@Bozo_Casanova
“What should they say” is not the right question a better question is “who are they” and “what do they care about?”
This is a non-answer. Reproductive rights alone should have led to a Democratic landslide. In the US if you had an election with a binary vote: Healthy Women or More Guns, which do you think would win? That's the answer: Americans are stupid.
Somehow the majority of Americans missed that they were doing OK. Perhaps that’s begging the question.
I'll put it another way: Americans have forgotten how bad it can get (but they will know soon). And yet, it was only 5 years ago. Americans are stupid.
That’s incorrect They never recovered from a transformed economy and society, and the people a few rungs up did, and pulled the ladder up behind them. And of course those who were just about to enter the working world at that time had their ability to build any kind of real ownership equity in anything or own a home traded away before they had a chance. Incidentally, you can’t really understand the rise out bitcoin and its popularity with millennial and Gen Z men outside that context, but I digress.
OK, so your assignment now is to explain that transformed economy and society to a bunch of idiots. Your bitcoin example is kind of a left-field distractor but I'll summarize it for you: bitcoin is the modern day penny stock.
I’ll give you that they were better than Republicans, but they don’t deserve more credit than that.
That's cute and it sounds intelligent in an Anastasis kind of way. I would like more explanation but I have feeling you'll either ignore it or throw a Guadaloopy "if you don't understand it, I don't know what to tell you" on it. But if you try to run from it, you're just doing more pseudointellectual posturing you complain about.
Out national elections aren’t “rigged,”
You left out the "electoral college" part. Don't be disingenuous.
Democrats made explicitly and conscious strategic choices at the leadership level to make tactical retreats from places like Texas, betting that demographic change, supported by Republican policy failure would carry them back into power. Their strategic thesis was wrong. It speaks to their ignorance of the communities they counted on. They aren’t victims.
The reasons you cited for your offered reasoning of abandoning Texas or letting macro/external factors do the work would seem to be based on sound reasoning, until it didn't. If you know why I would love to know more.
1) abandon all issue based litmus tests and racial or gender representation goals in favor of the single objective of winning races, recruit candidates who are the most credible and appealing person who lives in and is a product of the community on the 2-3 most tangible and immediate problems the community has. I interpret this as find likeable people ("knock on every door" types) who will win and then vote . . . their conscience? With what their voters want? Or along party lines? Isn't that last one the "litmus test" part? Did this work in the Montana senate race with Tester? Let me know if this is what you meant, I don't to put words in your mouth.
2) Contest every race in every place, with the strategic priority of winning county and state legislative elections.
Sure, makes sense. Does this cost money? Because it seems like it would cost money. And after getting relentlessly hustled by Act Blue, I'm out.