I'll take your word for it, as I've heard it elsewhere from other yankie comrades. It sounds like that applies more to the US context. The European and South American trotskyists are, I think, far less in electoralism mode.

The combination of 'effective strategies and ineffective execution' I think hits much of the nail of the head. When I discuss politics with Trotskyists, avoiding explicit theoretical issues where differences would become pronounced, I'm often in complete agreement as regards strategy, and even tactics and operations, but the executionc can certainly be lacking. It's worth bearing in mind, though, imo, that we're often speaking about deeply ideologically convinced people (like ourselves) who also see no other way of even trying to engage in genuinely radical politics, but where there isn't really much of an institutional structure to normalize effective political praxis, or when there are institutions, they are reformist and anti-revolutionary. I'm not surprised that then when they try to preach the immortal science it can come across as alienating.

For what it's worth, I've noticed a shift in trotskyist strategies where they will not adverstise themselves as hardcore as such as before, without broader far left party frameworks, while building a fraction of hardcore trotskyists within said broader org (in preparation, naturally, for the aforementioned day of revelation and judgement). Their strategy then seems to be nnot such trying to explicitly communicate a party line as to show the contradictions and shortcomings of less radical or unified orgs from within. So it's basically an evolution of entryism, as far as I can tell.