Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, chainsaw said:

Young voters today are overwhelmingly pro-Palestine, and even the ones who remain neutral are still self-interested enough to say hell no to all the tax dollars being diverted toward a foreign government.

Just curious, but what are you basing this on?

According to the May Harris poll, Israel (over Hamas) has a 54%-46% advantage in support amongst poll respondents 18-24.  This grows to 65%-35% for 25-34. 

I'll add that only 5% of those polled considered this their top issue, against 65% that said the economy. 

I think you have a misread on the importance of that one. 

Posted

I had high hopes for Hakeem Jefferies but so far he’s been a wet noodle. I’m really frustrated with the entire party. I can’t believe with everything that’s going on with this administration that Democrats have so far been completely unable to capitalize on it. It’s so frustrating 

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
40 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

Just curious, but what are you basing this on?

According to the May Harris poll, Israel (over Hamas) has a 54%-46% advantage in support amongst poll respondents 18-24.  This grows to 65%-35% for 25-34. 

I'll add that only 5% of those polled considered this their top issue, against 65% that said the economy. 

I think you have a misread on the importance of that one. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cr4n90g6v9qo

Quote

But opinion polls suggest support for Israel among the American public is dwindling.

A Gallup survey taken in March this year found only 46% of Americans expressed support for Israel (the lowest level in 25 years of Gallup's annual tracking) while 33% now said they sympathised with the Palestinians - the highest ever reading of that measure. Other polls have found similar results.

Surveys - with all their limitations - suggest the swing is largely among Democrats and the young, although not exclusively. Between 2022 and 2025, the Pew Research Center found that the proportion of Republicans who said they had unfavourable views of Israel rose from 27% to 37% (younger Republicans, aged under 49, drove most of that change).

I'd be interested to see that Harris poll. I'm not super familiar with them but I seem to recall them having a right-of-center bias. Did they really ask "Do you support Hamas over Israel" because that type of framing feels a bit like editorializing. "Do you support the Taliban over the Coalition of the Willing?"

Posted
10 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

I mean, he didn't have to quit.

He probably should not have, but this was the height of MeToo's political might.

Posted

I mean, if you’re looking for a Black mayne, then it’s not Booker you should be looking to. It’s Wes Moore.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
On 5/18/2025 at 9:52 PM, Brisketexan said:


“Moderate” means “I only want to expel all minorities from the country, not kill them.” And “independent” means “I once voted for a Dem for a local office because he was an old friend of mine.” Those labels are lies.

And independents that are actually independent are dumb as fuck and don't know shit about fuck.  I saw an NYT article about the huge number of independents that don't know what's going on, currently.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Rage+1 2
Posted

This entire discourse in the media about the Democratic party wanting to find a counter to Joe Rogan is gaining more traction and it's just a clear indicator that the Democrat party does not want to change anything at all about how it operates, they want to be able to throw money at the problem and continue business as usual. They want someone that will just sit there and defend the party, not hold any individual member accountable, not say anything negative about Israel, and allow it to continue to be a tepid gerontocracy.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

the Democrat party does not want to change anything at all about how it operates, they want to be able to throw money at the problem and continue business as usual.

Steve Bannon Bingo GIF

Posted
1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

Steve Bannon Bingo GIF

Yup and what's funny is Joe Rogan has these maga people on but if you listen to him most of his beliefs are more aligned with the left. But democratic party is too stupid to realize this and think just because he has maga type guest on then he's bad/maga.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
5 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Yup and what's funny is Joe Rogan has these maga people on but if you listen to him most of his beliefs are more aligned with the left. But democratic party is too stupid to realize this and think just because he has maga type guest on then he's bad/maga.

He's just a dumb guy who believes whatever is said by whoever he perceives to be the smartest person in the room at any given moment. His growth to where he is now was entirely organic and any effort to replicate it, especially by a god damn political party, will seem phony as hell and will obviously backfire. It's incredible how dumb these people are.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
Just now, Brian Fantana said:

He's just a dumb guy who believes whatever is said by whoever he perceives to be the smartest person in the room at any given moment. His growth to where he is now was entirely organic and any effort to replicate it, especially by a god damn political party, will seem phony as hell and will obviously backfire. It's incredible how dumb these people are.

