I thought it was clear that no Democrat could have won the last election since inflation was blamed on them, and most voters who voted simply accepted that narrative and voted accordingly.
The US Democratic Party - The Road to 2026 and 2028
- Thread starter rio's upper lip
- Start date
I'm starting to think the democrats are the real russian assets.
What a bunch of eejits!
Yep, they actively targeted these made up moderate Republicans that would rather vote Democrat than Trump. And they lost.
How can the lesson be to go more centrist? The lesson should be to not run a bad candidate.
The silly form of the argument is that Democrats lost the 2024 election because of the left-wing positions that they took in 2020, an election they actually won.
The somewhat more credible form is that the public has shifted on various issues since 2020.
...meanwhile the actual Democratic Party are busy fawning over the Reagan legacy and outing themselves as bathroom perverts, just to own trans people:
The party is less than dirt.
The party is less than dirt.
What issues specifically?
It's also worth noting that the Republicans for all their idiocy are not letting the public dictate their stance and policies. The sooner the Dems get out of this nonsense of fine tuning their platforms to "what the data says" the more authentic they'll look.
Ok Gavin. You don't think transgenders should play girl sports. Cool. The Republicans think that too. What issues of substance are you here to talk about?
Immigration and trans issues are the main ones I think.
Exactly. The Democrats need to move to the left if they want to win the next election (If there is an election that is free and fair, that is).
I think the Rs pulled off a masterclass in convincing the public that transgenders in sports is this predominant "problem" (for the record it's not, personally, but it's so minor in the grand scheme of things) that takes precedence over cost of living and other pertinent issues. Illegal immigration was at record lows even prior to Trump.
And the Rs aren't honest debaters... As soon as you align with them on some issues they find the next stupid topic to draw contrast with.
I shouldn't be surprised at this. But again, the Ds have fallen into the trap of letting the Rs set the debate space. Walz had the right idea of calling them weird for focusing on people's sex and gender so much. Before he was neutered by Kamala and party of course
I'm not sure what you mean. Most sources I've seen show that immigration in general, including illegal immigration, was very high during the Biden administration. This is what triggered the backlash.
Example,
"January 2024: WASHINGTON (AP) — Arrests for illegal border crossings from Mexico reached an all-time high in December since monthly numbers have been released, authorities said Friday, exposing a growing vulnerability for President Joe Biden in his campaign for a second term."
Other example,
"The number of people taken into custody by the U.S. Border Patrol has reached the highest levels in the agency’s 100-year history under Biden, averaging 2 million per year."
It was not an imaginary problem. Now rates might have gone down before Trump took over but that doesn't change the actual problem, people's issue isn't someone crossing the border but the social and economic problems their presence causes.
Now what's true is that many immigrants were legal in the sense that they claimed asylum, but the asylum claims were often bogus so that misreads the issue somewhat.
They were protecting Kamala from the public and the media probably because they were worried she'd fcuk up too much.
I almost think the problem isn't so much going more center or going more left (by European standards) but simply having a vision and being able to communicate that effectively which neither HC or KH was able to do in any way. Biden was more centrist in some ways but campaigned on essentially big public works projects to rebuild after COVID which was effective (campaign wise not execution wise once he was President). I do think a Dem vision would require more centrist ideas than leftists would prefer but also would include more progressive policies and not just campaigning with the damn Cheneys. The problem is whether the candidate is more center-left or progressive-ish, without being able to articulate a vision and sell it in both new media terms (soundbites) in addition to giving long form interviews on podcasts, then they (and all of us) are doomed.
Cannot disagree with a word Nader says. Best analysis of where that country is politically over decades I've heard in a while from a man who knows his shit whatever you think of him.
WE WILL WIN! WE WILL WIN!
And people claim they don’t know what they are doing. We should just sit back and let them do their magic. They know what the situation demands.WE WILL WIN! WE WILL WIN!
Worth a listen. Sanders is not a Democrat, but he does so well in highlighting that the Democrats are totally missing in action. This 83 year old has more sense, clarity and fight in him than that entire party.
Nader is better to listen to these days but don't have a problem with Sanders. The difference is Nader knows the Democrats are done. Sanders might hope they can be reformed. He's wrong (Sanders). A third party would benefit the US across the spectrum.
The thing is that the third parties are a joke. Take The Green Party, for example. They have no interest in building a political movement from the bottom and getting some seats in states legislatures (they have literally zero out of thousands of seats). But they are more than happy to roll out some Russian asset ghoul like Jill Stein every four years to siphon votes from the Democrats.
A different political system with more parties (not just three) would benefit the US greatly, but I just don't see it happening.
Not a serious country.WE WILL WIN! WE WILL WIN!
Anyway, i see dem senators are retiring for 2026, more open seats they have to hold, though i suppose the best timing is now.
I think that's probably all wrong.
Listen to Nader in the clip above the one you posted and tell me the same thing after with a straight face.
The Dems are in large part to blame for where America is if you know that history. It's all there to read and watch online these days. I cannot see any cogent counter argument. From NAFTA on some would say, and before that Nader and others would say.
I don’t need to watch a video to know that The Green Party hold zero seats in state legislatures or that Jill Stein is a Russian asset ghoul.
A Russian asset ghoul.
Like Corbyn? You'd probably say yeah but he was a Libyan ghoul and an Iraqi ghoul and so on and on. All anti-war people in militarized societies get this. And people are too stupid to break through it.
I don't have time for people who cannot educate themselves in the easiest (not even reading) way possible. That is, who just say won't bother at all. It kills the discourse so may as well just end it.
I agree. I’ve seen enough of your takes to know I don’t need to see more.
Buttigieg not running for the Senate or Governor next year. I guess that can only mean that he's gunning for 2028.
It's never gonna happen. The two current parties are guaranteed to always be in charge or be the opposition. It's perfect for career politicians.
That's if they still have elections in four years' time.
Seems like a sure thing he's running. Newsom, Buttigieg, and Shapiro are the ones who seem to testing the waters. Hopefully Harris doesn't get any funny ideas and instead runs for Gov of CA instead.
Agreed.
I'd be happy enough with any of those three, my preferred order is the one you listed.
...
why
...
why
...
Last edited:
Is the Russian asset in the room with us right now? Under your bed?
Is there any kind of recognition on their part that people think they're fecking useless? Are they just completely insulated from the criticism and oblivious to it?
they’ve lost brooklyn dad defiant. it’s joever for the dems.
After the amazing success of the "let's put Cheney's everywhere" strategy, this is the logical next step.