what's your political 'attitude' nowadays?

[bolverk 29403]

1 hour ago, Johnny Sack said:

This is how the game has to be played now. We'll still have the old guard fantasizing about magically returning to the days of William F. Buckley calmly debating his foes, regaling everyone with his well-reasoned soliloquys, but those days are gone (and I wish to hell that they weren't). There's no playing nice anymore. GWB tried to play nice and spent 8 years getting called Hitler (and that was when the left was 1/10th as vicious as they are now). McCain was the "maverick" who made his bones "reaching across the aisle," and the second he clinched the Republican nomination he became a racist old cancer patient who would personally use coat hangers to abort babies in back-alleys. Mitt Romney was practically a caricature of a moderate, temperate Northeastern old-school Republican who cared more about playing nice with the other side than actually advancing conservatism, and he got turned into an early-1900s robber baron who literally gave a man cancer. 

The only way now is to throw their own depravities back into their faces, call them the degenerate sickos that they are, and use every power you have to destroy them, because they'll sure do the same to you.

You don't deserve it, but I'll give you the broad perspective of the "Left" on those three:

Bush was opposed for 1) invading Iraq on the basis of the lie/false intelligence that they had anything to do with 9/11, thereby causing the loss of thousands of lives and destabilizing an entire region, which led to 2) the strengthening of a domestic surveillance state while also 3) busting a balanced federal budget. 4) He essentially killed all efforts to mitigate the effects of climate change while also 5) stoked the culture wars by blocking efforts to bring about marriage equality.

McCain was not 1) demonized by the Left due to his "maverick" status and willingness to reach across the aisle as most Democrats saw that as a good thing. Instead, it was the "Right" who were unenthused by that prospect. I don't think anyone gave a whole lot of worry to the fact that he'd been previously diagnosed with skin cancer until 2) he selected Sarah Palin as his running mate. Prior to that point, I think there was a better shot than not that he would've beaten Obama.

Romney was seen primarily as a stiff personality, who 1) grew up in wealthy privilege, but chose to engage in maker/taker rhetoric that belittled struggling people who were just recovering from the worst economic downturn since the Great Recession, and 2) opposed Obamacare which was a virtual carbon copy of healthcare reform he championed and passed as governor of Massachusetts.

Trump is/was a complete garbage narcissistic blowhard and simpleton.

[Mdhorn 5911]

31 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I could get behind getting rid of the EC if social programs were capped at say, 10B per presidential term.  Promising college debt forgiveness and reparations to purchase votes is bullshit.  Oh, and no more executive orders.  

Agree somewhat--reparations could be paid for with the legalization of marijuana, but instead will get legalized with the majority of growing licenses going to wealthy white males.  Or for reparations, allow for reduced college or trade school.  Like it or not the fastest growing segment of the population is minorities and there will be a reckoning eventually--because numbers man.  And an educated populace isn't our enemy.  College debt for some universities now exceeds the financial gain.  I believe in state schools, community college and trade schools--and they don't need to be expensive.  The financial aid package involving grants and work study hasn't changed since the late 80s and early 90s.  That's $3000-3500 dollar annual FWS award for a $70k college.  The people at the top are making much higher salaries, especially since universities have adopted more of a corporate plan--and this further striates society.  The pretense is that this only affects minorities.  I'm for no more executive orders when we have fair and honest elections, along with nominating SCOTUS justices.

[tchookem 3900]

Here's my deal.  I am virulently anti-Republican, currently.
And, I like what most Democrats stand for in the most general ways.  Meaning, I like where their policies "come from," without necessarily liking the policy itself or its proffered implementation.  So I can't get behind them 100%, but I have no alternative.
If we had an even semi-functional political system, where the Republicans participated in good faith, we could actually debate these policies, "hone" them, and maybe actually solve some problems and get shit done.  But we don't.
It's a very unsatisfying place to be.
I am not 100% convinced the Trumpkins are going to succeed in establishing a fascist dictatorship.  But I admit that it is going to be a near thing and I am nervous about it.

It's like you read my mind, but put it much more eloquently than what was in my head.

