Bill Maher has become the whiny little bitch he complains about

[linux 1783]

3 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

Sure there is. Dems can continue to lose to nutjobs. 

AOC and Bernie won’t win. You need a candidate that’ll appeal to the center. 

So the worst case scenario is the continued case scenario? meaning it can't go lower?

The center is already being appealed to and the end result is losing two elections to the worst possible candidate, democrats need to appeal to the worker they need to abandon economic centrism/center right.

[hpslugga 4097]

10 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

Sure there is. Dems can continue to lose to nutjobs. 

AOC and Bernie won’t win. You need a candidate that’ll appeal to the center. 

They already tried that and lost because of it. I mean I get that you didn’t read but like 5 words of what I said earlier, but a considerable part of their pitch in ‘24 was aimed at republicans abandoning Trump and switching over to them. They failed because they didn’t harvest nearly as many voters on that message that they needed, and they alienated the typical 1/3rd of the adult population that is registered to vote and chooses not to. They alienated them by flat out ignoring them and not addressing those core issues I previously mentioned.

Edited December 8 by hpslugga

[Rex Kramer 1531]

Just now, hpslugga said:

They already tried that and lost because of it. I mean I get that you didn’t read but like 5 words of what I said earlier, but a considerable part of their pitch in ‘24 was aimed at republicans abandoning Trump and switching over to them. They failed because they didn’t harvest nearly as many voters on that message and they alienated the typical 1/3rd of the adult population that is registered to vote and chooses not to.

I disagree with the vast majority of your long-winded original reply so not surprisingly I will disagree here too. Dem candidate was extremely weak who couldn’t differentiate herself from an incumbent that presided over record inflation. That alone will get you pasted in most elections. Her accepting support from corporations wasn’t in top 3 reasons of why she lost and probably not in top 10. 

[linux 1783]

9 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

I disagree with the vast majority of your long-winded original reply so not surprisingly I will disagree here too. Dem candidate was extremely weak who couldn’t differentiate herself from an incumbent that presided over record inflation. That alone will get you pasted in most elections. Her accepting support from corporations wasn’t in top 3 reasons of why she lost and probably not in top 10. 

Then explain Hillary? JFC of course your entire mantra is move to the right! you want democrats to lose giving out impossible targets, for example calling it "the center" lol

[linux 1783]

Nevertrumpers are 1% of the population sorry can't appeal to them any longer, some are good principled people but we are in the worst case scenario so bye!

[Rex Kramer 1531]

3 minutes ago, linux said:

Then explain Hillary? JFC of course your entire mantra is move to the right! you want democrats to lose giving out impossible targets, for example calling it "the center" lol

Wholly unlikeable. Less so than Kamala. More competent. Would’ve won if not for serious personal unlikeability. Clinton ran and lost a close race as a centrist. Biden won one just like that. Abandoning that after disastrous incumbent policies is a recipe for like 40% of the popular vote, Reagan-esque landslides. I’m certain new DNC leadership will not go with your strategy. 

As far as what I want?  I want a return to Bush. That ain’t gonna happen, so I genuinely want a competent Dem party. You’re proposing getting less competent, and you’re incapable of seeing the world as it is. 

[linux 1783]

Just now, Rex Kramer said:

Wholly unlikeable. Less so than Kamala. More competent. Would’ve won if not for serious personal unlikeability. Clinton ran and lost a close race as a centrist. Biden won one just like that. Abandoning that after disastrous incumbent policies is a recipe for like 40% of the popular vote, Reagan-esque landslides. I’m certain new DNC leadership will not go with your strategy. 

As far as what I want?  I want a return to Bush. That ain’t gonna happen, so I genuinely want a competent Dem party. You’re proposing getting less competent, and you’re incapable of seeing the world as it is. 

No shit it is likely not going to happen DNC prefers to lose and lose like idiots, they are corpocrats. Their portfolio is doing fine why worry?

Again Nevertrumpers are 1% of the population, you were already catered to by seeking endorsements from Liz Cheney, Kinzinger, and the results were worse than Hillary.

You can keep calling YOUR candidates weak candidates, but that is just reinforcing MY argument, you go corpocrat you lose. This is not 2004 or even 2012 anymore. Poverty is rising fast, people are angry/anxious and prone to pick monsters in desperation.

