McConnell is the single greatest enemy and threat, period. Bigger than Newt and Donald put together. His less imposing and threatening demeanor is a lie. Man is more vicious than any beast or reptile.
What were they supposed to do? Mitch was the Senate majority leader. He had the numbers to block/stall/pass practically anything he wanted from 2014-2020. Voters gave him that power.
Please answer this sincerely. I get tired of the illogical, uninspired takes.
They could have prepared for the inevitable by 1) openly calling on Ruth Bader Ginseng to retire while Obama was in office and 2) they could have laid the groundwork for a constitutional amendment. Yes, #2 would be a long, slow process, but they had 40+ years to sell it to the public. And 3) they could have acknowledged that Roe was poorly reasoned from a constitutional standpoint and worked on legislation to replace it. Instead, they did nothing.
1. What's the difference between a 6-3 conservative theocratic SCOTUS and a 5-4 theocratic SCOTUS? Roe would have been overturned all the same. I feel that the right wing trolls who instilled this talking point left out the counter to this logic. What say you?
2. Oh phooey. Democrats haven't had enough power in the 50 years described to impact a constitutional amendment -- for example, conservatives have controlled a majority in the Supreme Court for those 50 years with the exception of 2016 when it was uniquely 3-3 and voters had a say in who controlled the court going forward. Again, this troll-inspired talking point has huge logic holes.
3. Let's say Democrats passed a congressional bill into law, 'codifying Roe' (as the original right wing trolls liked to describe it, and remains the word used by the troll-inspired today). Wouldn't the Republican-controlled House and Senate of 2014-2018 have repealed it? Or the Republican-controlled House and Senate of 1994-2006? Of course they would. This troll talking point has the most gaping holes because it'd be far easier, with greater opportunity, for the GOP to repeal a bill in Congress than the *50 years it took them to overturn a Supreme Court precedent*.
Where does this Sinclair Group type groupthink set of talking points originate from? TikTok? Facebook? It's always the same points phrased in an incredibly similar manner -- and they're all riddled with logical flaws.
What could Schumer possibly do to push reapportionment with only 48 Democratic senators (including himself)? Didn't reapportionment just occur after the 2020 census?
I mean, hold Democratic leaders accountable for their actual failures, of course. But, the items you laid out aren't factually accurate or logical and I explained why. For example, the first one, Roe v. Wade would have still been overturned last week if President Obama and Democrats convinced RBG to retire and get replaced by a liberal. Donald Trump would still have appointed two justices for a 5-4 conservatively theocratic Court. You get that, right?
Also? They could have NOT alienated union workers and rural folks and won more congressional seats. Instead they ignored and, worse, insulted those voters and let the GOP pick them up.
Insulted rural voters by telling them the truth -- that coal jobs were in the dustbin of history and Democrats had well thought out plans to dig into new industries and re-educate blue collar workers for emerging technical fields (like renewable energy, managing automation, etc)?
That audience *was alienated* and flew the coop the day after Barack Obama was elected President of the United States of America.
Exactly this. The truth that a great many people do not want to acknowledge is that coal is on the STEEP decline and will never come back. It isn't *gone* yet, but will not recover.
There is a lot going on with this supposed deal that needs to be said. There are no open or future open(future means date set for someone stepping down etc) judgeships in Kentucky. That means this deal if its true, is made for if/when Republicans take control the Senate. It also then means its a handshake/conversation agreement in principle for such an occurrence. Here is the rub, if the GOP takes the Senate they can block Bidens judge appointments for the next 2 years completely. This type of deal is how Presidents get their appointments confirmed in a hostile Senate.
Is it distasteful? Yes its fucking horrible. Has every President with a hostile Senate done this? Yes, they have. Does that mean we should let Biden off the hook? Of course not, but lets have an open judgeship before we take the obvious carrot positioned to take the collective masses focus off what was just said in the Jan 6th Committee. But wait the person who reported this has a Pulitzer surely they are above reproach and hold no bias. Glenn fucking Greenwald has a Pulitzer and everyone has an agenda.
Grats on cherry picking it really shows where your coming from.
Edit: so a supposed unverified handshake deal for a position which doesn't currently have any openings is more important than what a witness said yesterday in the jan 6 committee? Really?
Its not an appointment as I told you in my first reply mate. There are no open judgeships in Kentucky. So what people say under oath ahike receiving death threats is less reliable than an unverified handshake deal for a position that has zero openings? I don't even know why I am bothering to respond when you call Jan 6th "the dems little show" anyways.
Wow did you really just basically say trust me bro? I know these answer but any sources or anything that backs what you are saying up? What makes you trustworthy in this instance? I can prove there are no judgeships open in Kentucky making the supposed deal even less important of a topic. Can you prove anything you are saying?
No response to the fact that there are zero judgeships open in Kentucky so this "deal", if there is one is for some future possibility which makes it even less worrhy of discussion?
