Where do we go from here?

[Healing]

Yeah, there is a form of argument that takes one example and extrapolates from that one example that an entire premise is wrong.

Same goes for the assumptions one imbues into another’s post.

There’s a reason I might selectively refute a quote, while leaving the remainder of the post unopposed.

 

[PandemicBlue]

Definitely disingenuous. PandumbicBoob is a vestige from the old ZZLP (where he was banned multiple times for trolling and derailing threads) and the TarPit, and he is essentially another riverheel. Do not engage.

I post what I believe and newsflash, Donald Trump just won....by the popular vote no less. Enough people have seen through the lies. Don't be like the Japanese soldier lost in the jungle who for 29 years, continued to fight as if WWII wasn't over.

And I was never banned from the TarPit. I was banned multiple times from the ZZLP but the fact that Inside Carolina unloaded that board kinda speaks for itself.

 

[Zoo_View]

i am so fucking tired talking stupid people into vaccines

Are you an MD or nurse or PA?

 

[farce©]

Are you an MD or nurse or PA?

I believe he said he is an MD

 

[Zoo_View]

I post what I believe and newsflash, Donald Trump just won....by the popular vote no less. Enough people have seen through the lies. Don't be like the Japanese soldier lost in the jungle who for 29 years, continued to fight as if WWII wasn't over.

And I was never banned from the TarPit. I was banned multiple times from the ZZLP but the fact that Inside Carolina unloaded that board kinda speaks for itself.

He didn’t write that you were banned from The Tar Pit.

Reading IS Fundamental.

 

[Zoo_View]

Bernie Would Have Won

The Democratic smothering of the Bernie coalition reaped its reward today, writes Krystal Ball.

open.substack.com

Bernie would have lost in Walter Mondale numbers.

 

[rodoheel]

Yeah, there is a form of argument that takes one example and extrapolates from that one example that an entire premise is wrong. If you're super clued in, good for you, but that doesn't prove shit about this place. This board is in blue la la land and has been for years. If people just need a place to bitch and complain and make themselves feel better, well this is the place. But somebody needs to start thinking about what the fuck just happened and stop pretending that 75 million people are all just raging foaming at the mouth lunatics.

You are literally posting on a thread that is for us to "start thinking about what the fuck just happened" and not "pretending that 75 million people are all just raging foaming at the mouth lunatics." This is from the second part of my initial two-part post starting the thread:

"Dems have no path forward unless they can rebuild their relationship with working-class populations. Messaging has to be crafted to appeal to them. We have to meet them where they are. They want messaging that appeals to them emotionally, not rationally. Not just economic messaging, but cultural messaging. Too many of them were convinced by the Pied Pipers of Trump, Fox News, et al that liberals hate them and look down on them, and in our frustration about them fleeing to Trump we made that easy to believe. And we can't just blame racism or culture-war grievances, because working-class minorities fled to Trump too. How do we message to them in a way that is coherent without alienating the more progressive parts of the liberal coalition? Not a dilemma I'd want to solve."

Stop lecturing us like you're the only person here who knows a Republican and/or understands that Democrats have lost working class voters and need to appeal to them better. It is no more productive to say that the only reason working class people vote for Trump is that college-educated liberals talk down to them than it is to say that the only reason people vote for Trump is that they're "raging foaming at the mouth lunatics." Of course 75 million people aren't raging foaming at the mouth lunatics. But placing the lion's share of the blame for Trump's success on the idea that liberals refuse to talk to or try to understand Trump voters is asinine. For Christ's sake, between 2016 and now we must have had 15,000 versions of the New York Times article "I met with Trump voters in a small-town diner to talk with them and try to understand them better." Are Fox News and Tucker Carlson doing pieces like that to try to help their viewers understand where liberals and progressives are coming from? Hell no; it's a lot easier to just paint us all as trans commie soy boys who want to impose mandatory sensitivity training for anyone who doesn't live within five minutes of a Starbucks.

We definitely have a big problem in this country with voters from different backgrounds not knowing or understanding each other, but that's a problem that cuts across all demographics in all directions. I'm fairly confident that liberals have done more to try to understand MAGA voters than the other way around, even if most of us still haven't done enough.