I mean he believes that healthcare should be universal, he believes in same sex marriage, he has a bunch of beliefs that are left wing. You're entirely right that his podcast growth is organic and trying to force it will definitely be fake and shitty. 

 

Like I've said a few times democrats just need to use Rogan and the other podcast as tools to spread their message. Because at least it seems genuine and getting some word to that audience is better than no words.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, BurntOrange&White said:

Yup and what's funny is Joe Rogan has these maga people on but if you listen to him most of his beliefs are more aligned with the left. But democratic party is too stupid to realize this and think just because he has maga type guest on then he's bad/maga.

He's bad/maga because:

He's extra dangerous because he normalizes these things as a seemingly progressive guy, with a lot of the same seemingly progressive values that his viewers used to have. It's essentially a permission structure for socially-aware progressive-leaning guys with asshole tendencies to embrace their asshole tendencies and slowly reject decency. The narrative being that if a guy like Joe Rogan made these lifestyle changes (moving from LA to Texas, going from apolitical to explicitly right wing) and can still be successful then I can also embrace a set of values that allows me to overlook my friends' problematic behaviors and disregard the hurtful consequences of voting republican.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

He's bad/maga because:

"X is bad because they endorsed Donald Trump" is the type of shit that will continue to lose Dems elections.

You admit that he has "seemingly progressive views."  A competent party would see that as an opportunity.  He isn't Ben Shapiro who is a Republican at his core.  He's absolutely capable of being won over with the proper messaging.  

For someone who expressed the need for Democrats to "fight" earlier in this thread, writing off all Trump voters as "bad" is the definition of surrendering.

And again, this isn't a desire to move the platform to the center or to pull a Newsom.  It's making the effort to put the widely popular platform in front of people who wouldn't encounter it otherwise.

(And I agree with all of the "creating a left Rogan is a bad idea" takes.  That will win over 0 voters.)

Edited by Chuckie Finster
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

He used to be progressive, probably as a way to fit in with his colleagues in LA, back when it was possible to call yourself progressive while still having slurs in your standup routine and be friends with married guys who sleep with subordinates.

No progressive would have endorsed Donald Trump, knowing everything we knew about him by 2024. Maybe I should have used more precise words than "seemingly progressive." When I say "seemingly progressive" I mean "doesn't talk like Pat Robertson."

He's really more of a throwback to the 2000s Ron Paul libertarian guys, who were completely insufferable.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
37 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

This entire discourse in the media about the Democratic party wanting to find a counter to Joe Rogan is gaining more traction and it's just a clear indicator that the

 

Where are you finding this because I’m not seeing this anywhere. 

 

EDIT— okay I found 1 article. I wouldn’t consider that “entire discourse in media” though

Posted
1 minute ago, Pancho said:

 

Where are you finding this because I’m not seeing this anywhere. 

 

EDIT— okay I found 1 article. I wouldn’t consider that “entire discourse in media” though

Maybe gaining more traction is an exaggeration but it's been a significant part of the discourse as to why Kamala lost since November and it keeps getting brought up as a serious solution.

  • Fuck You 1
Posted

Rogan has never been progressive, get the fuck out of here with that nonsense. He was a libertarian, which means he likes weed, and he didn't used to have a problem with gay people because he was around Hollywood folks all the time. He's been firmly right-wing though for the last 5+ years though, which tracks the shifting politics of most libertarians, because they don't actually care about liberty for anyone but themselves and they're stupid enough to fall for a thousand different and often contradictory conspiracy theories. 

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

He does actually hold a handful progressive beliefs still, but yeah he's mostly libertarian/right wing now. COVID broke his brain.

Bari Weiss and Bret Weinstein call themselves liberal.

When Joe says he's for shit like universal healthcare he's lying. He's never in his life lifted a pinky to advance that cause. He just knows that pretending to break from the right on a few issues is useful.  Weed is the only issue where he genuinely disagrees with the mainstream Republican party and he doesn't even really care if they legalize it because he knows they'll never arrest him for possession.  

