"critical theory" yeah i remember when Kamala Harris looked into the camera and said "i believe in the culture industry as proposed by Professor Theodor Adorno"
"critical theory" yeah i remember when Kamala Harris looked into the camera and said "i believe in the culture industry as proposed by Professor Theodor Adorno"
We all know that Buttigieg is a Gramscian sleeper agent trained by his father
Tom Nichols is canceled.
Let’s replace them with the old racist, sexist, and ableist terminology! How about “white trash” for “food insecure.”
What's the problem with food insecurity...?
Her unbridled hatred for Jazz during the campaign was really irritating!
What are we supposed to call "incarcerated people"? Jailbirds?
"Inmates" was, I believe, frequently used. www.urban.org/urban-wire/p...
“Prisoners” also works.
The kicker is the original poster doesn't allow comments on his post. Just tell me you're for fascism, it parses better.
Make America Frankfurt!
She said it right after her debate opponent barked about Haitians eating pets.
Hey now. Tom may have been part of a political movement that turned fascist right under his very nose but we should hear what he has to say.
It would be an even bigger step forward to ignore Tom Nichols. I could get behind that.
OK but remember when Al Gore did kind of actually say that "The first step in Germany's "descent into hell," Gore said, quoting the philosopher Theodor Adorno, was "'the conversion of all questions of truth into questions of power.'"
Twenty-five years after he ran for president, but yeah, sure.
you have a lot of time to read critical theory when you’re not president
In plain words that anyone can understand.
The GOP and their tame media have planted in their supporters' minds the firm belief that the academic discourse of the left - which is indeed alienating to people without that training - is the day-to-day speech of Democratic politicians. It isn't: but voter perceptions matter as much as facts.
like, in the grand scheme of things do i think electeds should avoid jargon? yes. but like, has anyone actually found an example of *electeds* using this language
there was a thread going around that actually tracked political comms and most cases were republicans feeding the outrage machine lol
.3 seconds google search produced this and many other examples of “birthing persons” used by elected bodies and then weaponized by the Right wing to paint Dems as out of touch weirdos that you can’t vote for x www.health.ny.gov/community/pr....
This isn't an elected body? It's an administrative office?
It’s an administrative body appointed by Democrats. Here’s an example of elected Democrats doing the same. An equally short google search could show you have the Right effectively weaponized it. council.nyc.gov/press/2022/0...
Tom has devolved to complaining about it appearing occasionally in legislation now.Caring about how something gets phrased in a bill that no deciding voter in an election will ever read is just looking for something to be mad about
You’ve all gone to “it isn’t happening” to “ok, it gets used in law, but Democrats aren’t saying it and voters aren’t hearing it” in record time.
I do think that the distinction between rhetoric and the wording in laws is an important line to draw. Voters care about what a law does and how it is sold. I do not think how something is phrased in a law or policy proposal matter unless it changes what the law actually does
They care. Democrats would be wise to stop handing effective weapons to the propagandists who use that phrasing to effectively portray Dems as weirdos that shouldn’t be near power.
Supposedly he has a clip of AOC saying "birthing person" once, but I think that says more about literally everybody else in the world than her.
Warren is the easy one here? Got dragged for it at the time
Big Structural Bailey. Third Way determined the lumpens HATE big structural Bailey
Yes! And they found exactly what you’d expect. It’s republicans dcinboxinsights.substack.com/p/was-it-som...
who gives a fuck? like actually who gives a fuck aside from outrage merchants and their marks? anyone else politically engaged enough to hear politicians say these things occasionally is not going to care
How many times on the trail did she say “cars and driving are an important part of fascism” :(
I would have respected her more had she invoked critical theory 😂
It’s a classic Democrat mistake. Reminds me of when Hilary Clinton looked into the camera and said, “I am an ardent believer in the ideology of Saul Alinsky.” Talk about a fumble!
Stuff like this is why I unfollowed him ages ago.
fuck the Frankfurt School, all my homies hate the Frankfurt School
Guaranteed going into '26 Cracker Barrel's logo change is going to get pinned on Democrats
These think tankers are a bit behind the times. Microaggression surely had its in 2015 but since 2017/18 I’ve only heard it used in a derisive manner.