 

[rodoheel]

Bernie Would Have Won

The Democratic smothering of the Bernie coalition reaped its reward today, writes Krystal Ball.

open.substack.com

Breaking news: according to progressives, a more progressive candidate would have apparently won every single election a Democrat ever lost.

 

[altmin]

I tell you one thing. i hope the 4 or 5 Democrats who remain in congress when the dust settles just get out of the way and let the GOP handle immigration. For once try not to clean up the Republican's mess.

 

[gregh1]

Keep in mind that we are only talking about 3% of the voting population; it is not everyone.

Also, just because Trump ran on certain themes does not mean that is what moved that 3% to vote. I tend to think that the 3% -- especially the latino voters -- were almost exclusively inflation voters. Inflation hurt working class people the most. Americans typically vote their pocketbooks above all other issues. I think it was as simple as blaming Biden for inflation and remembering that inflation was low under Trump.

The border, crime, Ukraine, transgenderism -- all of those issues are effective with the base that was already going to vote for Trump. But when it comes right down to what motivated those 3% to vote for Trump rather than Harris, I think it is simply the economy, stupid.

Which means, if the economy goes gang busters the next four years, Republicans will stay in power. And if the economy goes in the toilet, Democrats will get in power.

I think it is as simple as that.

Agreed here, but a caveat, messaging and finger-pointing needs to be improved even IF the economy does tank quickly enough. Repubs will lie regarding economy and/or blame dems. (they'll also lie about crime, or dem stone-walling regarding immigration reform, healthcare reform, etc).

 

[hedge]

God bless America and God Bless Donald Trump…

God bless Captain Vere!

 

[Icky Mettle]

I would like for you to tell me which of any of the things I listed spread by the liberal media as truth was actually true.

Won’t get into everything. Will just touch upon a few things.

We all have seen the things Trump has done and said. That’s all there for you to see and hear. You go ahead and spin why his rhetoric hasn’t been divisive, mean-spirited, violent, and dishonest.

When he won in 2016, Hillary conceded. I don’t recall her or Dems saying the election was stolen or trying to talk a Secretary of State into “finding” just enough votes to win a state or organizing a rally to attempt to stop the certification of votes or file multiple frivolous lawsuits challenging vote counts. The Russian interference did not mean the election was not legit; it was a national security concern. The Mueller report has information regarding the Trump campaign’s interactions with Russians Messi g up to the election. You can read it.

Jussie Smollett? Sorry, that wasn’t something Dems by and large were rallying around. He made a false claim that was reported. When it was first reported it wasn’t like most Dems were making a big deal out of it. The story really got “big” when it became obvious it was a false claim. Dems didn’t dispute that it was as false claim. It was right wingers who wanted to make a big deal about the whole thing when Dems were like, “Okay, that piece of shit lied. Who the fuck is that guy anyway and why did his claim become a story in the first place?”

Re: illegals crossing the border who was ready to sign a border bill to beef up border security? And who told republicans in Congress not to let it pass because it may look good for Biden and would take away a talking point for that person’s campaign. Tell me the specifics of Trump’s border policy vs. that of Biden. By the way do you know how border crossings/encounters are assessed?

And the folks who crossed the border and were flown to cities weren’t “illegals.” They were asylum seekers, which means they did not cross illegally.

And it’s not like it’s just Dems that have called Trump out for his shenanigans. Many of the people who have worked closest with him have, calling him a a threat to national security and incompetent. I’m sure you’ll counter that by saying that they had an axe to grind or they were incompetent or whatever. But, hypothetically, if that were the case, what it does it say about Trump if he surrounded himself with so many of those people?

I don’t have your initial post that I responded to right in front of me, so I can’t remember every detail of your post that could warrant a response. Not that it matters anyway. I’m sure typing this was just a fool’s errand.

 

[gregh1]

I wonder who the right is going to blame when the price of everything we buy goes up 20% sending us straight into a depression. When they control congress and the White House how will it be the democrats fault?

They'll figure a way, and if Rogan and Elon and everyone else repeat the lie enough sheeple will believe it. Of course the "anybody but the incumbent" factor will help regardless of the lies... so the only hope is that people truly do just vote with their pocket-book. But in that case we're kinda assholes for hoping poor and middle-class feel pain.