[Anastasis 23394]

Romney was a shitty candidate to run at Obama based on bolverks second point, but the attacks against him viewed contemporaneously are pretty laughable based on what succeeded him. 
 

If the GOP had any sense they would run Romney in 2024 and he would win in a landslide.  

Edited April 21, 2022 by Anastasis

[fattyflattie 4636]

6 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

Agree somewhat--reparations could be paid for with the legalization of marijuana, but instead will get legalized with the majority of growing licenses going to wealthy white males.  Or for reparations, allow for reduced college or trade school.  Like it or not the fastest growing segment of the population is minorities and there will be a reckoning eventually--because numbers man.  And an educated populace isn't our enemy.  College debt for some universities now exceeds the financial gain.  I believe in state schools, community college and trade schools--and they don't need to be expensive.  The financial aid package involving grants and work study hasn't changed since the late 80s and early 90s.  That's $3000-3500 dollar annual FWS award for a $70k college.  The people at the top are making much higher salaries, especially since universities have adopted more of a corporate plan--and this further striates society.  The pretense is that this only affects minorities.  I'm for no more executive orders when we have fair and honest elections, along with nominating SCOTUS justices.

All Ok with me. Just make it fall under the financial limit and idgaf. I also dgaf if we have 5 liberal justices and 5 conservative justices.  Give and take is not the enemy 

[Mdhorn 5911]

7 minutes ago, bolverk said:

You don't deserve it, but I'll give you the broad perspective of the "Left" on those three:

Bush was opposed for 1) invading Iraq on the basis of the lie/false intelligence that they had anything to do with 9/11, thereby causing the loss of thousands of lives and destabilizing an entire region, which led to 2) the strengthening of a domestic surveillance state while also 3) busting a balanced federal budget. 4) He essentially killed all efforts to mitigate the effects of climate change while also 5) stoked the culture wars by blocking efforts to bring about marriage equality.

McCain was not 1) demonized by the Left due to his "maverick" status and willingness to reach across the aisle as most Democrats saw that as a good thing. Instead, it was the "Right" who were unenthused by that prospect. I don't think anyone gave a whole lot of worry to the fact that he'd been previously diagnosed with skin cancer until 2) he selected Sarah Palin as his running mate. Prior to that point, I think there was a better shot than not that he would've beaten Obama.

Romney was seen primarily as a stiff personality, who 1) grew up in wealthy privilege, but chose to engage in maker/taker rhetoric that belittled struggling people who were just recovering from the worst economic downturn since the Great Recession, and 2) opposed Obamacare which was a virtual carbon copy of healthcare reform he championed and passed as governor of Massachusetts.

Trump is/was a complete garbage narcissistic blowhard and simpleton.

The Republican party purged their center with Gingrich and Limbaugh, on down to Trump.  He doesn't choose to remember that portion.  He's willfully ignorant and what they're doing is undermining Democracy not strengthening it, which again, he ignores.  He's fine with Republicans rallying around white nationalists because that's what they've become while he ignores the obvious.  Bolverk, if you think you're going to educate a willful ignorant white nationalist, you're just wrong.     

[Anastasis 23394]

15 minutes ago, bolverk said:

You don't deserve it, but I'll give you the broad perspective of the "Left" on those three:

Bush was opposed for 1) invading Iraq on the basis of the lie/false intelligence that they had anything to do with 9/11, thereby causing the loss of thousands of lives and destabilizing an entire region, which led to 2) the strengthening of a domestic surveillance state while also 3) busting a balanced federal budget. 4) He essentially killed all efforts to mitigate the effects of climate change while also 5) stoked the culture wars by blocking efforts to bring about marriage equality.

McCain was not 1) demonized by the Left due to his "maverick" status and willingness to reach across the aisle as most Democrats saw that as a good thing. Instead, it was the "Right" who were unenthused by that prospect. I don't think anyone gave a whole lot of worry to the fact that he'd been previously diagnosed with skin cancer until 2) he selected Sarah Palin as his running mate. Prior to that point, I think there was a better shot than not that he would've beaten Obama.

