Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

A measurable number of "progressives" either stayed home or did a protest vote for Jill Stein or some shit this last election for EXACTLY that sort of "progressive stand on uncompromising principles" or some shit.  It isn't the majority of progressives, but it's enough of them.

Dems are busy being divided by purity tests.

Republicans are busy uniting around the worst human imaginable.

My thesis is: what if that """dem division""" is outside agitation to incite divisions? Much of this insanity is faceless online people thrashing up an online shitstorm, and then that being used to characterize the entire "left". 

Conversely that is working to favor the right, in which their evils and wrongs are actively hidden by the firehose of falsehood and simply moving on to the next thing, rather than trying to address everything in good faith. 

 

I feel strongly that the magnitude of unity of the right and disunity of the left is synthetic, or at the very least being artificially amplified. It's the same algorithmic playbook we've been subjected to since 2016, just applied across LLM's and more mechanisms of evangelizing that worldview. 

4 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

People want to feel like you are fighting for them.  There's nothing inherently right, center, or left about that.  It's "sizzle."

and "sizzle" is exactly how we get into this mess - easily faked and promised up-front, and just as easily betrayed and never delivered on. It's trump's entire election strategy, and we've seen multiple cycles of the pattern of all sizzle no steak... But people keep thinking uncritically and ignore that it's ONLY sizzle because mAnY pEoPlE aRe SaYiNg

Edited by Captainant
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

"Everything I don't like is centrism" is how you lose elections.

Lumping all of the working class into the same bucket is as useful as assuming all Hispanics will vote the same.

People want to feel like you are fighting for them.  There's nothing inherently right, center, or left about that.  It's "sizzle."

Sizzle is funny tweets, press conferences, and long-ass filibusters.

Steak is results. Confirming corrupt judges, carrying out mass deportations, destroying the environment.

Right now, only one party is getting results for its base, and it sure as fuck isn't the Dems. And it hasn't been for a long time.

Posted
4 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Sizzle is funny tweets, press conferences, and long-ass filibusters.

Steak is results. Confirming corrupt judges, carrying out mass deportations, destroying the environment.

Right now, only one party is getting results for its base, and it sure as fuck isn't the Dems. And it hasn't been for a long time.

What specific “steak results” has Gavin whiffed on?

Posted
2 minutes ago, Pancho said:

What specific “steak results” has Gavin whiffed on?

I'm talking about the party. Build Back Better did not happen (fucking losers couldn't corral Manchin and Sinema). Immigration reform did not happen (fucking losers got outmanuevered by Trumpists and the courts that Dems allowed them to stack).

In California, Gavin has governed as a centrist. This is his first foray into making promises and pretending to be bold. Until I see those congressional districts come into existence, it's sizzle.

Posted
Sizzle is funny tweets, press conferences, and long-ass filibusters.
Steak is results. Confirming corrupt judges, carrying out mass deportations, destroying the environment.
Right now, only one party is getting results for its base, and it sure as fuck isn't the Dems. And it hasn't been for a long time.

And they weren’t able to accomplish any of that until they found the King of Sizzle.
Posted
18 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

The working class hates Dems because of the centrism.

Just spitballing, but it feels like the "working class' is almost just a buzzword at this point. Are we talking about leftists or working class people in general? Because a lot of the "working class" supports or is at least sympathetic to Donald Trump. His proudest, loudest and largest group of voters are working class. And it ain't centrism they are worried about. These people hear the world "socialist" and lose their fucking minds. 

"The ___ is not a monolith" has been overused at this point, but probably the most true when it comes to the working class. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 3
Posted
12 minutes ago, Captainant said:

My thesis is: what if that """dem division""" is outside agitation to incite divisions? Much of this insanity is faceless online people thrashing up an online shitstorm, and then that being used to characterize the entire "left". 

Conversely that is working to favor the right, in which their evils and wrongs are actively hidden by the firehose of falsehood and simply moving on to the next thing, rather than trying to address everything in good faith. 

I feel strongly that the magnitude of unity of the right and disunity of the left is synthetic, or at the very least being artificially amplified. It's the same algorithmic playbook we've been subjected to since 2016, just applied across LLM's and more mechanisms of evangelizing that worldview. 