This is, “Make the liberal columnists of the Trump years quit annoying me,” and they have already stopped! They write about how Trump has a point on crime now.
“Coconut Tree” was code for “Critical Theory.” The line itself is a paraphrase of a line from 18th Brumaire. Coconuts grow in “hothouses.” Every American knows this.
/s
But she didn’t outright reject that nonsense either, and she should have. Would’ve earned trust with swing voters. Remember: the goal is to win. It don’t matter if you have to do ridiculous or distasteful stuff to win. You have to win.
jfc
Please describe one ridiculous or distasteful thing we have to do in order to win.
Ridiculous: go on Fox News and Joe Rogan Distasteful: moderate on climate policy Others might have other examples.
Q: To what end? A: Centrist dogshit
Sir, as a centrist I am neither a dog nor a cat person. Thank you very much. What is your plan to flip TX?
What is your plan to win the Senate? (and why do all the Bluesky people avoid that question? It’s very funny, and telling.)
The guy everyone is excited about in Maine is campaigning against the oligarchy. Maybe big scary words aren't the problem
“Latinx” lost votes “Defund the police” lost votes. You *must* know that. If not you’re out of touch.
So things no one actually ran on nationally, got it.
No voted for the candidate who said Haitian immigrants are eating their neighbors cats because someone once used the word "latinx" If you're going to lie this obviously, you might at least try to make it sound plausible
What is your plan to win the Senate? (telling that nobody on Bluesky seems to have an answer to that question)
The “swing voters” for the last couple cycles have been disaffected cranks. It’s not the terminology that’s been moving them, it’s the democrats insistence on engagement with baseline reality. It would be more advantageous to say you think the moon landing was faked than to disown niche terms.
lets check in with reality: bsky.app/profile/dcin...
So you think Democrats should tell people to talk like humans and make a point of rejecting nonsense words like “birthing person,” “unhoused,” and “latinx”? Good. We agree! Now, let’s go win elections, me and you. ♡
Ah yes, condescending and trying to control people. That's a good look for democrats. Tell me - how many of these terms did you first hear by someone using them earnestly, and how many by a conservative complaining about liberals using them?
Elected Dems used “defund the police” Stupid.
Again - where did you FIRST hear the term? And which elected dems? How many? Was it widespread? Did party platforms or policies reflect this?
Yes, that is a stupid claim
Fact. Google it.
lol
That term isnt on the list lmao
Activists started using it and many elected Democrats were tripping over each other in the rush to decry it.
Not loud enough. They got tarred with it. Doesn’t matter if it’s unfair. They lost. BTW, what is your plan to flip TX?
Health care, green energy jobs, and not buying into right-wing framing like you and Colin Allred have done.
I generally agree with you. But you gotta show TX voters you ain’t a lefty loon. Whether fair or not. That’s what I mean by having to do “ridiculous and distasteful stuff” - you shouldn’t have to fend off FNC propaganda, *but the propaganda works,* so unfortunately you gotta deal with it.
You don't deal with it by signaling to voters you're a fickle coward by who'll shove your own supporters under the bus at the first sign of pushback.
Which ones? Be specific
Name them.
amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/07/...
An article written in 2024 bringing up that in 2020 Harris said that the Defund the Police movement was right for pointing out how we are excessively funding police at the expense of schools and other public services, and more police funding doesn't mean less crime. Do you think she was wrong?
She should never have associated with an obviously stupid and harmful slogan like “defund the police.” Obviously stupid. Democrats that associated themselves with stupid nonsense like that have their heads so far up their own asses they deserve to lose. Rs are criminals, wish Ds weren’t losers.
How then, in your mind, should she have answered the question "What do you think of the Defund the Police movement?"
We don’t deserve to lose. MGP does.
You're completely captured the propaganda that being near a "bad phrase" means that Democrats support everything associated with that "bad phrase". Funny how that never happens to Republicans. They're never punished because of an association with a phrase like "they're murderers and rapists".