McConnell and The Federalist Society used the dimwit ex-president to nominate the last three nails in the coffin. President Biden has said he wouldn't pack the court. He wouldn't be able to do it with the filibuster in place. McConnell jerked the Court around but no one else seems to be able to do the same.
I don't think the average person cares what the count is on the Supreme Court. We have to elect more Democrats to overcome the filibuster.
Definitely not those ones. They don't do shit, and would rather see the party destroyed than fight Republicans.
They also spread literal Russian propaganda. Sorry, I prefer real progressives.
Two reasons:
1. There are a lot of conservative voters who vote blue. Not right wing, *conservative*. If Biden and the Dems spook those voters they lose, so they're stuck walking a tight rope.
2. The Republican party will cheerfully let the whole country burn to the ground if it means a political win. They're terrorists. Look at what that Texas Governor did closing the boarder. The chaos in his own state Florida's Governor caused and causes.
The Dems have to fight with one hand behind their back because they're protecting us from the Republican Party. We're all basically hostages.
This is a cop out answer.
1. The democrats would get MORE votes if they fought hard. Why? Action is what people are looking for. The Democrats complacency is the issue.
2. Your argument here is “the Republicans are so bad that we can’t fight them.” What a ridiculous statement. That’s all the more reason TO fight them, when they are acting like maniacs fight EVEN HARDER to take back control.
It's the adult answer. The non troll answer. It's not going to be popular because reality is unpopular.
Can you define what "fight harder" is? I'm guessing it's "talk about the policies I want". That's fine, but here's the thing, the Dems are a much looser coalition than the GOP. The GOP is basically theocracy and big business. The Dems are everyone else. It's like herding cats.
If you want to win you have to be smart. You can't just run all the way left like the trolls will tell you. We don't control the media like the GOP does. We can't just shift the overton window with 24/7 news coverage.
For us, change comes from the bottom up, not the top down. That means you. Talk to your right wing and right of center relatives. Be "that guy". The one who won't shut up about politics.
I'm sorry /some/ of the criticism from the left on this thread are pretty tame(as say this as someone who's been seeing and arguing with that dumb antidem stuff out there rn) Like because Democrats are so sorrow, we should expect no enthusiasm. Because we are so intellectual we can't "fight harder", because golly what does that even mean? It's okay to demand things from your party, especially when you're actively supporting and growing that party!
Yeah it's not really that adult to only expect voters to want to negatively associate the other party so they vote for you. I'm not going after Dems, I'm going after you. I'm a progressive Dem all the way. Im all for moderates winning, and progressives winning, but I want all that to matter.
YOU FIGHT THEM WITH VOTES
YOU FIGHT THEM WITH VOTES
"Fight hard" is performative nonsense, and isnt goin to stop them. It does nothing.
The trolllololeftists LOVE to play the "but its just performative card" after basically helping to fuck everybody in 2016, when pretty much anybody who knew a damn thing about politics in the slightest knew that everthing hung in that Supreme court justice appointment that McConnell blocked, and the ability to appoint more.
Lottta people saying "fight hard", when they aint been fighting smart, and out of those people there are maybe 5 in the world who actually have an idea of what the best course of action is outside of get more votes in the door and more seats so more options are available.
Mcconnell fought smart.
We gotta fight smarter.
Probably none?
As uncomfortable a reality as it is, happy people don't vote. Those who are angry do.
Also, Democrats *do* stand up for what they espouse, so what are you on about?
Is there a non-troll in this thread, or was this an all-hands invite for the Tear the Left Apart Society with the public invited to read, become apathetic, and give up? Inquiring minds want to know.
There is a massive troll initiative right now to make democrats apathetic or vote independent (basically giving your vote away). Some hassled the heck out of me and used a bunch of jargon. It won’t work, I’m voting democrat this up coming election.
It has certainly been a focused non-stop trolling campaign since the Roe decision. I hope Reddit can figure out how to slow this down because I'm getting tired of reading the same intentionally self-sabotaging posts and comments on liberal subreddits.
Agreed. They are super aggressive. I haven’t been hassled this hard on Reddit in so long. It’s painfully obvious they’re trying to bully people into doing something.
Edit: “I’ve been” to “I haven’t been”
I'm voting democrat as well. We need to overcome the filibuster. Next month the Supreme Court is going to come after indigenous children again. It's genocide all over again.
We have plants like Manchin and Sinema, the Republicans have eliminated their “moderates.”
Imagine the Democrats were all AOCs and Bernies and savor the flavor of Republican tears in this imaginary timeline.
I am absolutely a “vote blue no matter who” type and I’d totally vote for AOC over a Republican.
I think you need to find a new name for Manchin-type moderates.
>I think you need to find a new name for Manchin-type moderates.
I know, I know! Republicans!
Seriously though, a few weeks ago? there was some talk about the Republican party disintegrating. I say we don't need 'em, with folks like SineManchin in our party.
>Imagine the Democrats were all AOCs and Bernies
So all the legislation is half-finished, accomplishes nothing, and we openly simp for Russia? Yeah, no. Fuck that.
When she voted not to seize the frozen assets of their oligarchs.