[Biff Tannen 46138]

9 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

Wholly unlikeable. Less so than Kamala. More competent. Would’ve won if not for serious personal unlikeability. Clinton ran and lost a close race as a centrist. Biden won one just like that. Abandoning that after disastrous incumbent policies is a recipe for like 40% of the popular vote, Reagan-esque landslides. I’m certain new DNC leadership will not go with your strategy. 

As far as what I want?  I want a return to Bush. That ain’t gonna happen, so I genuinely want a competent Dem party. You’re proposing getting less competent, and you’re incapable of seeing the world as it is. 

In what world is Kamala less likable than Hillary?  Am I reading that wrong?

[linux 1783]

The entire DNC platform in a nutshell is to alternate power with monsters, why do they care they got theirs? Then we wonder why we lose our inability to see big picture, to see the fundamentals... that poverty is the worst political poison, Hillary had no OMGINFLATION and she still lost, inflation was an austerity trap. One the Democrats always fall for, because GS demands that they fall for it.

The DNC would be the first group to kick out a true winner because he would negatively impact their net worth. 

 

Edited December 8 by linux

[Rex Kramer 1531]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

In what world is Kamala less likable than Hillary?  Am I reading that wrong?

Yes you read that wrong. I’m not sure how I could have written it more clearly. 

[mchookem 16764]

1 hour ago, Rex Kramer said:

Wholly unlikeable. Less so than Kamala.

well these words pretty clearly state that while Hillary was wholly unlikeable she was actually less unlikeable than Kamala.

if that is not what you meant then yes it could have been written more clearly.

e.g. "wholly unlikeable, more so than Kamala."

Edited December 8 by mchookem

[Rex Kramer 1531]

10 minutes ago, mchookem said:

well these words pretty clearly state that while Hillary was wholly unlikeable she was actually less unlikeable than Kamala.

if that is not what you meant then yes it could have been written more clearly.

e.g. "wholly unlikeable, more so than Kamala."

Technically you’re right, and fuck you for pointing out my articulation flaws, because I’m damn near the perfect man.  For the record, Kamala was a much more likable candidate than Hilary. 

[Biff Tannen 46138]

5 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

Technically you’re right, and fuck you for pointing out my articulation flaws, because I’m damn near the perfect man.  For the record, Kamala was a much more likable candidate than Hilary. 

Just making sure. Cause Hillary sucked. 

[Nivek 17395]

The problem with the left is that stupid is short and catchy, and their opposition have several literal propaganda networks spreading Russian talking points and lies 24/7.   Twitter. Newsmax, Fox NEWS + AM radio.  

[Brisketexan 106851]

9 minutes ago, Nivek said:

The problem with the left is that stupid is short and catchy, and their opposition have several literal propaganda networks spreading Russian talking points and lies 24/7.   Twitter. Newsmax, Fox NEWS + AM radio.  

This.  Stop overthinking it.  The most important voting demographic is stupid people.  They respond to short, soundbite lies that make them feel good.  So, tell more of those than the opposition, and you will win.  Everything else is intellectual claptrap that won't even budge the needle.

Tell more and better lies, and saturate every medium with them.  And win.

[YChang 3537]

The less cynical side of me isn’t about tell better lies but… it is VERY CLEAR that Dems suuuuuuck at communicating to the American public. Ethos, pathos, logos…

[bolverk 30305]

12 minutes ago, YChang said:

The less cynical side of me isn’t about tell better lies but… it is VERY CLEAR that Dems suuuuuuck at communicating to the American public. Ethos, pathos, logos…

Pretty much where I'm at. Cut to the chase and just tell simple truths.

[Brisketexan 106851]

4 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Pretty much where I'm at. Cut to the chase and just tell simple truths.

The truth only angers and upsets the stupids.  Tell them what they want to hear, which are simple, 3-8 word lies.  "Only I can fix it" is a fantastic one, for example.

[Rex Kramer 1531]

22 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The truth only angers and upsets the stupids.  Tell them what they want to hear, which are simple, 3-8 word lies.  "Only I can fix it" is a fantastic one, for example.

Loser talk from Sunny Hostin and Brisket. 

[softlynow 1894]

1 hour ago, Nivek said:

The problem with the left is that stupid is short and catchy, and their opposition have several literal propaganda networks spreading Russian talking points and lies 24/7.   Twitter. Newsmax, Fox NEWS + AM radio.  