Yeah, how dare she say that we should look at priorities and maybe not buy police departments an M1-A Abrams tank and close schools. You've been played, player, and you don't even realize it. Kamala Harris did not say "defund the police". Try again.
She came close enough to cause herself problems
"Close enough" you mean she mentioned the words. You're angry at the wrong people but it's the people that the propagandists in the media *want* you to be mad at. So they won.
Is cisgender a nonsense word
To most people. Just say “not trans” if you want people to understand you. Perfectly good word for sociology textbooks, but people hate jargon. Drop it for most situations.
nah i'm good you're cis
You are asking them to not do a thing they aren't doing, and repeatedly raising the issue (that does not exist) serves only to keep it an issue
what the fuck is these people's obsession with 'latinx'? oh, and can they point to one time Harris or Walz said it (no)?
They shouldn't though
jesus does it physically hurt being this fucking stupid?
Kitchen table issues, like, you know, Theodor Adorno.
In whose name do you bless your food before your meal, if not Theodor Adorno?
I actually don’t know who that is.
This is a stupid take. You don't win by standing for absolutely nothing.
This misconstrues my views. *Elect the most progressive candidate who can win in each district.* If you are promoting candidates who can win then you are just a self loathing puritan who wants to keep losing to MAGA.
"Lie to me, daddy" is a gross political position to take and will never be rewarded by progressives. Your views can grow and change but without a shred of honesty, then what exactly are we electing?
The history of gay rights progress suggests otherwise
So gay rights progress came about because people didn't say "LGBTQ+"??? Buddy, gay rights progress came about because trans people were sick of being beaten up by the police and they started rioting. It came about because people dying from AIDS started getting in everyone's faces and saying...
..."SILENCE + DEATH." Nowhere did it progress by people not pointing out the lived reality of LGBTQ+ people.
SILENCE=DEATH, goddamnit.
Stonewall was a goddamn riot!! These people forget history like it's nothing.
Are you paying attention to what's happening in this country right now or nah?
You need to read the replies. They're not all attacking you. Many of them are trying to show you how ignorant this rhetoric is.
Excuse me? Read the replies yourself before popping off. I’ve read and replied to almost all of them. Almost none of you super hard left types answer this basic question: what is your plan to win the Senate? I”How about Arkansas? Will candidates who want to “defund the police” win there?
There are no Democratic candidates saying "defund the police." There never have been. It's just a fucking troll from the right, which you are once again privileging over actual lived reality. You've absorbed the right-wing framing and accept it as true. If anyone is living in a bubble, it's you.
Dems ran on defunding the police in the mid-terms and won. Harris ran towards the cops, not away from them. She didn't run on defunding the police and she lost.
Harris praised the movement. Look it up.
And Harris lost so great job of contradicting yourself, ya ding-dong head.
My plan to win the Senate is to primary Dems who won't listen to the Base and send the winning candidates to the General. What's your plan that doesn't involve lying your face off?
The people who were mad about that sort of thing were posting about how they didn't believe her when she rejected the left in other ways.
Some. But she lost gettable votes by being and reading as too far left.
She also lost gettable votes by being and reading too far right. If your objective is to win, it's far better to compete with apathy, which has zero budget, than heavily funded fascists, just on strategy alone, without considering the moral compromise.
Anyone who demands Democrats police their vocabulary, but has nothing wrong with Republicans spitting the most racist shit ever is not a serious person
Agree! Who *are* these people? MAGA types? I, your *friend and ally,* have immense problems with Republicans moral depravity. Their debasement of our language and discourse. Their lies. Their abusiveness. Still—still!—Dems should do better because it is right and effective.
You are not a friend or ally if you are saying that Democrats have to police their language and otherwise can’t frame the conversation.
I don’t follow how helping Dems win is anti-Dem What is your plan to win the Senate?
You’re not helping them win
I know. The same ppl that lament how voters built up a false and rosey idea of Trump are now pretending that Democrats as a whole can’t be tarred by association with progressive culture. “Kamala didn’t say that”. I know man, but the Press and social media suck, and also Dems are a brand.