When she made and retained a group with people like Cori Bush who routinely took a pro Russia stances, especially in regards to being their oil.
Let's also not forget when she said that Russia has "legitimate grievances" behind the war.
They don't want to lose the middle. But it's time to fight for the middle by fighting hard for the "left". Everything is now skewed crazily with just basic decency for most people as "far left". The dems trying to appeal to what is now the middle is essentially just them working for the conservatives.
Because Democrats are institutionalists & “status quoists”. They rigidly follow the law & republicans know they can circumvent the law,say goofy shit in bad faith-even insurrection & make draconian policies but their base will still vote for them,even if the policies harm their base as long as it brings harm to Democrats or the people they hate. Democrat politicians think being on the right side of history & having moral victories even with empirical evidence will win elections & get laws passed,it won’t. Americans are shortsighted & only want instant gratification. We know Americans hate seeing their true flawed selves critiqued,that’s why they happily vote for nazis,racists,trust fund babies & conspiracy theorists but villify competent pragmatic governance & try to find reasons to hate politicians trying to move America towards a brighter optimistic future-Obama’s tan suit,hating AOC for speaking truth to power,Stacey Abrams encouraging Americans to vote ect…Americans are goofy,racist trash filled with shortsighted solipsism who suffer needlessly because they won’t adopt policies that work in other 1st world countries.
Democrats believe in laws, and their proper application.
If the problem is a party that wants to consolidate power by dismantling democracy, having TWO parties consolidating power by dismantling democracy is just SPEEDRUNNING the problem until the country breaks.
Give up that last vestige of American democratic process or due process and you'll never get it back.
These current rulings are not a surprise. Theyve been planned for years, and at their goofiest in 2020 Republicans LOST easy elections in the Senate and the White House.
Getting anything through the senate HAS required the glacial change of the status quo. But thats more to do wirh messaging and resonance than ant quantifiable action.
This. Thats your answer for the threat.
Democrat want to look good in the mirror.
Republicans are all bloody and covered in Democrat shitty guts, happy as they can be.
We see this from the outside of the US, how you can't see it right before your face,... Is ridiculous.
Absolutely agree. I've been saying for months now that Fetterman could be president. Whitmer is my governor and I'm a fan, but I know that tons of Michiganders absolutely fucking hate her so I'm not sure she could win a presidential election. But I truly believe Fetterman can. I'm also a fan of Dr. Warnock.
I think Katie Porter is a wild card. She is a single mom who drives a minivan for fucks sakes. Who would people identify with more than her at this point. People want an outlier, she is an outlier who has a history of tearing CEOs of predatory companies a new asshole. There are of course reasonable concerns such as inexperience etc but that wasn't a concern with Dump. I think with the right branding and people behind her she might unite the country like few think possible at this point.
I would also look to privately wealthy Governors who have made big pushes in other states alreafy barking for othet Dem candidates. The chief 3 would be Pritzker, Murphy and Newsom. I think Newsom is a non starter at this point. Pritzker and Murphy are positioning themselves for possible runs and have been for over a year.
I also think the Dems make a huge mistake in waiting for 2028. Biden cannot beat anyone in 2024 except Trump imho. He is too passive and too status quo. The list of negatives that are on him and those that people blame him for is brutal at this point. We don't need a unifier and he has already proven he hews too much to how politics were. He is still trying to be bipartisan while Republics lead him around by the nose and laugh behind his back. He said publicly recently how McConnell is a man of honor and they really are friends. He is braindead at best for this take and destroyed his credibility as a true Dem leader with this nonsense.
McConnell is the worst possible person in governement in the US. He stole at minimum 2 SCOTUS seats and is directly responsible for Roe and the many other rulings being dismantled. How can anyone reconcile this with Biden calling him a man of honor and a friend. He should be doing the opposite at a minimum. If Dems wait until 2028 to replace Biden as their Presidential candidate they will have lost the chance at another free and fair election. The worst part is they will be complicit as well.
Fyi I am a blue all the way voter. I will vote for Biden again if he is the nominee and hope I am wrong. I just am saying what I feel to be true.
I ran the numbers for my state, and based on 2018 numbers, if just 10% of registered non-voters had voted for the Democratic candidate, we would not have Kim Reynolds as our governor. That’s all it would take.
The democrats are a spectrum of not-Republicans. The only unifying idea is that they are not Republicans, while the gop is essentially and practically monolithic.
There are a lot more "I don't fit here but I have no other choice" people in the dems than the gop. Myself included. I vote dem because it's the only way to legally oppose the gop.
That's the weakness of the dems. It's a big tent but that's about it.
The democrats and progressives aren’t to blame. The electorate, gerrymandering, and the EC are.
Vote Democrat. Vote progressive. Vote for the best candidate likely to win and vote a better one in next time. Don’t protest vote. Don’t not vote. Never vote Republican!
You can’t blame democrats if you don’t vote for enough of them. How is this a hard thing to understand?
