• crusa187@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    This is quite true, and I’d like to add a bit of context. It’s important to understand why Rs won in that timeframe and what Ds did to try to emulate that success. In short, it’s all about the money Lebowski.

    Corporate donors massively favored Republicans in those days. Dems realized that on average, in 96% of the races where a candidate spent more money on ads, that candidate won. So Dems abandoned appealing to their constituents, and instead began appealing to rich donors in order to get more money. This is why campaign finance donations are considered legal bribes, because politicians promise and deliver on favors in exchange for those donations. If they don’t deliver, they lose out on funding for the next election cycle and in turn lose the race.

    The margins have slimmed, but the rich still favor Reps more to this day, and Dems haven’t pivoted from that strategy since. All it does is serve to further marginalize people, and cement the oligarchy. This is why we have to reform campaign finance to get money out of politics before we can ever hope to effect positive change, otherwise normal people will never be represented because it’s impossible for us to compete with unlimited money coming from the elites, corporate dark PACs, etc.