Ankle-biting Democrats

tbergs

Tim Simmons said:

Tim Simmons said:

Guys. I cannot recommend this more. It really gets to the heart of the divide in Dem circles. I went back to read this today after listening to the audio yesterday (also in the link). Just a great convo

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/28/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-ta-nehisi-coates.html

video too

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaeoDlLNnok

I watched/listened yesterday. I like Klein, but i feel like he was fumbling a lot of his points during this. I really liked what Coates had to say about it.

Tim Simmons

Agreed. 

A great take I read is Klein has a moneyball perspective of politics while Coates view is measured and of the longview. 

Tim Simmons

But that quote in screen grab is just fucking... everything. 

Lerxst1992

Tim Simmons said:

Agreed. 

A great take I read is Klein has a moneyball perspective of politics while Coates view is measured and of the longview. 

Longview? In what sense.

Ezra says “ And I think there is something in here. Do people feel like, even if they disagree with us on some things, they have a place with us? And my experience going around the country, talking to people — I’ve been on a lot of right-of-center podcasts lately — is that, rightly or wrongly, what they took, and something that really empowered Trump in the last election, was a sense that they didn’t.”

Coates replied with a what if Biden or a democrat won. 
He avoided the question.

i am not even on the right, and in a far left forum like this, there is no place for those who disagree. I made a basic argument that NYC is precisely the wrong place for a Mamdani experiment, for quite a few reasons. The first is the opportunity that does exist here. That evolved into a point that the US offers exceptional opportunity, especially to those who can figure out a way to prioritize investing in their budgets.

that led to getting mocked that I literally meant that subscriptions and coffee houses is enough to build wealth. And the usuals with glee exclaim how I was “proven wrong.” The truth is it’s a good starting point.

then I repost the original quote to back up my position. Completely ignored. To late, I was proven wrong and that was what was already celebrated. That’s par for the course here and very representative of folks like Harris or AOC, etc. refusing spots like Rogan or Maher. They don’t want to engage. They want to protect their worldview from skepticism. While folks like Kirk go out of their way to engage the other side. Dems have become what the right used to be.

Lerxst1992

Besides, instead of a Starbucks a day, plus $100 a month in subscriptions, over a 40 year career, investments generating a normal historical return probably leads to about $2 million. But in 40 years that’s not enough. Add 2% to the annual investment and calculate what the future value would be…

instead of debating whether that $100 is an accurate estimate, let’s leave subscriptions alone and go with seven takeout meals per month instead. Same approximate math.

Tim Simmons

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Agreed. 

A great take I read is Klein has a moneyball perspective of politics while Coates view is measured and of the longview. 

Longview? In what sense.

Given everything you read that Charlie Kirk said — and we probably don’t have very different views on the value of the things he said — why do you think he was winning?

That’s not really hard for me to understand. If I could just back up for a second, I want to say two things.

I published a book 10 years ago, “Between the World and Me,” and one of the constant reactions to that was that it was overly pessimistic about this country, it was overly pessimistic about the future: Why are you so dark, Ta-Nehisi? Why can’t you give us any sense of hope?

The reason I would always say is because any sort of sober examination of the history of this country says that those of us who believe in equality, those of us who believe in respecting the humanity of our neighbors — and of everyone — that we’re up against some really, really powerful forces of history and powerful narratives.

The implication of that is however good we felt in 2008, 2013, 2014, 2015 — there will be backlash.

Those of us who were crying in 2008 watching Obama give that speech, those of us who were so moved by watching him and Michelle step outside the car and felt so much fear for him — and then when nothing happened felt so great about that. Those of us who believed that seeing a Black family in the White House mirroring the best we had to offer — there are other people watching that, too.

And I don’t take any joy in saying this, but we sometimes soothe ourselves by pointing out that love, acceptance and warmth are powerful forces. I believe they are. I also believe hate is a powerful force. I believe it’s a powerful, unifying force. And I think Charlie Kirk was a hatemonger.