Zero disagreement with that.

But counterpoint: that's the world we live in, those are the rules of the new order. Play according to them, and turn them to your advantage, or LOSE.  That's why I'm all in favor of simple language lies, on repeat.  They work.  Turn the firehose on, crank it up to 11, and win.

Quote

and "sizzle" is exactly how we get into this mess - easily faked and promised up-front, and just as easily betrayed and never delivered on. It's trump's entire election strategy, and we've seen multiple cycles of the pattern of all sizzle no steak... But people keep thinking uncritically and ignore that it's ONLY sizzle because mAnY pEoPlE aRe SaYiNg

Yeah....you're not really rebutting my thesis here.  "we've seen multiple cycles of the pattern of all sizzle no steak... But people keep thinking uncritically and ignore that it's ONLY sizzle because mAnY pEoPlE aRe SaYiNg"  EXACTLY.  Understand that the vast majority of voters are utterly stupid and gullible and easily played.  So...PLAY THEM.  Offer them free candy bars and unicorn rides.  Whatever bullshit it takes to WIN.

The only rule of American politics, 2025: WIN.  Subpart (a) of that rule?  WIN.  Subpart (g)(2)(iii)?  Also WIN.

Nothing else matters if you don't WIN.

Posted

The working class isn't a buzzword, though. It's a well defined group of voters. People who need to work for a living. It's true that they're not a monolith, but it's also true that they have common experiences and values. They don't listen to people with soft ideas. The way to reach them is by being bold, and saying you will change things. The reason they want change is because they are struggling. So in an election between "nothing will fundamentally change" and "I am your retribution" who do you think is going to do better?

And why do you think Mamdani overperformed so much?

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Nivek said:

This is great, but it is also wrong.  The issues really come down to charisma and personality.  Biden kicked Trumps ass.  He has personality.  Obama would have trounced him.  Bill Clinton as well.   Trump won, because 2 candidates were women,  with HRC having been too guarded.   Harris didn't and doesn't have the outgoing personality.   We are bad at selecting leaders, smarmy is fine, shitty is fine, as long as we feel good when we watch them.   This is why we voted for Trump, because people felt good about being around him and watching him.   You can pretend it is policy related, but we re-elected Trump who was terrible and out of step with most people's sentiments.  Restated: we don't elect people over policy.  

The propaganda does come into play as well, and it will have a greater role once all barriers are gone.  But the next person has to be charming.  Gavin could do it.  

Yeah and those charismatic people can sell propaganda a lot better than wonks.  Bill Clinton is and was a huge wonk, but you'd never know it from his campaigns.

Also, Dems have been trying to sell high-minded ideas for decades that in theory (and probably practical applications) would benefit the working class.  For a variety of practical reasons, they never get any of it done (selling out to corporate interests + recalcitrant Congress, related issues) and are perceived as having bullshit the working class and utterly failed to deliver.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

The working class isn't a buzzword, though. It's a well defined group of voters. People who need to work for a living. It's true that they're not a monolith, but it's also true that they have common experiences and values. They don't listen to people with soft ideas. The way to reach them is by being bold, and saying you will change things. The reason they want change is because they are struggling. So in an election between "nothing will fundamentally change" and "I am your retribution" who do you think is going to do better?

And why do you think Mamdani overperformed so much?

Because he is in NYC.

I agree that they share anger and the struggle, but I disagree that the working class share common experiences and values. This country is way too big, with completely different lifestyles and surroundings. 

 

Edited by Hank Kingsley
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Because he is in NYC.

Cope.

I said he overperformed, not just that he won. We're talking about the working class, here.

Posted
1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Because he is in NYC.

I completely disagree that the working class has common values

 

Hell, most of the working class has totally given up on values, unless being an asshole is a value.  They think they got hosed so now want to see others fucked over - the pain is the purpose.  

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Posted
23 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

I'm talking about the party. Build Back Better did not happen (fucking losers couldn't corral Manchin and Sinema). Immigration reform did not happen (fucking losers got outmanuevered by Trumpists and the courts that Dems allowed them to stack).

In California, Gavin has governed as a centrist. This is his first foray into making promises and pretending to be bold. Until I see those congressional districts come into existence, it's sizzle.


