Locked out of power at the federal level, Democrats are struggling to show that they have taken to heart the message that voters sent in November and are well suited to regain power in future elections.
--The New York Times articles about autopsy conducted by the Democratic National Committee of the 2024 election
"Political Science" was a popular college major when Mad Dog was at university, but Mad Dog could not see then, nor since, where the "science" was in that.
Donald Trump ran on a very canny slogan: Kamala is for they/them; I'm for you.
Didn't that just say it all? Kamala is for those colored people from South of the Border. Kamala is for making your kids into transgenders, putting transgenders into your daughter's locker rooms and toilets, allowing some transgender male to run over your daughter at her field hockey game. Kamala is for giving away your money to them. It's us against them.
And Democrats walked right into that.
So that is Mad Dog's analysis. Is there any science to it?
None whatsoever. This is all drawn from field work, sampling opinions while knocking on doors in Hampton. Listening to blue collar workers in his offices and conversations around town.
But when Mad Dog suggested the Hampton Dems put people outside the polls on Election Day and conduct exit interviews to see how people voted and why, his fellow Dems scowled and snorted and said that was a ridiculous and misguided suggestion.
Granted, exit polling done right has to be randomized and done according to rules of surveying to be scientific.
Mad Dog was proposing to forget all that: rather than interviewing every 8th voter (to get a random sample) Mad Dog wanted to simply open up 10 desks with a sign: Tell Us Why You Voted the Way You Did!"
You would certainly not get a random sample that way; you'd get people who were not hurrying off to take children to school, people who were not trying to get to work. You'd get people with an axe to grind. But that might be revealing. And if you never try it, how do you know what you'll actually hear?
At any rate, if the Democrats really were interested in doing an "autopsy" that implies science, as an autopsy is very scientific, methodical and eyes wide open.
But, it sounds like the Democrats are not going to spend their time and money looking for uncomfortable truths.
They'll just spend money.
No comments:
Post a Comment