I think this is correct if I understand you. Media bias favors Republicans. That sucks. You still have to sell your brand even if the environment is unfair.
Yes exactly, well said.
So, not only do these people expect Zohran Mamdani to condemn "globalize the intifada," ever Democrat has to condemn everything anyone left of center said ever, got it
If it’s stupid, condemn it as a rule, yes. But I think that you have a point (implied), that Dems shouldn’t be overly defensive about manufactured controversy. (They should definitely play offense, not just defense.)
If you're against "manufactured controversy," you should probably have a quiet word with this poster (I think everyone would appreciate the silence): bsky.app/profile/fuli...
whats "stupid" here? Zohran for all you can say about him has been THE MOST OFFENSIVE AGAINST REPUBLICANS and yet the establishment hate him?
Go fuck yourself.
You seem like an open minded person. What is your plan to win the Senate?
Reinforce that narrative. It's what you do apparently bsky.app/profile/doom...
This is an explicitly anti-intellectual position.
What the fuck are you talking about
What is your plan to win the Senate?
What potential Democratic voter is looking for a rejection of these things? If you are against them, why not vote Republican?
Many voters in swing states who want better healthcare but don’t want to be condescended to or made to feel like their social values are scorned.
Their social values are shit and should be scorned.
What is your plan to win the Senate? How would you go about flipping TX?
Let the rurals suffer the consequences of the policies they voted for and not bail them out. Make voting in rural areas as difficult as possible. Every action that Republicans do should be met in kind tenfold. They are shitty people with shitty values and should get out of the way.
Run on punishing the corporations, the wealthy and the fraudsters. Run on more healthcare, jobs, unemployment insurance, Social Security and paid family leave.
Doubt that’s gonna flip TX. But at least you responded with a plan.
It would over time. Probably not 2026, but who knows how fragile their new maps are.
“Over time” uh huh
Yep. Start winning and keep winning. The only way Democrats have a chance to take back power is with big, bold, and new ideas. Play to the crowd outside the stadium, not the guys rooting for the other team.
Then run on better healthcare and not this anti-woke crap. You'll get a bigger coalition by offering material benefits and contrast with the GOP.
Not mutually exclusive
But why run on the anti-woke crap? It loses voters like me and others on the left.
It helps win the middle, or at least nit lose it
I don't think anyone in the middle will care about these words if you offer them better healthcare. Conversely, the voters who do care aren't going to vote for Democrats just because they stop talking about incarcerated people, racism and queer rights. The only voters these words affect are lost.
I don’t vote republican because, well, where to start! Corruption. J6. Science. Decency. Minority rights. Fiscal sanity.
Reject what? When was she supposed to do that
*eye roll* Stfu, weirdo
"In order to win we must let Republicans control the words we are allowed to say" Do you hear yourself?
You are going to get roasted for this take and you will deserve it.
What is your plan to win the Senate?
Yep, that’s why she lost. Not because America is sexist and racist with a terrible electoral system.
"It don’t matter if you have to do ridiculous or distasteful stuff to win." You are what's wrong with America. Doesn't matter Right, Left or center, THIS is bullshit and if that is truly your mindset, you should be ashamed.
If you just want to be a hard left puritan then you’re not taking the situation seriously. I want a better life for my family. What is your plan to win the Senate?
Explain 2020 when left wing activism and talking points were even more visible
So weird that you use right wingers framing for the reason she lost and that this is the real conversation to have when every white nationalist, white supremacist and racist clamored to have Trump elected. They should be punished.
Oh I agree with punishing these MAGA fascist broligarch assholes. Which is *why* I want to be smart and win. What is *your* plan to win the Senate?
The plan should be to stop playing by republican’s rules. The message is really, really simple and you don’t have to give air to ANY of their grievances. That entire third way list of “bad words” were republicans claiming Dems were saying them when they hardly were!
The message you promote here is a good one! Very, very good! I agree. I humbly suggest this should be complimented by *also* not saying stupid shit that ordinary people find repellent.
such as
Do you sincerely think swing voters, the dumbest people in the electorate, are informed enough and paying enough attention to decide their vote based on who is or isn't using terms like "critical theory" and "cultural appropriation"? Or can you just admit to projecting your own anti-left views?
