Where do we go from here?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rodoheel
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 524
  • Views: 7K
  • Politics 
I am mad at how much the steaks cost, so I will vote for the guy who is going to round up the workers who make them and put up tariffs on the machines that slice them. That'll bring prices down. Very hard to get me out of FAFO mode right now.
Yeah I completely understand people being upset about prices being high. What I don't understand is that people don't even make the barest effort to try to understand why the prices are high, what the current government had to do with it (or didn't), and how (if at all) electing someone different will change it. I simply can't condone ignorance for the sake of ignorance. In this day and age there is no excuse for not spending just a few minutes of effort to attempt to understand these things. I'm not saying everyone will reach the same conclusion - that's Democracy in action! - but "inflation was low when Trump was in office, inflation is high now, therefore Trump will lower inflation" is not a substitute for critical thinking.
 
No, but I also don't allow unknown males into my house to use the restroom with my daughter.
I would suggest that you consider allowing that before you allow Trump into the house with your daughter. Trump would be significantly more likely to rape them than a random sampling of unknown men.
 
No. That would be weird, also.
Right - which is the whole point, that the gender of the person doesn't make any difference. When your child, male or female, goes into a public restroom, they are doing so with strangers, male or female, who you probably wouldn't let come use the bathroom at your house. What is bizarre is that thinking that allowing trans people (a tiny minority of the population) to use the restroom of the gender with which they identify somehow increases the likelihood that your child will be assaulted or violated in the restroom - something which is obviously already illegal.
 
Right - which is the whole point, that the gender of the person doesn't make any difference. When your child, male or female, goes into a public restroom, they are doing so with strangers, male or female, who you probably wouldn't let come use the bathroom at your house. What is bizarre is that thinking that allowing trans people (a tiny minority of the population) to use the restroom of the gender with which they identify somehow increases the likelihood that your child will be assaulted or violated in the restroom - something which is obviously already illegal.
Like I said yesterday, the debate about restrooms is a secondary issue. The issue, to the degree that there is one, is that Biden used an EO to guarantee males access to girls bathrooms within weeks of taking office, but took over 2 years to use EO to address the border crisis.

It's a perception of priorities. An EO for transgender students is welcomed by Democrats, so it's put into place almost immediately. An EO to address the crisis of people illegally entering the country by the millions is likely viewed as racist.
 
Like I said yesterday, the debate about restrooms is a secondary issue. The issue, to the degree that there is one, is that Biden used an EO to guarantee males access to girls bathrooms within weeks of taking office, but took over 2 years to use EO to address the border crisis.

It's a perception of priorities. An EO for transgender students is welcomed by Democrats, so it's put into place almost immediately. An EO to address the crisis of people illegally entering the country by the millions is likely viewed as racist.
The difference is that the first is a yes or no and affects very few people in any tangible fashion. The other affects millions, the national economy and international relations. Which decision requires time, research and diplomacy? I know nuance isn't highly valued but neither is the thoughts of a fool.
 
The difference is that the first is a yes or no and affects very few people in any tangible fashion. The other affects millions, the national economy and international relations. Which decision requires time, research and diplomacy? I know nuance isn't highly valued but neither is the thoughts of a fool.
Even if it's true that it takes years to take action, that situation is only one of several. The NYTimes opinion I posted on an earlier page talks about some others. Yes, it's just opinion and nobody knows for sure, even with exit polling, why Harris lost.

Here's another relatively interesting exit poll analysis. The bolded sections, I believe, say a lot. Cultural issues were the top issue for swing voters who eventually voted for Trump, according to the poll.

Why America Chose Trump: Inflation, Immigration, and the Democratic Brand
Harris couldn’t outrun her past or her party— it was a vice grip that proved impossible to escape.
November 8, 2024

KEY FINDINGS:KEY FINDINGS
The top reasons voters gave for not supporting Harris were that inflation was too high (+24), too many immigrants crossed the border (+23), and that Harris was too focused on cultural issues rather than helping the middle class (+17).