And CNN, the NYT, WaPo and just about every other news media with reach will turn on an actual left-of-center Democratic Party in a heartbeat, because that would hurt their bottom line. We don't live in the era of Murrow and Cronkite where the journalists fought for, and kept a bit of, independence from the MBAs looking to the next quater. I'm not even sure MSNBC would go all in on a real l-o-c Dem candidacy.

Just like the early part of the 20th, we will need a catastrophe to even think about shaking the current Pub / Pub-lite dichotomy.

Anyone still pushing a Dems to the center strategy isn't paying attention or has an agenda wholly divorced from defeating Trumpism.

[softlynow 1894]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

This.  Stop overthinking it.  The most important voting demographic is stupid people.  They respond to short, soundbite lies that make them feel good.  So, tell more of those than the opposition, and you will win.  Everything else is intellectual claptrap that won't even budge the needle.

Tell more and better lies, and saturate every medium with them.  And win.

The problem with this is the media will HAMMER Dem lies. Just demolish the liars. Because Dems are pussies and will wilt at the slightest hint of concerted media pushback, and the media knows this.

There is no strategy. All the monied segments of this country have pushed their chips in on Trumpism now. 

[Nivek 17395]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

This.  Stop overthinking it.  The most important voting demographic is stupid people.  They respond to short, soundbite lies that make them feel good.  So, tell more of those than the opposition, and you will win.  Everything else is intellectual claptrap that won't even budge the needle.

Tell more and better lies, and saturate every medium with them.  And win.

Worth adding that the right doesn't just sell feel-good rhetoric ("you are going to be so rich") but they really mostly sell fear-mongering, hate, and blame and appealing to our basal emotions.     

 

[Brisketexan 106851]

39 minutes ago, softlynow said:

The problem with this is the media will HAMMER Dem lies. Just demolish the liars. Because Dems are pussies and will wilt at the slightest hint of concerted media pushback, and the media knows this.

There is no strategy. All the monied segments of this country have pushed their chips in on Trumpism now. 

When the media does call you out, deny.  Call the media liars when they call you out.  

The script is there.  It's as simple as it gets.  Only a fool would fail to run the plays that are proven winners.

[softlynow 1894]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

When the media does call you out, deny.  Call the media liars when they call you out.  

The script is there.  It's as simple as it gets.  Only a fool would fail to run the plays that are proven winners.

So . . . Democrats.

They also don't have the stomach for it.

[Dutchrudder 11234]

2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

This.  Stop overthinking it.  The most important voting demographic is stupid people.  They respond to short, soundbite lies that make them feel good.  So, tell more of those than the opposition, and you will win.  Everything else is intellectual claptrap that won't even budge the needle.

Tell more and better lies, and saturate every medium with them.  And win.

All of that rightwing infrastructure existed in 2020, and Biden still got 81 million votes. I don't think it's the lies that matter, having a candidate that isn't tied to the currently very unpopular administration would have made the difference. That candidate also needed to be different from the current administration, and not say something like "I wouldn't do anything different." 

Once Biden decided to run again, the Dem leadership backed him and prevented everyone in the party aside from Doug Phillips from challenging it. It was a colossal miscalculation on their part. Probably due to selfishness from those around Biden who wanted to stay in power and influencial positions, and Bidens ego getting the best of him. Having to back out of that position after a disastrous debate performance, and then straddling the line between "not fit to run" and "fit to be President another 6 months" wasn't helping either. Kamala had to convince people that Joe was just fine and very capable as POTUS, but that he wasn't up to the task of another campaign. It's a very disingenuous argument to make, and it hurt her credibility to do so the whole campaign. 

The fact is, Kamala never would have won an open Dem primary by herself. She was a convenient fall back plan, that was half baked at best. She never should have been the nominee to begin with, there should have been a primary. It would have told us what we know now, that campaigning primarily on abortion rights, "saving democracy" and the status quo isn't going to win this election. 

[C-Man 27771]

4 minutes ago, Dutchrudder said:

All of that rightwing infrastructure existed in 2020, and Biden still got 81 million votes. I don't think it's the lies that matter, having a candidate that isn't tied to the currently very unpopular administration would have made the difference. That candidate also needed to be different from the current administration, and not say something like "I wouldn't do anything different." 