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

Bari Weiss and Bret Weinstein call themselves liberal.

When Joe says he's for shit like universal healthcare he's lying. He's never in his life lifted a pinky to advance that cause. He just knows that pretending to break from the right on a few issues is useful.  Weed is the only issue where he genuinely disagrees with the mainstream Republican party and he doesn't even really care if they legalize it because he knows they'll never arrest him for possession.  

Nah I don't believe he's lying about that. He likes universal healthcare because Bernie talked him into it years ago and he's never changed that position as far as I know. I'm not sure how he could advance that cause from his position in any way, There has never been a presidential candidate that earnestly pushed for universal healthcare.

There is an endless list of shit to criticize him for without unfairly scrutinizing positions he has actually been consistent on throughout the years.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 1
Posted

Rogan goes occasionally left on some issues because he doesn’t want the perception and label of being right wing/maga even thought that’s what he really is. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
3 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Rogan goes occasionally left on some issues because he doesn’t want the perception and label of being right wing/maga even thought that’s what he really is. 

It's a combination of that and what I said earlier, he is a sponge that has no real convictions of his own (or very few) and soaks up whatever opinion is emanating from who he perceives to be the smartest person in the room at any given moment. There simply hasn't been anyone in front of him (that I'm aware of) that has argued against universal healthcare ever since he interviewed Bernie years ago. I think he could easily flip-flop on any day some dipshit provides him with an argument he finds compelling enough.

  • Fuck You 1
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

he is a sponge that has no real convictions of his own (

that's exactly the point and he's never had any coherent political worldview past the end of his own nose. he does not hold any political principles beyond his own fucking wallet and pathetic ego. I had him pegged as a right-wing adjacent libertarian dipshit way back in 2015 when centrists and leftists like Kyle Kulinski thought he was an ally because he was saying agreeable shit about the Dem establishment (mainly Hillary) and was pro-weed and pro-universal health care or whatever. The man's actions never suggested to me that he was anything but a charlatan jerk-off who would never do anything overtly principled to win over true progressives because he's been a lucky rich white guy his entire adult life and has only becoming increasingly out of touch as his wealth bubble grew. 

ETA: Kyle has since seen the light on Rogan's broken brain and has nothing but hot smoke for him because he knows that despite all the times he  went on Rogan's show and schooled him politely and supposedly won Joe over, the moment the show ended Joe conveniently forgot all of it and reverted back to his knuckle-dragging dipshittery.

Edited by Gourmand
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted

3 Democratic members of Congress who ran for election with Cancer, or were diagnosed sooner after have died this year. All seats are vacant (in all fairness, Gerry Connolly died in the last 48 hours, but he also has known he has aggressive cancer since last fall). Sly Turner’s seat won’t be filled. There is a 4th member who hasn’t voted since April due to health issues.

The big beautiful bill passed by one vote last night.  The Democratic Party is broken at its core. The fact these members were allowed to carry on and run again without leadership calling them out is a red flag on how broken the party is.

  • Rage+1 8
Posted
4 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

3 Democratic members of Congress who ran for election with Cancer, or were diagnosed sooner after have died this year. All seats are vacant (in all fairness, Gerry Connolly died in the last 48 hours, but he also has known he has aggressive cancer since last fall). Sly Turner’s seat won’t be filled. There is a 4th member who hasn’t voted since April due to health issues.

The big beautiful bill passed by one vote last night.  The Democratic Party is broken at its core. The fact these members were allowed to carry on and run again without leadership calling them out is a red flag on how broken the party is.


This ossified party is riddled with multiple myeloma.

These guys are literally dying off. But the party and its platform is figuratively dying off as MAGA’s complete obliteration of the old rule book has changed the game. The ability to communicate your message and the media landscape is has completely changed.

There needs to be a purging of the ranks that allows for younger generations to take over.