Other high-testing reasons were that the debt rose too much under the Biden-Harris Administration (+13), and that Harris would be too similar to Joe Biden (+12).

These concerns were similar across all demographic groups, including among Black and Latino voters, who both selected inflation as their top problem with Harris. For swing voters who eventually chose Trump, cultural issues ranked slightly higher than inflation (+28 and +23, respectively).

The lowest-ranked concerns were that Harris wasn’t similar enough to Biden (-24), was too conservative (-23), and was too pro-Israel (-22).
Today, Blueprint released the first data-based report about why voters cast their vote the way they did with a new poll conducted in the days after Election Day and weighted to the 2024 election results.

..........................................................

11.8-Post-Election-1-3-1412x2048.png
more:
 
I am going to evolve a little from yesterday's post that the messaging didn't matter because we first had to focus on the next two years and save Democracy for the next election.

Actually, messaging might be a big help in countering Trump seizing power and bridge over to the Presidential Election in four years.

Now I don't pretend to understand identity politics or the focus on special interest group appeasement. But this problem was evident when the Harris campaign felt it couldn't respond in some fashion to the transgender ad.

Democrats have got to emphasize messaging that its the party "for the people". This will contrast to what we know Trump will be doing. And everytime he runs counter to that, we can point it out.

And if identity politics has to be thrown under the bus.........well so be it. The future is at stake.
 
Like I said yesterday, the debate about restrooms is a secondary issue. The issue, to the degree that there is one, is that Biden used an EO to guarantee males access to girls bathrooms within weeks of taking office, but took over 2 years to use EO to address the border crisis.

It's a perception of priorities. An EO for transgender students is welcomed by Democrats, so it's put into place almost immediately. An EO to address the crisis of people illegally entering the country by the millions is likely viewed as racist.
I gave the precise citation to the EO, executed on the first day of Joe's presidency, about the border. You are just lying again and again because you have nothing.
 
I am going to evolve a little from yesterday's post that the messaging didn't matter because we first had to focus on the next two years and save Democracy for the next election.

Actually, messaging might be a big help in countering Trump seizing power and bridge over to the Presidential Election in four years.

Now I don't pretend to understand identity politics or the focus on special interest group appeasement. But this problem was evident when the Harris campaign felt it couldn't respond in some fashion to the transgender ad.

Democrats have got to emphasize messaging that its the party "for the people". This will contrast to what we know Trump will be doing. And everytime he runs counter to that, we can point it out.

And if identity politics has to be thrown under the bus.........well so be it. The future is at stake.
All politics in America are now identity politics. If you don't understand that MAGA is the most comprehensively identity-fueled political movement in modern history, then you don't understand politics.
 
I gave the precise citation to the EO, executed on the first day of Joe's presidency, about the border. You are just lying again and again because you have nothing.
Here's the link to a June 2024 EO:


Here's the EO from March of 2021 ralated to transgender students.

EO 14021:
Guaranteeing an Educational Environment Free From Discrimination on the Basis of Sex, Including Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity

Signed:March 8, 2021

Published:March 11, 2021FR Citation:86 FR 13803FR Doc. Number:2021-05200

I was wrong about the details of the 2021. It was related to transgender students, not gender affirming surgeries for prisoners. The ultimate perception is largely unchanged.

I didn't see any replies with a citation.
 
Last edited:
So "working class" , no college degree folks-you were better off in the massive unemployment, supply chain shortage, pandemic days of Trump?
Am I getting it right here ?
No, they were better off in the first two years of Trump’s first presidency, pre-pandemic and pre-inflation.

Which is to say, they were better off during the Obama economy, which was dropped right into Trump’s lap, and which he joyfully took all the credit for despite not doing anything to improve upon it. And his dumb cuck cultists like Ramnoiser swallowed his lies about the “world’s greatest economy” whole.
 
