Trausti
Illuminator
I'm genuinely astonished that anyone could believe the current Democrat party leans to the right.Just popping back in to post this, which seems appropriate.
Transcript:
Skepchick: Why the Democrats Keep Leaning Right
I'm genuinely astonished that anyone could believe the current Democrat party leans to the right.Just popping back in to post this, which seems appropriate.
Transcript:
Skepchick: Why the Democrats Keep Leaning Right
That doesn't surprise me at all. But it's true. Everyone outside the US (and obviously some in the US) can see it.I'm genuinely astonished that anyone could believe the current Democrat party leans to the right.
Her argument seems to be that support for immigration was only polled badly during 2024, so why run against it? Maybe because the election was in 2024? The Democrats should stake out the sensible center position, "Yes we have the right to deport people who are here illegally, but that doesn't mean that we stop random people on the street and ask for their papers." There are lots of voters who can be peeled away from the Republicans with that kind of message, but instead the Democrats seem to be articulating the message that the borders should be effectively open and anybody already here can stay.Just popping back in to post this, which seems appropriate.
Transcript:
Skepchick: Why the Democrats Keep Leaning Right
You're still not reading the post. The phrase after "need" is "to choose," and I'm not even the one asserting that. Here, I'll repost it:I'm not going to pretend that you actually think "caused to need to" is significantly different from "forced". If you create a situation where someone "needs" to make a specific choice, you’re describing a lack of agency. You're still trying to blame the Democratic party for a conscious decision made by individual voters.
If you want to disagree, disagree. But at least understand what you're disagreeing with.You're attributing the 2024 loss directly to those voters, are you not? As in, if the Democratic party had not caused those voters to need to choose between their party and their principles, they would have won?
Senator John Fetterman is what Democrats were mostly like a generation or less ago. Now he seems a lone voice of common sense.That doesn't surprise me at all. But it's true. Everyone outside the US (and obviously some in the US) can see it.
Whereas us normal people can see how he fell to the right and became pretty much a pariah to the actual left.Senator John Fetterman is what Democrats were mostly like a generation or less ago. Now he seems a lone voice of common sense.
Ahem.Whereas us normal people can see how he fell to the right and became pretty much a pariah to the actual left.
Comparing these two pages head-to-head...biden was the incumbent and chose to run again, so when he dropped out that they didn’t have a primary was supposedly a major factor and anti-democratic. but, the gop was basically a show primary and trump bought out his comp by offering them cabinet spots to drop out and endorse him.
That's a good question, and there isn't an obvious answer.why is that situation something that hurt the dems but not the gop
These smug pilots have lost touch with regular passengers like usHarris in the debate was a politician. Trump was not.
Do you think you should stop and consider why you believe the guy with brain damage is making the most sense?Senator John Fetterman is what Democrats were mostly like a generation or less ago. Now he seems a lone voice of common sense.
You mean the thing they did? The position they have had for decades? The position both Biden and Harris touted every time they spoke on immigration? The very reasoning behind the Biden administration's immigration policies?Her argument seems to be that support for immigration was only polled badly during 2024, so why run against it? Maybe because the election was in 2024? The Democrats should stake out the sensible center position, "Yes we have the right to deport people who are here illegally, but that doesn't mean that we stop random people on the street and ask for their papers." There are lots of voters who can be peeled away from the Republicans with that kind of message, but instead the Democrats seem to be articulating the message that the borders should be effectively open and anybody already here can stay.
I'm going to amend this just a bit, because the final numbers don't tell the whole story....seems fair to say the GOP had a more open and competitive process, but not by all that much.
Yes, you are claiming they were forced to choose, while whining that I said "forced" and not "caused to need to".You're still not reading the post. The phrase after "need" is "to choose," and I'm not even the one asserting that. Here, I'll repost it:
If you want to disagree, disagree. But at least understand what you're disagreeing with.
[ETA] Ugh I can't even quote myself accurately.
Just to be clear, you are claiming that the Democrats did not have a primary in 2024? Are you sure about that? Or is this more of the amplification of that right wing nonsense that the DNC could have somehow overturned state level primary laws and rerun the primary months after it had occurred? Because I hate to be the one to break it to you, "enlightened centrist", but those people are not making that accusation in good faith.Comparing these two pages head-to-head...
![]()
2024 Democratic Party presidential primaries - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
![]()
2024 Republican Party presidential primaries - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
...seems fair to say the GOP had a more open and competitive process, but not by all that much.
That's a good question, and there isn't an obvious answer.
If I had to speculate, I'd say that the Democrats faced a much steeper opportunity cost due to foregoing a primary process in a year where incumbency itself turned out to be systematically disadvantageous across the globe. Dems had the chance to pick a relative outsider promising progressive reforms and instead chose more of the same.
This is just nonsense. I live in MTG's district. I just went to vote for her replacement last weekend. There were 17 different candidates to pick from, with multiple Republicans and multiple Democrats all vying for the seat. By what authority do you imagine that the DNC could have kept candidates who wanted to from competing in the 2024 primaries? Why did they not do so in this election? Hell, why did I have the choice to vote for another candidate in the 2024 Democratic primary, if as you say, the DNC gave me no chance to choose anyone else?I'm going to amend this just a bit, because the final numbers don't tell the whole story.
This is what the GOP had in 2024 that the Democrats did not have. Their mistake was failing to choose one of these conventional conservative politicians who never supported the forcible reversal of the 2020 election result; Democrats' mistake was never giving their supporters any chance to really choose anyone other than the incumbent president & veep in an election cycle where incumbency turned out to be a major headwind across the free world.
Comparing these two pages head-to-head...
![]()
2024 Democratic Party presidential primaries - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
![]()
2024 Republican Party presidential primaries - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
...seems fair to say the GOP had a more open and competitive process, but not by all that much.
Just to be clear, I linked to both sets of primaries, wrote that one of them was "more open and competitive" than the other one, and am now beginning to question whether you actually read through an entire post before responding.Just to be clear, you are claiming that the Democrats did not have a primary in 2024?
At which debate do you think the eventual Republican nominee did best?Comparing these two pages head-to-head...
![]()
2024 Democratic Party presidential primaries - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
![]()
2024 Republican Party presidential primaries - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
...seems fair to say the GOP had a more open and competitive process, but not by all that much.