Rotunda Posted September 24 Posted September 24 1 minute ago, ClashAndBurn said: Stagnation was what we got with 6 out of 8 years of Obama, so we've seen how Democrats and their voters have responded to this before. All that you can expect from Team Blue is more of the same. Oh, and draconian immigration laws passed through bipartisanship. This kind of disillusionment won't manifest until we've died of old age. Because a right-wing Kamala loss, whether in 2024 or 2028, will result in an even more right-wing Democrat running in 2032, just like how we went from Hillary to Biden. So I guess this brings me back to my original point right? I've seen you post on this forum for years, and you've always seemed simultaneously outraged by the rightward shift of the Republicans but also somewhat pessimistic about anyone's ability to alter that course. To me, it seems like like these unremarkable Democrats are uniquely limiting folks ability to request/demand something more, and more like the coalition necessary to demand something greater isn't where it needs to be yet. 1
Armani? Posted September 24 Posted September 24 19 minutes ago, Relampago. said: Boo! 👻 Don't they have her up 6 in Pennsylvania 3
GhostBox Posted September 24 Posted September 24 The same people who think some lefty candidate would do better in Montana are the same ones who believed one would do great in WV 😂 2
Communion Posted September 24 Posted September 24 4 minutes ago, GhostBox said: Oh please if Roan really cared about anything I mean. That's literally the point. It's not a pop star's job to care who wins the senate. That's the job of politicians. It's literally the Dems' job to get cultural figures to want to help them win. And yet that's made harder with the wedge issue of genocide. But of course you of all the usual sycophants somehow think a pop star bares more responsibility in flipping the Senate than the literal VP and Dem nominee. Genuinely every next post revealing you're a DNC bot. Imagine typing "Kamala isn't even gonna campaign in [state where Senate candidate has closed gap to down to 4 points] anyway" and thinking you were...making a point? 1 1
Rotunda Posted September 24 Posted September 24 7 minutes ago, Communion said: Is trying to appeal to old Republicans in Montana or Ohio working? Tim Ryan ran on anti-Asian racism and white farmers in Ohio still didn't vote for him. Those same farmers are possibly going to take Moreno over the line while the party dictates that outreach to progressive young voters in places like Youngstown is pointless. Texas has one of the youngest populations in the nation, many of them shown to be liberal and progressive. Beto is the closest Dems have gotten to challenging for the Senate and he ran an explicitly progressive campaign with young people. If Harris wasn't endorsing genocide, she could have Chappell Roan storming Missouri with Lucas Kunce and actually possibly flip the seat by driving up youth turnout. At a basic level, you're not gonna get a disagreement from me about the need to try something different in a lot of these states/races. If your position is that these Moderate Dems aren't getting the job done, so we might as well try and build a different constituency in certain places, I agree with that. I think I take issue when it seems like these pivots are seen as no brainer solutions that would yield better outcomes.
GhostBox Posted September 24 Posted September 24 2 minutes ago, Communion said: I mean. That's literally the point. It's not a pop star's job to care who wins the senate. That's the job of politicians. It's literally the Dems' job to get cultural figures to want to help them win. And yet that's made harder with the wedge issue of genocide. But of course you of all the usual sycophants somehow think a pop star bares more responsibility in flipping the Senate than the literal VP and Dem nominee. Genuinely every next post revealing you're a DNC bot. Imagine typing "Kamala isn't even gonna campaign in [state where Senate candidate has closed gap to down to 4 points] anyway" and thinking you were...making a point? Kamala is not popular enough in that state to help a close election. Having her there would probably hurt his chances more than help. roan (if she cared about anything like she says she does) could just campaign for him knowing she wouldn't be doing so along side Harris. but again. She obviously doesn't care 1
Rotunda Posted September 24 Posted September 24 (edited) Can we leave Chappell Roan out of this . I think we understand the example Communion is using. Edited September 24 by Rotunda 2
Communion Posted September 24 Posted September 24 1 minute ago, Rotunda said: At a basic level, you're not gonna get a disagreement from me about the need to try something different in a lot of these states/races. If your position is that these Moderate Dems aren't getting the job done, so we might as well try and build a different constituency in certain places, I agree with that. I think I take issue when it seems like these pivots are seen as no brainer solutions that would yield better outcomes. In the case of Texas, the only proven strategy to actually come close to flipping a Senate seat has been Beto's explicitly progressive campaign that itself was ran as an almost mini extension of Sanders 2016. Many young volunteers from Sanders 2016 went on to help run Beto's 2018 Senate campaign. It feels like gaslighing not by you but pundits and Dems in general to try and erase how Beto was overtly progressively coded when entering national politics. I would even argue that Tim Ryan explicitly attempting dirt bag liberal populism by going on TV and saying he's afraid of an America where kids learn Chinese in schools is enough evidence that this imagined group of voters isn't there for Sherrod to court and he needs to go back to turning out the base in urban city centers. Sure, I'd give you Missouri. That's more a one-off experiment to see how a populist candidate can usurp a lazy incumbent if given the right coalition building. But that seems less expensive of an experiment than funneling like $100m into a Kentucky senate race for some conservative-coded former army vet moderate lesbian candidate to still get molly whopped by some 86 year old Republican. 1
