Pot kettle black. What you call a moron I see as someone who knows a con, a sociopath, and a party of lying propaganda spreaders when he sees them. You may not like what he says, but the bigger question is why the GOP considers a sociopath as their chosen one.
The right is banking on two things: -Voter suppression/gerrymandering -Liberal let down/complacency I think Georgia is a good example of voter suppression backfiring when it’s blatant. When you couple that fact that it supercharges the left, and with the fact that the right’s number one agenda will be how Trumps 2020 loss was rigged... you’ll potentially see the opposing of what normally happens in a mid term. So yeah right now I think the left is enjoying a nice well deserved break, the muscle memory Trumpism created should kick back into gear next year fairly easily imo... but we’ll see. We also don’t know the extent to which Republicans will go to use their new powers they gave themselves to overturn elections. That’s really the big unknown and really the biggest threat to our democracy. So yeah if the Republicans overturn elections sure... it could be a “red wave”... which will be something to be proud of if you’re a Republican. Think of all the people who came before that died to give everyone the right to vote, and just like that, one party is so paranoid about losing power because their policies suck that they’ll spit on the graves all the generations that came before us and kick the table over like little babies. It really is something to behold.
Way too early to determine how voters will feel next year, not to mention the voter suppression battle going on right now. Always tough to say what will happen in a midterm, especially this one as I think the traditional midterm flip-flop may not happen...as long as Dems don’t piss people off. Also, as far as the reference article, that Os posted, it seems to be making a lot of assumptions and leaving out some key parts. One, it focuses on the fact that responders don’t want taxes raised, except the question asked was whether they wanted income taxes raised. Biden’s already mentioned that income taxes would not be raised and that this would be paid for by a corporate tax raise. Two, it focuses on a few more-leaning red districts...that have Dem reps...and assuming that the more-leaning blue districts involved would likely follow suit. Big assumption, but who really knows at this point (and the article did throw that out there at the beginning). Another thing is that The poll is a Harris poll, which according to 538, is right-leaning and almost as right-leaning as Rasmussen. (1.1 compare to 1.5).
While I disagree with the idea that "progressives" are "captured by an upper-class elite for whom anti-racism is now an all-dominating philosophy," that statement being incredibly broad and misleading, in my opinion, here's some of the "more at the link" that I think is worth posting: There was a time when progressives were not so enthralled by the whims of one social class. They aspired to talk like ordinary people and persuade the vast majority, not the elites who run our universities and corporate HR departments. Take, for instance, the civil rights leader Jesse Jackson. Having grown up poor and cut his teeth in the civil rights movement, Jackson has always thought hard about building diverse coalitions and persuading the largest number of people possible to support his positions. Messaging he used during his 1988 bid for the Democratic nomination for the presidency sits with me: "Most poor people are not lazy. They are not Black. They are not brown. They are mostly white and female and young," he said during a speech at the Democratic convention. "But whether white, Black, or brown, a hungry baby's belly turned inside out is the same color: Color it pain, color it hurt, color it agony." Rather than argue for the interest of one racial group or another, Jackson was preaching solidarity. He was telling the audience that people of all skin colors should care about hunger, not just because they should care about their fellow man but because they, too, could be one of those hungry people one day. It's that kind of messaging that progressives should use to pass their policies. Zaid Jilani is a journalist who hails from Atlanta, Georgia. He has previously worked as a reporter-blogger for ThinkProgress, United Republic, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, and Alternet. He is the cohost of the podcast "Extremely Offline." The views in this article are the author's own. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opin...berals-quit-it-opinion/ar-BB1gxbxn?li=BBnbfcL
