Democrats

Gern Blansten

Taunting trump absolutely does work...many examples

Go Beavers

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

They are losing men because one party says ‘men be better and step up’ and the other is saying, ‘hey be your unrestrained self and do/say what you want’ and then prove that being leading by that same example. 

Like, how do you combat that? 

By offering voters something they might appeal to them? The problem is democrats are inside this bubble. The first few other replies, picture of an older R voter with their gun toting anti vaxxer. The exact opposite of what Silvers  point was, and something about a boxer…. Dems are not appealing to a large segment of voters, but it possibly can’t be their fault?

More from Silver….

“ I know it might not seem related at first, Carrie, but I’m thinking about your question in the context of the debate Democrats are having about how to win back young men. (Gen Z men actually voted majority Trump last year.) One Democratic group, for instance, recently proposed a $20 million initiative called “Speaking With American Men”. Adding fuel to the fire is the Catalist report I discussed last week that found an expanding gender gap, especially among young voters and Black and Latino men. In fact, essentially all of the decline that Harris experienced relative to Biden came from men

“How does this relate to the River and the Village? For those who haven’t read On the Edge, the Village is my term for basically the progressive establishment, which is consensus-driven and risk-averse rather than individualistic. Its quintessential institutions are Harvard and the New York Times, but this attitude is also very much reflected in Democratic political campaigns. Conversely, the River is for analytical, contrarian, risk-seeking types: think Silicon Valley, Wall Street and Las Vegas. Until fairly recently, the River mostly saw itself as being apolitical or part of a third, vaguely libertarian-ish “Grey Tribe”. But a faction of the River — not all of it by any means, but a prominent faction associated with people like Elon Musk, Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen — has become heavily invested in the conservative political movement over the past few years.

How should the dems respond is a reasonable question, but it starts with the question of why are people drawn to the republican message of anti-feminism, anti equal access, the politicization of gender, and the promotion of outdated, rigid gender roles. 

gimmesometruth27

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

I love the claim “religiosity, marital status, and patriotism, all of which are associated with better mental health”. 

Interesting how that doesn’t bear out in the real world outside of the US. I simply can’t reconcile the angry white male who wears tshirts like the one above as having superior mental health over even a gnat. 

Where was that claim?  I must have missed it.  I will say that I would agree that a HAPPY marriage would certainly be connected to better mental health.  Or any happy partnership.  I think humans need companions naturally.  

that dude in that picture is either divorced or incel. no normal, untraumatized person would wear a shirt like that. its like walking into a room of strangers and just announcing with a megaphone that you are an asshole. normal people don't do that.

benjs

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

They are losing men because one party says ‘men be better and step up’ and the other is saying, ‘hey be your unrestrained self and do/say what you want’ and then prove that being leading by that same example. 

Like, how do you combat that? 

By offering voters something they might appeal to them? The problem is democrats are inside this bubble. The first few other replies, picture of an older R voter with their gun toting anti vaxxer. The exact opposite of what Silvers  point was, and something about a boxer…. Dems are not appealing to a large segment of voters, but it possibly can’t be their fault?

More from Silver….

“ I know it might not seem related at first, Carrie, but I’m thinking about your question in the context of the debate Democrats are having about how to win back young men. (Gen Z men actually voted majority Trump last year.) One Democratic group, for instance, recently proposed a $20 million initiative called “Speaking With American Men”. Adding fuel to the fire is the Catalist report I discussed last week that found an expanding gender gap, especially among young voters and Black and Latino men. In fact, essentially all of the decline that Harris experienced relative to Biden came from men

“How does this relate to the River and the Village? For those who haven’t read On the Edge, the Village is my term for basically the progressive establishment, which is consensus-driven and risk-averse rather than individualistic. Its quintessential institutions are Harvard and the New York Times, but this attitude is also very much reflected in Democratic political campaigns. Conversely, the River is for analytical, contrarian, risk-seeking types: think Silicon Valley, Wall Street and Las Vegas. Until fairly recently, the River mostly saw itself as being apolitical or part of a third, vaguely libertarian-ish “Grey Tribe”. But a faction of the River — not all of it by any means, but a prominent faction associated with people like Elon Musk, Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen — has become heavily invested in the conservative political movement over the past few years.

