Why would you say something so brave, yet true?

:)

Step 1 is already done, and now institutional resistance from inside the party is the problem. So it is in fact time for step 2, there’s enough of a body of voters to start building it.

The trick is that to subsume the DNC in the next ten years or so, the party has to form a coalition with it for now while remaining separate. That could achieve two goals: first, put a lot of pressure on Republicans they aren’t ready for. Next, create a strong leftward tension that just isn’t represented right now and which the Democrats will be walled off from controlling.

It’s sort of what happened with the Tea Party / MAGA.

These people are all whooshing hard on what you said. They can’t even imagine non-scold comments anymore.

That is exactly what they just said.

Good, eventually. Bad, at first.

It seems that way because I chose to say “you”, which is my bad. I meant it in the broader sense though, most of us are choosing not to sleep with the rest of us, most of the time.

There is no added exclusion to that just because some of us become more firm in refusing to, and give reasons why.

It most certainly doesn’t exclude anyone unless you think someone refusing to have sex with you is an act of exclusion.

Most of all of us are refusing to have sex with you at this very moment.

Would you mind saying what you mean here? I’d like for you to explain your thought a little more.

Ever wonder about how the rallies were really low attendance but Kamala’s were bumping? What if you had two entire social networks that were at a fever pitch for months, non stop? How about three? Just three 24/7 online rallies, unending, with most of America logged on and posting every single day?

It doesn’t seem generalized at all to me.

• A series of laws are passed that make this thing riskier.
• Do less of the risky thing.
• Make it clear why.

What’s the problem?

It’s also worth mentioning that turnout percentage wise, 12m fewer votes is just 6-7%, and a turnout swing of that size is perfectly normal

Yeah, this is a big problem as well. I don’t want to make it seem like Republicans are somehow good for workers. They’re way worse. They will devastate the working class in the coming years.

I’m saying that it doesn’t seem to workers like there IS a party that is pro worker. And to be honest, “isn’t as bad for workers” isn’t the same as “pro worker”. So I think that if workers don’t feel like Democrats or Republicans are on their side, that seems perfectly rational to me.

Okay, cool. I’m glad I asked, instead of assuming it wasn’t genuine!

I’m not pointing the finger specifically at Biden, but I know there’s some debatable space even regarding him. I also think the rail strike is an example of bad publicity more than anything else. Biden actually intervened to stop the strike AND then pressed the rail companies to concede to the unions. It was actually a pretty big win, but it looked horrible to anyone who didn’t do the work to pay attention to the whole thing (which is damn near everyone).

The things I’m thinking about are party-wide, and they aren’t all recent. Some of it is clumsy communication, though that’s bad because it’s usually due to a big disconnect between policy-makers and regular folk. But, some of it is actual screw-ups that we never even tried to stop or reverse, or even admit was a mistake in the first place.

The Economy vs the economy (recent): Democrats are really proud of themselves for their stock market performance, and all signs point to them actually fixing up the capital-E Economy quite a lot from the devastation (and time bomb legislation) of Trump’s term. But most of us are actually concerned with the lower-case-e economy, which sucks right now.

• Grocery prices shot through the roof. My bill went from $800 to $2k/mo over the last few years. We aggressively cut back but things are much leaner now. We can’t eat out anymore. Most of this isn’t inflation, it’s just people charging more, but it’s gone completely unmentioned for years.
• Housing prices also shot through the roof. Again, because of megacorporate bad behavior, with giant companies buying up billions in houses and just… raising the prices. Things were already bad here, but this has been a catastrophe.

This and a bunch of other stuff collaborates to create an impression to folks that inflation is high and the economy sucks. But, technically, those cost of living setbacks aren’t actually due to inflation, and technically they aren’t “the economy”. So the Democrat message of “the economy is great!” has a lot of people pretty angry and frustrated.

NAFTA, and the globalization trend (decades of bad policy, here): Huge swaths of legislation which directly resulted in the loss of domestic industry and handouts to megacorporate / Wall St. bodies can be directly traced to Democrat policies. Seriously. It’s not like all policy can be predictably good or bad over a long period of time, but this specifically has never seemed good. Factories began to close domestically the instant NAFTA passed legislation, and we’ve never really recovered.

The problem here is that this is largely due to the Neoliberal / Third Way movement of Democrats. This is a pseudo-conservative corporation-friendly movement that led to Clinton’s huge sweeps in the 90s, and because of that dramatic success, Democrats see corporate lobby/donors as a core pillar of the party now. In fact, the same folks that pushed Harris’ incredibly disappointing play for “swing voter” Republicans are part of this pillar. They aren’t “borderline” conservatives, they are literal conservatives.

Fundamentally, I’m not saying “Democrats are BAD!”, I’m saying that these disconnects and pro-corporate stances are real. To look at the Democrats and feel like they aren’t sticking up for workers isn’t irrational. It makes a lot of sense.

To see what a pro-worker party might be like, think about Bernie (who seems real damn frustrated with the party right now) - as an independent, he establishes a firm coalition with Democrats in order to serve the purpose of mitigating Republican harm, but his entire slate of concerns are so completely different from Democrats writ large that they seem like totally different platforms. And, well, honestly, they are.

Yes, I can. Is that something that you would earnestly want me to do, or are you just curious if it’s something that I’m able to do?

I don’t think this was the decider. I may think their vote was unfortunate, and probably very unfortunate for them specifically, but the truth of the matter is that the abandonment of the working class in the Rust Belt is what swing the election. This would have been a safe protest vote in a world where the Democrats openly and unashamedly courted workers.

The real irony is that if they had courted workers, they would have been able to support a bolder stance against the genocide as well, and thus not lost these votes.

😂 sure

gr8 b8 m8

His model and 538s have both produced outcomes where one candidate gets 520+ EVs.

He assigns the quality ratings to polls himself and publicly announces them. They’re based on whether or not they predicted the outcome of the election.

It’s his very poll scoring system that causes polls to herd. Because even if they’re wrong, they’re wrong together.

He determines the weights of those polls and chooses how to apply them.

Nate has done plenty.

This dude thinks EVERYONE is thinking what he’s thinking and we just don’t say it out loud. He thinks ANY of us are one drunk post away from spewing the same garbage. In his mind he’s just guilty of posting under the influence because of that.