Romney was seen primarily as a stiff personality, who 1) grew up in wealthy privilege, but chose to engage in maker/taker rhetoric that belittled struggling people who were just recovering from the worst economic downturn since the Great Recession, and 2) opposed Obamacare which was a virtual carbon copy of healthcare reform he championed and passed as governor of Massachusetts.

Trump is/was a complete garbage narcissistic blowhard and simpleton.

Oh, and bolverk you are totally delusional if you think that that the us political establishment broadly, both republicans and democrats, didn’t have skin in the game wrt Iraq. Revisionist history. But yes gwb and the folks should get run over it. Just don’t stop there. 
 

 

[bolverk 29403]

6 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Romney was a shitty candidate to run at Obama based on bolverks second point, but the attacks against him viewed contemporaneously are pretty laughable based on what succeeded him. 
 

If the GOP had any sense they would run Romney in 2024 and he would win in a landslide.  

Agreed. Romney would do quite well in the current environment, which likely won't be much improved from today.

1 minute ago, Mdhorn said:

The Republican party purged their center with Gingrich and Limbaugh, on down to Trump.  He doesn't choose to remember that portion.  He's willfully ignorant and what they're doing is undermining Democracy not strengthening it, which again, he ignores.  He's fine with Republicans rallying around white nationalists because that's what they've become while he ignores the obvious.  Bolverk, if you think you're going to educate a willful ignorant white nationalist, you're just wrong.     

Agreed. That's why I told him he didn't deserve the response, but I couldn't help myself.

[Mdhorn 5911]

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

All Ok with me. Just make it fall under the financial limit and idgaf. I also dgaf if we have 5 liberal justices and 5 conservative justices.  Give and take is not the enemy 

Well you won't have to worry about any of this because Democrats will eat each other.  While we're discussing preferences, let's add term limits.

[mchookem 16224]

33 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

They got all that thrown back at them by their own--McCain was called a loser by Trump because he got captured.  Trump shat on Purple Heart recipients, just like Limbaugh. There's no wringing sense out of any of Johnny's dishonest posts and I promise you won't miss one on ignore.  

i mean i think he legit accused the left of using 'McCain supports abortion!' as a negative attack.

 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

11 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

The Republican party purged their center with Gingrich and Limbaugh, on down to Trump.  He doesn't choose to remember that portion.  He's willfully ignorant and what they're doing is undermining Democracy not strengthening it, which again, he ignores.  He's fine with Republicans rallying around white nationalists because that's what they've become while he ignores the obvious.  Bolverk, if you think you're going to educate a willful ignorant white nationalist, you're just wrong.     

That’s a joke.  The GOP has moved very little from where it was 20-30 years ago.  The democrats have moved way to the left.  You have admitted and proud socialists who are party heavyweights.  
 

[aggie08 21434]

2 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

This is how the game has to be played now. We'll still have the old guard fantasizing about magically returning to the days of William F. Buckley calmly debating his foes, regaling everyone with his well-reasoned soliloquys, but those days are gone (and I wish to hell that they weren't). There's no playing nice anymore. GWB tried to play nice and spent 8 years getting called Hitler (and that was when the left was 1/10th as vicious as they are now). McCain was the "maverick" who made his bones "reaching across the aisle," and the second he clinched the Republican nomination he became a racist old cancer patient who would personally use coat hangers to abort babies in back-alleys. Mitt Romney was practically a caricature of a moderate, temperate Northeastern old-school Republican who cared more about playing nice with the other side than actually advancing conservatism, and he got turned into an early-1900s robber baron who literally gave a man cancer. 

The only way now is to throw their own depravities back into their faces, call them the degenerate sickos that they are, and use every power you have to destroy them, because they'll sure do the same to you.

This man believes these things. Like in his bones. Cheney and co. "played nice." It was the left who tarnished McCain's legacy. You almost have to admire the willful "head in the sand" myopia.

[Mdhorn 5911]

1 minute ago, mchookem said:

i mean i think he legit accused the left of using 'McCain supports abortion!' as a negative attack.