I really need to say this over and over again. I have a politic that rejects violence, that rejects political violence. I take no joy in the killing of anyone, no matter what they said.

But if you ask me what the truth of his life was — and the truth of his public life — I would have to tell you it’s hate. I’d have to tell you it is the usage of hate and the harnessing of hate toward political ends.

Then let me flip that question a bit. Why are we losing?

We’re losing because there are always moments when we lose.

See, that feels very fatalistic to me.

It doesn’t feel fatalistic to me. It feels like the truth. Let me express what I mean.

I’m Ta-Nehisi Coates, I’m the writer, I’m the individual, right? But I am part of something larger, and I’ve always felt myself as part of something larger. I have a tradition, I have ancestry, I have heritage. What that means is that I do whatever I do within the time that I have in my life, whatever time I’m gifted with, and much of what I do is built on what other people did before them.

Then, after that, I leave the struggle where I leave it, and hopefully, it’s in a better place. Oftentimes it’s not. That’s the history in fact. And then my progeny, they pick it up, and they keep it going.

I am descended from people who, in their lifetime, fought with all their might for the destruction of chattel slavery in this country. And they never saw it. They never saw it. In my personal belief system, they died in defeat, in darkness.

So I guess the privilege that I draw out of this, the honor that I draw out of this, is not that things will necessarily be better in my lifetime, but that I will make the contribution that I am supposed to make.

The fact of the matter is, as horrifying as the killing of Charlie Kirk was, and as horrifying as the feeling is in this moment, that we are in an era of political violence — and I don’t want to sound flip here. Political violence is the norm for the Black experience in this country. It just is. I don’t even mean like the Malcolm X, Martin Luther King variety of it — which is the norm, too.

You would be hard-pressed to have a conversation with a Black person in this country who is a descendant of slavery and not have them be able to tell you themselves: Look, my uncle, my grandfather, my great-grandfather, they lived in a small town in Mississippi, in Tennessee, in Alabama, and they got into some sort of dispute with a white man. Either they were lynched or we had to run.

Political violence runs through us. It is our heritage. Is that good? No. Do we valorize it? Absolutely not. Do we minimize it? Absolutely not.

But a life free of it is not a thing that’s really in reach in my time.

.....

I’ve thought a lot — in the reactions I have read in the last couple of weeks — about how many people believe we are already in a cold civil war. That we are in a time that we are dealing with divisions and questions.

I see it on the right, for sure. I hear it on the left too. I have a lot of emails that are like: We need a national divorce. How that is going to be effectuated is never exactly clear.

Do people you respect say that to you?

Well, yes, actually. I will say that. People say things to me that are off the record, and I shouldn’t say it.

You don’t believe that, though? You don’t believe we are at a point where the next 10, 20, 30 years could be shaped by decisions we would understand as within normal politics, within elections and legislation and organizing and so on?

No.

Good. I think that’s great.

I mean, that could happen. But I guess the broader thing I am thinking about is how much does this era stand out in the long sweep of American history? It’s bad — but it wouldn’t make my list for the worst.

Tim Simmons

Lerxst1992 said:

i am not even on the right, and in a far left forum like this, there is no place for those who disagree. I made a basic argument that NYC is precisely the wrong place for a Mamdani experiment, for quite a few reasons. The first is the opportunity that does exist here. That evolved into a point that the US offers exceptional opportunity, especially to those who can figure out a way to prioritize investing in their budgets.

that led to getting mocked that I literally meant that subscriptions and coffee houses is enough to build wealth. And the usuals with glee exclaim how I was “proven wrong.” The truth is it’s a good starting point.

then I repost the original quote to back up my position. Completely ignored. To late, I was proven wrong and that was what was already celebrated. That’s par for the course here and very representative of folks like Harris or AOC, etc. refusing spots like Rogan or Maher. They don’t want to engage. They want to protect their worldview from skepticism. While folks like Kirk go out of their way to engage the other side. Dems have become what the right used to be.

But way to turn it around and make it about you.

