New data sheds light on the policy preferences of nonvoting Democrats in the last election. It may disappoint some progressives.

Contrary to what left-wing optimists had hoped, Democratic nonvoters in 2024 appear to have been less progressive than Democrats who voted. For instance, Democratic nonvoters were 14 points less likely to support banning assault rifles, 20 points less likely to support sending aid to Gaza, 17 points less likely to report believing that slavery and discrimination make it hard for Black Americans, 17 points more likely to support building a border wall with Mexico, 20 points more likely to support the expansion of fossil fuel production, and, sadly for economic populists, 16 points less likely to support corporate tax hikes (though this group still favored corporate tax hikes by a three to one margin). Overall, nonvoting Democrats were 18 points less likely to self-identify as “liberal” or “very liberal.” Here is a point for the centrists.

After spending months blaming actual leftists, it turns out it was just regular Democrats that were okay with giving Trump the presidency.

  • LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world
    27·
    2 days ago

    The graph of the data from this survey

    Something interesting, according to this survey 27% of democrat non voters want Obamacare repealed. 27% think women are too easily offended. 20% are pro-life.

    As the article suggests, however, we shouldn’t really take this data as a defining reason for why democratic voters didn’t come out to vote. Even more so, the data literally shows that the majority still broadly support progressive policies. Portraying this as “oh the Democrats were too progressive or too far left” is BS. The articles first couple paragraphs focus on portraying things from this perspective but it does get better.

    I think you should just look at the graph though. That’s the data. And it shows that non-voters were still majority supporters of progressive policies. That’s what matters.

    • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
      2·
      22 hours ago

      Perhaps it’s just the $150M spent on The Abundance agenda working their magic, producing articles that support centrist neoliberalism.

    • shikitohno@lemm.ee
      5·
      2 days ago

      Yeah, this was an odd write-up. I found this section particularly baffling.

      It’s true that Democrats need to energize their base voters, but our analysis suggests that they’re unlikely to do so successfully through a strategy of blanket progressive appeals to an ideologically diverse base. Instead, Democrats need to persuade nonvoters with a clear and credible message about how the party plans to improve the economic lives of working people.

      Now, credible eliminates the means-tested-to-death programs the Dems love so much, right out of the gate. This, much as the author seems loath to say it, leaves you with progressive ideas, or Republican/conservative ideas. Presumably, folks who cared enough to register as Democrats don’t like the conservative ideas, so we can fairly safely discard them as a winning move to get those voters out. Raising the minimum wage, universal healthcare, building more housing and/or implementing schemes to help people afford current housing, expanding benefits like WIC and EBT, free and universal university education, or taxing the rich and corporations to fund these sorts of programs are all clear, credible and progressive stances that would help working people.

      It doesn’t get much more simple than, “I make minimum wage. They say they will make minimum wage a bigger number, so I will get more money.” or “My check would be bigger if I didn’t have to pay insurance premiums, and I could spend it on other stuff if my insurance actually reliably covered most medical expenses without me having to cough up $2500-$6000 a year out of pocket first.”

      I’d also like to send out a special “Fuck you” to everyone who signed off on changing the position representing nonvoting Democrats and those who voted, depending on whether the nonvoters were more or less likely to respond in a certain way compared to those who voted in this section.

      The second thing to notice about the demographics of Democratic nonvoters: They were overwhelmingly working class and relatively economically precarious. Democratic nonvoters were nearly twice as likely (60 percent vs. 32 percent) to have a household income of less than $50,000 per year, they were nearly three times less likely to hold a four-year college degree (47 percent vs. 17 percent), twice as likely to be gig workers (31 percent vs. 15 percent), and only half as likely to be union members (27 percent vs. 14 percent). Further, nonvoting Democrats were more than twice as likely as voting Democrats to report feeling the economy is worse now than a year ago (46 percent vs. 22 percent) or that their incomes had recently decreased. And, perhaps not surprisingly given their economic precarity, Democratic nonvoters were substantially more likely than voters to support increased state welfare spending (61 percent vs. 52 percent).

    • reddig33@lemmy.worldEnglish
      111·
      2 days ago

      Wanting Obamacare repealed isn’t “Democrat” unless you want it replaced with Medicare for all. Go vote Republican if you want to strip everyone of their healthcare.

      • LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world
        11·
        2 days ago

        My thought as well. I totally get if you want it replaced with Medicare for all (I do), but no actual Democrat wants that shit repealed outright without a universal healthcare replacement.