Smith's federal criminal cases against Trump were upended by the election, as the Justice Department's longstanding policy is that sitting presidents can't be charged with crimes.
!remindme in 1 year when the effects of mass deporting low income agriculture workers and slapping tariffs across the board kick in and people are hurting even worse. our big beefy boy will have done dick about it and people will revert back to hating him yet again.
the average American voter doesn’t have the attention span to even remember covid or how Trump botched the response and helped kill a million Americans, much less the awareness to understand how badly the pandemic broke supply chains and thus the global economy, nor how the Biden admin still helped us fare better than the rest of the developed world in recovering from it.
not that that’s the voters’ fault. Dems did absolutely fuck all to raise awareness of that for the every man. instead, they barked at people saying the economy has recovered to all time highs (for CEOs), ignoring the actual plight of the working class.
they were too busy courting “moderates” by sprinting to the right and capitulating to Republicans’ framing of the issues, a tried and true losing strategy
And now they’re saying that Democrats were “Too leftist and too woke”, but they did this shit. Gimme a break, it’s a “Heads I win, Tails you lose” designed to make the Dems go further right
If by too leftist and too woke, they are saying that Democrats need to hit the identity politics a bit less, this is understandable.
Old school leftists have been saying this for a while. We need to protect at-risk groups, of course. But we cannot abandon the populism and we need to stop ignoring the class warfare (being conducted on the poor and middle class). It really is the economy.
If anyone is saying they were too leftist, as in the way it used to mean, there is no way the campaign went “too leftist”.
Are you referring specifically to this cycle, or Democrats in the past in a more general sense?
I don’t recall ever having heard Kamala bring up her race or gender. When asked about it directly in an interview, she said it’s no secret she’s a woman of color but never really followed up on it.
I do remember her talking a lot about her experience growing up in a middle class family or becoming a prosecutor, but does that really count as identity politics?
In general, and more recently. Yes, Kamala thread the needle quite well, I thought. One of the best examples is as you say - not taking the bait, but also selecting Walz.
It goes mostly beyond Democrats, TBH. There is a cultural thing going on right now, and honestly, I cannot help but wonder if it is part of the oligarchy’s strategy to specifically annoy and turn off a lot of people - meaning, some people just want escapism in their entertainment, and instead, they are often getting sanctimonious messaging that is so ham-fisted as to break the fourth wall. If they aren’t doing this on purpose with the intent of making more Republicans, they should know they are not really winning hearts and minds by seemingly going out of their way to try to ruin every single intellectual property with this stuff. Their attitude, even if they are losing literally millions of dollars in the process, seems to be to raise their middle finger to the fans. The people getting annoyed by this are not all racists, or misogynists or transphobic…but they might start voting with that bunch for the likes of donvict as a result.
So, a lot of this is entirely beyond the Democratic Party’s control, but I think they’d be better off if they made it clear they are for EVERYONE while distancing themselves from more sanctimonious messaging that looks like it is just engaging in blaming cishet white men for existing.
People struggling to make ends meet might just be getting tired of the culture lecturing on how “too many white men are being centered” in fictional narratives when they just want some escapism to escape from the miserable lives Republicans are making for them, and if they think the Democrats are here to pound the same message in, they are going to tune out.
I agree, I don’t think Trump’s economic plans will be for people’s benefits. If he actually cuts the programs he has said he would it should reduce federal spending and then federal income tax. But I am of the opinion that the amount I would get back in tax savings does not outweigh the benefit of making sure myself and other citizens have access to these programs. But maybe I’m wrong.
I’m thinking donvict will have the long-term effect of reversing the decades-long downward trend of crime.
Why?
We have the opportunity to remove more lead from our pipes, thus less lead getting into our bloodstreams. Less lead == less crime. Donvict will likely reverse that.
Restricting/eliminating access to abortion - well, the future of that practically writes itself.
Cutting social spending - what is going to be the natural outcome of that?
It’s almost like the qons don’t really care about America at all. Seemingly, it’s designed for rich broligarchs to stay ensconced in their compounds and gated communities, make more money and throw everyone else to the wolves. They clearly don’t give a rat’s ass about the people that live in this country that are not billionaires.
I believe you can trust your intuition on this one. Assuming he is successful in doing what he promises (which, with Trump, you can never trust anything he says but always have to assume the worst), erasing a century’s worth of progress in the administrative state will have disastrous consequences for the most vulnerable members of society who rely on entitlement programs to make ends meet during these late stages of neoliberalism (as one example, but there are others, like the FDA and EPA). but all these cuts will take a few points off the bottom line for the ultra rich, so let the apologists and propagandists sing about how great it will be when that all trickles down (it never does).