How should the dems respond is a reasonable question, but it starts with the question of why are people drawn to the republican message of anti-feminism, anti equal access, the politicization of gender, and the promotion of outdated, rigid gender roles. 

Just a theory - maybe they see Trump's support of something which they also support, and are willing to look past a litany of behaviours which they are either ambivalent to, or outright disagree with. Perhaps people are just willing to ignore a lot, in exchange for something they care a lot about.

Making this more potent, there seems to be a phenomena where when Trump says something is good or bad, folks will believe it - even when their eyes and ears show them otherwise. This is pretty dangerous. Trump can say "I love Jesus and the Bible is my favourite book", and folks eat it up, even after a photo op where he held the Bible upside down - and just from that, he has support from the evangelicals. When one party is not willing to fabricate a persona to win people over, and the other lives in the lies, there's an inherent disadvantage that really, if the Democrats were to play the same game, philosophically, they wouldn't be the Democrat Party anymore.

Does this resonate with anyone else or is this good weed?

mickeyrat

rahm on bulwark pod today

Tim Simmons

Just go away Rahm

Lerxst1992

Tim Simmons said:

Just go away Rahm

 Yes it’s Democrats like Rahm Emanuel and Seth Moulton that are the problem. 

Not the Democrats, who believe in discrimination by race.Not the people that lied to us about Biden‘s condition for a year, covered it up. Appointed a replacement, purposefully delayed that appointment so no options could be considered. Yeah it’s all wrong. Manual‘s fault

Lerxst1992

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

They are losing men because one party says ‘men be better and step up’ and the other is saying, ‘hey be your unrestrained self and do/say what you want’ and then prove that being leading by that same example. 

Like, how do you combat that? 

By offering voters something they might appeal to them? The problem is democrats are inside this bubble. The first few other replies, picture of an older R voter with their gun toting anti vaxxer. The exact opposite of what Silvers  point was, and something about a boxer…. Dems are not appealing to a large segment of voters, but it possibly can’t be their fault?

More from Silver….

“ I know it might not seem related at first, Carrie, but I’m thinking about your question in the context of the debate Democrats are having about how to win back young men. (Gen Z men actually voted majority Trump last year.) One Democratic group, for instance, recently proposed a $20 million initiative called “Speaking With American Men”. Adding fuel to the fire is the Catalist report I discussed last week that found an expanding gender gap, especially among young voters and Black and Latino men. In fact, essentially all of the decline that Harris experienced relative to Biden came from men

“How does this relate to the River and the Village? For those who haven’t read On the Edge, the Village is my term for basically the progressive establishment, which is consensus-driven and risk-averse rather than individualistic. Its quintessential institutions are Harvard and the New York Times, but this attitude is also very much reflected in Democratic political campaigns. Conversely, the River is for analytical, contrarian, risk-seeking types: think Silicon Valley, Wall Street and Las Vegas. Until fairly recently, the River mostly saw itself as being apolitical or part of a third, vaguely libertarian-ish “Grey Tribe”. But a faction of the River — not all of it by any means, but a prominent faction associated with people like Elon Musk, Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen — has become heavily invested in the conservative political movement over the past few years.

How should the dems respond is a reasonable question, but it starts with the question of why are people drawn to the republican message of anti-feminism, anti equal access, the politicization of gender, and the promotion of outdated, rigid gender roles. 

You are trying to understand why moderates and independents would not consider voting for Democrats, as they see the Democrats as extreme, by looking at the extreme from the right? This makes absolutely no sense.

josevolution

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

They are losing men because one party says ‘men be better and step up’ and the other is saying, ‘hey be your unrestrained self and do/say what you want’ and then prove that being leading by that same example. 

Like, how do you combat that? 

By offering voters something they might appeal to them? The problem is democrats are inside this bubble. The first few other replies, picture of an older R voter with their gun toting anti vaxxer. The exact opposite of what Silvers  point was, and something about a boxer…. Dems are not appealing to a large segment of voters, but it possibly can’t be their fault?

More from Silver….