You're aware she would have to spend the entire campaign denouncing the latest word someone had claimed Dems were using?
I agree that Dems shouldn’t be played like puppets. It’s a balance. But signals matter. You can demonstrate you’re not a crazy leftist puritan without being defensive, I think.
If it helps clarify the balance, someone with an archive of mailouts confirmed these were, bar one or possibly two, all words republicans whined about, not words that democrats used. This is not a game you can win by playing.
In the mean time, trying to prove I am now like my opponent is not actually a great way to get my supporters or my opponents' to vote for me.
Elected Dems used “defund the police” and we deserved to lose because that shit is STUPID
Thing is, if we look at a campaign that is actually succeeding at the moment you may notice the guy is only willing to talk about what he *does* stand for, not what he doesn't. As well as staying on topic, this does involve actually standing for things.
Everyone that voted for Trump in 2024 is happy with the outcome, or want to be absolved of their part in his reelection. May they all rot in hell. No amount of coddling by Democrats will convert them to the righteous cause.
So you give up and want to lose? You don’t want to try to win??
No. Kamala Harris was a mainstream Democrat, as was Biden, as was Hillary, as was Obama. What message do you think is going to appeal to Trump voters that won't alienate Democrats?
Harris had one if the most left voting records in the Senate if not the most. Biden governed as the most liberal president since FDR
Remember: swing voters don’t exist. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Swing voters are the least informed voters. The margin was so thin that it didn't matter what she did (i.e. run a centrist campaign), the media landscape branded her as a radical. Maybe low-info voters will always see a Black woman as a radical, no matter what her policies are...
no, for the same reason nobody gives a shit if she actually said "critical theory is good" nobody would give a shit if she said "critical theory is bad." it's dumb bullshit made up by her opponents for stupid people. have some self respect lol
Are the "swing voters" in the room with you right now?
You're just a maga fuck who doesn't like Trump's aesthetics
Hahaha. No, I am on your team, actually. What is your plan to flip TX?
If the goal is to win maybe the stupid "chasing the Rs right and validating their every insane brainfart" bullshit the Dems have been doing for decades that has absolutely obliterated the party and got us Trump might be a thing to *stop* doing
Which leftist candidate have one red states? All the purple state govs and senators are centrists.
"The Dems run as far right as they can and actively sabotage and undermine any candidate to the left of Nancy Pelosi" "Oh yeah well then where's all the left wing state governors?!" Do you iron your brain every night before you go to bed?
"We have to show the tumblr users who's boss" is how you get Brianna Wu.
This is nonsensical. You simply don't understand the strength of the GOP outrage machine that amplifies comments by random people - or just makes them up entirely If Harris rejected every one, she'd never say anything else, & you'd say she didn't give enough reasons for people to vote for her
IKR! So much manufactured outrage! So, oh, I agree and I think I do understand. (The Sydney Sweeney foofaraw is a recent example.) you have a fair point! But I *still* think it makes sense to demonstrate that Dems aren’t crazy by rejecting nonsensical stuff. Ans elected Dems haven’t done that.
Name one elected Democrat that commented on the original Sydney Sweeney ad (not the controversy after FOX talked about it incessantly for days)
The Democrats will never be able to out fascist a fascist. Nobody believes them when they do that. Nobody believes that a chest thumping democrat rejecting wokeness at the top of the lungs will ever do so more effectively than any random republican.
Who is arguing they should go fascist??? What is your plan to flip TX?
It’s implied in what you’re saying. You want them to move to the right, to appeal to the same bigotry and stupidity that Republicans do. And they will never be effective at that. No one will believe that. So if that’s the plan to flip Texas that’s not gonna work either.
You didn’t answer the question. None of the hard left puritans on Bluesky answer the question: because you have no plans. In no way does “moderate” and don’t use “stupid woke lingo” equate to go full fascist or even Republican. Just nominate sane candidates that can flip districts.
