just so im clear - your argument is dems used to be racist, and now they are not, which is good but they still lose, because none of the candidates are exciting, like they used to be when they were racist, but now they are all woke, which is good, but it makes them boring, which is bad
Actually, my argument is that you’re a racist and that there’s nothing positive to be gained from engaging with you beyond mockery.
you asked the question to matt what changed after 2012 - your answer is that dems stopped being racist. your answer is also that dems since then, all the non-racist ones, have been uncharismatic and boring and that's why they lost. this is your argument and it make no sense
Hillary Clinton called black children superpredators and stayed married to a child rapist after he publicly humiliated her with his intern. Biden won, barely, when Trump was actively destroying the country during COVID. Harris couldn’t make the argument that all of what’s happening now is bad.
ah ok now I am starting to understand! apologies misread you before. Your argument is that there has never been a non-racist dem candidate ever and that is why they were all uninspiring and lost. I agree! I'm a socialist who has never voted D or R because I believe we need to overthrow capitalism :)
I think it makes perfect sense that a slate of weak candidates underperform relative to a cult leader who mobilizes bigots with bigotry.
I disagree I think it doesn't matter who the leader is under capitalism the rich get their way. There was an australian prime minister called Kevin Rudd who wanted mining billionaires to pay more tax. So the mining billionaires removed Rudd and replaced them with a new PM who wouldn't make them pay