Bears01 Posted November 8 Posted November 8 @on the line we had a democratic candidate, who reached out to republicans in ways I've never seen a democrat do before (more than Hillary and Biden which was ENOUGH as is), completely secede on the issue of immigration, and got absolutely curbstomeped. And your idea is "run more to the right?" The people have made it clear that they are tired of the status quo, going back 16 years now. Go ahead, embrace the status quo. Offer people basically nothing except "the other side is BAD" I won't be there to vote for your loser candidates anymore. 4
Cruel Summer Posted November 8 Posted November 8 5 minutes ago, Thuggin said: If Pelosi didn't push Biden out it would be been a Reagan level blowout. New Jersey gone. Virginia gone. New Mexico gone. Minnesota gone. New Hampshire gone. Maine gone. Not even just Reagan - Nixon's reelection in '72, a 23.2% popular vote STOMP, would have looked tame and mild in comparison
Virgos Groove Posted November 8 Posted November 8 4 minutes ago, Communion said: DADDY XI JINPING This is gonna be liberals in two years, but with China: Are we ready for Walzism-Dengism? 1
19SLAYty9 Posted November 8 Posted November 8 Nikki Haley's political career is over tho. Let's celebrate that
XDNA Posted November 8 Posted November 8 About Nancy - there were reports that some Dems did not want Harris to get the nomination because they didn't think she could win. AOC told us this on her IG Live prior to JB dropping. But there was backlash about the possibility of skipping Harris. I'm curious to learn everything that was going on behind the scenes prior to Biden dropping and then during Harrris' campaign. It will at least be interesting.
Dera Posted November 8 Posted November 8 4 hours ago, Lightbringer007 said: WHAT THE FAWK- this is actually tv material the way I thought it was RFK Jr who got appointed to a cabinet position, not this guy 1
ClashAndBurn Posted November 8 Posted November 8 2 minutes ago, 19SLAYty9 said: Nikki Haley's political career is over tho. Let's celebrate that Nah, she has a promising future as Josh Shapiro's running mate-to be in 2028.
Lil Mistee Posted November 8 Posted November 8 I need Jimmy Carter, with has last breath, to say… "America… is… an… oligarchy" *chokes* 1
Redstreak Posted November 8 Posted November 8 55 minutes ago, on the line said: And ATRLs take away is MORE LEFT!!!!! 🤣 Do you think it benefits democrats to be diet republicans, yes or no
RihRihGirrrl Posted November 8 Posted November 8 4 minutes ago, XDNA said: About Nancy - there were reports that some Dems did not want Harris to get the nomination because they didn't think she could win. AOC told us this on her IG Live prior to JB dropping. But there was backlash about the possibility of skipping Harris. I'm curious to learn everything that was going on behind the scenes prior to Biden dropping and then during Harrris' campaign. It will at least be interesting. I'm be honest, I did not think she could win from the beginning cause I did not believe America would vote for a black woman.....but I was turned by her debate performance, that's when I started believing. Then she lost moment but then Ann came along and gave me hope again....
Communion Posted November 8 Posted November 8 PEOPLE SAY WE'RE ALIKE THEY SAY WE GOT THE SAME HAIR ITS YOU AND ME WITH THE COIN THAT THE INDUSTRY LOVES TO SPEND AND WHEN THE POLLS GO TO BED THE INTERNET WILL GO CRAZY FORGOT THAT INSIDE THE ICON THERES STILL A YOUNG MITTY FROM 'CHUSETTS 5
Sannie Posted November 8 Posted November 8 1 hour ago, Communion said: Linking me a Matt Yglesias tweet should be criteria for getting tossed into a gulag. The data is interesting and actually mimics what leftists are arguing. The issue is ans will always be economics. Even in people's cultural critiques, it goes back to the economy. People don't hate undocumented migrants. They hate when told by the right that their economic suffering is cause Dems are giving benefits to the undocumented over them. People don't hate trans people. They hate when hold by the right that their economic suffering is not a priority for Dems and Dems care more about identity issues that most voters can't relate to. As long as Dems don't run on the economy, it gives the right the fuel to link other values that Dems have like progressive social values with economic suffering. Ohhh, finally some good food from Miss Communion. So what do we do, then? Bc I feel like this puts us in a tough spot. Do we ignore the attacks on trans people and immigrants to focus on the economy? Because it sounds like if we defend either of these vulnerable populations or try to find nuance with this issue, the right's response will just be, "see, you care more about them than us". This is a genuine question.