Once Biden decided to run again, the Dem leadership backed him and prevented everyone in the party aside from Doug Phillips from challenging it. It was a colossal miscalculation on their part. Probably due to selfishness from those around Biden who wanted to stay in power and influencial positions, and Bidens ego getting the best of him. Having to back out of that position after a disastrous debate performance, and then straddling the line between "not fit to run" and "fit to be President another 6 months" wasn't helping either. Kamala had to convince people that Joe was just fine and very capable as POTUS, but that he wasn't up to the task of another campaign. It's a very disingenuous argument to make, and it hurt her credibility to do so the whole campaign. 

The fact is, Kamala never would have won an open Dem primary by herself. She was a convenient fall back plan, that was half baked at best. She never should have been the nominee to begin with, there should have been a primary. It would have told us what we know now, that campaigning primarily on abortion rights, "saving democracy" and the status quo isn't going to win this election. 

Many Americans were tired of Trump's act by 2019/2020 but COVID-19, and his horrid response to it, is why Biden was elected in 2020. That's it. No need to complicate things.

[Burt 4132]

Never thought I'd utter these words, but can we get back to talking about Bill Maher?

[wildcat09 29577]

Y'all, don't make me tap my "there isn't a center" sign again.

[Rex Kramer 1531]

2 hours ago, Dutchrudder said:

All of that rightwing infrastructure existed in 2020, and Biden still got 81 million votes. I don't think it's the lies that matter, having a candidate that isn't tied to the currently very unpopular administration would have made the difference. That candidate also needed to be different from the current administration, and not say something like "I wouldn't do anything different." 

Once Biden decided to run again, the Dem leadership backed him and prevented everyone in the party aside from Doug Phillips from challenging it. It was a colossal miscalculation on their part. Probably due to selfishness from those around Biden who wanted to stay in power and influencial positions, and Bidens ego getting the best of him. Having to back out of that position after a disastrous debate performance, and then straddling the line between "not fit to run" and "fit to be President another 6 months" wasn't helping either. Kamala had to convince people that Joe was just fine and very capable as POTUS, but that he wasn't up to the task of another campaign. It's a very disingenuous argument to make, and it hurt her credibility to do so the whole campaign. 

The fact is, Kamala never would have won an open Dem primary by herself. She was a convenient fall back plan, that was half baked at best. She never should have been the nominee to begin with, there should have been a primary. It would have told us what we know now, that campaigning primarily on abortion rights, "saving democracy" and the status quo isn't going to win this election. 

You can’t possibly be this logical. The reason why Trump won had nothing to do with that. It has everything to do with dumb voters. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 34100]

14 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

You can’t possibly be this logical. The reason why Trump won had nothing to do with that. It has everything to do with dumb voters. 

wow, first post of yours where I completely agree

[Satchel 6982]

I’ll admit to be surprised at the sheer number of post election autopsies that blame ignorance of policy positions and Democratic malfeasance in messaging for Trump’s win.

Really? 
 

If we want to keep it real, there are other reasons why dominant culture voters opted for Trump:

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/xK1PNXbfcZCHh6ui/

[Brian Fantana 6862]

14 minutes ago, Satchel said:

I’ll admit to be surprised at the sheer number of post election autopsies that blame ignorance of policy positions and Democratic malfeasance in messaging for Trump’s win.

Really? 
 

If we want to keep it real, there are other reasons why dominant culture voters opted for Trump:

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/xK1PNXbfcZCHh6ui/

I mean this all can be attributed back to Republicans being good at generating sound bites that make people feel good. Racist shit appeals to some of our basic, tribal instincts. It really is that simple. Doesn't mean it can't be messaged against successfully, it's just that the current crop of Dems are very bad at it.

[Dutchrudder 11234]

5 hours ago, Rex Kramer said:

You can’t possibly be this logical. The reason why Trump won had nothing to do with that. It has everything to do with dumb voters. 

I'm sure if they call enough people stupid, they will win the LatinX vote in 2028!

[hpslugga 4097]

23 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

Y'all, don't make me tap my "there isn't a center" sign again.

It sounds like a nice idea for there to be a center. In the real world, it's just a ridiculous compromise between ideological positions. I believe Phil Ochs wrote a song about it.

