That's why their main complaints have been procedural: "Why didn't you come to us first with your plans?". And why they slow-walked the vote on a war powers act.
Either the majority of Americans want this war, in which case the Dems have to be quiet, or they don’t, in which case the dems should be making it the number one issue.
Sadly I suspect the answer is not in the side of the Hollywood version of post ww2 America.
Now is the time to insert the “are we the bad guys” meme.
By "loudest supporters" - are you referring to the donor class? Money is speech, after all.
The Democratic party has an identity crisis: it's failing to balance special interests and their traditional constituents - post-Goldwater/ southern-strategy. Instead of activating their base, they seem to be courting the political center that has been hollowed out by Maga and polarization, incidentally matching the desires of their donors who abhor any kind of populist leftist politics, including anything in instituted by FDR.
No, I don't believe so. I'm talking about the people who convinced them that culture wars were the right way to do battle with a conservative opponent despite that being automatically an uphill battle. The dem leadership focused on issues that polled well with a small group of loud people on a crusade, and largely ignored bread & butter issues that resonate with people less politically inclined. But centrist votes are counted just the same as partisan ones, and more plentiful.
Which dem leadership? The only crusade I remember was Kamala Harris going on a national tour with Liz Cheney and brightly signaling her rightward shift. Somehow, "Republicans for Kamala" failed to save her campaign in the swing-states.
> people who convinced them that culture wars were the right way to do battle
Who are they exactly?
> The dem leadership focused on issues that polled well with a small group of loud people on a crusade, and largely ignored bread & butter issues that resonate with people less politically inclined
Which issues, specifically?
> centrist votes
You think there’s some huge swath people who’d vote Dem if it wasn’t for their pesky (and incredibly mild) protective stance towards trans people, for example?
Honestly curious which sources do you get your political news from mainly?
> The dems have no power against a unified GOP front
They absolutely do. The war powers act is “bi partisan” And they can protest the war strongly on moral and budgetary grounds for starters. The war is incredibly unpopular with the Dem base and even independents. Opposing it is a layup. (But, like I said, the truth is Dem leadership wants the war)
> and they already look pretty weak on issues like this.
Fighting (whether winning or losing) shows strength not weakness and is what voters react to. Standing down is exactly NOT what they should do. C’mon, man!
> They are trying to figure out how they can mollify their base while attracting enough centrist voters to retake Congress later this year
Like I said the war is UNPOPULAR so OPPOSE it. Winning stat.
> year. I don't care for the dem leadership but I feel a little sympathy for them
NO! They’re “blundering” when they don’t have to. (But see points about Schumer wanting the war)
> Catering to their loudest supporters is a pretty big reason they are the minority party right now.
Also a backwards take. They’re a minority party because they’d rather lose and maintain power than oppose the capitalists who own them.
Name one instance of this actually happening. I'll wait.