"Biden Bungles His Crisis": https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-bungles-his-crisis-11623277137?mod=hp_opin_pos_2 Biden Bungles His Crisis The Manchin mess and spending spree are a White House misreading the political moment. By Daniel Henninger June 9, 2021 6:18 pm ET Joe Biden was Barack Obama’s vice president-elect in 2008 when future White House colleague Rahm Emanuel posited what became a truism of Democratic politics: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that [is] it’s an opportunity to do things that you think you could not before.” On the other hand: A crisis is a terrible thing to bungle. With the Covid pandemic, President Biden got his crisis. It is an understatement for the ages to say he has used this crisis to do things no Democrat has attempted in more than 50 years. The questions are everywhere this week: Has Mr. Biden wasted his crisis? Are the Democrats on course to lose the House next year (and not beyond imagining, the Senate)? Is the Biden agenda disappearing up the flue of Joe Manchin’s chimney? My short answers are yes, yes and yes. Mr. Biden misread the crisis, his party will lose the House, and his and the left’s ham-handed attacks on a Democratic senator from red West Virginia have put Mr. Biden’s domestic policies at risk of implosion. How could so much presidential ambition go wrong so quickly? On May 28, Mr. Biden released his self-defining $6 trillion budget. Two weeks later this is where we are: His negotiations with Republicans have collapsed, progressives are freaking out over Mr. Manchin’s opposition to breaking the filibuster and passing the S.1 voting bill (a New Republic article argues “Yes, Take This Seriously: It’s Time to Kill the Senate”), and the political calender is ticking off the summer days before members of Congress desert Washington—and the Biden agenda—to campaign back home for Numero Uno’s re-election. The grandiose Biden policy agenda wasn’t born yesterday. Clearly, progressive Democrats thought in November that Trump fatigue would produce bigger margins than a 50-50 Senate and a slim House majority. But reality checks have never stopped the American left. After gaining so much ground inside the post-Obama Democratic Party, this has become a determined, bloody-minded faction, and it may be willing to pay a high political price, including loss of House control, to turn the Biden entitlements and taxes into federal law this year. Ideas come and go. Laws are embedded. The most intriguing political straw of public doubt I’ve seen recently was inside the May 26 Fox poll: “More voters say socialism is a major threat to the stability of the U.S. today: 49% feel that way, up from 39% percent in 2019.” Among independents, fear-of-socialism sentiment rose 17 points. That’s a huge move among swing voters. Look at the then-and-now dates on the poll—2019 and 2021. They bracket the coronavirus pandemic. Call this the Covid Effect—hard-to-predict shifts in public attitudes from the pre-pandemic status quo. The year 2020 was a maelstrom of events: Covid, omnipresent Donald Trump, George Floyd, the summer protests-c*m-riots, a close election, the new year starting with a Capitol riot. Amid 2020, the original Biden campaign plan seemed sound: Go for normal and run to the center. But after winning, “normal” somehow got replaced with (in Mr. Biden’s phrase) “go big.” No full explanation exists for why a safety-first political lifer jumped so far left. Sly Bernie Sanders put out the idea that Mr. Biden might equal FDR. The media was cheering. Hmmm, maybe he could join, or surpass, Barack Obama in the Democratic pantheon. So, like LBJ’s unwasted political crisis in 1964, Mr. Biden went beyond big on big government, proposing to spend trillions on new, permanent entitlements: $200 billion for universal pre-K; $225 billion for federal child care; $225 billion for 12 weeks of guaranteed family leave (eventually paying $4,000 a month); $109 billion for free community college. Plus saving the planet, expanding unions and infrastructure to the horizon—all explicitly “paid for” with new taxes. It looks increasingly like Mr. Biden and his allies on the left have misread the moment. The American public has just spent a year committing unprecedented acts of self-discipline. They entered 2021 looking for post-pandemic stability. Suddenly, they get this Democratic fiscal extravaganza, including the oddity of mass-mailing $1,400 checks even to people who held well-paying jobs. Instead of a new progressive revolution, Mr. Biden may be reviving some old saws, such as the burden this outsized debt will impose on one’s children or grandchildren. If intimidation by progressives and the media fails to force Sens. Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona to support blowing up the filibuster, the Democrats’ default strategy is more coals into the inferno: a massive reconciliation bill of spending, taxes, cats and dogs. Mr. Biden and the Democrats won’t turn back now, but the political price for misreading the pandemic crisis could be high. House control is probably gone. Four Senate Democrats running for re-election won their last races by less than 3%: New Hampshire’s Maggie Hassan (0.1%), Nevada’s Catherine Cortez Masto (2.4%), Arizona’s Mark Kelly (2.4%) and Georgia’s Raphael Warnock (2%). Joe Biden was right the first time. Voters did want normalcy. They may keep voting until they get it. Appeared in the June 10, 2021, print edition.