 

There's no debating a cult.  Logic isn't their tool--the party of morality and fake religiosity rallied around a man that lied daily for a living, ran on being able to shoot someone on 5th avenue and spoke to grabbing 'em by the pussy.  Trump could use one of his aborted embryo's as a necktie and they'd grovel to kiss his ass.   

[Willfully Horn 7916]

1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

I could get behind getting rid of the EC if social programs were capped at say, 10B per presidential term.  Promising college debt forgiveness and reparations to purchase votes is bullshit.  Oh, and no more executive orders.  

Zero percent, maybe one percent loans for college. That seems like a fair compromise. It isn't immoral to publicly fund education, however. What was immoral was putting a predatory lender in charge of education .

[Anastasis 23394]

50 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Romney would do quite well in the current environment, which likely won't be much improved from today.

Seems like the Obama/Romney debate exchange is just a political ad waiting to happen. If you need an Orange Man one to round the universe, go with Helsinki. If I was GOP I would do everything in my power to put Romney in position as the primary candidate and try to clear the deck of the scrubs. 

 

 

[bolverk 29403]

48 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

That’s a joke.  The GOP has moved very little from where it was 20-30 years ago.  The democrats have moved way to the left.  You have admitted and proud socialists who are party heavyweights.  
 

Show us that 10-item scale of political values.

[aggie08 21434]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

Seems like the Obama/Romney debate exchange is just a political ad waiting to happen. If you need an Orange Man one to round the universe, go with Helsinki. If I was GOP I would do everything in my power to put Romney in position as the primary candidate and try to clear the deck of the scrubs. 

 

 

In what reality are you living that the GOP would ever try to get behind Romney in 2024, or that modern Republican voters would turn out to give him the nomination?

[Biff Tannen 45499]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

If I was GOP I would do everything in my power to put Romney in position as the primary candidate and try to clear the deck of the scrubs. 

He would lose almost half of the GOP base and pick up only a little from the middle/left.  It would be a slaughter.  The toothpaste is out of the tube.

[Anastasis 23394]

7 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

In what reality are you living that the GOP would ever try to get behind Romney in 2024, or that modern Republican voters would turn out to give him the nomination?

The reality where I was trying to take control of the executive branch. If your response is that the GOP is disinclined to deal with reality, I have been on that ship for 20+ years.

[bolverk 29403]

4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Seems like the Obama/Romney debate exchange is just a political ad waiting to happen. If you need an Orange Man one to round the universe, go with Helsinki. If I was GOP I would do everything in my power to put Romney in position as the primary candidate and try to clear the deck of the scrubs. 

 

 

In a sane world where positioning Romney to appeal to the majority of the US electorate with a move to the middle, that would make sense from a strategic standpoint if the GOP weren't what it is today but Biden is already somewhat occupying that space. But, putting Romney and Biden head-to-head, I'd wager on the former at this point.

I just don't see how Romney could possibly make it out of the Republican primary where only the most hardcore conservative candidate can even get to that point. Doing away with partisan primaries and having some sort of ranked choice system of mixed ideologies/parties seems like the only way to move the finalists into a place to win if you're looking for parity.

At the same time, you do have to admit that the more moderate Dem primary candidates seem to win more often than not.

[Anastasis 23394]

11 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

He would lose almost half of the GOP base and pick up only a little from the middle/left.  It would be a slaughter.  The toothpaste is out of the tube.

Maybe, maybe not. 

Desantis will most likely be the nominee.

But I think that Romney can make a deep run. 

[aggie08 21434]

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Maybe, maybe not. 

Desantis will most likely be the nominee.

But I think that Romney can make a deep run. 

Someone who went against Trump directly won't be able to "make a deep run" in Republican primaries for another two decades.

[bolverk 29403]

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Maybe, maybe not. 

Desantis will most likely be the nominee.

But I think that Romney can make a deep run. 

I would enthusiastically applaud Romney winning the GOP primary just to bring back some semblance of sanity to the next election.

[Anastasis 23394]

12 minutes ago, bolverk said:

I just don't see how Romney could possibly make it out of the Republican primary where only the most hardcore conservative candidate can even get to that point.

I don't disagree.  The dems showed that they know how to roll up when needed behind their "establishment" candidate to exclude their "extremist" candidate when push comes to shove. 