 

[rodoheel]

Never any evidence attached to these claims. If you think Mondale is Sanders you’re delusional. It’s 2024.

What was the evidence attached to the claim that Sanders would have won this year? The idea that Joe Rogan endorsed him before so he would have enforced him this time and that would have been the difference?

No one has any evidence because what we're discussing is a counterfactual. The perfect debate because everyone is convinced they're right and no one can prove otherwise. I have no idea whether Bernie would have won this election in the alternate universe where he was the candidate, and anyone who says they do is a fool or has an agenda to push.

What I do know is that's is BS for Bernie, in the space of one day, to go from tweeting this:

"We know why Trump should NOT be president. Here’s why Kamala should be. She wants to:- Raise the min wage to $15 per hour- Cancel all medical debt- Help working parents by expanding the child tax credit- Expand Medicare to cover home health care, vision & hearing."

To tweeting a two-page screed where he accuses Democrats of abandoning the working class and failing to pass the progressive agenda with not one word to say about Trump or Republicans having obstructed and demonized that agenda at every turn.

I want progressives in the leftist coalition. I don't think liberals can win without leftists, and vice versa. But apparently progressives think they can win without leftists. Because Sanders and other prominent leftists have reacted to this devastating loss by immediately taking out the knives they had clearly been sharpening behind their backs for months or years. It may be true that liberals need to grow a spine and risk alienating wealthy donors by leaning in harder on overtly populist policies, but it's also true that leftists need to be realistic about where the overall electorate is on certain issues (like Gaza and Medicare for all) and stop acting like every leftist policy preference is so universally popular that adopting it is the easy button to victory.

 

[gregh1]

"Let it burn" is a feeling we have, but obviously a strategy people are pondering. But the Dems need to do something to capitalize on the conflagration. They need to make bold, loud predictions now that will stand time (and manipulation & spin) so they can hold the Repub's feet to the fire. Dems need to be able to says "we told you so", or else the gullible, tribal, confirmation-biased, misinformed people won't know who to blame.

It seems we're in a world of incumbents always losing, but if Trump's impact takes 7 yrs to finally be painful then it could be Dems as the incumbents in 7 yrs being blamed.

^That's my feelings regarding OP's #3

 

[SnoopRob]

Bernie would have lost in Walter Mondale numbers.

Bernie is the backup QB who would lead his team to the state championship/national championship/Super Bowl win if only the coach would put him in.

 

[Zoo_View]

Never any evidence attached to these claims. If you think Mondale is Sanders you’re delusional. It’s 2024.

You don’t understand the visceral hatred of the word “socialist.”

The entire campaign - Bernie: “I’m a Democratic Socialist.” The opposition: “Even he says he’s a socialist.”

He’s a dead man walking as a general election candidate.

 

[farce©]

Bernie Sanders was never ever never ever ever going to be the Democratic Presidential nominee because he is not a Democrat. Democrats nominate Democrats. Republicans nominate Republicans. That’s what political parties do. Bernie is an independent. If he wants to run for President as an Independent he should feel free to do so. But the Democrats will never nominate someone who isn’t a Democrat to be their Presidential nominee.

 

[Zoo_View]

He registered as a Democrat to run in the primary. Republicans just elected a man, for the second time, who wasn’t a Republican until fairly recently.

Reagan was famously a Democrat before his corporate turn.

Bernie’s policies represent the core of the Democratic Party’s ethos more than any Democratic candidate since Harry Truman.

Is Bernie a Democrat in the US Senate?

No. He’s an Independent.

If he wants to run for the Democratic nomination for a political office, he needs to be a Democrat.

 

[farce©]

He registered as a Democrat to run in the primary. Republicans just elected a man, for the second time, who wasn’t a Republican until fairly recently.

Reagan was famously a Democrat before his corporate turn.

Bernie’s policies represent the core of the Democratic Party’s ethos more than any Democratic candidate since Harry Truman.

Bernie can register as a Democrat to run for President the same way I registered as a Republican to vote in the Republican primary in Ohio in 2016. Bernie is not and never has been a dues-paying member of the Democratic Party. They are never and were never going to nominate him.