Jump to content

chainsaw

Full Members
  • Posts

    9112
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by chainsaw

  1. You're right dude. Keep doing the same thing, see how that works out for the Dems.
  2. Everyone on that list either campaigned as radical leftists courting the youth vote (Obama) or are fucking losers who lost spectacularly or barely eked out victories despite some monumental benefit such as Ross Perot and a global pandemic. It's a shame Obama didn't follow through on his bold vision because he squandered so much of the party's credibility in the process.
  3. I think if the party establishment threw its support behind him he would win a rigged primary. There's a reason everyone coordinated their drop-outs and endorsed Biden in 2020 before Super Tuesday. If they'd wanted it to be Pete, it would've been Pete. But because the DNC is a gerontocracy it wasn't "his turn" and that's how we got stuck with Biden in 2024. The establishment loves that Pete has been vetted by the consultant class and is comfortable among donors and coastal elites. They love that he can say he's done "active duty" but also that he has an ivy league education. He was placed on Biden's cabinet precisely because the DNC wanted to fast-track him for future presidential races, when it will be "his turn." Bottom line? Pete can win a primary even without the support of leftist Democrats, so long as he's anointed by the party bigwigs behind the scenes who will shamelessly put their thumbs on scales. Pete's problem is that all of the party's power evaporates in a general election, and the leftists who could help you win a general election (many of whom aren't Democrats) are gonna stay home because based on their lived experiences (nothing good from Bush, nothing good from Obama, nothing good from Trump I, nothing good from Biden, nothing good from Trump II) they perceive no difference between the party's anointed nominee (whose platform will be "Sissy Sause" Fascism with a side of Civility™ and Competency™) and JD Vance ("Original Sause" Fascism). The party actually believes that a $20M focus group will give them the answer to reclaiming young men and Latinos. I don't know who sold them on that pipe dream, but it really captures how thin their playbook is. It's like being stuck in a 20-foot hole you dug and deciding the cause of the problem is that you used the wrong type of shovel--the kind of thinking only a self-interested shovel company would endorse. The things about Pete that you, a college graduate with assets and a career, admire so much about him (he's articulate, thoughtful, accomplished, demonstrably competent) are the same things that are disqualifying for enough people in enough swing states that the only way to overcome that disadvantage is by making a convincing case that he's not just another neoliberal democrat willing to say whatever he thinks the people want to hear. I don't think Pete can make that case convincingly to leftists, even if he goes on their podcasts.
  4. Not all straight, white (and, I'll add, Bible-believing) men have to be boring or safe. Make it class-based and don't pander to any particular racial demographic and you'll re-gain the youths.
  5. Dems never learn. Sure, keep doing the same things and see how that works out for the party.
  6. I'm guessing it happened in the power vacuum that followed the 2024 election https://punchbowl.news/wp-content/uploads/AOC-Shapiro.pdf
  7. If I'm wrong, I'd be thrilled. But I try to pay attention to these things and even I haven't come across any evidence that Buttigieg supports medicare for all, or any other programs that aren't means-tested beyond all recognition. The last I'd heard from him he was flirting with COVID shutdown opposition and suggesting that Joe Biden opened the border. That's weak Newsom shit.
  8. Even setting the McKinsey stuff aside, Americans are just done with neoliberalism, and unfortunately that's what Pete Buttigieg represents and hasn't repudiated. Nor could he ever convincingly repudiate it, at this point, because he's way too committed to it. He's a younger, male, Elizabeth Warren. America doesn't want that anymore, if they ever did. AOC became the defacto leader of the party for many reasons, but one of the biggest reasons is that she doesn't campaign like a neoliberal. Her policies are socialist-adjacent, which used to be disqualifying but now is an asset. People, not just young people, want socialism. They reward socialism at the polls. And they punish neoliberals, like the asshats who run the DNC who can't even allow a Palestinian to be heard for five fucking minutes, with apathy and third party votes. I like Pete, personally, and I know he could do the job and do it well, even if he and I don't see eye to eye on policy. But nominating him is like bringing caviar to a honky tonk. Just give the people what they want already, for the love of god.
  9. AOC is the defacto leader of the party, and I don't think she will run in 2028. Assuming the Dems can win in 2028 (a huge assumption) her next chance would be 2036, when she'll be like 50, or damn near 50. Will she still be a powerhouse at that time? Time will tell. Crockett, same deal. I don't think she has a chance to become president, but the House might not be her ceiling. That's why they're people to watch, but not viable nominees.
  10. You're right. Has he shown interest in the presidency? Only drawback is that he's not from a swing state (nor is he white, which could hurt his chances) Not gonna happen. The party needs them more than they need the party. GOP figured this out quick. Dems, not so much.
  11. You can't win without 'em so they better shape the fuck up.
  12. PRETENDERS Newsom (fascist apologist, weak, squandered his credibility). Pete (ties to McKinsey, will be eaten alive by populists, not straight) Booker (owned by big pharma, all sizzle no steak, washed up before his filibuster and hasn't made news since, not white) Warren (looks old, no charisma, not male) CONTENDERS Walz (the peak of the Kamala Harris campaign's momentum, but looks old and might not actually want to be president) JB Pritzker (compassionate, strong as hell, clearly wants the job but can be criticized for his wealth and is a health risk due to his size) Beshear (proven he can win in a red state, young and handsome, but may be too moderate) Shapiro (strong in a swing state, skilled orator, but would alienate young voters and has baggage relating to the death of Ellen Greenberg) Ossoff (from a swing state, also well spoken, and much younger than Shapiro, but could be too moderate for young voters and the party may not want him abandoning a hard-fought senate seat in a state where Warnock barely held onto his seat) ONES TO WATCH AOC (Needs a stint in the Senate or as Governor but she is the de-facto leader of the party, so watch what she does in 2028 with that power) Crockett (Not in the squad, but knows how to attack and has risen to stardom because of it) Talarico (Needs an opportunity to transition from TX Lege to Congress, watch to see if he gets to speak at the DNC)
  13. "He openly brags about how he controls Judges, and even Justices of the United States Supreme Court" is the new "It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side."
  14. Blue sky says the vote is secret so not necessarily, just that she doesn't agree with Jackson's opinion for whatever reason.
  15. Tomorrow there will be an Executive Order invoking the Alien Enemies Act against white Afrikaaners
  16. https://i.imgur.com/0raSpls.gif
  17. It's the perfect crime. Nobody would even investigate it. Cybertrucks fall off bridges because of course Cybertrucks would fall off bridges.
  18. So the redacted stuff, I'm guessing he has a medical condition?
  19. The entire "groundswell" of pro-Paxton billboards and social media ads came from that asshole
  20. That graph tells half the story. It's not just that they're appealing to stupid people (they are, and the stupid people are responding as expected) It's also that these counties have driven out the people who have (or tried to get) college degrees. They're driven out because the counties have nothing going on economically: goodbye to that rural clinic and sayonara to that tiny, underfunded, private university. They're also driven out by red state policies that are openly hostile to women, to people of color, to queer people, to the irreligious, and even to people who are religious but not Protestant. You only have one life to live, so why would anyone who values education spend it in a podunk town with nothing going on? The part of the story I'm not sure the graph fully captures is that people who have attended college probably haven't increased their affinity for the democratic party. I don't think the people have "moved further left" it's just that the existing left-of-center people have been forced to relocate to population centers where all the jobs and amenities are.
×
×
  • Create New...