Your reply about “all sizzle and no steak” was referencing and implying Gavin since that’s what was being talking about. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Captainant said:

do you really think that's the tenor of this board or progressives in general?

Several posters on this board are quick to jump on anyone with unsatisfying answers on Gaza and protection of trans rights.  If this is representative at all for the left-wing of the party then it’s prioritizing two issues that are subordinate to economic issues for the fat part of the middle that has felt forced to look at Republicans for solutions.  

  • Like 3
Posted
10 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

Several posters on this board are quick to jump on anyone with unsatisfying answers on Gaza and protection of trans rights.  If this is representative at all for the left-wing of the party then it’s prioritizing two issues that are subordinate to economic issues for the fat part of the middle that has felt forced to look at Republicans for solutions.  

It is very tough because it truly represents a dillema. You have such a tiny group affected by it (e.g. men in women sports outrage!) that if you abandoned the vocal adn proactive support, would eliminate the GQP ads ran every 15 minutes as talking points but also abandoning that tiny group in the name of pragmatism and "will fight that fight later, let's win first" mentality would upset a lot of people and it is a bad signal. Same thing with Gaza.

It can be argued that the role of politics and politicians is to fight and protect that tiny group. The weak need the masses and the strong.

But it can also be argued on the otherhand, political issue triage and prioritization is important and you have to actually be able to win elections in whatever environment you find yourself competing in, to actually affect change.

Posted
15 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

Several posters on this board are quick to jump on anyone with unsatisfying answers on Gaza and protection of trans rights.  If this is representative at all for the left-wing of the party then it’s prioritizing two issues that are subordinate to economic issues for the fat part of the middle that has felt forced to look at Republicans for solutions. 

I think that's a bit of embellishment, considering that it's in response to some pretty outright horrible things being posted. Your framing is impressively inequitable in that the inciting trolls get a pass, while the ire is saved for the response.

Because truly, policy-wise the left had more to say and propose for economic issues. And yet, of it's as important as you claim, they choose tariffs and shrinking the economy with trump? Make it make sense, aside from "strong man"

Posted
8 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

It is very tough because it truly represents a dillema. You have such a tiny group affected by it (e.g. men in women sports outrage!) that if you abandoned the vocal adn proactive support, would eliminate the GQP ads ran every 15 minutes as talking points but also abandoning that tiny group in the name of pragmatism and "will fight that fight later, let's win first" mentality would upset a lot of people and it is a bad signal. Same thing with Gaza.

It can be argued that the role of politics and politicians is to fight and protect that tiny group. The weak need the masses and the strong.

But it can also be argued on the otherhand, political issue triage and prioritization is important and you have to actually be able to win elections in whatever environment you find yourself competing in, to actually affect change.

Never once has Democratic surrender on a political argument eliminated that issue as a political talking point. In fact, I'd bet money that it's never worked for anyone in politics, anywhere in the world, ever. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
36 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Hell, most of the working class has totally given up on values, unless being an asshole is a value.  They think they got hosed so now want to see others fucked over - the pain is the purpose.  

Yep.  Only reason union workers vote Republican.  Al ready fucked let’s see who else can get fucked

Posted
25 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

Several posters on this board are quick to jump on anyone with unsatisfying answers on Gaza...

i'm sure if a progressive with a hard line against Israel jumped in the fray Ana would surely get onboard.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

It is very tough because it truly represents a dillema. You have such a tiny group affected by it (e.g. men in women sports outrage!) that if you abandoned the vocal adn proactive support, would eliminate the GQP ads ran every 15 minutes as talking points but also abandoning that tiny group in the name of pragmatism and "will fight that fight later, let's win first" mentality would upset a lot of people and it is a bad signal. Same thing with Gaza.

It can be argued that the role of politics and politicians is to fight and protect that tiny group. The weak need the masses and the strong.

But it can also be argued on the otherhand, political issue triage and prioritization is important and you have to actually be able to win elections in whatever environment you find yourself competing in, to actually affect change.

I don't find him particularly charismatic so I think Colorado governor is his ceiling, but I've listened to Jared Polis talk about this and he advocates steering everything back to household economics. 

