Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, anti-***** said:

No, but seriously. Can you imagine that, even today, how many couples are putting on a show, pretending to be the perfect nuclear family, when the chances are that one or both of them probably wished for something else in life? And that's such a taboo, nobody wants to talk about it.

 

With all the talk about the declining birth rate, I fear they will start pushing the idea a heterosexual nuclear family hard again. And I hope people who don't want that for themselves find the strength to fight back.

The issue is a lot of people *do* want that lifestyle, and there's nothing wrong with it. Declining birth rates aren't because people don't want kids, they can't afford them. Republicans (I know I'm just going to be beating this drum ad nauseum) offer that through scare mongering, Dems could offer that through strong economic uplifting, but then how will the consultancy class make their millions? People don't look at these old shows and focus on the lack of non-whites or queers, they see families that didn't really have to struggle like they feel they do now 

Edited by Redstreak
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 3

  • Replies 78.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vermillion

    11970

  • GhostBox

    5725

  • ClashAndBurn

    3259

  • Communion

    2990

Posted

"That the New York Times turned down" lnkjkkjnknkjn defund legacy media! :gaycat6: 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted

 

Dems losing 11million votes, yet Trump had the same amount of votes from 2020.

 

 

Just another plain example of how bad of a job the democrats have done. Hopefully they have learned their lesson and can finally evolve from the neo-liberal bullsh*t

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, Vermillion said:

Again, Chris can only say this because he's not going anywhere :rip: 

 

I don't see this dynamic changing because the white working class and now Latino male working class is buying the Republicans cultural excuses for their problems as well as their economic solutions.

 

And with Citizens United Dem neolibs will continue screaming that they need a cashflow framework from neolib donors to WIN.

 

This logjam will only break with a Dem personality to override it like Trump/MAGA and Bernie's now finished. So now what.

 

 

 

We just hope the economic fallout to happen after Trump's tariffs cause a similar reactionary response that happened with Biden

 

But otherwise, the shifts in Texas & Florida look "permanent" to me for Latinos. And that's not a good signal nationwide in other states.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted

Dems will continue arguing they need money to win, which only exists in the current cultural framework of the party to win elections, celebrities included.

 

The only thing to break through that dynamic for economic populism that won't alienate the cultural progressivist base and force the cultural liberal donors in line will be a NEW, steamrolling, forceful, relatable personality. Obama 2008 dynamics are no longer repeatable and they need a white man.

Posted
59 minutes ago, khalyan said:

One of my coworkers said his favorite politician currently is Tulsi because she went to war and she switched parties so to them, she can appeal to both sides :rip: 

I have seen some Republican MAGAts claim that Tulsi would be the perfect first female president of the United States :deadbanana4: Tbh I really do feel that the first female president of the US if ever it happens will be a Republican. 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Armani? said:

We just hope the economic fallout to happen after Trump's tariffs cause a similar reactionary response that happened with Biden

 

But otherwise, the shifts in Texas & Florida look "permanent" to me for Latinos. And that's not a good signal nationwide in other states.

At this point, the ONLY thing that will get Democrats to win will be Republican economic crashes, because kowtowing to Latino male cultural demands will cause a progressive base turnout backlash :ace: 

 

I OFFICIALLY give up :ace: 

Posted
15 minutes ago, Communion said:

Most poor people aren't working on factory assembly lines anymore. They're working at cash registers. They work part-time, high turnover jobs in hospitality and healthcare

This gets right back to the branding problem though. This demo isn't what a neolib Hollywood political consultant will think is sexy enough to a Latino construction worker to bother making an ad about or a speech next to.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Vermillion said:

At this point, the ONLY thing that will get Democrats to win will be Republican economic crashes, because kowtowing to Latino male cultural demands will cause a progressive base turnout backlash :ace: 

 

I OFFICIALLY give up :ace: 

Dont give up sis, you're one of the best there is :heart:

 

I do think this is the time that progressives start following @Communions lead though and back off supporting the party until they drastically change. Neoliberalism has to die if the party wants any kind of future. 
 

The next Dem candidate for president has to call for things like universal healthcare, higher wages, an end to globalization, less support for Israel, taxing the wealthy, paid family leave, taking on corporations, repealing right to work etc etc. and their actions better back it up too 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted

The more I read about people trying to concoct a perfect Bernsomwhitaib'd candidate the more I realize we really need Republicans to mega flop cause no one knows wtf to do :suburban:

 

The only thing the candidate needs imo is:

- Populist economic policy

- Anti-establishment repudiation of Democrats and Republicans

 

The end! If we lose cause someone was fat or a woman, then that's just the way it is. But tossing out someone with real resolutions for looks is… :suburban:

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • ATRL Moderator
Posted

Kari Lake having more votes than Kamala :bibliahh:

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 8
Posted
3 minutes ago, Relampago. said:

The more I read about people trying to concoct a perfect Bernsomwhitaib'd candidate the more I realize we really need Republicans to mega flop cause no one knows wtf to do :suburban:

 

The only thing the candidate needs imo is:

- Populist economic policy

- Anti-establishment repudiation of Democrats and Republicans

 

