the OP thinks can't win state wide and why?

[DownriverDem]

14. Parts of the state

is pretty racist - UpNorth, the west side, Macomb County and the UP. Our candidate has to be able to win statewide. At the end of one of Abdul's ads Bernie says "Don't worry about his name" and then laughs. I don't think that was a good thing to say. We have to make sure Rogers doesn't win.

[Boo1]

8. Polling shows them performing exactly equal against the republican

One says the words Democratic Establishment" a lot, which is my red flag that I means I won't support them in a primary.

If you are running for the nomination of a party you should like what that party stands for. If not go somewhere else.

[Cirsium]

9. Not helpful

You are cavalierly dismissing a large segment of Democratic voters, who very possibly represent the wave of the future. What if you were told that if you don't like the progressive wing of the party and the recent trend in that direction that you should go somewhere else?

People have different ideas about what the party stands for, and it is ultimately up to the voters. Most progressives support positions that are in alignment with the New Deal. That certainly could be characterized as "what the party stands for" much more so than say "third way" ideas.

Vote however you like in the primary, but please don't imply that those with whom you disagree are somehow disloyal and should go somewhere else. That is extremely destructive.

[Boo1]

11. Save your lectures

They don't represent a future I want for the Democratic party. They dont feow the party, they retract it to a smaller geographic and philosophical niche that will not win in America.

[Cirsium]

12. Love to

I was responding to your lecture.

[leftstreet]

15. Most people want nonprofit healthcare

They want rich people to start paying up

They don't want their tax dollars spent on the military

They want higher wages and more time off

Decades of credible polling and candidate support will show you that these ideas aren't a "geographic and philosophical" niche. They're ideas that cross the red/blue spectrum. It's the parties that haven't been following the desires of the voters

[Boo1]

17. Maybe

But election results don't really support that being true, or atleast not enough of an issue for most people.

Socialism isn't going to catch on with the majority

[leftstreet]

18. Results don't include half the voters

Almost half the eligible voters in the US don't vote. Whether not registered, stopped voting, or just don't give a shit either way.

So we can't say it is/isn't about policy until "socialist" policies are on offer.

Looking at Platner, he apparently got the most D primary voters in ME history, and his platform was very anti-ruling class

[Boo1]

19. Exactly

They dont give enough of a shit to vote. They dont care.

[DownriverDem]

13. I agree

I will vote for whoever the Dem nominee is in November. My state like many is not the same everywhere. That is the problem and my concern.

[Cirsium]

16. Understood

Your fear is that rural Michigan voters won't vote for El-Sayed? Because of his name or ethnicity? Or because of his policies?

I am in the most conservative district in the state, and have been for a long time. By way if contrast I can remember elections downriver where the Democratic candidate got 70%-80% of the vote (John Dingell). I worked in agriculture and have a lot of contacts. From what I am hearing and have observed for decades, it is cautious middle of the road Democrats who fare poorly. We can and have succeeded here. But not by pandering or playing it safe.

In 2006 Democrats won precincts across the northeast lower peninsula and all of the precincts in the UP. Obama did very well in rural precincts, winning many of them. Trump did well here, yes, but so did Sanders and Dean. I remember people saying about Dean "I may not agree with everything he says, but he says what he means and he is a fighter." In 2008, I would say to workers who had been voting Republican but were now supporting Obama, "but Rush said he is a Socialist" the answer was often "maybe that's what we need."

People don't care about ideology and don't talk about it. Crushing poverty, lack of access to healthcare, lack of access to anything but right wing media, collapsing infrastructure, inroads by wealthy outsiders, are all bigger factors than ideology. Sure, we can mock and ridicule the "anti-establishment" sentiment as ignorant and naive. Where does that get us? We can point out that there are a lot of low information voters here. True enough. Of course racist appeals work here (they work in the big city white suburbs, too.) All true.

I don't know that El-Sayed will do well here, but I do know that there is a growing sentiment that a radical shakeup is needed, especially among younger people. Too often Democrats have been listening to the consultants who want to fine tune the message to appeal to different constituencies. That approach has failed. Looking at you, James Carville. I wonder if he would have thrown a fit over FDR and the New Deal? "Too radical!! We need to move to the middle where the swing voters are!! That's how you win!"

I think we are going to flip the 1st district. If we did, El-Sayed would very likely win the state.