They ask you about bathrooms and trans rights, you respond about filling potholes and making sure people can work all day and have enough money to pay their rent and be able to relax when the work day is over.  That's not throwing the trans community under the bus, it's refocusing attention away from the vulnerable and to the area that survey respondents say is the most neglected.  

This is me, not Polis, but I'd say "Gaza is a long way from here, it's a terrible situation and I can't fix it.  What I can do is work towards making sure you have enough money in your paycheck to take care of your family, protect access to the medical care you need and make sure we're keeping your family safe."  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Never once has Democratic surrender on a political argument eliminated that issue as a political talking point. In fact, I'd bet money that it's never worked for anyone in politics, anywhere in the world, ever. 

Yeah, you've still got various years or even decades old clips of Dems supporting trans and gay rights.

Posted
14 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I think that's a bit of embellishment, considering that it's in response to some pretty outright horrible things being posted. Your framing is impressively inequitable in that the inciting trolls get a pass, while the ire is saved for the response.

This is a message board and we can talk (or not) about whatever we want.  But as it pertains to the greater online discourse and how that shapes public opinion, every minute fraction of oxygen you give to the inciting trolls is EXACTLY what they want from you.  

Posted
10 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

They ask you about bathrooms and trans rights, you respond about filling potholes and making sure people can work all day and have enough money to pay their rent and be able to relax when the work day is over.  That's not throwing the trans community under the bus, it's refocusing attention away from the vulnerable and to the area that survey respondents say is the most neglected.  

Sure, but that's not what everyone else does. They just flat out agree with the right's stance on trans kids and act like it's common sense.

Posted
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

A measurable number of "progressives" either stayed home or did a protest vote for Jill Stein or some shit this last election for EXACTLY that sort of "progressive stand on uncompromising principles" or some shit.  It isn't the majority of progressives, but it's enough of them.

I'm gonna need to see some analysis or hard numbers to believe this. Progressives fucking hate Jill Stein. 

The vast majority of people that sat out were previous Biden voters that felt disaffected.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, LCHorn said:

This is a message board and we can talk (or not) about whatever we want.  But as it pertains to the greater online discourse and how that shapes public opinion, every minute fraction of oxygen you give to the inciting trolls is EXACTLY what they want from you.  

You're right, the Internet is much better when hate and racism and dehumanizing speech are left unchallenged to crowd out other discourse. We should just let magicsoccerspray and pronghorn post whatever disinformation they want because we don't want to be divisive!

Posted
12 minutes ago, Captainant said:

We should just let magicsoccerspray and pronghorn

If you want to make punching bags out of a few bad apples here, be my guest.  We aren’t fucking TexAgs, after all.  
 

That’s not the same as repeating a critique that Newsom or Buttigieg or whoever is an unfit candidate because they don’t have the preferred response to issues that aren’t primary for most voters.  

Posted
3 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

That’s not the same as repeating a critique that Newsom or Buttigieg or whoever is an unfit candidate because they don’t have the preferred response to issues that aren’t primary for most voters.  

I don't feel like I'm reading that sort of thing here or in IRL discussions? And I'm mainly seeing that discourse in faceless social media forums like Twitter or reddit - places that I doubt are genuine reflections of sentiment given what we know about online influence campaigns.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
It's the economy, stupid.
 

If that were true, then no republican would win. Economies are better under democratic presidents.

Women will not get elected to the highest office, and policy/facts/laws only matter to the left.
  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)

One thing the Democrats need to do across the board is implement some message discipline and demand that their talking heads eliminate criticism of “America” or “the country” or different systems and instead make every critique as personal and targeted as they can. This is something the GOP does very effectively.

The GOP never talks about the need for “America” to reckon with its failings. They say awful things about America, but blame the lib cucks.  Dems can do this too.

Instead of “America must atone for its sins of racism and discrimination” try “Neanderthal assholes are ruining our beautiful country with their racism.”  The first bit leads you into a fruitless debate about whether America is really a racist country and will alienate people who might otherwise vote for you.  The second only alienates self-identified Neanderthal racists and that small group isn’t voting for you anyway.

Instead of a critique of “capitalism,” try attacking “greedy billionaires who are ruining markets.” 

You can then make the same proposals for solutions, it’s all just targeted at groups that most voters don’t like or identify with. 
 