“ I know it might not seem related at first, Carrie, but I’m thinking about your question in the context of the debate Democrats are having about how to win back young men. (Gen Z men actually voted majority Trump last year.) One Democratic group, for instance, recently proposed a $20 million initiative called “Speaking With American Men”. Adding fuel to the fire is the Catalist report I discussed last week that found an expanding gender gap, especially among young voters and Black and Latino men. In fact, essentially all of the decline that Harris experienced relative to Biden came from men

“How does this relate to the River and the Village? For those who haven’t read On the Edge, the Village is my term for basically the progressive establishment, which is consensus-driven and risk-averse rather than individualistic. Its quintessential institutions are Harvard and the New York Times, but this attitude is also very much reflected in Democratic political campaigns. Conversely, the River is for analytical, contrarian, risk-seeking types: think Silicon Valley, Wall Street and Las Vegas. Until fairly recently, the River mostly saw itself as being apolitical or part of a third, vaguely libertarian-ish “Grey Tribe”. But a faction of the River — not all of it by any means, but a prominent faction associated with people like Elon Musk, Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen — has become heavily invested in the conservative political movement over the past few years.

How should the dems respond is a reasonable question, but it starts with the question of why are people drawn to the republican message of anti-feminism, anti equal access, the politicization of gender, and the promotion of outdated, rigid gender roles. 

You are trying to understand why moderates and independents would not consider voting for Democrats, as they see the Democrats as extreme, by looking at the extreme from the right? This makes absolutely no sense.

So what do you propose Democrats do? Going forward? You’ve stated your case on how they screwed the election up you keep harping everything that happened! When will you move forward 

josevolution

Or maybe you want an apology from the DNC? 

Gern Blansten

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Just go away Rahm

 Yes it’s Democrats like Rahm Emanuel and Seth Moulton that are the problem. 

Not the Democrats, who believe in discrimination by race.Not the people that lied to us about Biden‘s condition for a year, covered it up. Appointed a replacement, purposefully delayed that appointment so no options could be considered. Yeah it’s all wrong. Manual‘s fault

The GOP smear machine is excellent unfortunately. Emanuel and even Newsom have probably been damaged too much by it. Not sure Newsom even has a shot at a national office anymore. At least not in 2028....maybe I'm wrong.

Lerxst1992

josevolution said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

They are losing men because one party says ‘men be better and step up’ and the other is saying, ‘hey be your unrestrained self and do/say what you want’ and then prove that being leading by that same example. 

Like, how do you combat that? 

By offering voters something they might appeal to them? The problem is democrats are inside this bubble. The first few other replies, picture of an older R voter with their gun toting anti vaxxer. The exact opposite of what Silvers  point was, and something about a boxer…. Dems are not appealing to a large segment of voters, but it possibly can’t be their fault?

More from Silver….

“ I know it might not seem related at first, Carrie, but I’m thinking about your question in the context of the debate Democrats are having about how to win back young men. (Gen Z men actually voted majority Trump last year.) One Democratic group, for instance, recently proposed a $20 million initiative called “Speaking With American Men”. Adding fuel to the fire is the Catalist report I discussed last week that found an expanding gender gap, especially among young voters and Black and Latino men. In fact, essentially all of the decline that Harris experienced relative to Biden came from men

“How does this relate to the River and the Village? For those who haven’t read On the Edge, the Village is my term for basically the progressive establishment, which is consensus-driven and risk-averse rather than individualistic. Its quintessential institutions are Harvard and the New York Times, but this attitude is also very much reflected in Democratic political campaigns. Conversely, the River is for analytical, contrarian, risk-seeking types: think Silicon Valley, Wall Street and Las Vegas. Until fairly recently, the River mostly saw itself as being apolitical or part of a third, vaguely libertarian-ish “Grey Tribe”. But a faction of the River — not all of it by any means, but a prominent faction associated with people like Elon Musk, Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen — has become heavily invested in the conservative political movement over the past few years.

How should the dems respond is a reasonable question, but it starts with the question of why are people drawn to the republican message of anti-feminism, anti equal access, the politicization of gender, and the promotion of outdated, rigid gender roles. 

You are trying to understand why moderates and independents would not consider voting for Democrats, as they see the Democrats as extreme, by looking at the extreme from the right? This makes absolutely no sense.