"Just nominate sane candidates that can flip districts." The whole point of gerrymandering is to make this basically impossible. TX fascists have a lock on power. Probably better to focus on overwhelming voter turnout than hoping that a white racist will be impressed with your anti-wokeness.
No they don’t. You can’t gerrymander the whole state. What is your plan to flip the state? You don’t seem to care to try. I would like to win elections. That’s better for people’s lives than being a hard left puritan.
Oh and you care based on what, your posts here? The plan is the same, because that lock on power is also maintained through voter suppression. Purging the rolls, intimidating voters, and so on. Ken Paxton bragged that Trump would have lost TX without him doing exactly that.
But you didn't say "don't use." You said it had to be specifically condemned. Which is to give into right-wing framing that this "lingo" is everywhere, when it isn't. It ends up being advice to out-right the right, which cannot be done. It wasn't necessary for Biden to win in 2020 during peak woke.
No. The goal isn't to win. The goal is human rights for everyone.
Not only should Dems not say those words, they should talk about not saying those words. Without saying them.
“Why didn’t Harris explicitly reject a social theorist who died in 1969?” is the sort of question that should answer itself, yet here you are.
The logical conclusion is black dems should just run as far left as possible
She lost becsuse of people like you who think that it s ok to treat people like idiots or outright lie to them. On their defense they usually get paid a lot of money to do so, doing it for the love of the game like you is kind of insane.
Your and @radiofreetom.bsky.social the Republican's white-supremacist "have we tried appeasing the fascists?" strategy saw @kamalaharris.com waste billions to lose all 3 elected bodies of government in the most winnable election in a century. @zohrankmamdani.bsky.social gets landslides on no cash.
If anything, this was the least winnable election for Democrats since WWII. bsky.app/profile/jbur...
It's adorable you seem to think that doesn't have anything to do with the positions said ruling parties chose to offer, and instead seem to be suggesting that its the result of alien lasers or something.
Conservatives lost in the UK. Democrats lost in the US. Their policies weren’t very similar. A lot of dissatisfaction with governments in 2024 was due to post-COVID inflation and global instability.
Both fully supported the Zionist white-supremacist colonial genocide and attacked trans rights. If you're going to be this vague in your support of your nebulous argument, why fucking bother? Are you always this lazy in your thinking?
IDK, the economy was actually pretty good and Trump is terrible. Seems winnable with candidates who are a better fit for the country (Bashear, Whitmer, Shapiro - not far left candidates who lack strength as communicators (Biden, Harris))
You should read this: www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019...
Do you really think that Biden and Harris are far-left candidates?
Relative to red states we need to flip, yes. They are the farthest left candidates for prez in recent history. More far left than any other elected president.
Really? More left than FDR? Jimmy Carter? Have you ever been outside the USA?
ok, so Biden and Harris are far left in your opinion. good to know that your brain is made from literal shit.
The economy was pretty good, but voters felt the economy was bad because of inflation.
True. Still a winnable election.
No it wasnt
Compare Harris as a communicator to Trump. Trump has only ever beaten 2 women candidates. One had been subjected to 40+ years of misogynistic media calumny. The other had to play catchup but the misogynoir was fresh and plentiful. But “Latinx” amirite?? Stupid takes abound here.
Biden and Harris are far left to you? That’s crazy
Oh ffs 🤦🏼♀️
What is your plan to win the Senate?
Well first, I wouldn’t sell out minorities (gender, race, ethnicity) to pander to conservatives with the hope that they’ll vote for us - they won’t.
You didn’t answer the question. Shouldn’t you want the most progressive candidate who can win to be elected? What views does that candidate hold in, say, Arkansas?
They should hold the same views wherever they are. I don’t think a progressive is going to win over the cousin fuckers in Arkansas by pandering and if they do change their tune to try and win over with the cousin fuckers, then they’re going to lose their base.
We once had a DEMOCRAT PRESIDENT from ARKANSAS. Recently! You know what he didn’t do? Call voters “cousins fuckers.” Which evidences poison if the mind and the soul. Reexamine your heart and your brain, because *you,* ma’am are part of the problem. Condescending out of touch hard leftists like you.