Edited April 21, 2022 by Anastasis

[Anastasis 23394]

1 minute ago, bolverk said:

I would enthusiastically applaud Romney winning the GOP primary just to bring back some semblance of sanity to the next election.

I think Romney would handle Joe or Kamala head to head in 2024. Could he fend off Desantis or Trump in GOP primaries in 2024? Very much less sure. Biden or Romney run in 2016 and I think that we are looking at a very different political landscape, fwiw.

[George Clooney 378]

DeSantis will likely be the next president. Unfortunately for Ron, his short stature (5'9") will likely be a legitimate hurdle to overcome. Perhaps that's why he's often so angry.

[Anastasis 23394]

1 minute ago, George Clooney said:

DeSantis will likely be the next president. 

Probably what we are looking at. In the prediction markets I am no on Trump and no on Biden maxed out atm. I still think that Romney is worth a flier to make the stage on the GOP side, but I have lost a lot of money in prediction markets expecting rational behavior from the GOP (wrt Kavanaugh confirmation). 

[Paul Wesley 3277]

There was polling of Republicans in January where 54% said they supported party over Trump, and 36% said they supported Trump over the party.  A solid majority of Republicans still firmly believe the big lie DESPITE NO FUCKING EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER.  

The rightwing backlash to a Mitt nomination would be ****LOUD****.  They do not forgive him for his impeachment vote.  If he's the nominee, either a huge % of their voters will stay home, or (more likely) we'd get a Trumpkin (or Trump himself) as a 3rd party candidate.

Republicans cannot win national elections without the lunatics that make up somewhere between 35-50% of their voters, and it's scary to consider the ramifications of that.

The only actual issues that they have real-world policy proposals for are banning abortion and scapegoating immigrants.  It's been 25+ fucking years since they actually talked about fixing healthcare.   I don't hear meaningful proposals for helping the middle class, addressing wild income disparities, educating children, or articulating a coherent foreign policy.

For a solid fucking decade now, conservative media ignores nearly every real issue in favor of Seth Rich, pizzagate, birthers, bamboo ballots, Hunter's laptop, relentless anti-Fauci conspiracies, more Hunter's laptop, Jewish space lasers, Tucker Carlson's open white supremacy, "hey look, let's imagine we found more imaginary things on that imaginary laptop," and jaw-dropping levels of stupidity from the My Pillow guy.... all of whom have banded together to accuse anyone who opposes them of grooming children.

Those people are abso-fucking-lutely not voting for Mitt.  

[zzzz 39]

5 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

McCain was the "maverick" who made his bones "reaching across the aisle," and the second he clinched the Republican nomination he became a racist old cancer patient who would personally use coat hangers to abort babies in back-alleys. Mitt Romney was practically a caricature of a moderate, temperate Northeastern old-school Republican who cared more about playing nice with the other side than actually advancing conservatism, and he got turned into an early-1900s robber baron who literally gave a man cancer. 

McCain and Romney are now scorned as RINOs because they didn't put Trump before America. Just like Liz Cheney.

The GOP has become a willing vehicle for tyranny.

[Paul Wesley 3277]

I'll bet Fox News and all the rightwing talkshow hosts *combined* haven't spent 5 minutes in all of 2022 talking about how to fix a broken healthcare system.

Contrast that with several hours a day talking about how catastrophic it would be if a high school teacher ever mentions that 250 years of brutal human enslavement ran a wee bit contrary to the values that America espoused at its founding.

[gmr548 16517]

I think Romney would handle Joe or Kamala head to head in 2024. Could he fend off Desantis or Trump in GOP primaries in 2024? Very much less sure. Biden or Romney run in 2016 and I think that we are looking at a very different political landscape, fwiw.

Yeah, there’s always a lot of what ifs, but in the past six years especially.

[horn4life 3755]

I think the main thing that is continually overlooked is that the GOP lurched hard to the right.  Very, very hard, to where lies are now truth.

When you realize for example that Obamacare was actually based on "what was formerly a conservative plan of healthcare' is fairly illustrative.  The Dems moved toward the GOP and the GOP turn and moved farther away.  