!remindme in 1 year when the effects of mass deporting low income agriculture workers and slapping tariffs across the board kick in and people are hurting even worse. our big beefy boy will have done dick about it and people will revert back to hating him yet again.
the average American voter doesn’t have the attention span to even remember covid or how Trump botched the response and helped kill a million Americans, much less the awareness to understand how badly the pandemic broke supply chains and thus the global economy, nor how the Biden admin still helped us fare better than the rest of the developed world in recovering from it.
not that that’s the voters’ fault. Dems did absolutely fuck all to raise awareness of that for the every man. instead, they barked at people saying the economy has recovered to all time highs (for CEOs), ignoring the actual plight of the working class.
I still don’t understand why Kamela didn’t run ads reminding people of how badly Trump fucked up Covid
they were too busy courting “moderates” by sprinting to the right and capitulating to Republicans’ framing of the issues, a tried and true losing strategy
And now they’re saying that Democrats were “Too leftist and too woke”, but they did this shit. Gimme a break, it’s a “Heads I win, Tails you lose” designed to make the Dems go further right
If by too leftist and too woke, they are saying that Democrats need to hit the identity politics a bit less, this is understandable.
Old school leftists have been saying this for a while. We need to protect at-risk groups, of course. But we cannot abandon the populism and we need to stop ignoring the class warfare (being conducted on the poor and middle class). It really is the economy.
If anyone is saying they were too leftist, as in the way it used to mean, there is no way the campaign went “too leftist”.
Are you referring specifically to this cycle, or Democrats in the past in a more general sense?
I don’t recall ever having heard Kamala bring up her race or gender. When asked about it directly in an interview, she said it’s no secret she’s a woman of color but never really followed up on it.
I do remember her talking a lot about her experience growing up in a middle class family or becoming a prosecutor, but does that really count as identity politics?
In general, and more recently. Yes, Kamala thread the needle quite well, I thought. One of the best examples is as you say - not taking the bait, but also selecting Walz.
It goes mostly beyond Democrats, TBH. There is a cultural thing going on right now, and honestly, I cannot help but wonder if it is part of the oligarchy’s strategy to specifically annoy and turn off a lot of people - meaning, some people just want escapism in their entertainment, and instead, they are often getting sanctimonious messaging that is so ham-fisted as to break the fourth wall. If they aren’t doing this on purpose with the intent of making more Republicans, they should know they are not really winning hearts and minds by seemingly going out of their way to try to ruin every single intellectual property with this stuff. Their attitude, even if they are losing literally millions of dollars in the process, seems to be to raise their middle finger to the fans. The people getting annoyed by this are not all racists, or misogynists or transphobic…but they might start voting with that bunch for the likes of donvict as a result.
So, a lot of this is entirely beyond the Democratic Party’s control, but I think they’d be better off if they made it clear they are for EVERYONE while distancing themselves from more sanctimonious messaging that looks like it is just engaging in blaming cishet white men for existing.
People struggling to make ends meet might just be getting tired of the culture lecturing on how “too many white men are being centered” in fictional narratives when they just want some escapism to escape from the miserable lives Republicans are making for them, and if they think the Democrats are here to pound the same message in, they are going to tune out.
I agree, I don’t think Trump’s economic plans will be for people’s benefits. If he actually cuts the programs he has said he would it should reduce federal spending and then federal income tax. But I am of the opinion that the amount I would get back in tax savings does not outweigh the benefit of making sure myself and other citizens have access to these programs. But maybe I’m wrong.
I’m thinking donvict will have the long-term effect of reversing the decades-long downward trend of crime.
Why?
It’s almost like the qons don’t really care about America at all. Seemingly, it’s designed for rich broligarchs to stay ensconced in their compounds and gated communities, make more money and throw everyone else to the wolves. They clearly don’t give a rat’s ass about the people that live in this country that are not billionaires.
I believe you can trust your intuition on this one. Assuming he is successful in doing what he promises (which, with Trump, you can never trust anything he says but always have to assume the worst), erasing a century’s worth of progress in the administrative state will have disastrous consequences for the most vulnerable members of society who rely on entitlement programs to make ends meet during these late stages of neoliberalism (as one example, but there are others, like the FDA and EPA). but all these cuts will take a few points off the bottom line for the ultra rich, so let the apologists and propagandists sing about how great it will be when that all trickles down (it never does).