Dera Posted November 8 Posted November 8 1 hour ago, Communion said: People don't hate trans people. They hate when hold by the right that their economic suffering is not a priority for Dems and Dems care more about identity issues that most voters can't relate to. Communion this is a weird take. People stare at you in public and talk to you weird if you are conspicuously trans, especially in little red towns. It's not because they are reminded of their economic suffering. All that legislation prohibiting trans healthcare for kids, and prohibiting education about transness in schools, is not because people are concerned about economic impacts. It's because people don't believe kids can or should be trans. 2
Virgos Groove Posted November 8 Posted November 8 Just now, Communion said: PEOPLE SAY WE'RE ALIKE THEY SAY WE GOT THE SAME HAIR ITS YOU AND ME WITH THE COIN THAT THE INDUSTRY LOVES TO SPEND AND WHEN THE POLLS GO TO BED THE INTERNET WILL GO CRAZY FORGOT THAT INSIDE THE ICON THERES STILL A YOUNG MITTY FROM 'CHUSETTS Mitt had binders full of women, Kamala had binders full of Republicans. Wait, you might be cooking…
Dera Posted November 8 Posted November 8 mess not @Sannie kind of echoing me back to back I already fear there are some dupes running around this thread but now I look just as bad...
Bears01 Posted November 8 Posted November 8 9 minutes ago, XDNA said: About Nancy - there were reports that some Dems did not want Harris to get the nomination because they didn't think she could win. AOC told us this on her IG Live prior to JB dropping. But there was backlash about the possibility of skipping Harris. I'm curious to learn everything that was going on behind the scenes prior to Biden dropping and then during Harrris' campaign. It will at least be interesting. @ClashAndBurn was right in the regard that a lot of the "democratic old guard" base would not stand for "a BLACK WOMAN" being passed over for. Even though before she got in, everyone knew she was a bad candidate, they just huffed the Hopium (me to the max) because she wasn't Biden. Now that the worst case scenario has manifested into reality, it's time for the party and its voters to disregard trivial bullshit like that going forward. But I'll believe it when I see it, so no votes for me. The only Democratic "Star" that has any legit accomplishments that benefits the working class to their name, is Whitmer. She'd be the only one I can stomach in 2028, but my true hope is that someone else can rise from the ashes and take this broken party over
Bears01 Posted November 8 Posted November 8 2 minutes ago, Sannie said: Ohhh, finally some good food from Miss Communion. So what do we do, then? Bc I feel like this puts us in a tough spot. Do we ignore the attacks on trans people and immigrants to focus on the economy? Because it sounds like if we defend either of these vulnerable populations or try to find nuance with this issue, the right's response will just be, "see, you care more about them than us". This is a genuine question. I say democrats do both. Fight for trans people, and get back to being the party of FDR, but get back to being the party of FDR above all else. This era of post Regan democrats needs to die before anything 1
Sannie Posted November 8 Posted November 8 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Dera said: Communion this is a weird take. People stare at you in public and talk to you weird if you are conspicuously trans, especially in little red towns. It's not because they are reminded of their economic suffering. All that legislation prohibiting trans healthcare for kids, and prohibiting education about transness in schools, is not because people are concerned about economic impacts. It's because people don't believe kids can or should be trans. 5 minutes ago, Dera said: mess not @Sannie kind of echoing me back to back I already fear there are some dupes running around this thread but now I look just as bad... Ddd, no but I kind of do agree with Communion and I don't think they're saying what your posts posits. They're talking, I think, specifically about why people vote. People aren't going to vote against Dems because they think trans people are inherently bad, but they might vote against Dems if they believe Dems care more about identity politics than fixing the economy as the latter is what benefits them most. There is no doubt there are people who are obsessed with trans peoples' existence, but I don't think that plays a role in the average Americans' decision to vote for someone. Edited November 8 by Sannie
ATRL Moderator Bloo Posted November 8 ATRL Moderator Posted November 8 22 minutes ago, ClashAndBurn said: @Communion @Bloo @Vermillion they said the thing! TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME!!!!! "Orange man good..?" is coming I fear 1
