Elections Is it ever better to lose an election?

[BreatheSherBro]

Next week is the election, and I am sure that a lot of people from both parties want their candidate to win.

For the long term health of the party and for accomplishing major goals though, is it ever better to lose an election? I think answer can be yes because losing an election can allow the party to reset and reassess their strategy and priorities.

To me, the Democratic party isn't very cohesive at the moment. It has the old guard that wants their party to be more centrist and the new guard that wants the party to be more liberal. If Kamala loses, depending on what counties she wins or loses, it could spell out which direction the party should go in.

I think the Republican party is much more cohesive and unified than the Democratic party, but they are very much attached to Trump. Trump has much more influence over them than past candidates. If Trump loses, then the Republican party might be able to break free of some of Trump's grip over the party.

Whichever party wins the election is going to have a hard time accomplishing anything (at least legislatively) because of how divided the country is right now. Is it better to ever lose the election, learn from it, and come back to power later when your party is more in position to accomplish major tasks like when there is a clear mandate?

 

[Vergilius]

I feel like both parties would benefit from losing. The Democrats need to reconnect with ordinary, working people. They have to reaccess how and why the lost the white working class so comprehensively to Trump's Republicans. They can't just be the party of minorities and the educated elite.

On the flip side, the Republicans need to move on from Trump. They can hold on to some of the positives he's brought: suspicion of China, less automatically pro-business and hopefully get even more in touch with working class people to the point of actually making a positive difference in their lives (a guy can dream)... but they could accomplish this better with someone less divisive and abravise than Trump.

All in all, both parties could do with an organized and consistent bid from a third party to force them into being sharper, trimmer and more focused.

 

[Poon Goon]

First thought that came to mind was that mayor in Mexico that was beheaded on his sixth day in office. Guy might have rather taken the L if he could see the future. Others in his party might be reassessing their strategy as well.

 

[UberHere]

No.

 

[King Joffery]

Definitely not for this election. If Kamala wins the Democrats will win every election for the next 50 years even if she does a terrible job due to being able to open the floodgates to illegal immigration and getting them fast-tracked to citizenship whom they will disproportionally ship to swing states to secure the election.

 

[Jack V Savage]

If Dems had won in 2004, they probably would have gotten slaughtered in 2008, and a lot of big, positive changes that the 2008 election led to (banking reform, the ACA, SSM) wouldn't have happened. If Republicans had lost in 2016, they would probably be way less crazy and would be looking at a massive landslide win this year with someone like Haley or Kemp as the nominee.

 

[ferrisjso]

I don't believe this country will ever elect someone left of center under this regime. But if thats wrong in theory Kamala losing is better for the left because they will have an open primary in 2028. Where if she wins Kamala will run for reelection and after that Walz will be the frontrunner. The whole process shuts down when theres an incumbent. The left won't even be able to run a candidate until 2036. Thats a whole new generation forced to live under capitalism.

If you don't like a candidate from "your party" them losing means they are out of the picture and you get a fresh do ever. Whereas a candidate you don't like winning locks them and their VP in for 8-12 years where you can't get rid of them.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I don't believe this country will ever elect someone left of center under this regime. But if thats wrong in theory Kamala losing is better for the left because they will have an open primary in 2028. Where if she wins Kamala will run for reelection and after that Walz will be the frontrunner. The whole process shuts down when theres an incumbent. The left won't even be able to run a candidate until 2036. Thats a whole new generation forced to live under capitalism.

If you don't like a candidate from "your party" them losing means they are out of the picture and you get a fresh do ever. Whereas a candidate you don't like winning locks them and their VP in for 8-12 years where you can't get rid of them.

One wonders what this guy thinks the center is. Kropotkin, maybe? Malatesta?

 

[Seano]

It would probably be better for the Dems to lose this one, for them anyway. Then they can build up an intelligent articulate candidate for 2028. I cant imagine anyone wants 8 potential years of Harris. Some may say they want her over Trump, which I get, but I can't imagine there's any real enthusiasm about her.

 

[Deleted member 585708]

If the GOP lose, they might break free of the Trump curse.

But if they win, equally, it's his last go and they can put him behind them once and for all.

Either way, he's old and fat, so he's not a huge long term concern.

If the Dems lose, it rather depends who they get behind, no? Sometimes leaderlessness can really drag a party down.

 

[NickNick]

No, the Supreme Court alone is a reason why it's never better. Trump got to seat 3 SC justices. If he wins next week, he will likely get two more with Thomas and Alito retiring securing a far right majority for decades to come.

 

[Jack V Savage]

If the GOP lose, they might break free of the Trump curse.

But if they win, equally, it's his last go and they can put him behind them once and for all.

Either way, he's old and fat, so he's not a huge long term concern.

The concern is future elections if Trump wins. American constitutional democracy is not guaranteed to survive his next attack.

 

[idrankyourbeer]

It would probably be better for the Dems to lose this one, for them anyway. Then they can build up an intelligent articulate candidate for 2028.

they already have one in 2024

 

[Seano]

they already have one in 2024

Then whats Harris doing on the ticket?

 

[Deleted member 585708]

The concern is future elections if Trump wins. American constitutional democracy is not guaranteed to survive his next attack.

He's not like Putin or Kim Jong Un who might live long.

 

[idrankyourbeer]

Then whats Harris doing on the ticket?

putting her boot up a very stupid persons ass.

 

[K1levelgrappler]

I basically think America is a doomed garbage ass country and deserves whatever it gets and I wouldn’t expect a Kamala presidency to halt the decline in any meaningful way but there’s a lot people on the chuds enemies list who don’t deserve what’s coming if Trump wins.

In any sane, functional country the dems should lose for a variety of reasons but It’s America the only way to punish the dems is to vote for a bunch of completely irredeemable Nazis so that’s a tough pill to swallow.

Either way, Kamala win or no, the chuds are gonna take over at some point and start smiting everyone who ever looked at them sideways and that’s just something I’ve been resigned to for awhile now. That and the inevitable climate meltdown and all the horrors that will unleash. I’m pretty doom brained about everything these days lol.

 

[Jack V Savage]

He's not like Putin or Kim Jong Un who might live long.

Doesn't matter. The backsliding and movement will be in place.

Good outline here:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/12/president-trumps-dream-is-to-become-americas-viktor-orban.html

 

[Seano]

putting her boot up a very stupid persons ass.

She put her boot up her own ass? Was this an Onlyfans thing?

 

[Jack V Savage]

I basically think America is a doomed garbage ass country and deserves whatever it gets and I wouldn’t expect a Kamala presidency to halt the decline in any meaningful way but there’s a lot people on the chuds enemies list who don’t deserve what’s coming if Trump wins.

In any sane, functional country the dems should lose for a variety of reasons but It’s America the only way to punish the dems is to vote for a bunch of completely irredeemable Nazis so that’s a tough pill to swallow.

Either way, Kamala win or no, the chuds are gonna take over at some point and start smiting everyone who ever looked at them sideways and that’s just something I’ve been resigned to for awhile now. That and the inevitable climate meltdown and all the horrors that will unleash. I’m pretty doom brained about everything these days lol.

I think if Trump loses again, the Orbanist wing will be discredited, at least for a while, and the country will get a reprieve. Can't say that we won’t face another threat at some point, but this latest one will be beaten.