Tim Simmons

I think this discourse (Coates and Klein) proves that maybe the party, the ideology, or whatever is bigger than Reddit or AMT. And maybe taking a small sampling and applying it to the whole is not the best approach when arguing positions. 

Lerxst1992

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

i am not even on the right, and in a far left forum like this, there is no place for those who disagree. I made a basic argument that NYC is precisely the wrong place for a Mamdani experiment, for quite a few reasons. The first is the opportunity that does exist here. That evolved into a point that the US offers exceptional opportunity, especially to those who can figure out a way to prioritize investing in their budgets.

that led to getting mocked that I literally meant that subscriptions and coffee houses is enough to build wealth. And the usuals with glee exclaim how I was “proven wrong.” The truth is it’s a good starting point.

then I repost the original quote to back up my position. Completely ignored. To late, I was proven wrong and that was what was already celebrated. That’s par for the course here and very representative of folks like Harris or AOC, etc. refusing spots like Rogan or Maher. They don’t want to engage. They want to protect their worldview from skepticism. While folks like Kirk go out of their way to engage the other side. Dems have become what the right used to be.

But way to turn it around and make it about you.

I know. Did too much reading of the Coates transcript. Dude says “I” about 17,000 times. And nice way to avoid the point.

“ I don’t know that we weren’t. I, for instance, have. I don’t know if it’s on YouTube anymore — but for instance I think about when I received an invitation to go to West Point, and I had to go up there to talk about “Between the World and Me.”

I had to challenge them very, very directly about what it meant to have, at that time, Confederate memorials up there and to talk about a Confederate — I can’t remember what the motto is exactly — but basically, it’s an argument against lying and what it meant to have that there and have those grand historical lies.

We had a really great interaction. I know everybody didn’t agree with me. It would never occur to me, and I think it actually insults the dialogue to take that and say: Ta-Nehisi owns West Point cadets! Ta-Nehisi smashes..”

Lerxst1992

Tim Simmons said:

I think this discourse (Coates and Klein) proves that maybe the party, the ideology, or whatever is bigger than Reddit or AMT. And maybe taking a small sampling and applying it to the whole is not the best approach when arguing positions. 

Politics is about power, and winning is about being able to control the law, especially the senate. As I’ve recently taken a pause from saying, three red state dem senate seats need to be replaced, and four swing state seats need to be held, and another seat needs to be won for the Dems to have a say in who is next on the Supreme Court.

These senate races will not be in mamdaniville. The will be in states like NC IA OH GA etc. Places where the trans narrative is about Dems supporting biological boys playing against girls in sports. Places where voters believe Dems want free healthcare for illegal immigrants. And a big reason for this is Dems speak in theories, above the heads of voters while Rs get in the pit and fight a basic argument.

You see it everyday in places like this. Pearl clutching and implying voters are deplorable.

The Dems will not be able to turn this around in places that decide  the senate until they realize these are the voters that exist, not the voters they wish existed.

Halifax2TheMax

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

I think this discourse (Coates and Klein) proves that maybe the party, the ideology, or whatever is bigger than Reddit or AMT. And maybe taking a small sampling and applying it to the whole is not the best approach when arguing positions. 

Politics is about power, and winning is about being able to control the law, especially the senate. As I’ve recently taken a pause from saying, three red state dem senate seats need to be replaced, and four swing state seats need to be held, and another seat needs to be won for the Dems to have a say in who is next on the Supreme Court.

These senate races will not be in mamdaniville. The will be in states like NC IA OH GA etc. Places where the trans narrative is about Dems supporting biological boys playing against girls in sports. Places where voters believe Dems want free healthcare for illegal immigrants. And a big reason for this is Dems speak in theories, above the heads of voters while Rs get in the pit and fight a basic argument.

You see it everyday in places like this. Pearl clutching and implying voters are deplorable.

The Dems will not be able to turn this around in places that decide  the senate until they realize these are the voters that exist, not the voters they wish existed.

  * The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

And said voters will deserve everything that comes down on them.  And come down it will.