Yeah I completely understand people being upset about prices being high. What I don't understand is that people don't even make the barest effort to try to understand why the prices are high, what the current government had to do with it (or didn't), and how (if at all) electing someone different will change it. I simply can't condone ignorance for the sake of ignorance. In this day and age there is no excuse for not spending just a few minutes of effort to attempt to understand these things. I'm not saying everyone will reach the same conclusion - that's Democracy in action! - but "inflation was low when Trump was in office, inflation is high now, therefore Trump will lower inflation" is not a substitute for critical thinking.
I agree in terms of the "reality" of inflation, but both candidates ran on reducing inflation (groceries,etc.) going forward. I do think the amount of stimulus pumped into the economy, under Trump and Biden, spurred inflation in consumer goods. It wasn't just supply chain issues beyond a certain point. You can't simultaneously say you'll fix something going forward and shrug off the past saying you couldn't control it. On an intellectual level, I knew all along Harris couldn't control prices. She admitted as much ultimately in moderating her position to only include "gouging" in emergency situations.
 
Here's the link to a June 2024 EO:


Here's the EO from March of 2021 ralated to transgender students.

EO 14021:
Guaranteeing an Educational Environment Free From Discrimination on the Basis of Sex, Including Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity

Signed:March 8, 2021

Published:March 11, 2021FR Citation:86 FR 13803FR Doc. Number:2021-05200

I was wrong about the details of the 2021. It was related to transgender students, not gender affirming surgeries for prisoners. The ultimate perception is largely unchanged.

I didn't see any replies with a citation.
EO 13993, January 20, 2021. Shove the rest of your non stop bullshit back up your cow's ass.
 
EO 13993, January 20, 2021. Shove the rest of your non stop bullshit back up your cow's ass.
If you are under the impression that EO 13993 was to improve border security, you are wrong... and apparently you are the liar.

EO 13993 revoked Trump Executive Order 13768.

Trump Executive Order 13768:
The order stated that "sanctuary jurisdictions" including sanctuary cities that refused to comply with immigration enforcement measures would not be "eligible to receive Federal grants, except as deemed necessary for law enforcement purposes" by the U.S. Attorney General or Secretary of Homeland Security.

I'll add.... given how freely you throw around accusation of lying, you should really be a little more diligent in confirming your claims.
 
Last edited:
All politics in America are now identity politics. If you don't understand that MAGA is the most comprehensively identity-fueled political movement in modern history, then you don't understand politics.
That's the point. Contrast to his identity politics by talking "for Americans" Being tarred with identity politics feathers ain't working for Democrats. He's got the job. We contrast when given the opportunity. Bet he will give plenty of openings.
 
I normally wouldn't post entire articles from behind a paywall, but Mika Brzezinski read the entire thing on-air...

Democrats and the Case of Mistaken Identity Politics
Nov. 9, 2024

Some Democrats are finally waking up and realizing that woke is broke.

Donald Trump won a majority of white women and remarkable numbers of Black and Latino voters and young men.

Democratic insiders thought people would vote for Kamala Harris, even if they didn’t like her, to get rid of Trump. But more people ended up voting for Trump, even though many didn’t like him, because they liked the Democratic Party less.

I have often talked about how my dad stayed up all night on the night Harry Truman was elected because he was so excited. And my brother stayed up all night the first time Trump was elected because he was so excited. And I felt that Democrats would never recover that kind of excitement until they could figure out why they had turned off so many working-class voters over the decades, and why they had developed such disdain toward their once loyal base.

Democratic candidates have often been avatars of elitism — Michael Dukakis, Al Gore, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and second-term Barack Obama. The party embraced a worldview of hyper-political correctness, condescension and cancellation, and it supported diversity statements for job applicants and faculty lounge terminology like “Latinx,” and “BIPOC” (Black, Indigenous, People of Color).

This alienated half the country, or more. And the chaos and antisemitism at many college campuses certainly didn’t help.