ClashAndBurn Posted September 24 Posted September 24 4 minutes ago, Rotunda said: So I guess this brings me back to my original point right? I've seen you post on this forum for years, and you've always seemed simultaneously outraged by the rightward shift of the Republicans but also somewhat pessimistic about anyone's ability to alter that course. To me, it seems like like these unremarkable Democrats are uniquely limiting folks ability to request/demand something more, and more like the coalition necessary to demand something greater isn't where it needs to be yet. My point is that Dem voters are motivated by vibes rather than policy. Kamala is showing that if she ran on Trump's policies from 2016, voters would not care enough to pay attention. And in the end, what we are doing is slowly boiling the frog. Voters don't even realize that what little was achieved with the utterly pathetic Obamacare would be considered a leftist pipe dream and, as Sannie would deem it, an entirely unreasonable demand that "flies to close to the sun" if it were attempted today. There will always be an existential threat running under the Republican Party label. It will always be the most important election of our lifetime. What's galling is that what was seen as fascist immigration policy in 2016 is now viewed as reasonable and bipartisan today. Im pessimistic because the democrat voters ALWAYS seem to pick the worst possible choice whenever there are other options available. All based on vibes. The presidential ticket has been poisoned by the Obama cabinet for the previous two cycles, and then voters didn't even get a real choice this time around. Kamala was forced on us without whether it the scrutiny of a primary or even earning a single delegate. 2032 will be the first opportunity for there to even be a primary without the DNC pressing their thumbs on the scale for a preferred candidate since 2008, and that will only be the case if there isn't a progressive for them to gatekeep away from the nomination and the race is just between Walz and Shapiro. 1 1
CaptainMusic Posted September 24 Posted September 24 I hope that if Trump wins he at least loses the popular vote (even if it doesn't mean anything) and the house. It will truly be a disaster if he wins everything smh. 3
GhostBox Posted September 24 Posted September 24 3 minutes ago, CaptainMusic said: I hope that if Trump wins he at least loses the popular vote (even if it doesn't mean anything) and the house. It will truly be a disaster if he wins everything smh. I don't think we are prepared for the stuff they would do now with full control. scary to even think about it
thesegayz Posted September 24 Posted September 24 6 minutes ago, GhostBox said: 😢 Those voters: I can't bring myself to vote for Kamala, makes me feel icky!! a legitimate dying women: this is the last vote I'll ever cast and these are all the reasons those voters: ew you disgusting shill! You're going to ROT in hell with the war criminals you support 6 1
Sannie Posted September 24 Posted September 24 7 minutes ago, CaptainMusic said: I hope that if Trump wins he at least loses the popular vote (even if it doesn't mean anything) and the house. It will truly be a disaster if he wins everything smh. There's less than a zero percent chance he wins the popular vote. No need to even entertain this idea imo.
FameFatale Posted September 24 Posted September 24 34 minutes ago, GhostBox said: Charlie Kirk was fuming about this this morning He basically exposed he was the one behind bringing attention to it to Ronna McDaniel years ago and she ignored him. Then earlier this year he started ringing the alarm to others in congress and they kept telling him don't worry about it until he found some that would do his bidding for him to influence the state politicians in Nebraska. He was pissed because Turning Point spent a lot of money trying to influence Nebraska to winner takes all. He openly admitted they had planned for the tied 269-269 and had republicans ready to push to for Trump's favor. It's wild how they admit it all after all their plans are wiped away now 6
GhostBox Posted September 24 Posted September 24 This is just nuts. They haven't even been back for long and are leaving a gain 💀
ClashAndBurn Posted September 24 Posted September 24 9 minutes ago, thesegayz said: Those voters: I can't bring myself to vote for Kamala, makes me feel icky!! a legitimate dying women: this is the last vote I'll ever cast and these are all the reasons those voters: ew you disgusting shill! You're going to ROT in hell with the war criminals you support More like, the most negative thing anyone would have to say about this is just cynicism about how meaningful it really is. Frankly, her vote has zero actual impact because she lives in Mississippi and all her story serves is tear-bait for genocide-supporting liberals, but… sure… keep making up things nobody ever said about her. 1
Recommended Posts