 

[Satchel 6982]

18 hours ago, Dutchrudder said:

I'm sure if they call enough people stupid, they will win the LatinX vote in 2028!

At one of his rallies, Trump told his people that he really didn’t care about them, that he just wanted their votes. You can’t be more disrespectful  and still have dumb ass people support you, unless of course all you’re irrationally concerned about the dispossession of white people.

[Dutchrudder 11234]

6 hours ago, Satchel said:

At one of his rallies, Trump told his people that he really didn’t care about them, that he just wanted their votes. You can’t be more disrespectful  and still have dumb ass people support you, unless of course all you’re irrationally concerned about the dispossession of white people.

I think it has a lot more to do with people in the middle not liking Kamala for numerous reasons that don't have to do with her race or gender. Despite all the crazy shit he says Trump got a couple million more votes than 2020, but she lost several million votes compared to Biden and performed much worse in many solid Blue areas. 

Again, I go back to the point that I don't think she would win a normal Dem primary if given the chance. All of her candidates for her VP were better choices for the top of the ticket, and they probably beat Trump if they make it through the normal primary process. Shapiro, Whitmer, Newsome, Beshear, Wes Moore, etc, any combo of them would have been a better option. 

[Biff Tannen 46138]

31 minutes ago, Dutchrudder said:

I think it has a lot more to do with people in the middle not liking Kamala for numerous reasons that don't have to do with her race or gender. Despite all the crazy shit he says Trump got a couple million more votes than 2020, but she lost several million votes compared to Biden and performed much worse in many solid Blue areas. 

Again, I go back to the point that I don't think she would win a normal Dem primary if given the chance. All of her candidates for her VP were better choices for the top of the ticket, and they probably beat Trump if they make it through the normal primary process. Shapiro, Whitmer, Newsome, Beshear, Wes Moore, etc, any combo of them would have been a better option. 

I disagree in full. Why would any of those have been better?  They all would have been painted with the same “socialist, communist, fascist, trans-loving, war on Christmas, etc” brush that Kamala was. 

[linux 1783]

38 minutes ago, Dutchrudder said:

I think it has a lot more to do with people in the middle not liking Kamala for numerous reasons that don't have to do with her race or gender. Despite all the crazy shit he says Trump got a couple million more votes than 2020, but she lost several million votes compared to Biden and performed much worse in many solid Blue areas. 

Again, I go back to the point that I don't think she would win a normal Dem primary if given the chance. All of her candidates for her VP were better choices for the top of the ticket, and they probably beat Trump if they make it through the normal primary process. Shapiro, Whitmer, Newsome, Beshear, Wes Moore, etc, any combo of them would have been a better option. 

Look a primary that late was a logistical nightmare but I will say this it SHOULD have happened as a full one day vote, the months long primary process is poison for democrats it creates scenarios for the corpocrats ALWAYS winning the nomination.

End the current nomination process!

Still Hillary won her primary and lost, there is a fundamental problem with current reality and even though you hate to hear it again the correlation between educated and uneducated is the #1 or #2 and vote intention between the candidates after urban vs rural.

There is a nuclear powder keg and having a single primary would not have solved anything, we need to abandon the large tent and put populist charismatic candidates forward. At this rate we will lose the black male vote

Edited December 11 by linux

[Brian Fantana 6862]

Lol @ motherfuckers still shilling for Josh goddamn Shapiro and Gavin Newsom

[Satchel 6982]

17 hours ago, Dutchrudder said:

I think it has a lot more to do with people in the middle not liking Kamala for numerous reasons that don't have to do with her race or gender. Despite all the crazy shit he says Trump got a couple million more votes than 2020, but she lost several million votes compared to Biden and performed much worse in many solid Blue areas. 

Again, I go back to the point that I don't think she would win a normal Dem primary if given the chance. All of her candidates for her VP were better choices for the top of the ticket, and they probably beat Trump if they make it through the normal primary process. Shapiro, Whitmer, Newsome, Beshear, Wes Moore, etc, any combo of them would have been a better option. 

I disagree. By any objective measure, both of the women who led the Democratic ticket were more qualified than the man they against. America has made it abundantly clear that is not ready to elect a woman in general and a black woman in particular. Gavin Newsome could have run on the exact same ticket with the same policy platform and messaging, and would have defeated Trump.

