Fair, but white Americans basically never feel that about left-wing radicalism. There has never been a time in American politics, ever, when left-wing radicalism has been electorally successful. I suppose maybe during the Great Depression, but that only worked because the Depression lasted so long. In the Great Recession, the bullshit picked up right where it left off as soon as the economy was recovering.
go fuck yourself. I was leaving. I'm trying to leave. The problem is that this place is both my support network in a way, and also the source of so much of my angst. Like, I have trouble quitting.
Dollars to donuts, that's what we'll see from Dems for the foreseeable future.
See: Tar-Baby - Wikipedia.
I guess you start by claiming the other side's weather machine will do more harm if they are not stopped.
John Edwards. Jimmy Carter to some extent.
Don't get rope-a-doped […]. Democrats have almost universally been the party of economic populism until the Neoliberal Consensus Virus took hold. They missed their moment because of the aforementioned alignment with the donor class.
They aren't actually religious. Ask them to name any legislative effort they made or the Orange Turd made that was based upon the teachings of the leader their religion was founded on?
I would certainly welcome, in the 2028 Dem primary, a candidate who delivers that message. It may well be that primary voters respond to it. I just have a hard time believing that either Dem leadership, or Dem voters, are going to conclude from 44% of voters saying that Harris was "too liberal" that we can win by moving left on economic issues. Even if you can convince them that the "too liberal" part had more to do with.
I would certainly welcome, in the 2028 Dem primary, a candidate who delivers that message. It may well be that primary voters respond to it. I just have a hard time believing that either Dem leadership, or Dem voters, are going to conclude from 44% of voters saying that Harris was "too liberal" that we can win by moving left on economic issues. Even if you can convince them that the "too liberal" part had more to do with.
I don't think that's the answer. At least it's not my answer. I just think the electorate is so scrambled up by both malicious and uninformed misinformation that the only thing that's going to convince them that Republican economic policy is bad is to watch Republican policy fail. I really think the "too liberal" thing has way more to do with social issues than economic issues. I just don't think Dem economic proposals were the problem. I think highly negative (somewhat irrational) feelings about the economy were the problem. I simply don't think there was an economic policy message Harris could have delivered that would have made people change their minds about the economy being bad.
I don't know why it's so hard to see what it's so hard to see what is going on. Ever since Trump started running, his support has always come disproportionately from a) people with hostile racial attitudes; and b) people who live in areas going brown.
The point is that neither fared well. You're saying, "well, this populism light bombed but if we go big on populism, then we'll win." I mean, maybe, but do you think it's a persuasive position?
"When we fight, we wiiiiin." It might have worked but it sounded like a Grandmother when Harris said it and they played it over and over.