Halifax2TheMax

  * The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

Dave gets it.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CG3lrWBAjcB/?igsh=MTN4Y2ZtM2x3NjFpMg==

Tim Simmons

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

i am not even on the right, and in a far left forum like this, there is no place for those who disagree. I made a basic argument that NYC is precisely the wrong place for a Mamdani experiment, for quite a few reasons. The first is the opportunity that does exist here. That evolved into a point that the US offers exceptional opportunity, especially to those who can figure out a way to prioritize investing in their budgets.

that led to getting mocked that I literally meant that subscriptions and coffee houses is enough to build wealth. And the usuals with glee exclaim how I was “proven wrong.” The truth is it’s a good starting point.

then I repost the original quote to back up my position. Completely ignored. To late, I was proven wrong and that was what was already celebrated. That’s par for the course here and very representative of folks like Harris or AOC, etc. refusing spots like Rogan or Maher. They don’t want to engage. They want to protect their worldview from skepticism. While folks like Kirk go out of their way to engage the other side. Dems have become what the right used to be.

But way to turn it around and make it about you.

I know. Did too much reading of the Coates transcript. Dude says “I” about 17,000 times. And nice way to avoid the point.

“ I don’t know that we weren’t. I, for instance, have. I don’t know if it’s on YouTube anymore — but for instance I think about when I received an invitation to go to West Point, and I had to go up there to talk about “Between the World and Me.”

I had to challenge them very, very directly about what it meant to have, at that time, Confederate memorials up there and to talk about a Confederate — I can’t remember what the motto is exactly — but basically, it’s an argument against lying and what it meant to have that there and have those grand historical lies.

We had a really great interaction. I know everybody didn’t agree with me. It would never occur to me, and I think it actually insults the dialogue to take that and say: Ta-Nehisi owns West Point cadets! Ta-Nehisi smashes..”

huh? It’s literally a discussion between 2 people. Where did you come up in their discussion? 

gimmesometruth27

52 minutes until the RaDiCaL lEfT wOkE dEmOcRaT sHuTdOwN!!!!!

Tim Simmons

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

I think this discourse (Coates and Klein) proves that maybe the party, the ideology, or whatever is bigger than Reddit or AMT. And maybe taking a small sampling and applying it to the whole is not the best approach when arguing positions. 

Politics is about power, and winning is about being able to control the law, especially the senate. As I’ve recently taken a pause from saying, three red state dem senate seats need to be replaced, and four swing state seats need to be held, and another seat needs to be won for the Dems to have a say in who is next on the Supreme Court.

These senate races will not be in mamdaniville. The will be in states like NC IA OH GA etc. Places where the trans narrative is about Dems supporting biological boys playing against girls in sports. Places where voters believe Dems want free healthcare for illegal immigrants. And a big reason for this is Dems speak in theories, above the heads of voters while Rs get in the pit and fight a basic argument.

You see it everyday in places like this. Pearl clutching and implying voters are deplorable.

The Dems will not be able to turn this around in places that decide  the senate until they realize these are the voters that exist, not the voters they wish existed.

I mean, politics is about representing the will of the people in governance. I understand the challenges Dems face. But also, they don't exist in a vacuum either. There are consequences for Republican governance too and that affects the electorate. You are looking at Liberal positions as a binary, its either Far left or center left and its not. Ive never advocated that Mamdani's proposals for NYC will work in MO. I've said a charismatic liberal who offers the people of MO what they are interested in, will. 

Again, you are taking an extreme left positions and applying it to the whole democratic party where in reality, thats NOT where the Democratic party is. The party as a whole exists closer to the middle than to the left. I'm sorry the left is so threatening to you when all they are advocating for a fairer shake, or just a leg up to get by in a system thats designed to keep people feudal. 
 

 

Lerxst1992

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

I think this discourse (Coates and Klein) proves that maybe the party, the ideology, or whatever is bigger than Reddit or AMT. And maybe taking a small sampling and applying it to the whole is not the best approach when arguing positions. 