So what do you propose Democrats do? Going forward? You’ve stated your case on how they screwed the election up you keep harping everything that happened! When will you move forward 

It’s hysterical that this forum will go on and on for years for the obnoxious shit that Trump does. But when Democrats screw up, lie to us, we want to move on within six months? The absurdity around here is stunning

unless you know the who, what where when why …we were railroaded by Biden‘s team (or was dem leadership  involved?) I’m not sure why anyone would be thinking of moving on right now

Go Beavers

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

They are losing men because one party says ‘men be better and step up’ and the other is saying, ‘hey be your unrestrained self and do/say what you want’ and then prove that being leading by that same example. 

Like, how do you combat that? 

By offering voters something they might appeal to them? The problem is democrats are inside this bubble. The first few other replies, picture of an older R voter with their gun toting anti vaxxer. The exact opposite of what Silvers  point was, and something about a boxer…. Dems are not appealing to a large segment of voters, but it possibly can’t be their fault?

More from Silver….

“ I know it might not seem related at first, Carrie, but I’m thinking about your question in the context of the debate Democrats are having about how to win back young men. (Gen Z men actually voted majority Trump last year.) One Democratic group, for instance, recently proposed a $20 million initiative called “Speaking With American Men”. Adding fuel to the fire is the Catalist report I discussed last week that found an expanding gender gap, especially among young voters and Black and Latino men. In fact, essentially all of the decline that Harris experienced relative to Biden came from men

“How does this relate to the River and the Village? For those who haven’t read On the Edge, the Village is my term for basically the progressive establishment, which is consensus-driven and risk-averse rather than individualistic. Its quintessential institutions are Harvard and the New York Times, but this attitude is also very much reflected in Democratic political campaigns. Conversely, the River is for analytical, contrarian, risk-seeking types: think Silicon Valley, Wall Street and Las Vegas. Until fairly recently, the River mostly saw itself as being apolitical or part of a third, vaguely libertarian-ish “Grey Tribe”. But a faction of the River — not all of it by any means, but a prominent faction associated with people like Elon Musk, Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen — has become heavily invested in the conservative political movement over the past few years.

How should the dems respond is a reasonable question, but it starts with the question of why are people drawn to the republican message of anti-feminism, anti equal access, the politicization of gender, and the promotion of outdated, rigid gender roles. 

You are trying to understand why moderates and independents would not consider voting for Democrats, as they see the Democrats as extreme, by looking at the extreme from the right? This makes absolutely no sense.

I’m raising the question as to what the appeal of republicans is, as opposed to blaming the democrats for making them vote republican. And about half the population views both parties as too extreme, so another question is since the dems are mostly moderate, how did that perception take hold? The answer most likely lies in social media and the right’s grasp on misinformation and false narratives. 

tbergs

Gern Blansten said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Just go away Rahm

 Yes it’s Democrats like Rahm Emanuel and Seth Moulton that are the problem. 

Not the Democrats, who believe in discrimination by race.Not the people that lied to us about Biden‘s condition for a year, covered it up. Appointed a replacement, purposefully delayed that appointment so no options could be considered. Yeah it’s all wrong. Manual‘s fault

The GOP smear machine is excellent unfortunately. Emanuel and even Newsom have probably been damaged too much by it. Not sure Newsom even has a shot at a national office anymore. At least not in 2028....maybe I'm wrong.

I don't mind Newsom. He's made some missteps here and there, but Rahm is a dirty politician who crawled in to the shadows after his disastrous end to his mayoral run in Chicago. It's like when Bush and Cheney all of a sudden emerged again because the Trump administration has proven that people are dumb enough to just let the corruption and cover-ups get a pass in the current political landscape. There should be no redemption tour for these people.

mrussel1

Lerxst1992 said:

josevolution said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

They are losing men because one party says ‘men be better and step up’ and the other is saying, ‘hey be your unrestrained self and do/say what you want’ and then prove that being leading by that same example. 

Like, how do you combat that? 

By offering voters something they might appeal to them? The problem is democrats are inside this bubble. The first few other replies, picture of an older R voter with their gun toting anti vaxxer. The exact opposite of what Silvers  point was, and something about a boxer…. Dems are not appealing to a large segment of voters, but it possibly can’t be their fault?

More from Silver….

