about whom is moving next door, whether it is safe to walk by a homeless camp and what they are teaching in school.
All the analyses I have heard it was the economy and inflation. He thinks we should be spreading even more fear of the "other".
He is full of s--t

.... in addition to the economy, we do have to address people's other concerns. For instance, having to explain, deflect, and tip-toe around "defund the police" was not helpful, and it is still being used against us.

to this guy?

.... haven't been doing too well with the Supreme Court?

sorry but most Americans are too dumb to understand anything other than that IMO. Angry old man rant over.

The republicans support and bow down to a convicted felon, corrupt, unethical, amoral racist. And WE'RE the party of permissiveness? That is just the biggest bunch of bullshit. And as one DUer responded (I'm paraphrasing) why the FUCK are we listening to this compromised, third way asshole?

... won by a landslide. The felon's win was not convincing, he just barely scraped by, but given your characterization, he shouldn't have come close.

Assuming you want to win elections, what would be your suggestions?

Nor Bill Clinton, nor Terry Mcauliffe, nor Bob Shrum.

Do we need to against freedom to "win"?
If we "win" in that way, it's exactly the same as losing.

.... Permissiveness, as used pejoratively, includes toleration of criminal violations, that is, being soft on crime. Obviously criminal conduct is not what we mean when we speak of freedom.

But you are right in that some folks think that civil rights amount to permissiveness.

.... "soft on crime". And it's largely our own fault.

The slogan "defund the police" came from our quarter. Many democrats, rather than just call it bullshit, excuseed it through attenuating justifications that it really meant this or that or the other thing. To which those who originated the slogan maintained that, no, it actually, really means defund the police.

I'm not sure if you have encountered it, but right here on DU we have folks who insist dogmatically that ACAB. I bet you know what that stands for, but if you don't there is a wiki article you can refer to. That certainly isn't a helpful stance in electoral politics, and it is one that taints our candidates.

Bill Clinton, who, in this very thread has been denigrated, responded to concerns about rising crime by promising to hire 100,000 police officers. And after years of progressives sneering at law enforcement, he rebuffed Sister Souljah for celebrating race-based violence. And here we are sneering at him, one of only two Democratic presidents since FDR to be reelected, because he wasn't soft on crime.

Being soft on crime is an example of the permissiveness that we are yoked with, and criminal behavior has nothing to do with freedom.

I didn't vote for a convicted felon for President. A felon who ran so that he could stay out of prison. Yeah. We're the permissive ones...

.... of much of the electorate. It is easy for the opposition to cast us as "soft on crime" and that is not without reason.