But Trump calls voters names.
Indeed. And I’m just using ridiculous language because that dude is a pompous little tool.
I know but clearly calling voters names us a winner thing to do.
Exactly. Trump is terrible. An abomination. Don’t be like Trump.
Im confused as to what you are advocating for now. My rep is the leader of the blue dogs. Flipped my red district in 2022. :/ the sacrifices I knew about were Guns, Environment including and especially the endangered species act. Didn’t sacrifice: trans rights.
Bill Clinton hasn’t been president in decades, that’s not recently. You’re right, I should call them sibling fuckers given the Duggars live there. Alas, it turns out the entire premise that you’re defending is bullshit: bsky.app/profile/jona...
You seem like an extremist, and not very nice. I want to win elections. Not be a hard left puritan.
I’m a registered republican, lmao. And I’m no extremist. I was the vote for Harris no matter what because I don’t want a bloody fascist in office, but that doesn’t mean that the Dem candidate should throw trans people, gay people, brown people, black people, or women under the bus to get GOP votes
“Centrists”: The easiest way to win is to WANT to lose, and then guarantee it by dissatisfying everyone. Checkmate vertebrates 🐒
Is that the goal? Win what exactly?
Power in order to advance good policy. You want more healthcare for more people? Minority rights? Climate policy? Win the Senate.
Oh. Which candidates are running on that stuff right now?
Dems are uniformly better than Rs on all of those issues and it ain’t even close.
You are not answering the question I asked which concerns specifics, what you are saying here is generalities. So that would be you can't think of any candidates or even leaders who are doing anything like that either huh? Why is that you think?
Gosh, I think any of the likely and quality candidates in 2028, for instance, are good and far better than Rs on these issues. Whitmer. Bashear. Butedgeig. Pritzger. Shaprio. All.
Again you keep talking in generalities, which ones are running on actual laws, legislation, platforms and policies? When they have power, have they done any of that stuff?
You're right, you SHOULD do distasteful things to win. Which is why people like you should shut the fuck up and get behind the progressive candidates who are actually WINNING instead of wishcasting a centrist administration that wouldn't meet the moment. Remember: the goal is to win.
Nonsense?? You know what's nonsense? Trying to appeal to the mythical 'swing voters'. They don't exist. They're really Republicans who will always vote Republican no matter how much time Dems waste on them. All that's accomplished is turning off Dem voters who end up not going to the polls.
What is your plan to win the Senate? How would you flip TX? Sounds to me you just want to be a hard left puritan and never compromise.
If you look back at recent history & current climate,trying to 'a woo' the moderates/swing voters lost Dems House,Senate, & WH.Progressive or "hard left" voters stayed away from the polls bc they are tired of Dems efforts on the same people who will never vote Dem anyway.It's a sunk cost fallacy.
I think you are incorrect. Look at all the Dem senators and governors in red and purple states: none of them are hard left extremist types. I think you just *want* this to be the strategy that works because you believe in far left positions.
Why should I have to sacrifice voting rights?
You’re not listening. My advice to you is to nominate the most progressive candidate *who can win*
The shittiest part is, I can see the bitter anger in her representation of representing Vancouver not BC Washington not DC Clark County not NE Across from Portland not ME. She hates her most populous city and we can tell!!
She plays it like the country folk have real concerns and we don’t.
My rep is MGP. I am allowed to be pissed at my democrat and even recommending unifying around hating her to both of the factions since she has all the hatable traits to leftists and normie dems.
She makes me feel sick. And I feel moral anguish because of her. It isn’t about purity. I would happily trade for Marcy Kaptur.
Give me a Jim Costa. Give me any of the democrats who arent from Texas or Maine.
She is good! More like her please! Better than the alternative by far!
I like how she talks like us… but go to 25 seconds. watch for 45 seconds from there. :( if she didn’t seem to hate us first. youtu.be/7LvhUHKYupI?...
The alternative is serving in national office you dipshit!