The Marxists wing of the Democrat party has taken over the Nevada Democrat Party, which was staffed by the Harry Reid crowd and the establishment Democrat party types: Infighting grips Nevada Democrats ahead of midterms
It should be no surprise that the Democrats don't move in lockstep and this should've been expected. From what I've been hearing is that there are more Democrats who are uneasy about doing away with the filibuster and Manchin is the public face of it. None of that means that the Biden Presidency is a failure, if anything just what he's done so far has been successful compared to many other administrations. Even with 2022 coming up there still is time for negotiations and things to change. I think HR1 might be dead but the John Lewis Act does seem more possible. Infrastructure is far from dead and if it came down to it I still think that Biden could pass a much smaller but still significant infrastructure bill that might garner Republican support. Just this past week there was a very bipartisan bill improving US competitiveness passed in the Senate.
They already passed a trillion dollar spending bill. The next one should be a bonus but is treated like a given since they have the gall to try. We'll see in another year what pans out.
"Democrats are in danger of losing their advantage with minority voters. That's good for democracy": https://theweek.com/politics/1001417/ilhan-omar-identity-politics-minefield Joel Mathis JUNE 10, 2021 Democrats are in danger of losing their advantage with minority voters. That's good for democracy. Democrats appear to be at increasing risk of losing their advantages with minority voters. A new post-mortem on the 2020 election compiled by a trio of advocacy groups warns the party could backslide with Black, Hispanic and Asian American voters because it treats those groups as "monolithic." That's scary for Democrats. From a small-d democratic point of view, though, the report is excellent news. All too often parties and activists treat our politics like a demographic Rubik's Cube — move the right colors into the right place and everything will come together. It's the logic of "The Emerging Democratic Majority," which posited (in part) that America's increasing diversity would move the electorate leftward. That notion had its mirror image in "The Flight 93 Election," the Trumpist manifesto in which the pseudonymous author lamented that "the ceaseless importation of Third World foreigners" means "that the electorate grows more left, more Democratic, less Republican, less republican, and less traditionally American with every cycle." Reality might be more fluid and nuanced. There's a strong conservative tradition among African Americans — think Malcolm X — and more than a few Latino voters have strong anti-socialist sentiments that make them suspicious of Bernie Sanders types. Even these observations might be too broad. As the post-mortem report notes, there can be differing values and priorities between "Hispanic men in the Rio Grande Valley, oil and gas workers in New Mexico, [and] Latinas in South Florida." If minority voters are up for grabs, Democrats would have to thoughtfully fight for their support, instead of taking votes for granted. On the other side, Republicans could find growing diversity in their ranks muddies the white backlash politics that have driven the party during the Trump era — and the party's impulse to constrict the electoratemight become less pressing if GOP officials took seriously the notion they can and should compete for Black, Latino, and Asian voters. Either of these outcomes would be good for our vulnerable democracy, which depends on dynamism and persuasion to thrive — and suffers when parties assume a group of voters is, or isn't, permanently in their corner. The 2020 Democratic post-mortem, designed as a warning, might just offer a glimpse at a hopeful way forward.
They think she's Trump without actually doing Trump-like things? Maybe she needs jugs full of spraytan, fake blonde hair and hormone therapy to be liked by cons.