Pretending as Johnny Sack does that compromise is bad and that it's only Crips and Bloods shows how broken the GOP is from a moral perspective.  There is no compromise, there is only winning, and the cost to democracy be damned.  Support anyone with an (R) behind their name.  Hell today Hilter could run for the House and could you honestly say that there would be any pushback from the Republican party if it looked like Hitler might take a seat with a (D) next to it?  The party is exactly what Donald Trump made it into.  Where Trump could shoot a man in the middle of 5th Avenue and he would not lose his support. Instead, the rationalizations  and whatabouts would flow.  Johnny shows us exactly what the GOP is today.  

 

 

Edited April 21, 2022 by horn4life

[Steamboat1874 4032]

On 4/19/2022 at 11:24 PM, Hookah Horns said:

Lately I'm mostly pissed at how inept the Ds are at the combat that is modern politics and their general failure to effectively counter the Magat insanity. 

This !

[Chuckie Finster 22600]

I had very low expectations for the country as a whole on January 5th, but as I watched the events of the next day unfold I thought, "well, at least we're done with Trump."

The fact that he is not only still a part of the political discourse, but an active party leader, is beyond my lowest expectations and a confirmation that we are irreversibly fucked.

[Hookah Horns 3082]

9 hours ago, Anastasis said:

I think Romney would handle Joe or Kamala head to head in 2024. Could he fend off Desantis or Trump in GOP primaries in 2024? Very much less sure. Biden or Romney run in 2016 and I think that we are looking at a very different political landscape, fwiw.

Trump and Rhonda Santis would absolutely crush Romney, no doubt about it in my mind. 

[Hookah Horns 3082]

1 minute ago, Chuckie Finster said:

I had very low expectations for the country as a whole on January 5th, but as I watched the events of the next day unfold I thought, "well, at least we're done with Trump."

The fact that he is not only still a part of the political discourse, but an active party leader, is beyond my lowest expectations and a confirmation that we are irreversibly fucked.

Many of us have had that thought countless times, for me going back to pussygrabgate. Trump is a cockroach. 

[Anastasis 23394]

7 minutes ago, Hookah Horns said:

Trump and Rhonda Santis would absolutely crush Romney, no doubt about it in my mind. 

To be honest, unless there is a significant ground shift, Don Jr. would probably crush Romney. 

 

[Brisketexan 104628]

Just now, Anastasis said:

To be honest, unless there is a significant ground shift, Don Jr. would probably crush Romney. 

 

Anastasis is a pile of shitmucus, but he ain't wrong about this.

The GQP is only going to move in one direction: batshittier, Trumpier.  Stop thinking of it as a political party, and start thinking of it as a cult, run and manipulated to serve its sociopathic leaders, manned by a mixed crew of the mentally ill, stupid and gullible, and depraved and greedy.  Imagine "what would a cult do?" and you can 100% predict every move the "party" makes.

[Biff Tannen 45499]

1 hour ago, horn4life said:

I think the main thing that is continually overlooked is that the GOP lurched hard to the right.  Very, very hard, to where lies are now truth.

When you realize for example that Obamacare was actually based on "what was formerly a conservative plan of healthcare' is fairly illustrative.  The Dems moved toward the GOP and the GOP turn and moved farther away.  

Pretending as Johnny Sack does that compromise is bad and that it's only Crips and Bloods shows how broken the GOP is from a moral perspective.  There is no compromise, there is only winning, and the cost to democracy be damned.  Support anyone with an (R) behind their name.  Hell today Hilter could run for the House and could you honestly say that there would be any pushback from the Republican party if it looked like Hitler might take a seat with a (D) next to it?  The party is exactly what Donald Trump made it into.  Where Trump could shoot a man in the middle of 5th Avenue and he would not lose his support. Instead, the rationalizations  and whatabouts would flow.  Johnny shows us exactly what the GOP is today.  

 

 

But Sack showed us a graph that says it's actually the DEMS that moved left while the Rs stayed closer to the middle!  I have to believe the graph!