They're either Progessive or they're not. People are sick of the status quo leftover from the Reagan Era Dems, i.e. New Democrats... who for 45 yrs have enabled the Republicans in their endeavours to get the US to where it is at this moment in history.
I like “new Democrats” and would be happy to have one. My rep is the leader of the Blue Dogs.
Blue Dog coalition sounds a lot like the New Dems that came into being in the 1990's who claimed to have progressive policies, which turned out to be more nonsense from a bunch of neoliberals.
What kind of candidates are winning statewide in purple and red states? Whitmer Bashear Shapiro Kelly Galleago Etc. The evidence is not aligned with what is in lefty Bluesky hearts. Median voter theory is aligned with the evidence.
But those people are all to the left of MGP…
Gallego & Kelly are my state senators.They won bc they ran unopposed.They were the only choices for voters like me who would never vote GOP & for who not voting is not an option.This is a common problem for Dem voters when we have little choice.They suck & I hope they get primaried.They're GOP-lite
I'm not bc my logic is based on empricial evidence. But if you think the Dem Party continuing on the same trajectory that wants to keep 'a wooing' voters who will only end up voting Republican or Independent anyway... is finally going to win Dems elections... OK. 🧵
But... factoring this into that great American tradition of Republican voters who vote to screw the 'other' guy... that 'swing voter' strategy is a lose/lose. 🤦🏽♂️
I prefer to stake the future on empirical evidence, rather than far left hopes and dreams. I want my life to get better.
Empirical evidence is showing that Dem strategy of trying to appeal to 'swing voters' at the cost of progressive/left voters isn't working. Hopefully,Dems win in upcoming elections. But it will be bc🍊 & the entire GOP is so freaking evil that even my golden retriever could beat them in an election.
It’s the only that has worked in red and purple states. You just don’t want that to be true, I think.
It has literally obliterated the Dems and turned a number of blue states purple and purple states red. You people would rather lose with your right wing bullshit than win
You're high.
Nonsense?? You know what's nonsense? Trying to appeal to the mythical 'swing voter'. What a crock of shit.
So your idea of building trust is to either throw anyone but straight white men under the bus or to lie that you will. Are you sure the electorate that finds that appealing is going to think Trump is going to do that less or more?
why don’t you just actually advocate what you believe instead of passing it off onto other imaginary voters
In general I think people *should* advocate what they believe rather than arguing for taking positions for electoral reasons. But in at this time the discussion is about strategy. That said, are you suggesting that I am hiding what I “actually believe” I assure you, I am not.
So you think everyone should stop saying any of the words on that list? Or just that Harris should've said that everyone should stop saying the words on that list?
That reminds me, I need to have “And exactly what the fuck do you know about winning, you little collaborator shit” put on a macro or something
Why doesn’t this apply to right wing politicians who (these days) never ever disavow even the furthest fringes of their base? Trump is out there repeating racist tripe about Haitian immigrants eating housecats, but Kamala should have shat on anyone who adds additional letters onto “LGBT”?
Oh my god shut the fuck up
What is your plan to win the Senate? How do you plan to flip TX?
I am sure every republican voter is waiting with bated breath for dems to use the right language
You're a ridiculous moron
"You haven't explicitly disclaimed this thing I'm hoping I can force you to talk about because it gets you off message" is the bullshit game the fascist enablers want to make Democrats play. Don't play that game.
That’s true, sometimes this is a trap. Usually it’s a trap. But there is a way to reject garbage ideas like “defund the police” and win respect and trust.
It's always a trap and furthermore it's always used by the media to work very hard to drive a wedge in the Democratic coalition. If she "disclaims" it then the media will talk endlessly about how that means that "Democrats are in disarray". The narrative must be fed & the narrative is "Dems bad"
You’re out of touch with reality.
If you were on the street confronting masked agents, or standing outside courtrooms protesting, or pushing into ICE facilities, or throwing sandwiches or doing ANYTHING helpful no one woukd give a flying fuck if you used any or all of those words.
Yes, that's it right there.
This guy sucks. @radiofreetom.bsky.social
I’m a Democrat and I want to hear these words more. If they shy away from them, I think they are weak and cowardly.