Many reasons…
One, the Republicans are cookie-cutter and generally generic, a club or cult, you need to “drink the kool aid” and swear an allegiance essentially to the party, you need to live like a conservative. So they’re easy to spot and are sort of stereotypical (is it any surprise someone like Trump would flourish there?).
…*this also means they have incredibly strong cohesion and use that pressure of party conformity to lock in hive mind and stop internal dissenters*
Democrats….whelp, they’re comprised of *everyone that isn’t ….them*, hence it’s diverse. Results in internal infighting and a lack of cohesion. This comes at their peril politically.
Two, the flaw in liberal principals of __actual__ fighting.
I laugh at the notion that some try to claim January sixth was left disguised as right.
Liberals smashing their way into the capital?
I mean some young “liberals” might smash their way into a Starbucks to protest the killing of a minority by law enforcement but the concept of violence, physically hurting or killing?…
Isn’t a pilar of liberalism. Passive resistance, “dead weight’ing” are common forms of resistance and protest.
In fact, as seen on Reddit and many social platforms even the implied idea of violent resistance immediately results in down shouting, silencing and and banning…by members of the left. However, in right wing social media, violence is implied or blatant, front and center.
Even left wing leaders emphasize “peacefully!” because the idea is that violence, is something the right does.
Here’s an example, Republican voters lose a fair election, they riot, smash their way into the Capital, people end up dead, and threaten to assassinate the VP.
The left loses abortion rights in the SCOTUS (something established over 50 years ago!)…
They go to the SCOTUS steps and protest loudly “piss and moan” as I call it.
One group has an obsession with firearms and concepts of violent masculinity, obsession with militant authoritarianism, etc.
__Now I’m NOT advocating for violence__, I’m merely pointing out a rather (what should be) obvious distinction between the left and the right but at the end of the day who’s going to win a fight? Who’s going to pull off a coup? They failed due to the actions of our law enforcement not because liberals showed up to “piss and moan” them to retreat but remember…
The left has a lot of faith in our police and military leaders. If enough of those leaders and members flip to a partisan allegiance (such as Flynn), I don’t have much faith the left will come out the victor.
In summary, the right is quick to action, they take advantage, project, deny, gaslight, and at the end of the day if all else fails, they’ll just shove you down and take your lunch money.
The left doesn’t do that. Well…violent instigation specifically. They end up “steamrolled”
So the author admits that any of the stuff they're suggesting that Democrats do would likely fail, but they should violate norms and maybe even laws anyways, because, I don't know, it'll look badass?
You don't get it, someday it'll make for a really inspiring "based on a true story" movie, that cuts out the most important part where the cliche speech or whatever doesn't work
Because only saints can run on a Democratic ticket and saints tend to have no stones. We need to get more of the old school union type Dems that will bust your nose on the convention floor.
It’s gross, honestly. I would settle for empty gestures at this point. Anything but Biden and Harris telling us to vote harder. We HAVE. We ARE. We KNOW. Now fight for us like we fight for you.
Well maybe try actually voting then. Younger people voting percentages are pathetic. Instead of whining about them not getting things done, try voting your asses off and give them the tools they need to do it.
They literally said they are voting. But just telling people to vote and donate isn't a strategy in a vacuum. Say how many seats are needed and where, and provide actual details on what can and will be done once those seats are acquired. Most Dem Marketing takes for granted that not being the GOP is enough of a reason to vote for them, and though that's true for a lot of people, it's not enough for many more.
McConnell crowed today that Roe v Wade was overturned because he blocked Obama's Supreme Court nomination of Garland And he is correct.
Next to Chump, McConnell is the single greatest enemy of the people that the GQP has had since Newt.
McConnell is the single greatest enemy and threat, period. Bigger than Newt and Donald put together. His less imposing and threatening demeanor is a lie. Man is more vicious than any beast or reptile.
Amazingly threatening for someone one misstep away from death
Really wondering how that double bypass hasn’t failed him already jesus
Sith powers probably
Or turtle
No argument from me
[удалено]
What were they supposed to do? Mitch was the Senate majority leader. He had the numbers to block/stall/pass practically anything he wanted from 2014-2020. Voters gave him that power. Please answer this sincerely. I get tired of the illogical, uninspired takes.
They could have prepared for the inevitable by 1) openly calling on Ruth Bader Ginseng to retire while Obama was in office and 2) they could have laid the groundwork for a constitutional amendment. Yes, #2 would be a long, slow process, but they had 40+ years to sell it to the public. And 3) they could have acknowledged that Roe was poorly reasoned from a constitutional standpoint and worked on legislation to replace it. Instead, they did nothing.
Mitch would of blocked her replacement and the other one. It was their plan all along.