[Johnny Sack 8397]

17 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

But Sack showed us a graph that says it's actually the DEMS that moved left while the Rs stayed closer to the middle!  I have to believe the graph!

No democrat can tell you what a woman is -- Jesus Obama was anti gay marriage when he ran for President in 2008.  Democrats have unashamed socialists as party heavyweights and thought leaders.

Dems in Dallas, Harris and Travis counties have a real hard time winning any primary unless they are the right color or sex. 

It is either a straight up lie or self delusion to claim Republicans have veered more from the center than Democrats the last 20-30 years.

It's largely white liberals causing this extreme shift to the left.

Some observations from one of Obama's staffers (and a socialist) -- data scientist David Shor:

 

At the subgroup level, Democrats gained somewhere between half a percent to one percent among non-college whites and roughly 7 percent among white college graduates (which is kind of crazy). Our support among African Americans declined by something like one to 2 percent. And then Hispanic support dropped by 8 to 9 percent....One implication of these shifts is that education polarization went up and racial polarization went down.

....What happened in 2020 is that nonwhite conservatives voted for Republicans at higher rates; they started voting more like white conservatives....Clinton voters with conservative views on crime, policing, and public safety were far more likely to switch to Trump than voters with less conservative views on those issues. And having conservative views on those issues was more predictive of switching from Clinton to Trump than having conservative views on any other issue-set was.

....This lines up pretty well with trends we saw during the campaign. In the summer, following the emergence of “defund the police” as a nationally salient issue, support for Biden among Hispanic voters declined. So I think you can tell this microstory: We raised the salience of an ideologically charged issue that millions of nonwhite voters disagreed with us on. And then, as a result, these conservative Hispanic voters who’d been voting for us despite their ideological inclinations started voting more like conservative whites.

....Over the last four years, white liberals have become a larger and larger share of the Democratic Party....And since white voters are sorting on ideology more than nonwhite voters, we’ve ended up in a situation where white liberals are more left wing than Black and Hispanic Democrats on pretty much every issue: taxes, health care, policing, and even on racial issues or various measures of “racial resentment.” So as white liberals increasingly define the party’s image and messaging, that’s going to turn off nonwhite conservative Democrats and push them against us.

....If Democrats elevate issues or theories that a large minority of nonwhite voters reject, it’s going to be hard to keep those margins....Black conservatives and Hispanic conservatives don’t actually buy into a lot of these intellectual theories of racism. They often have a very different conception of how to help the Black or Hispanic community than liberals do. And I don’t think we can buy our way out of this trade-off. Most voters are not liberals. If we polarize the electorate on ideology — or if nationally prominent Democrats raise the salience of issues that polarize the electorate on ideology — we’re going to lose a lot of votes.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/03/david-shor-2020-democrats-autopsy-hispanic-vote-midterms-trump-gop.html

[Serak The Preparer 3424]

@Johnny Sack - you have said multiple times there are socialists in the Democratic party leadership. Can you list just one or two of these leaders and/or explain what you mean by socialism? For example AOC (who I suspect is one of the people you are thinking of) believes in Medicare for all, which can certainly be described as socialist healthcare, but she doesn't advocate for communally / governmentally owned means of production.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

I said there are socialist Dem heavyweights and thought leaders.  AOC, Sanders, Tlaib, Cori Bush.

Are these individuals, who are members of the Democrat Socialists of America, not party heavyweights and thought leaders?

You think Bernie Sanders would have had a snowball's chance in hell of being a serious primary contender 20 years ago?  Or 30 years ago?

[Brisketexan 104628]

On issues such as "support a violent fascist overthrow of the government," and "support right-wing legislatures being able to cancel out the popular vote and declare their chosen candidate the winner," the polling shows that these are winning positions among the American "right."

Every other issue is just details.  Any party that supports fascist overthrow of the government and voiding the vote of the people is so far right as to be off the scale.  That's the issue the johnnys of the world want to skip right past, when in reality, it's literally the only issue that matters.  No policy debate or difference matters if one side simply seizes power and imposes their will on the citizens.