“When the woke police come at you,” Rahm Emanuel told me, “you don’t even get your Miranda rights read to you.”

There were a lot of Democrats “barking,” people who “don’t represent anybody,” he said, and “the leadership of the party was intimidated.”

Donald Trump played to the irritation of many Americans disgusted at being regarded as insensitive for talking the way they’d always talked. At rallies, he referred to women as “beautiful” and then pretended to admonish himself, saying he’d get in trouble for using that word. He’d also call women “darling” and joke that he had to be careful because his political career could be at risk.

One thing that makes Democrats great is that they unabashedly support groups that have suffered from inequality. But they have to begin avoiding extreme policies that alienate many Americans who would otherwise be drawn to the party.

Democrats learned the hard way in this election that mothers care both about abortion rights and having their daughters compete fairly and safely on the playing field.

A revealing chart that ran in The Financial Times showed that white progressives hold views far to the left of the minorities they champion. White progressives think at higher rates than Hispanic and Black Americans that “racism is built into our society.” Many more Black and Hispanic Americans surveyed, compared with white progressives, responded that “America is the greatest country in the world.”

Gobsmacked Democrats have reacted to the wipeout in different ways. Some think Kamala did not court the left enough, touting trans rights and repudiating Israel.

Other Democrats feel the opposite, calling on the party to reimagine itself.

Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, a vulnerable Democrat in a red congressional district in Washington, narrowly held her seat. The 36-year-old mother of a toddler and owner of an auto shop told The Times’s Annie Karni that Democratic condescension has to go. “There’s not one weird trick that’s going to fix the Democratic Party,” she said. “It is going to take parents of young kids, people in rural communities, people in the trades running for office and being taken seriously.”

Representative Seth Moulton, a Massachusetts Democrat, said the party needs rebranding. “Democrats spend way too much time trying not to offend anyone,” he said. “I have two little girls. I don’t want them getting run over on a playing field by a male or formerly male athlete, but as a Democrat I’m supposed to be afraid to say that.”

On CNN, the Democratic strategist Julie Roginsky said that Democrats did not know how to talk to normal Americans.

Addressing Latinos as “Latinx” to be politically correct “makes them think that we don’t even live on the same planet as they do,” she said. “When we are too afraid to say that ‘Hey, college kids, if you’re trashing a campus of Columbia University because you aren’t happy about some sort of policy and you’re taking over a university and you’re trashing it and preventing other students from learning, that that is unacceptable.’ But we’re so worried about alienating one or another cohort in our coalition that we don’t know what to say.”

Kamala, a Democratic lawmaker told me, made the “colossal mistake” of running a billion-dollar campaign with celebrities like Beyoncé when many of the struggling working-class voters she wanted couldn’t even afford a ticket to a Beyoncé concert, much less a down payment on a home.

“I don’t think the average person said, ‘Kamala Harris gets what I’m going through,’” this Democrat said.

Kamala, who sprinted to the left in her 2020 Democratic primary campaign, tried to move toward the center for this election, making sure to say she’d shoot an intruder with her Glock. But it sounded tinny.

The Trump campaign’s most successful ad showed Kamala favoring tax-funded gender surgery for prisoners. Bill Clinton warned in vain that she should rebut it.

James Carville gave Kamala credit for not leaning into her gender and ethnicity. But he said the party had become enamored of “identitarianism” — a word he uses because he won’t say “woke” — radiating the repellent idea that “identity is more important than humanity.”

“We could never wash off the stench of it,” he said, calling “defund the police” “the three stupidest words in the English language.”

“It’s like when you get smoke on your clothes and you have to wash them again and again. Now people are running away from it like the devil runs away from holy water.”

For ZZL libs, this is the most accurate and concise description of your problem. It’s also an “I told you so” because conservatives have been saying these things for years to the derision of the left. Some on here will agree and some will continue to dismiss it / deny it and those are the ones that aren’t serious and are the ones that the party needs to distance itself from.
 
Back
Top