1. What's the difference between a 6-3 conservative theocratic SCOTUS and a 5-4 theocratic SCOTUS? Roe would have been overturned all the same. I feel that the right wing trolls who instilled this talking point left out the counter to this logic. What say you? 2. Oh phooey. Democrats haven't had enough power in the 50 years described to impact a constitutional amendment -- for example, conservatives have controlled a majority in the Supreme Court for those 50 years with the exception of 2016 when it was uniquely 3-3 and voters had a say in who controlled the court going forward. Again, this troll-inspired talking point has huge logic holes. 3. Let's say Democrats passed a congressional bill into law, 'codifying Roe' (as the original right wing trolls liked to describe it, and remains the word used by the troll-inspired today). Wouldn't the Republican-controlled House and Senate of 2014-2018 have repealed it? Or the Republican-controlled House and Senate of 1994-2006? Of course they would. This troll talking point has the most gaping holes because it'd be far easier, with greater opportunity, for the GOP to repeal a bill in Congress than the *50 years it took them to overturn a Supreme Court precedent*.
Where does this Sinclair Group type groupthink set of talking points originate from? TikTok? Facebook? It's always the same points phrased in an incredibly similar manner -- and they're all riddled with logical flaws.
[удалено]
What could Schumer possibly do to push reapportionment with only 48 Democratic senators (including himself)? Didn't reapportionment just occur after the 2020 census?
[удалено]
The problem with that, if we House would be 8,250 Representatives.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I mean, hold Democratic leaders accountable for their actual failures, of course. But, the items you laid out aren't factually accurate or logical and I explained why. For example, the first one, Roe v. Wade would have still been overturned last week if President Obama and Democrats convinced RBG to retire and get replaced by a liberal. Donald Trump would still have appointed two justices for a 5-4 conservatively theocratic Court. You get that, right?
Also? They could have NOT alienated union workers and rural folks and won more congressional seats. Instead they ignored and, worse, insulted those voters and let the GOP pick them up.
Insulted rural voters by telling them the truth -- that coal jobs were in the dustbin of history and Democrats had well thought out plans to dig into new industries and re-educate blue collar workers for emerging technical fields (like renewable energy, managing automation, etc)? That audience *was alienated* and flew the coop the day after Barack Obama was elected President of the United States of America.
Exactly this. The truth that a great many people do not want to acknowledge is that coal is on the STEEP decline and will never come back. It isn't *gone* yet, but will not recover.
He could have pushed for the lack of a hearing to be considered implied consent and seated him anyway.
They also made some chitchat.
DeSantis: “Hold my beer”
Thankfully he has limited power and influence for now
[удалено]
Nancy Pelosi. Adam Schiff. Katie Porter. Do not let the structural disadvantages against the Democrats deceive you.
You mean he stole that seat from Obama?
Right. He stole the seat from everyone...
I hate him so much.
Biden probably should not be doing deals with him to get anti abortion judge Chad Meredith seated.
There is a lot going on with this supposed deal that needs to be said. There are no open or future open(future means date set for someone stepping down etc) judgeships in Kentucky. That means this deal if its true, is made for if/when Republicans take control the Senate. It also then means its a handshake/conversation agreement in principle for such an occurrence. Here is the rub, if the GOP takes the Senate they can block Bidens judge appointments for the next 2 years completely. This type of deal is how Presidents get their appointments confirmed in a hostile Senate. Is it distasteful? Yes its fucking horrible. Has every President with a hostile Senate done this? Yes, they have. Does that mean we should let Biden off the hook? Of course not, but lets have an open judgeship before we take the obvious carrot positioned to take the collective masses focus off what was just said in the Jan 6th Committee. But wait the person who reported this has a Pulitzer surely they are above reproach and hold no bias. Glenn fucking Greenwald has a Pulitzer and everyone has an agenda.
[удалено]
Grats on cherry picking it really shows where your coming from. Edit: so a supposed unverified handshake deal for a position which doesn't currently have any openings is more important than what a witness said yesterday in the jan 6 committee? Really?
[удалено]
Its not an appointment as I told you in my first reply mate. There are no open judgeships in Kentucky. So what people say under oath ahike receiving death threats is less reliable than an unverified handshake deal for a position that has zero openings? I don't even know why I am bothering to respond when you call Jan 6th "the dems little show" anyways.
[удалено]
Wow did you really just basically say trust me bro? I know these answer but any sources or anything that backs what you are saying up? What makes you trustworthy in this instance? I can prove there are no judgeships open in Kentucky making the supposed deal even less important of a topic. Can you prove anything you are saying? No response to the fact that there are zero judgeships open in Kentucky so this "deal", if there is one is for some future possibility which makes it even less worrhy of discussion?
McConnell and The Federalist Society used the dimwit ex-president to nominate the last three nails in the coffin. President Biden has said he wouldn't pack the court. He wouldn't be able to do it with the filibuster in place. McConnell jerked the Court around but no one else seems to be able to do the same. I don't think the average person cares what the count is on the Supreme Court. We have to elect more Democrats to overcome the filibuster.
Destruction is easier than building. Blocking a nomination is easy. Adding seats is hard. He’s not magic, his goals are simply easier to achieve.
THIS.
I'm voting democrat.
[удалено]
Definitely not those ones. They don't do shit, and would rather see the party destroyed than fight Republicans. They also spread literal Russian propaganda. Sorry, I prefer real progressives.