The end! If we lose cause someone was fat or a woman, then that's just the way it is. But tossing out someone with real resolutions for looks is… :suburban:

Well yes, but I also don't think Elissa Slotkin (who I believe is the only person set aside for looks) has the solution :suburban:

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Posted
1 minute ago, khalyan said:

Kari Lake having more votes than Kamala :bibliahh:

ddd I love how they use official headshots for all the candidates but then miss Petty is just like... THERE :bibliahh:

  • Haha 2
Posted
1 minute ago, wastedpotential said:

Well yes, but I also don't think Elissa Slotkin (who I believe is the only person set aside for looks) has the solution :suburban:

No, in her case she's too fat, but if AOC or Casar serve Chris Christie in 2 years I'm turning the other cheek :suburban:

 

And besides all that, if they really see someone as too fat 4 years out…. get them on the Ozempic. We have solutions! There's no solution to bad policy and unpopularity.

  • Haha 4
Posted
5 minutes ago, Relampago. said:

The end! If we lose cause someone was fat or a woman, then that's just the way it is. But tossing out someone with real resolutions for looks is… :suburban:

Trump already reset the rules via his leaked central casting quotes from his first term and perceived turnout being affected one way or another, built-in hypocrisy and double standards on him looking like an Oompa Loompa included.

 

I don't make the rules. 

 

:coffee2: 

  • ATRL Moderator
Posted

It really has NOTHING to do with looks and gender.

 

AOC could be the best messenger for anti-establishment progressive policies, and be the obvious heir to a Bernie Sanders' sequel campaign if she was interested in running. We should not pursue a white straight man over AOC just because we're afraid of the perceived dynamics if that white straight man isn't as strong on his platform.  

  • Like 8
Posted
29 minutes ago, Redstreak said:

The issue is a lot of people *do* want that lifestyle, and there's nothing wrong with it. Declining birth rates aren't because people don't want kids, they can't afford them. Republicans (I know I'm just going to be beating this drum ad nauseum) offer that through scare mongering, Dems could offer that through strong economic uplifting, but then how will the consultancy class make their millions? People don't look at these old shows and focus on the lack of non-whites or queers, they see families that didn't really have to struggle like they feel they do now 

Not gonna lie, I'm not particularly interested in what the hetero people want anymore... They've had 2024 years to do their stuff, now is the time for something else. :gaycat5:

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Down 1
Posted

Elissa will depress base turn-out because the voters aren't interested in practical solutions. They're interested in radical change.

 

Ignore Latino male chauvinism at your peril. That goes especially for nominating AOC.

 

Economic messaging will NOT be able to overcome cultural biases and are NOT worth the risk. You HAVE to run with awareness of both.

Posted
Just now, khalyan said:

It really has NOTHING to do with looks and gender.

 

AOC could be the best messenger for anti-establishment progressive policies, and be the obvious heir to a Bernie Sanders' sequel campaign if she was interested in running. We should not pursue a white straight man over AOC just because we're afraid of the perceived dynamics if that white straight man isn't as strong on his platform.  

And tbh, I do think AOC would flop just cause she's damaged goods, but I think way too many people are concerned about winning IMMEDIATELY in 26/28. 

 

These years should be focused on reworking the Democratic Party. Even if progressive policy doesn't immediate net us a sweeping win, the current strategy is unsustainable in general. The party needs new and fresh faces and ideas. It's time to stop hitting the panic button every time and think long term.

 

AOC would do a great job of planting the seeds of progressive ideas as a familiar, but new, face. She might not win but in 2032, things like UBI and Medicare for All probably won't be so unfamiliar anymore, and things like AI and ever increasing drug prices will only make them more relevant. Long term thinking is going to go a long way here.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, anti-***** said:

Not gonna lie, I'm not particularly interested in what the hetero people want anymore... They've had 2024 years to do their stuff, now is the time for something else. :gaycat5:

But it's not just the heteros, I have a kid, I also have to worry about feeding him and doctors visits and the funding of school programs he needs. Having bills is never going to go away for anyone of any group and that's what you're ignoring. You're giving in to Republican propaganda that its us v them a la working class infighting. There's no woke version of that. Our enemy is always going to be moneyed interests

Edited by Redstreak
  • Like 5
Posted
2 minutes ago, Redstreak said:

Our enemy is always going to be moneyed interests

Who have a vested interest in convincing blue-collar Latino men that trans kids are the cause of all their problems :coffee2: 

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Vermillion said:

Who have a vested interest in convincing blue-collar Latino men that trans kids are the cause of all their problems :coffee2: 

But Bernie came out of nowhere, took five seconds to say "it's Wall Street bankers dummy", and became a near celebrity overnight. It just feels like this isn't that hard, we already figured it out :gaycat6:

Edited by Redstreak
  • Like 3
Posted
Just now, Redstreak said:

Which is why Bernie came out of nowhere, took five seconds to say "it's Wall Street bankers dummy", and became a near celebrity overnight. It just feels like this isn't that hard, we already figured it out :gaycat6:

Fine, pick a candidate that isn't anyone we've discussed.

 

"All they need is a good message" is NOT good enough.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.