The olds have failed. Sorry. Dem Boomers lost. Accept it and let us take over because you have shown yourself unable and unwilling to take on the challenges of the 2020’s.
Covid killed off any remnants of lingering 20th century thought, anything Pax Americana, or the idea American virtue. We’re in a brave new world and can’t be fettered with the current vestibular incantation of the Democratic Party.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted

8 years ago, Alex Jones was a novelty to Joe Rogan. Someone he found fascinating and could hold an interview with that would be entertaining and incisive at the same time without ever devolving into namecalling or a debate. Today, Alex Jones is a personal friend who influences his opinions and values.

8 years ago, Joe Rogan opposed government intervention into personal liberties such as abortion, gender-affirming care, and marriage. Today, Joe Rogan pals around with people who think the government should pass laws to increase white birth rates, people who think "gender ideology" is corrupting our children, and people who want women to be submissive and for gays and trans people not to exist.

8 years ago, his guests included Bill Burr and Steve-O. Now, it's crackpots like Aaron Rodgers and xenophobes like Douglas Murray, author of "The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam" and "The War on the West"

This is what happens when dark money is behind the wheel of a Gen X-er's social media diet. You turn libertarians into white nativist conservatives. You create a climate where someone with the exact same platform as Pat Buchanan's becomes electable.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

You all admit Rogan can be swayed in his opinions yet you list every reason not to use him as a medium for your messages. Swaying him sways his massive following, it’s that simple. Refusing him is worse than anything because that’s no message. 

Posted
9 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

I'd go all in on an idea like this before any of the shit the Dems are trying right now 

 

where can i try out?

Posted
44 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

You all admit Rogan can be swayed in his opinions yet you list every reason not to use him as a medium for your messages. Swaying him sways his massive following, it’s that simple. Refusing him is worse than anything because that’s no message. 

I don’t mind certain Dems using him as a medium. I think Pete could do it. Bernie could too, though I don’t trust him not to mostly bash Dems which ultimately isn’t helpful. But most Dem officials Rogan would be openly hostile to and they wouldn’t know what to do with that.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
48 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

I'd go all in on an idea like this before any of the shit the Dems are trying right now 

 

I'm a big proponent of the first part - developing local newspapers to get the word out.  Print media is dying in the free market.  Many of the surviving papers put up firewalls either for their entire publication, or for the sports.  But that leaves a void.  In Nebraska, after the Omaha World Herald was gutted there were a couple of papers that popped up that rely on donations and provide really good, but limited, reporting.  But they don't have the budget to do daily sports.  If they did, it would get way more eyeballs.  Their current reporting frequently focuses on the corruption in state government or public organizations, like this report on the fuckery around around the power company self-dealing on a property purchase.  It's not explicitly political, but helps explain the reality to brainwashed rubes.  You don't need stories that even mention Trump, but when you explain the reality of his policies, it can undermine him and others who follow a similar path.  

We aren't going to win the political battle without winning the media battle. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
On 5/19/2025 at 7:56 AM, wildcat09 said:

"[Republican candidate] is a fucking creep I wouldn't let within 100 yards of my daughter" should be a common Dem attack line, man.

Dems don't appear weak for attacking Republicans, they appear weak because they say shit like "[Republican candidate] is a threat to democracy but if I elected I promise I will work with Republicans to address the issues that are important to them!"  

I am a fairly reserved person that does not talk a great deal when I am not working. However if someone came up to me and asked me how I would go about messaging my response would be "If elected I will on day one go after every single elected official that supported a traitor in the White House. I will also make it a point to make sure that our attorney general does their job this time around and makes it clear that an attack on democracy is an attack on Americans as well. These people will be dealt with in court and they won't have to wait long to face the music."

I do not want to hear candidates from the Democratic Party ever again tell me they are working with anyone from the party filled with grifters and traitors. Just full stop on that. It is not a winner to try to work with liars and thieves who willingly stood by while the president raked in billions from foreign governments that then went into his own personal coffers. People who allowed that to happen are cowards who do not deserve to work in government and honestly should be in prison for a complete dereliction of the oath that they took to the Constitution. Whenever that day comes that Democrats can flush out thousands upon thousands of government officials at the national, state and local level, well, that will be when this country starts anew. No one can predict the when of that. The how is the simple part. People vote with their wallet (And obviously not always wisely) and they get angry and get in the streets when the wallet runs dry. You can run the gamut of history and see that happen repeatedly. We are no exception to this. We just have bigger and more dangerous weapons at our disposal with our military.