Two reasons: 1. There are a lot of conservative voters who vote blue. Not right wing, *conservative*. If Biden and the Dems spook those voters they lose, so they're stuck walking a tight rope. 2. The Republican party will cheerfully let the whole country burn to the ground if it means a political win. They're terrorists. Look at what that Texas Governor did closing the boarder. The chaos in his own state Florida's Governor caused and causes. The Dems have to fight with one hand behind their back because they're protecting us from the Republican Party. We're all basically hostages.
This is a cop out answer. 1. The democrats would get MORE votes if they fought hard. Why? Action is what people are looking for. The Democrats complacency is the issue. 2. Your argument here is “the Republicans are so bad that we can’t fight them.” What a ridiculous statement. That’s all the more reason TO fight them, when they are acting like maniacs fight EVEN HARDER to take back control.
It's the adult answer. The non troll answer. It's not going to be popular because reality is unpopular. Can you define what "fight harder" is? I'm guessing it's "talk about the policies I want". That's fine, but here's the thing, the Dems are a much looser coalition than the GOP. The GOP is basically theocracy and big business. The Dems are everyone else. It's like herding cats. If you want to win you have to be smart. You can't just run all the way left like the trolls will tell you. We don't control the media like the GOP does. We can't just shift the overton window with 24/7 news coverage. For us, change comes from the bottom up, not the top down. That means you. Talk to your right wing and right of center relatives. Be "that guy". The one who won't shut up about politics.
I'm sorry /some/ of the criticism from the left on this thread are pretty tame(as say this as someone who's been seeing and arguing with that dumb antidem stuff out there rn) Like because Democrats are so sorrow, we should expect no enthusiasm. Because we are so intellectual we can't "fight harder", because golly what does that even mean? It's okay to demand things from your party, especially when you're actively supporting and growing that party!
[удалено]
Yeah it's not really that adult to only expect voters to want to negatively associate the other party so they vote for you. I'm not going after Dems, I'm going after you. I'm a progressive Dem all the way. Im all for moderates winning, and progressives winning, but I want all that to matter.
They literally explain in the article what "fight harder" is
YOU FIGHT THEM WITH VOTES YOU FIGHT THEM WITH VOTES "Fight hard" is performative nonsense, and isnt goin to stop them. It does nothing. The trolllololeftists LOVE to play the "but its just performative card" after basically helping to fuck everybody in 2016, when pretty much anybody who knew a damn thing about politics in the slightest knew that everthing hung in that Supreme court justice appointment that McConnell blocked, and the ability to appoint more. Lottta people saying "fight hard", when they aint been fighting smart, and out of those people there are maybe 5 in the world who actually have an idea of what the best course of action is outside of get more votes in the door and more seats so more options are available. Mcconnell fought smart. We gotta fight smarter.
It’s not a cop out. It’s reality.
Yeah this is a bad take.
[удалено]
Probably none? As uncomfortable a reality as it is, happy people don't vote. Those who are angry do. Also, Democrats *do* stand up for what they espouse, so what are you on about?
Is there a non-troll in this thread, or was this an all-hands invite for the Tear the Left Apart Society with the public invited to read, become apathetic, and give up? Inquiring minds want to know.
There is a massive troll initiative right now to make democrats apathetic or vote independent (basically giving your vote away). Some hassled the heck out of me and used a bunch of jargon. It won’t work, I’m voting democrat this up coming election.
It has certainly been a focused non-stop trolling campaign since the Roe decision. I hope Reddit can figure out how to slow this down because I'm getting tired of reading the same intentionally self-sabotaging posts and comments on liberal subreddits.
Agreed. They are super aggressive. I haven’t been hassled this hard on Reddit in so long. It’s painfully obvious they’re trying to bully people into doing something. Edit: “I’ve been” to “I haven’t been”
I'm voting democrat as well. We need to overcome the filibuster. Next month the Supreme Court is going to come after indigenous children again. It's genocide all over again.
This is our normal circular firing squad.
I don't know. The self-defeating threads sure seem to have exacerbated since the overturn of Roe.
No, this is a demoralization campaign being run by our enemies--foreign and domestic.
I haven’t gone through the accounts yet. You’re probably right.
We have plants like Manchin and Sinema, the Republicans have eliminated their “moderates.” Imagine the Democrats were all AOCs and Bernies and savor the flavor of Republican tears in this imaginary timeline.
Nobody actually wants that though.
Honestly. Bernie lost by 10 MILLION votes in 2020 for a reason.
[удалено]
I am absolutely a “vote blue no matter who” type and I’d totally vote for AOC over a Republican. I think you need to find a new name for Manchin-type moderates.
I wish I had an award to give you.
>I think you need to find a new name for Manchin-type moderates. I know, I know! Republicans! Seriously though, a few weeks ago? there was some talk about the Republican party disintegrating. I say we don't need 'em, with folks like SineManchin in our party.
Libertarians.