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11668]

15 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Dems in Dallas, Harris and Travis counties have a real hard time winning any primary unless they are the right color or sex. 

lol. i think that's one thing both parties have in common

[fattyflattie 4636]

11 hours ago, bolverk said:

At the same time, you do have to admit that the more moderate Dem primary candidates seem to win more often than not.

That’s because middle of the road Rs will cross over and vote them into office. Because outside of this boards hyperbole that every R is a nazi, the real world exists. 

[RomaVicta 29794]

16 hours ago, horn4life said:

I stand corrected. George Herbert Walker Bush was indeed the last GOP Presidential candidate to initially win the office of the Presidency with both the Popular vote, and the Electoral vote.  The year was... 1988.

That's interesting isn't it?  That for almost 25 years the GOP has not had a new Presidential candidate that could win the popular vote.  But on the bright side the GOP has had two Presidents who initially won the Presidency with a clear minority of the vote.

I just wish the GOP would occasionally actually solve a REAL PROBLEM, rather than always finding a solution for an IMAGINARY PROBLEM they promote heavily with messaging. I really wish the Republican party was the party it was when I was a loyal member.  Now it's just a shell with fake principles with a shit ton of racism and bigotry.  Which is probably why they are a minority party, that relies on misinformation and voter suppression. Sad to me that is the case.  Too bad the GOP has shit ideas.  Dems have a lot of shit ideas too.  But they don't latch onto absolute lies and pretend they are truth.  THAT is very fucking dangerous, and gets us traitors like Trump elected to office.

They can't really even attempt to solve a problem because:

1. They've campaigned for decades that government cannot do anything good.
2. They've starved government agencies (passing the savings onto the rich) making government less effective in accordance with the scriptures.

This combination gives them the time and power to devote their full efforts to hate campaigns created to mask their greed and disregard for the US. 

It all started one Morning in America when a smiling old guy on a horse rode into the arena. Idiot World was in love. Malign World was in charge.

[Don Johnson 4745]

Romney was painted as a racist and would be again.  He's going to put blacks "back in chains."  That's the playbook.

[Serak The Preparer 3424]

6 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I said there are socialist Dem heavyweights and thought leaders.  AOC, Sanders, Tlaib, Cori Bush.

Are these individuals, who are members of the Democrat Socialists of America, not party heavyweights and thought leaders?

You think Bernie Sanders would have had a snowball's chance in hell of being a serious primary contender 20 years ago?  Or 30 years ago?

The Democratic Socialists of America are not socialists, though, just like The People Republic of China is not a republics state. I would agree with you that the people you mentioned are party heavyweights and/or thought leaders. However they do not want to seize the means of production. If you look at the website they do want collective healthcare and collectively-owned utilities and transportation. We are already largely have collectively-owned transportation. Ports and airports are publicly owned. The large majority of roads are publicly owned. Busses, subways, etc. Utilities are more evenly distributed between private and public but again this is not a giant shift towards true socialism.

You explicitly claimed that "You have admitted and proud socialists who are party heavyweights.". If your evidence of being an admitted and proud socialist is membership in the DSA, you are being disingenuous at best.

[Michael Knight 12898]

I'm about here

 

 

[Paul Wesley 3277]

Those graphs...  There has been a measurable Democratic shift to the left on many issues, and you could reflect that shift in a graph.  e.g.  Should a gay couple be allowed to get married?  Should America's healthcare system cover some basic level of care for all its citizens?  Is capital punishment - as currently practiced in the states - problematic in terms of race or social class?  

If you want to discuss those shifts, then let's all admit that we could illustrate the same shifts for the past 300 years.  e.g.  Should women vote?  Should people with dark skin be enslaved and treated as property?  Do we need national civil rights laws ensuring equal access to voting?

I'm sure you're proud of the R's non-movement.  Congrats, I guess.

It would be a lot harder to illustrate in a graph where the Republicans have moved, because *their* movement has been one where you altogether quit talking about healthcare, infrastructure, and educational standards, and instead endlessly discuss fake laptops, anti-vaccine conspiracies, unvarnished white supremacy, and - most importantly - imaginary massive voter fraud that gives you justification to overthrow democracy.