Social issues are extremely important to me and almost all of you, but you beat these cowards on issues related to a voter's bank account and how they can do better for their family. Hitler, Mussolini, the Japanese fascist movement of the 1920's and 30's all did it. They all appealed to how they could get their fellow citizens to believe they could make them wealthier as a collective. It was all lies of course, but people will believe exceptional lies when they feel they are not getting what they deserve. TFG just lied and lied and lied and lied some more to get votes. It worked because we live in an era when our populace should be the most educated in history with all the access we have to information. Instead we are the laziest we have ever been at getting factual information. We give people a lower standard of education on purpose. Our monetary policy, as astutely pointed out here by most of you, benefits those with the biggest wallets. This happens when people BELIEVE THE BIG LIE. There is no other way for billionaires to bilk the system without the support of millions of average Americans who think they will do better under an authoritarian regime. By the time they find out that's not the case it's too late. We are where Italy was at in the late 20's, but we have far more money being taken by those who need it the least. Until we see millions of people out in the streets demanding that that money be returned to the average American household nothing is going to change. 

Edited by UpperWestside
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted

You also realize the Senate is gonna eviscerate this shit? I seriously doubt it passes anywhere close to what it is now. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Every channel and podcast I’m seeing is discussing the coverup of Biden’s mental decline. It’s almost as if Democrats really suck at messaging. 

Posted
4 hours ago, immamac said:

You also realize the Senate is gonna eviscerate this shit? I seriously doubt it passes anywhere close to what it is now. 

I don't know what makes you optimistic thereof; even if these fucking freaks rewrite the bill they will still do it at the expense of those most in need and for the benefit of the wealthiest 1%. This is a massive wealth transfer that will be rubber-stamped by the Senate because these so-called fiscal hawks will ultimately cave just like every goddamn Republican caves at the threat of being on the wrong side of Donald Trump.  

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Posted
I don't know what makes you optimistic thereof; even if these fucking freaks rewrite the bill they will still do it at the expense of those most in need and for the benefit of the wealthiest 1%. This is a massive wealth transfer that will be rubber-stamped by the Senate because these so-called fiscal hawks will ultimately cave just like every goddamn Republican caves at the threat of being on the wrong side of Donald Trump.  

This right here is how it will go down.
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
On 5/20/2025 at 3:14 PM, Thatguy said:

We don't have anything like that on our side where we would sell our soul in order for it to get done. Hard to beat that.

Class warfare against the oligarchs and other filthy rich would work. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
On 5/24/2025 at 2:47 PM, Fudge Nuggets said:

Class warfare against the oligarchs and other filthy rich would work. 

What part of this don't you guys understand? The Republicans have successfully pulled 7 presidential terms in my lifetime to the Dems 5. In that time they have cut top line taxes from 70%. Cut corporate taxes. Created a bunch of tax loopholes. Signed a bunch of bills to allow corps to destroy US manufacturing. Dipped into entitlements. Merged the banking sectors back together and allowed banking entities to keep swallowing one another. Deregulated. Got us into a bunch of wars. Ballooned the debt. Put us into a recession everytime one of them has held office. Gotten a bunch of kids shot at school. Reversed women's bodily autonomy. Literally they have successfully been stripping away everything that was gained from the Progressive Era, The New Deal Era, and the Great Society. Republican states have the lowest minimum wages. Most crime. Worst schools. Most poverty. Yet still the masses keep voting for them.

How have they been doing it? Because the American people care more about making sure they have a caste system than they care about self preservation. This has been the problem throughout history regardless of the system the people have been in and the number one reason societies crumble. The Dems struggle because they preach equality. America doesn't want equality. As long as Republicans include a hierarchy they will keep winning.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 3
  • Rage+1 3
  • Drool 1


×
×
  • Create New...