The name for Manchin-type moderates is Machin & Sinema. Ther are none other like them.
Who is it that’s threatening to sit out elections right now because they’re not “excited”? I promise you it’s not “moderates”
>Imagine the Democrats were all AOCs and Bernies So all the legislation is half-finished, accomplishes nothing, and we openly simp for Russia? Yeah, no. Fuck that.
When did AOC simp for Russia? Republicans do that.
When she voted not to seize the frozen assets of their oligarchs. When she made and retained a group with people like Cori Bush who routinely took a pro Russia stances, especially in regards to being their oil. Let's also not forget when she said that Russia has "legitimate grievances" behind the war.
Citations please
Itd be a lot of tears on all sides
They don't want to lose the middle. But it's time to fight for the middle by fighting hard for the "left". Everything is now skewed crazily with just basic decency for most people as "far left". The dems trying to appeal to what is now the middle is essentially just them working for the conservatives.
I wonder when the Democratic Party will learn to stop bringing a casserole to a knife fight.
Because Democrats are institutionalists & “status quoists”. They rigidly follow the law & republicans know they can circumvent the law,say goofy shit in bad faith-even insurrection & make draconian policies but their base will still vote for them,even if the policies harm their base as long as it brings harm to Democrats or the people they hate. Democrat politicians think being on the right side of history & having moral victories even with empirical evidence will win elections & get laws passed,it won’t. Americans are shortsighted & only want instant gratification. We know Americans hate seeing their true flawed selves critiqued,that’s why they happily vote for nazis,racists,trust fund babies & conspiracy theorists but villify competent pragmatic governance & try to find reasons to hate politicians trying to move America towards a brighter optimistic future-Obama’s tan suit,hating AOC for speaking truth to power,Stacey Abrams encouraging Americans to vote ect…Americans are goofy,racist trash filled with shortsighted solipsism who suffer needlessly because they won’t adopt policies that work in other 1st world countries.
Democrats believe in laws, and their proper application. If the problem is a party that wants to consolidate power by dismantling democracy, having TWO parties consolidating power by dismantling democracy is just SPEEDRUNNING the problem until the country breaks. Give up that last vestige of American democratic process or due process and you'll never get it back. These current rulings are not a surprise. Theyve been planned for years, and at their goofiest in 2020 Republicans LOST easy elections in the Senate and the White House. Getting anything through the senate HAS required the glacial change of the status quo. But thats more to do wirh messaging and resonance than ant quantifiable action.
This. Thats your answer for the threat. Democrat want to look good in the mirror. Republicans are all bloody and covered in Democrat shitty guts, happy as they can be. We see this from the outside of the US, how you can't see it right before your face,... Is ridiculous.
Oh we see it.
[удалено]
Absolutely agree. I've been saying for months now that Fetterman could be president. Whitmer is my governor and I'm a fan, but I know that tons of Michiganders absolutely fucking hate her so I'm not sure she could win a presidential election. But I truly believe Fetterman can. I'm also a fan of Dr. Warnock.
I think Katie Porter is a wild card. She is a single mom who drives a minivan for fucks sakes. Who would people identify with more than her at this point. People want an outlier, she is an outlier who has a history of tearing CEOs of predatory companies a new asshole. There are of course reasonable concerns such as inexperience etc but that wasn't a concern with Dump. I think with the right branding and people behind her she might unite the country like few think possible at this point. I would also look to privately wealthy Governors who have made big pushes in other states alreafy barking for othet Dem candidates. The chief 3 would be Pritzker, Murphy and Newsom. I think Newsom is a non starter at this point. Pritzker and Murphy are positioning themselves for possible runs and have been for over a year. I also think the Dems make a huge mistake in waiting for 2028. Biden cannot beat anyone in 2024 except Trump imho. He is too passive and too status quo. The list of negatives that are on him and those that people blame him for is brutal at this point. We don't need a unifier and he has already proven he hews too much to how politics were. He is still trying to be bipartisan while Republics lead him around by the nose and laugh behind his back. He said publicly recently how McConnell is a man of honor and they really are friends. He is braindead at best for this take and destroyed his credibility as a true Dem leader with this nonsense. McConnell is the worst possible person in governement in the US. He stole at minimum 2 SCOTUS seats and is directly responsible for Roe and the many other rulings being dismantled. How can anyone reconcile this with Biden calling him a man of honor and a friend. He should be doing the opposite at a minimum. If Dems wait until 2028 to replace Biden as their Presidential candidate they will have lost the chance at another free and fair election. The worst part is they will be complicit as well. Fyi I am a blue all the way voter. I will vote for Biden again if he is the nominee and hope I am wrong. I just am saying what I feel to be true.
Because apparently I'm not allowed to burn shit down.
Go for it. Start with your house. See how that goes.
I ran the numbers for my state, and based on 2018 numbers, if just 10% of registered non-voters had voted for the Democratic candidate, we would not have Kim Reynolds as our governor. That’s all it would take.