ClashAndBurn Posted November 8 Posted November 8 (edited) 51 minutes ago, Bears01 said: These are the signs (especially Psaki) that people are SOMEWHAT starting to get it. If the next Democratic candidate is not drastically different, doesn't offer a bold, economic look too the future, in lines of everything that FDR did, that truly address the needs of the working class, I'm not voting for them. I'm not voting in 26, democrats get what they deserve. Sadly the country doesn't, but the country voted for it Here's the thing though. Pelosi is retiring and was only intending to stay on so she could advise Hakeem Jeffries on how to corral a very slim majority as House Speaker. It's likely this was intended to be her last term and she passes the torch to her daughter. Psaki abandoned her post as Press Sec and left it to the most ill-prepared successor imaginable. KJP was always reading off the podium and rarely looked reporters in their eyes as she answered their simple and predictable questions. They have the clearest eyes in retrospect, but they've stepped out of their positions of greatest influence. No Dem consultants will take what they have to say into account, but they will be elevating the opinions of Joe Scarborough, Elise Jordan, Jennifer Rubin, Philippe Reines, and Julie Roginsky who are flooding the airways with "progressives, LatinX, pronouns, and Gaza protests are toxic and must be abandoned wholesale" That is the belief they've had all along, but they were too scared to fracture the coalition and risk Trump winning in a George HW Bush-style landslide. Now that they have lost, there's no reason to hold back anymore. We will get purged from the party, but still be expected to vote for them because we genuinely have no one else. Edited November 8 by ClashAndBurn
Cruel Summer Posted November 8 Posted November 8 I feel like it's possible to defend trans individuals by responding to hateful rhetoric and policies by defending their rights and livelihoods and then saying "but now let's talk about the issues that actually impact people's ability to put food on the table instead of demonizing and scapegoating people who also just want to survive" and steering the conversation toward the economy, healthcare, wages, sick leave etc Obviously this is a massive oversimplification in many ways and I'm no politician, but I feel like this is the general spirit of how to handle standing up for trans people in a way that doesn't "take the bait" so to speak 4 1
Communion Posted November 8 Posted November 8 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Sannie said: Do we ignore the attacks on trans people and immigrants to focus on the economy? Because it sounds like if we defend either of these vulnerable populations or try to find nuance with this issue, the right's response will just be, "see, you care more about them than us". Wait until I tell you that in 2020, the same platform that called for Medicare For All and Tuition-Free College for all also called for: - decriminalizing border crossings and ending inhumane detention centers, replacing them with expanded pathways to citizenship and addressing root causes of migration - codifying access to hormone therapy and gender affirming surgeries for trans people into law under Medicare for All while reinstating civil rights protections for trans people in healthcare settings ...and the person running this campaign not only got endorsed by Joe Rogan of all people but was seen across pollsters as beating Trump if he won the 2020 democratic nomination? (It's almost like some of you should begin to understand just why some of us will never forgive the establishment for taking the reality of President Bernie Sanders away from us.) Edited November 8 by Communion 1
midnightdawn Posted November 8 Posted November 8 7 minutes ago, BOOMBAYAH said: The infighting beginsss The whole party is at fault though. If just one high-profile Democrat had announced a primary challenge it would have ended Joe. Everyone just sat back and let the trainwreck unfold. 1
ClashAndBurn Posted November 8 Posted November 8 11 minutes ago, Bears01 said: @ClashAndBurn was right in the regard that a lot of the "democratic old guard" base would not stand for "a BLACK WOMAN" being passed over for. Even though before she got in, everyone knew she was a bad candidate, they just huffed the Hopium (me to the max) because she wasn't Biden. Now that the worst case scenario has manifested into reality, it's time for the party and its voters to disregard trivial bullshit like that going forward. But I'll believe it when I see it, so no votes for me. The only Democratic "Star" that has any legit accomplishments that benefits the working class to their name, is Whitmer. She'd be the only one I can stomach in 2028, but my true hope is that someone else can rise from the ashes and take this broken party over Biden picked Kamala to be a poison pill. He knew she was unelectable, and that if he was ever to be passed over for his perceived weaknesses, the party would be locked into having to select her as a successor. She was his incumbency insurance. And when she flopped, well… 1
Recommended Posts