[Brisketexan 106851]

I disagree. By any objective measure, both of the women who led the Democratic ticket were more qualified than the man they against. America has made it abundantly clear that is not ready to elect a woman in general and a black woman in particular. Gavin Newsome could have run on the exact same ticket with the same policy platform and messaging, and would have defeated Trump.

This. Even my quite feminist wife and daughter both agree “yeah…if we want to win, we need to run a white dude.” That’s just how it be.

[Rex Kramer 1531]

2 hours ago, Satchel said:

I disagree. By any objective measure, both of the women who led the Democratic ticket were more qualified than the man they against. America has made it abundantly clear that is not ready to elect a woman in general and a black woman in particular. Gavin Newsome could have run on the exact same ticket with the same policy platform and messaging, and would have defeated Trump.

Newsome would’ve been trounced. Running a Californian as reckless as Newsome is a recipe for disaster. I don’t buy misogyny. Hilary is totally unlikable and there was no differentiation between Kamala and her boss. If Michele Obama had been running she would’ve whooped Trump’s ass. So I think you’re wrong and I think you and Briaket should feel very badly. 

[MrBig 5621]

2 hours ago, Satchel said:

Gavin Newsome could have run on the exact same ticket with the same policy platform and messaging, and would have defeated Trump.

Gavin would have been beaten by Trump. Obama would have kicked his ass. The problem with Dems is that they run candidates who are unlikeable. A logistically great campaign is useless if the candidate is meh. 

The only way to counter widespread propaganda is to put someone out there who can be liked. If you like someone, it’s less easier for people to fall for stupid lies peddled by the other side. Obama would have made Trump look like a fool while not sounding like a whiny little bitch. 

[staboner 5069]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

This. Even my quite feminist wife and daughter both agree “yeah…if we want to win, we need to run a white dude.” That’s just how it be.

[Biff Tannen 46138]

34 minutes ago, MrBig said:

Gavin would have been beaten by Trump. Obama would have kicked his ass. The problem with Dems is that they run candidates who are unlikeable. A logistically great campaign is useless if the candidate is meh. 

The only way to counter widespread propaganda is to put someone out there who can be liked. If you like someone, it’s less easier for people to fall for stupid lies peddled by the other side. Obama would have made Trump look like a fool while not sounding like a whiny little bitch. 

Obama was an amazing orator. I wish he could run again, but the constitution or something. I found Kamala very likable. Hillary, not at all. 

[MrBig 5621]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

Obama was an amazing orator. I wish he could run again, but the constitution or something. I found Kamala very likable. Hillary, not at all. 

Kamala is likable but she’s also very hateable. We can’t win unless we get an Obama level speaker as a candidate. 

[Satchel 6982]

4 hours ago, MrBig said:

Gavin would have been beaten by Trump. Obama would have kicked his ass. The problem with Dems is that they run candidates who are unlikeable. A logistically great campaign is useless if the candidate is meh. 

The only way to counter widespread propaganda is to put someone out there who can be liked. If you like someone, it’s less easier for people to fall for stupid lies peddled by the other side. Obama would have made Trump look like a fool while not sounding like a whiny little bitch. 

Likability, along with character are virtues that are no longer valued by voters. Do you Trump at all?

[MrBig 5621]

5 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Likability, along with character are virtues that are no longer valued by voters. Do you Trump at all?

No way. I just not been impressed by any Dems since Obama. I like Pete B but I doubt he could win. I like James Talarico and the way he speaks, but there is no way he ever makes it onto the national stage. Dems need a progressive religious guy like that to breakthrough to rural America. 

[Satchel 6982]

6 minutes ago, MrBig said:

No way. I just not been impressed by any Dems since Obama. I like Pete B but I doubt he could win. I like James Talarico and the way he speaks, but there is no way he ever makes it onto the national stage. Dems need a progressive religious guy like that to breakthrough to rural America. 

Rural America needs to start voting in their own interests and resist appeals that animate their racial anxieties and opposition to equity principles.

[Biff Tannen 46138]

5 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Rural America needs to start voting in their own interests and resist appeals that animate their racial anxieties and opposition to equity principles.

Put another way:  People need to stop being astoundingly fucking stupid.

But that is NOT in the cards.  And so here we are again.