Jump to content

The Dog

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    10297
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    56

Posts posted by The Dog

  1. 23 minutes ago, Tuco said:


    I could be wrong, but I don’t think it was intended to be a slogan. It was a line from an early speech, the crowd started chanting it, and the campaign realized they hit a nerve.

    It wasn't - it's become a rallying cry and it was totally organic. Never seen anything like it.

    I think the "we're not going back" thing is a good pushback to the GOP. It's a chance to flip the narrative from the GOP being able to say "we can make it better" to the Democrats being able to say "no, they will make it worse - and they wrote a book on how they will do it (Project 2025)." The GOP wrote down exactly how they plan to govern and a lot of it is very unpopular.

    That said, wet blanket time for the Democrats:

    The Democrats have a lot of momentum right now, but inflation and a tighter job market still loom large over everyone's lives.

    Yes, gouging is a thing and so is corporate greed, but all the average person knows is things are more expensive and it's harder to find a job. Inflation has slowed, but things are still more expensive and wages haven't kept up. Those are facts and voters need someone to blame. The Democrats were in the White House as that occurred and there isn't an easy counter like there is on immigration with Trump killing the border bill. 

    The good news for the Democrats is that Trump and many of the GOP candidates are terrible and can't stay on message to save their lives - and it's easy to pull them offsides with psyops like filling their convention arena on the night of the "official" nomination. 

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
  2. 17 minutes ago, 'stache said:

    If most people still don't know about it, how do you reach them? It's been blasted repeatedly for at least the last two months.

    only for those of us wonks who get into this stuff. 

    What I'd do:

    1. Highlight the worst parts of it that they are most likely to implement;

    2. Attach Trump to it (his name is ALL over that document in spite of him lying about not knowing anything about it) - he's also on record as saying he was going to do many of the things documented in it;

    3. Blast that all over media until election day. 

    • Hook 'Em 3
  3. 16 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

    Hector Neris had just fine numbers for us last season. It was all smoke and mirrors and a merry go round on the bases. Never got the fascination with the idea of bringing either him or Maton back.  No idea where Maton is or how he's doing.  Probably will cost me an immaculate grid square some day. 

    Maton signed with TB, was crap, then traded to the Mets where he's been a lot better. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  4. 7 minutes ago, troph said:

    and the reality is - the border will only become a bigger and bigger issue with climate change. I like the Dems approach and think Trump is a raging authoritarian, fascist, piece of shit, but the Dems need to flip the script and be tough on illegal immigration while having a humane and sustainable policy on asylum, dreamers, those already here, worker program, etc. AND own the public narrative on the issue. The Republicans are dead ass wrong on this and they are dead ass wrong on targeting repro rights, but if/when they win again, it will almost certainly be on the border. That issue simply isn't going away in our lifetime.

    and it never will. 

  5. 11 minutes ago, austingirl said:

    I'm glad she's officially supporting Harris, but I will always harbor some animosity towards most Trump officials. If I'm being generous, I can get why some of them signed on in the beginning, when there was still lingering hope that Trump would listen to his advisors and stop acting crazy. But by Jan 6, he had shown his true colors over and over again.

    remember that they had the votes to 25th amendment him but Pence refused to sign off.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
    • Rage+1 4
  6. 29 minutes ago, Chopper said:

    Harris and her team were not happy with Biden for putting her in charge of the S America border task force. There definitely were some hard feelings within the Administration over that. 

     

    6 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

    I think she shoudl have embraced it and run with it. 1- Gain support from Latinos here in the US. 2- Broaden international standings in the Hemisphere. 3- The solution is not AT the border, it is on both sides of the border.

    Fortunately they have an out with Trump killing the border bill.

    "We managed to stem the tide in spite of Trump killing the bill that would have made our jobs easier."

    • Hook 'Em 2
  7. 1 hour ago, GopherRock said:

    Nancy was leaning hard on Joe, but she absolutely did not anticipate either the timing of the decision or the rapid consolidation of the rank-and-file around Kamala.  I think she was envisioning a freewheeling brawl on the floor of the United Center.

    Turns out the following were the opinions of most Democrats:

    • Willing but unimpressed to slog out a joyless campaign with Joe at the helm
    • The decision to withdraw is Joe's and Joe's alone
    • In the event he withdraws, VP Harris is the only way forward 

    The speed at which the party rallied around Harris is stunning. The replacement process was all over in about 3 hours, and completed with an amount of energy that I haven't seen in the Democratic base since 2008. I didn't think that the Democratic Party was capable of such a thing. 

    The "circular firing squad" is why I and others didn't want Biden to drop out. 

    I have no doubt that part of Biden's agreement to drop out was that the party rally around Harris.

    And the Democrats FINALLY did something the Republicans always do - THEY FELL IN LINE. 

    People had to set their ambitions aside for this to work and as others have said - they "understood the assignment."

    That's the biggest reason this transition has succeeded whether she wins in November or not. 

     

    • Hook 'Em 8
×
×
  • Create New...