GraceRandolph Posted November 9 Posted November 9 I'm sorry, but I never want to see an Obama, Clinton, Biden, or Harris as a surrogate for the Democratic Party going forward. 7 1
Vermillion Posted November 9 Posted November 9 Just now, GraceRandolph said: I'm sorry, but I never want to see an Obama, Clinton, Biden, or Harris as a surrogate for the Democratic Party going forward. Yeah, that's not gonna happen Â
Harrier Posted November 9 Posted November 9 1 minute ago, GraceRandolph said: I'm sorry, but I never want to see an Obama, Clinton, Biden, or Harris as a surrogate for the Democratic Party going forward. I also would like to see this. The democratic party needs a clean slate. One of the ways to do that is to leave all these folks in the dust like the GOP did with Bush. Won't happen tho unless a true outsider takes control next time Â
Eternal220 Posted November 9 Posted November 9 repubs going to win the presidency, house and senate. its gonna be a tough few years for dems that voted. good luck and remember to blame the people that chose not to voteÂ
anastaciabby Posted November 9 Posted November 9 1 minute ago, GraceRandolph said: I'm sorry, but I never want to see an Obama, Clinton, Biden, or Harris as a surrogate for the Democratic Party going forward. wasn't Obama and his administration the ones who funded ICE with 18B dollars, even more than bush or clinton? The hate train against us by the Dems was always crazy 1
RihRihGirrrl Posted November 9 Posted November 9 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Harrier said: I also would like to see this. The democratic party needs a clean slate. One of the ways to do that is to leave all these folks in the dust like the GOP did with Bush. Won't happen tho unless a true outsider takes control next time  Obama is popular....Bush is not. We need a more progressive platform and new aged candidates but it would be kinda dumb not to leverage a popular ex President Edited November 9 by RihRihGirrrl
Vermillion Posted November 9 Posted November 9 Susie already picking neocons   He'll be gone in a month   This country is SO ****ing spastic   Â
ClashAndBurn Posted November 9 Posted November 9 14 minutes ago, Harrier said: You demand she aligns herself with you perfectly in order to earn your vote. You say this, but she did not align with us on virtually anything. She put herself at odds with the progressive faction, basically told us we were not wanted nor needed, but scolded for making a genocide a moral red line... that many of us allowed her to cross and voted for her anyway. Â She did what you said would be a great idea! She explicitly abandoned trans people by omitting them from her message. Now the hindsight analysts are saying she should have disavowed trans people and called for a ban on their public existence instead of just not centering them. Â She lurched to the right on immigration and adopted Trump's policies from 2016. She promised to build Trump's border wall, but with American money instead of Mexicans'. Â She didn't talk about healthcare or improving the ACA. She didn't mention student debt forgiveness. She didn't mention a single thing leftists want. She repudiated us. She said she would give Israel all the bombs they needed to raze Gaza. She did EVERYTHING David Shor popularists said she should do. Â And she failed. Horribly. She lost the popular vote by worse than John Kerry. She distanced herself from the left, chased Republicans and promised she would include them in her Administration... and she got less Republican voters than Joe Biden. 1 4
anastaciabby Posted November 9 Posted November 9 4 minutes ago, Vermillion said: Â but that would not change anything? are we just going to let them silence media like this that's actually informative?
Gottasadae Posted November 9 Posted November 9 15 minutes ago, anti-***** said: Unpopular in part because of Biden's health problems. Yes Gaza, yes inflation, but now the inflation is the lowest since before Covid. And dare I say that as a white guy I know of a lot white people still prefer to vote for white people, and men prefer to vote for men.  And you say he "barely won the EC" yeah, but also received the most total votes in history. This.  Biden declined badly in past 4 years and basically if not his health issues - he could've won easily his second term. Kamala lost in all of the swing states he gained back in 2020, plus Nevada 1
Virgos Groove Posted November 9 Posted November 9 2 minutes ago, Vermillion said: Susie already picking neocons   He'll be gone in a month   This country is SO ****ing spastic     So he's just gonna continue Biden's Ukraine policy?  1
Harrier Posted November 9 Posted November 9 6 minutes ago, Bloo said: The suggestion that the infighting in this thread is more impactful than the dumb campaign decisions Kamala Harris made is not a serious piece of commentary. Like, let's be serious.  We say she should embrace universal economic populism because it's more appealing than identity-based messaging. You then agree and say, "But what about the trans issue!?" We try to explain that the data do not show that this is a point of concern with the electorate and those questions should be redirected back to economic issues and then you say we're being divisive.  It truly feels like you're intentionally not listening at this point.  Did I say that? Don't make stuff up. I'm not saying we have any impact obviously not, it's about the way the broader left works as a whole. Do you all say those things should be redirected back to economic issues? Maybe you do Bloo. But did anyone say it during that outrage thread on her trans answer? When that was literally what she (clumsily) tried to do? An answer that had no serious consequences with regular voters and yet all the girls used it as yet more evidence of how evil Kamala was and how you should all vote third party instead. A special interest group forcing Kamala to earn their vote on their special interest issue. 2
anastaciabby Posted November 9 Posted November 9 To nobody in particular but the amount of people that use x still though, aren't we supposed to be going against the establishment?