I think some Dems are getting better about this but still fall short because it’s intellectually dishonest (a bit) and confrontational.  But whatever, we are trying to win. It’s very crafty because it basically allows most people to tell themselves they aren’t part of the problem set you’re talking about.  No one wants to feel called out by an elected leader. 

 

Edited by 956 Worldwide
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
57 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, you've still got various years or even decades old clips of Dems supporting trans and gay rights.

Even if they didn't have that, it wouldn't matter. They've got a multi-billion dollar propaganda apparatus fully devoted to shaping false public narratives about the Democratic party. Dems have to fight those narratives, not concede to them. 

Posted
2 hours ago, chainsaw said:

I'm talking about the party. Build Back Better did not happen (fucking losers couldn't corral Manchin and Sinema). Immigration reform did not happen (fucking losers got outmanuevered by Trumpists and the courts that Dems allowed them to stack).

In California, Gavin has governed as a centrist. This is his first foray into making promises and pretending to be bold. Until I see those congressional districts come into existence, it's sizzle.

Democratic party has not had the benefit of non-obstruction Guardians of Pedophiles much and when they did, it was a razor thin margin for a short term.   Heck the GQP stole a SC seat from Obama.   Context matters.  

Posted
1 hour ago, Pancho said:


Your reply about “all sizzle and no steak” was referencing and implying Gavin since that’s what was being talking about. 

I was referencing that the whole party has adopted "all sizzle no steak" as a strategy and implying that Gavin is part of that faction of the party.

One way of looking at modern politics is this:

Both Parties have access to cheat codes that are extremely popular with all voters, but assure the destruction of an entrenched, powerful interests that are embedded with the parties.

Both Parties campaign heavily about using one (or more) cheat code, but when they are in a position to use one, they don't ever do it.

For Republicans, a full disclosure of the Details of the Epstein Case has broad bipartisan support, but now that Republicans are in power, they refuse to do it.

For Democrats, an economic policy of Taxing Billionaires has broad bipartisan support, but when Democrats are in power, they refuse to do it.

That's because both parties are compromised by powerful interests. Even if some (or most) of the working class doesn't "know" that, or have any information to support a belief that it's true, they "feel" like the system is rigged against them. Government is rigged against them. The Job Market is rigged against them. The Housing Market is rigged against them. Healthcare is rigged against them.

That's a common value held by people in the working class, regardless of their political leanings. Trump was the only candidate who acknowledged their grievances, and was rewarded for that. Any Democrat who runs interference for billionaires, or consultants, or the status quo, they are part of the problem. Everyone needs to get with the program. Zohran Mamdani is shouting the blueprint at you.

Posted
3 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Even if they didn't have that, it wouldn't matter. They've got a multi-billion dollar propaganda apparatus fully devoted to shaping false public narratives about the Democratic party. Dems have to fight those narratives, not concede to them. 

Dems also need to take a page from the recent GOP guidebook:

No one criticizes the nominee, no one criticizes the party, and once in office, no one criticizes the president.

Argue for your stance. Criticize proxies when needed. Criticize (carefully) policies while treating it as a given the nominee/party/president will come around. 
 

But never, ever, ever go on tv or the internet and let voters think there light be a reason not to vote for the nominee.

Posted
6 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

I was referencing that the whole party has adopted "all sizzle no steak" as a strategy and implying that Gavin is part of that faction of the party.

One way of looking at modern politics is this:

Both Parties have access to cheat codes that are extremely popular with all voters, but assure the destruction of an entrenched, powerful interests that are embedded with the parties.

Both Parties campaign heavily about using one (or more) cheat code, but when they are in a position to use one, they don't ever do it.

For Republicans, a full disclosure of the Details of the Epstein Case has broad bipartisan support, but now that Republicans are in power, they refuse to do it.

For Democrats, an economic policy of Taxing Billionaires has broad bipartisan support, but when Democrats are in power, they refuse to do it.

That's because both parties are compromised by powerful interests. Even if some (or most) of the working class doesn't "know" that, or have any information to support a belief that it's true, they "feel" like the system is rigged against them. Government is rigged against them. The Job Market is rigged against them. The Housing Market is rigged against them. Healthcare is rigged against them.