“ I know it might not seem related at first, Carrie, but I’m thinking about your question in the context of the debate Democrats are having about how to win back young men. (Gen Z men actually voted majority Trump last year.) One Democratic group, for instance, recently proposed a $20 million initiative called “Speaking With American Men”. Adding fuel to the fire is the Catalist report I discussed last week that found an expanding gender gap, especially among young voters and Black and Latino men. In fact, essentially all of the decline that Harris experienced relative to Biden came from men

“How does this relate to the River and the Village? For those who haven’t read On the Edge, the Village is my term for basically the progressive establishment, which is consensus-driven and risk-averse rather than individualistic. Its quintessential institutions are Harvard and the New York Times, but this attitude is also very much reflected in Democratic political campaigns. Conversely, the River is for analytical, contrarian, risk-seeking types: think Silicon Valley, Wall Street and Las Vegas. Until fairly recently, the River mostly saw itself as being apolitical or part of a third, vaguely libertarian-ish “Grey Tribe”. But a faction of the River — not all of it by any means, but a prominent faction associated with people like Elon Musk, Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen — has become heavily invested in the conservative political movement over the past few years.

How should the dems respond is a reasonable question, but it starts with the question of why are people drawn to the republican message of anti-feminism, anti equal access, the politicization of gender, and the promotion of outdated, rigid gender roles. 

You are trying to understand why moderates and independents would not consider voting for Democrats, as they see the Democrats as extreme, by looking at the extreme from the right? This makes absolutely no sense.

So what do you propose Democrats do? Going forward? You’ve stated your case on how they screwed the election up you keep harping everything that happened! When will you move forward 

It’s hysterical that this forum will go on and on for years for the obnoxious shit that Trump does. But when Democrats screw up, lie to us, we want to move on within six months? The absurdity around here is stunning

unless you know the who, what where when why …we were railroaded by Biden‘s team (or was dem leadership  involved?) I’m not sure why anyone would be thinking of moving on right now

This is a joke right?  Trump fucks something up every single day.  We don't have time to stew on what happened six months ago.  How many posts about Abrego-Garcia do you see here?  That poor man is in a third world country jail AFTER the Supreme Court ordered him released.  Yet he still rots and the DOJ does nothing to get him out.  See anyone stewing about that? No, because Trump is on to some other travesty.  But you are laser focused on something that happened almost a year ago now, and wouldn't even be a blip on the Trump continuum of atrocities.  I'm sorry, your posts are absurd and this is why I think you are full MAGA, just refusing to admit it.  

mrussel1

Let's take a test.  What's worse in your eyes Lerx:

Biden's "handlers" hiding his incapacities or

Trump eliciting a bribe for a free plane that goes to his library after his term
Trump pushing his coins while his family cuts deals in the Middle East
Trump jailing and deporting people without due process, defying the courts
Trump cutting HIV funding to third world nations
Trump slashing medicaid to the least among us
Trump damaging everyone's retirement to the tune of down 3% since his tariff nonsense began
Trump attacking Harvard and eliminating student visas across the board (no matter your country of origin)
Trump slashing the NOAA
Trump trying to eliminate FEMA with no replacement
Trump threatening to suspend Habeas Corpus

I could go on and on.  Yet, every one of  your posts is about Biden WHO HAS NO FUCKING POWER.  Can we find one criticism of Trump or his policies this year?   Is there one by you?  

Gern Blansten

tbergs said:

Gern Blansten said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Just go away Rahm

 Yes it’s Democrats like Rahm Emanuel and Seth Moulton that are the problem. 

Not the Democrats, who believe in discrimination by race.Not the people that lied to us about Biden‘s condition for a year, covered it up. Appointed a replacement, purposefully delayed that appointment so no options could be considered. Yeah it’s all wrong. Manual‘s fault

The GOP smear machine is excellent unfortunately. Emanuel and even Newsom have probably been damaged too much by it. Not sure Newsom even has a shot at a national office anymore. At least not in 2028....maybe I'm wrong.

I don't mind Newsom. He's made some missteps here and there, but Rahm is a dirty politician who crawled in to the shadows after his disastrous end to his mayoral run in Chicago. It's like when Bush and Cheney all of a sudden emerged again because the Trump administration has proven that people are dumb enough to just let the corruption and cover-ups get a pass in the current political landscape. There should be no redemption tour for these people.

I think Newsom is great...I'm just worried that people that aren't familiar with him have already formed a bad opinion because of the GOP trashing him constantly. They are good at smearing people a few years before we need them ala Hillary.