anti-bitch Posted November 9 Posted November 9 3 minutes ago, Gottasadae said: This.  Biden declined badly in past 4 years and basically if not his health issues - he could've won easily his second term. Kamala lost in all of the swing states he gained back in 2020, plus Nevada Also, Biden could have won in 2016 by a lot.
ClashAndBurn Posted November 9 Posted November 9 9 minutes ago, GraceRandolph said: I'm sorry, but I never want to see an Obama, Clinton, Biden, or Harris as a surrogate for the Democratic Party going forward. Well, tough. You're going to accept all of their stump speeches, along with the "elitist celebrity snob endorsements" from Taylor Swift, Katy Perry, Beyonce, Lady Gaga, Bruce Springsteen, and Eminem, and you will just have to deal with "the most important election of our lifetimes" as they stan for the IDF volunteer trying to one up JD Vance in how much support he's willing to give Israel.  1 1
ATRL Moderator Bloo Posted November 9 ATRL Moderator Posted November 9 4 minutes ago, Harrier said: Did I say that? Don't make stuff up. I'm not saying we have any impact obviously not, it's about the way the broader left works as a whole. Do you all say those things should be redirected back to economic issues? Maybe you do Bloo. But did anyone say it during that outrage thread on her trans answer? When that was literally what she (clumsily) tried to do? An answer that had no serious consequences with regular voters and yet all the girls used it as yet more evidence of how evil Kamala was and how you should all vote third party instead. A special interest group forcing Kamala to earn their vote on their special interest issue. Youâre doing it again. Any reactions to her milquetoast answer on trans rights is a part of democracy. Voters have every right to voice their frustration. It is the job of the politician to learn how to navigate that tightrope to win. Kamala Harris failed to do that because her political instincts are bad. We will just have to agree to disagree because I feel like weâre speaking past each other and Iâve said all I can say at this point. 1
Communion Posted November 9 Posted November 9 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Harrier said: "Kamala Harris is too focused on cultural issues like transgender issues...". Also this is an insane sleight of hand and shows up only when one can be driven by personal transphobia or wanting to sabotage the left. Â The actual statement is: "Kamala Harris is too focused on cultural issues like transgender issues rather than helping the middle class". Â Meaning voters agree with this statement when viewing addressing cultural issues as *at odds* with addressing economic issues. Â Just like the very same question on immigration reveals in its wording that voters are driven by the belief that immigrants are being helped in place of the government helping people like them instead. That this is seen as a one-or-the-other reality. A claim pushed by a right-wing media ecosystem that thrives because Democrats allow that space in their inaction. Â I get why you don't want to acknowledge the actual reality of the question, because it exposes the absurdity of the people you share ideological lanes with when trying to make this argument. Â The very right-wing Dems now echoing these calls to let trans people die or suffer and be alienated from society don't actually want to do anything progressive with the economy. They don't want to let people know most voters - at least ones Dem were previously winning in elections - are not raging bigots, but feel instead like they've been dumped. Â Seth Moulton thinks his voters in MA-06 care about 13-year-old trans girls on middle soccer teams while he wants poor people to die by refusing to co-sponsor Medicare For All. Â Tom Suozzi is screaming about pronouns and trans people while wanting the people of NY-03 to be wage slaves since he does not support raising the minimum wage. Â America is not Europe. America is not Australia. The innate diversity of America means that our economic populist movements are DIVERSE. There is no "let's give everyone healthcare but also ban migrants and trans people". Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition. Bernie's multi-racial working class. The economic left IS the social left. Â There is no elected Democrat right now throwing trans people under the bus who is also an economic progressive. The right is just being the right. Edited November 9 by Communion 5
Vermillion Posted November 9 Posted November 9 Just now, anastaciabby said: To nobody in particular but the amount of people that use x still though, aren't we supposed to be going against the establishment? My use of that here has already been discussed heavily with the mods and longtime posters. I'm not dismissing your point, but understand that what your bringing up isn't new in terms of the pros and cons of quick news delivery via the person now owning it. Â They still break news (if sourced correctly) up to 20 min quicker on average than the major cable networks and news sites.
Recommended Posts