That's a common value held by people in the working class, regardless of their political leanings. Trump was the only candidate who acknowledged their grievances, and was rewarded for that. Any Democrat who runs interference for billionaires, or consultants, or the status quo, they are part of the problem. Everyone needs to get with the program. Zohran Mamdani is shouting the blueprint at you.

Good post, but grievances aren't values. 

Posted
46 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

That’s not the same as repeating a critique that Newsom or Buttigieg or whoever is an unfit candidate because they don’t have the preferred response to issues that aren’t primary for most voters.  

Idk man, at least in Buttigieg's case, going on a prominent liberal podcast and running an obvious smoke screen for the second Holocaust that we're actively funding and supporting with weapons of war is kind of not ok and saying we should not hold his feet to the fire over it seems like a real shitty opinion.

Posted
1 minute ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I seriously question the wisdom of using a successful ranked-choice NYC primary as the blueprint to win competitive first past the post general elections nationwide. 

Just because you are arguing that you support electing a seriously flawed candidate doesn't mean you think the candidate should be a blueprint.

Posted
1 minute ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

Just because you are arguing that you support electing a seriously flawed candidate doesn't mean you think the candidate should be a blueprint.

There’s a post two above me calling him the blueprint. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Idk man, at least in Buttigieg's case, going on a prominent liberal podcast and running an obvious smoke screen for the second Holocaust that we're actively funding and supporting with weapons of war is kind of not ok and saying we should not hold his feet to the fire over it seems like a real shitty opinion.

A huge issue facing the Democratic party is that, like yourself with Palestine, many of their voters care deeply and passionately about a singular issue, to the point that it is their North Star politically.  On a human level, there is absolutely nothing wrong with this, to be clear, and in theory political parties should be an amalgamation of "north stars" broadly united towards a common goal.

Where we run into problems is that in the current state of America, the North Star political issue to 95% of Republicans is "own the libs."  That's it.  When winning is the ultimate shared goal, it makes it much easier for folks from different walks of life to come together and get behind ideas that might not fully align with their core belief system.

If they want to stop the onslaught of the country by the current party in power, Democrats will either 1) need to focus on aligning the entire coalition behind "winning" as the primary goal or 2) somehow break the "own the libs" trance that Fox News has on Republican voters.

I know which one I think is easier to achieve.

  • Like 2
Posted
32 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Good post, but grievances aren't values. 

Counterpoint: grievances and hatred may be the only real American values that exist.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, LCHorn said:

I don't find him particularly charismatic so I think Colorado governor is his ceiling, but I've listened to Jared Polis talk about this and he advocates steering everything back to household economics. 

They ask you about bathrooms and trans rights, you respond about filling potholes and making sure people can work all day and have enough money to pay their rent and be able to relax when the work day is over.  That's not throwing the trans community under the bus, it's refocusing attention away from the vulnerable and to the area that survey respondents say is the most neglected.  

This is me, not Polis, but I'd say "Gaza is a long way from here, it's a terrible situation and I can't fix it.  What I can do is work towards making sure you have enough money in your paycheck to take care of your family, protect access to the medical care you need and make sure we're keeping your family safe."  

he's a gay Jew.  He's not going any higher. 

Posted
21 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

I think he was saying that arguing on behalf of the blue collar and the poor is the blueprint.  Not the whole package.

I think the issue is that, as @Hank Kingsley has pointed out, this isn’t a strategy. In the first instance, there aren’t enough poor and blue collar Americans to win national elections. 
 

Second, even if they were, the issues are different.  Why are you poor? Were you born into generational poverty and shitty schools and never had a chance? Were you middle class and then the factory in town moved to China? Did you graduate with a CS degree and now no one is hiring? 
 

Trump appeals to parts of the poor and blue collar all the time, that’s what the tariffs and bringing back manufacturing schtick is all about. You can (accurately) say it’s all BS and hypocrisy and a sham but you can’t say he’s ignoring that sector and their issues. He’s all about them and it was likely key to the win. 
 

If step one of your plan is “create a class consciousness in America” then it’s time to ask if the plan is really to win an election.  Otherwise, the question is HOW are you going to appeal to the working class. 



×
×
  • Create New...