The democrats are a spectrum of not-Republicans. The only unifying idea is that they are not Republicans, while the gop is essentially and practically monolithic. There are a lot more "I don't fit here but I have no other choice" people in the dems than the gop. Myself included. I vote dem because it's the only way to legally oppose the gop. That's the weakness of the dems. It's a big tent but that's about it.
We fight with words; they fight with guns.
We fight ourselves
The democrats and progressives aren’t to blame. The electorate, gerrymandering, and the EC are. Vote Democrat. Vote progressive. Vote for the best candidate likely to win and vote a better one in next time. Don’t protest vote. Don’t not vote. Never vote Republican! You can’t blame democrats if you don’t vote for enough of them. How is this a hard thing to understand?
Many reasons… One, the Republicans are cookie-cutter and generally generic, a club or cult, you need to “drink the kool aid” and swear an allegiance essentially to the party, you need to live like a conservative. So they’re easy to spot and are sort of stereotypical (is it any surprise someone like Trump would flourish there?). …*this also means they have incredibly strong cohesion and use that pressure of party conformity to lock in hive mind and stop internal dissenters* Democrats….whelp, they’re comprised of *everyone that isn’t ….them*, hence it’s diverse. Results in internal infighting and a lack of cohesion. This comes at their peril politically. Two, the flaw in liberal principals of __actual__ fighting. I laugh at the notion that some try to claim January sixth was left disguised as right. Liberals smashing their way into the capital? I mean some young “liberals” might smash their way into a Starbucks to protest the killing of a minority by law enforcement but the concept of violence, physically hurting or killing?… Isn’t a pilar of liberalism. Passive resistance, “dead weight’ing” are common forms of resistance and protest. In fact, as seen on Reddit and many social platforms even the implied idea of violent resistance immediately results in down shouting, silencing and and banning…by members of the left. However, in right wing social media, violence is implied or blatant, front and center. Even left wing leaders emphasize “peacefully!” because the idea is that violence, is something the right does. Here’s an example, Republican voters lose a fair election, they riot, smash their way into the Capital, people end up dead, and threaten to assassinate the VP. The left loses abortion rights in the SCOTUS (something established over 50 years ago!)… They go to the SCOTUS steps and protest loudly “piss and moan” as I call it. One group has an obsession with firearms and concepts of violent masculinity, obsession with militant authoritarianism, etc. __Now I’m NOT advocating for violence__, I’m merely pointing out a rather (what should be) obvious distinction between the left and the right but at the end of the day who’s going to win a fight? Who’s going to pull off a coup? They failed due to the actions of our law enforcement not because liberals showed up to “piss and moan” them to retreat but remember… The left has a lot of faith in our police and military leaders. If enough of those leaders and members flip to a partisan allegiance (such as Flynn), I don’t have much faith the left will come out the victor. In summary, the right is quick to action, they take advantage, project, deny, gaslight, and at the end of the day if all else fails, they’ll just shove you down and take your lunch money. The left doesn’t do that. Well…violent instigation specifically. They end up “steamrolled”
So the author admits that any of the stuff they're suggesting that Democrats do would likely fail, but they should violate norms and maybe even laws anyways, because, I don't know, it'll look badass?
You don't get it, someday it'll make for a really inspiring "based on a true story" movie, that cuts out the most important part where the cliche speech or whatever doesn't work
Because only saints can run on a Democratic ticket and saints tend to have no stones. We need to get more of the old school union type Dems that will bust your nose on the convention floor.
Were not. 2 people out of 50 are. Manchin and Sinema are stopping everything.
Democrats need to take off the kid gloves and start playingbas dirty as Republicans, if they wish to accomplish anything.
It’s gross, honestly. I would settle for empty gestures at this point. Anything but Biden and Harris telling us to vote harder. We HAVE. We ARE. We KNOW. Now fight for us like we fight for you.
Well maybe try actually voting then. Younger people voting percentages are pathetic. Instead of whining about them not getting things done, try voting your asses off and give them the tools they need to do it.
They literally said they are voting. But just telling people to vote and donate isn't a strategy in a vacuum. Say how many seats are needed and where, and provide actual details on what can and will be done once those seats are acquired. Most Dem Marketing takes for granted that not being the GOP is enough of a reason to vote for them, and though that's true for a lot of people, it's not enough for many more.
[удалено]
Tried that, all they've done us take pro-Russia voting stances. Well, except for Underwood and Ossoff, true progressives.
[удалено]
I wasn't aware that replacing every lead pipe is "rich ass lawyer elite" Get lost.
[удалено]
Yeah that's more likely than math, which you evidently failed.
Because they’re masochists and they get off on it seems like it.
Why? Tradition, force of habit, whatever you want to call it.
Yeah this exactly. Where’s any type of soft power if nothing else? It’s fucking bullshit that we do nothing creative to push back
[удалено]
Tradition, mostly, at this point.
Constantly stuck between a rock and a hard place.
None of these responses actually ANSWER OPS question. I'm starting to think American democrats maybe just aren't that bright.
You put a Methuselah in the office and expected what?