Our advantage will likely be the fringe magats will lose interest and stay home in 2026.

mrussel1

Gern Blansten said:

tbergs said:

Gern Blansten said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Just go away Rahm

 Yes it’s Democrats like Rahm Emanuel and Seth Moulton that are the problem. 

Not the Democrats, who believe in discrimination by race.Not the people that lied to us about Biden‘s condition for a year, covered it up. Appointed a replacement, purposefully delayed that appointment so no options could be considered. Yeah it’s all wrong. Manual‘s fault

The GOP smear machine is excellent unfortunately. Emanuel and even Newsom have probably been damaged too much by it. Not sure Newsom even has a shot at a national office anymore. At least not in 2028....maybe I'm wrong.

I don't mind Newsom. He's made some missteps here and there, but Rahm is a dirty politician who crawled in to the shadows after his disastrous end to his mayoral run in Chicago. It's like when Bush and Cheney all of a sudden emerged again because the Trump administration has proven that people are dumb enough to just let the corruption and cover-ups get a pass in the current political landscape. There should be no redemption tour for these people.

I think Newsom is great...I'm just worried that people that aren't familiar with him have already formed a bad opinion because of the GOP trashing him constantly. They are good at smearing people a few years before we need them ala Hillary.

Our advantage will likely be the fringe magats will lose interest and stay home in 2026.

I don't think that story is written, honestly.  That's all insider stuff, for those that are deep into politics.  They weren't going to vote for Newsome anyways.  I also think it's harder to damage a white male (a tall handsome one at that) compared to a woman.  The same things just don't stick.  Plus Newsome is very good on his feet, very articulate.  I think the D's would be wise to run someone like him.  

Merkin Baller

.Lerxst1992 said:

josevolution said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

They are losing men because one party says ‘men be better and step up’ and the other is saying, ‘hey be your unrestrained self and do/say what you want’ and then prove that being leading by that same example. 

Like, how do you combat that? 

By offering voters something they might appeal to them? The problem is democrats are inside this bubble. The first few other replies, picture of an older R voter with their gun toting anti vaxxer. The exact opposite of what Silvers  point was, and something about a boxer…. Dems are not appealing to a large segment of voters, but it possibly can’t be their fault?

More from Silver….

“ I know it might not seem related at first, Carrie, but I’m thinking about your question in the context of the debate Democrats are having about how to win back young men. (Gen Z men actually voted majority Trump last year.) One Democratic group, for instance, recently proposed a $20 million initiative called “Speaking With American Men”. Adding fuel to the fire is the Catalist report I discussed last week that found an expanding gender gap, especially among young voters and Black and Latino men. In fact, essentially all of the decline that Harris experienced relative to Biden came from men

“How does this relate to the River and the Village? For those who haven’t read On the Edge, the Village is my term for basically the progressive establishment, which is consensus-driven and risk-averse rather than individualistic. Its quintessential institutions are Harvard and the New York Times, but this attitude is also very much reflected in Democratic political campaigns. Conversely, the River is for analytical, contrarian, risk-seeking types: think Silicon Valley, Wall Street and Las Vegas. Until fairly recently, the River mostly saw itself as being apolitical or part of a third, vaguely libertarian-ish “Grey Tribe”. But a faction of the River — not all of it by any means, but a prominent faction associated with people like Elon Musk, Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen — has become heavily invested in the conservative political movement over the past few years.

How should the dems respond is a reasonable question, but it starts with the question of why are people drawn to the republican message of anti-feminism, anti equal access, the politicization of gender, and the promotion of outdated, rigid gender roles. 

You are trying to understand why moderates and independents would not consider voting for Democrats, as they see the Democrats as extreme, by looking at the extreme from the right? This makes absolutely no sense.

So what do you propose Democrats do? Going forward? You’ve stated your case on how they screwed the election up you keep harping everything that happened! When will you move forward 

It’s hysterical that this forum will go on and on for years for the obnoxious shit that Trump does. But when Democrats screw up, lie to us, we want to move on within six months? The absurdity around here is stunning

unless you know the who, what where when why …we were railroaded by Biden‘s team (or was dem leadership  involved?) I’m not sure why anyone would be thinking of moving on right now

Please tell us more about hysterical behavior. 

DE4173

Curious if anything bad regarding Newsom was self-inflicted compared to what the GOP is trashing him about?