Politics is about power, and winning is about being able to control the law, especially the senate. As I’ve recently taken a pause from saying, three red state dem senate seats need to be replaced, and four swing state seats need to be held, and another seat needs to be won for the Dems to have a say in who is next on the Supreme Court.

These senate races will not be in mamdaniville. The will be in states like NC IA OH GA etc. Places where the trans narrative is about Dems supporting biological boys playing against girls in sports. Places where voters believe Dems want free healthcare for illegal immigrants. And a big reason for this is Dems speak in theories, above the heads of voters while Rs get in the pit and fight a basic argument.

You see it everyday in places like this. Pearl clutching and implying voters are deplorable.

The Dems will not be able to turn this around in places that decide  the senate until they realize these are the voters that exist, not the voters they wish existed.

I mean, politics is about representing the will of the people in governance. I understand the challenges Dems face. But also, they don't exist in a vacuum either. There are consequences for Republican governance too and that affects the electorate. You are looking at Liberal positions as a binary, its either Far left or center left and its not. Ive never advocated that Mamdani's proposals for NYC will work in MO. I've said a charismatic liberal who offers the people of MO what they are interested in, will. 

Again, you are taking an extreme left positions and applying it to the whole democratic party where in reality, thats NOT where the Democratic party is. The party as a whole exists closer to the middle than to the left. I'm sorry the left is so threatening to you when all they are advocating for a fairer shake, or just a leg up to get by in a system thats designed to keep people feudal. 
 

 

To me, lol? All I want is republicans to lose. What your argument is missing is the purity test on the left, especially from the younger Dems. That’s very strong also in online forums like this and many in Reddit.

we just saw an election where Rs successfully convinced voters the Dems were further left than they actually were. Lost seven of seven swing states. Solidly lost the popular vote. And the Dems response? 

…Send Bernie and AOC into tiny liberal pockets in red states and try to make the argument that far left policies could win in red America.

….nominate an extreme lefty offering free goodies for extremely high taxes in the financial capital of the world.

….doubling down on national policies that will alienate moderate voters.

democrats have a built in disadvantage on policies while they pretend they don’t. They are screwed on either side they take on issues such as reparations, trans and Hamas. Someone like Coates will ensure Dems get fewer supporters, especially those in his demo. Topics like this should warn the party to proceed with extreme caution on these areas. But no, they go all in, and whichever side taken, votes will be lost. Rs know how not to do this.


edit, and on and on with Epstein. Like that will have any traction in 2028.

Tim Simmons

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

I think this discourse (Coates and Klein) proves that maybe the party, the ideology, or whatever is bigger than Reddit or AMT. And maybe taking a small sampling and applying it to the whole is not the best approach when arguing positions. 

Politics is about power, and winning is about being able to control the law, especially the senate. As I’ve recently taken a pause from saying, three red state dem senate seats need to be replaced, and four swing state seats need to be held, and another seat needs to be won for the Dems to have a say in who is next on the Supreme Court.

These senate races will not be in mamdaniville. The will be in states like NC IA OH GA etc. Places where the trans narrative is about Dems supporting biological boys playing against girls in sports. Places where voters believe Dems want free healthcare for illegal immigrants. And a big reason for this is Dems speak in theories, above the heads of voters while Rs get in the pit and fight a basic argument.

You see it everyday in places like this. Pearl clutching and implying voters are deplorable.

The Dems will not be able to turn this around in places that decide  the senate until they realize these are the voters that exist, not the voters they wish existed.

I mean, politics is about representing the will of the people in governance. I understand the challenges Dems face. But also, they don't exist in a vacuum either. There are consequences for Republican governance too and that affects the electorate. You are looking at Liberal positions as a binary, its either Far left or center left and its not. Ive never advocated that Mamdani's proposals for NYC will work in MO. I've said a charismatic liberal who offers the people of MO what they are interested in, will. 

Again, you are taking an extreme left positions and applying it to the whole democratic party where in reality, thats NOT where the Democratic party is. The party as a whole exists closer to the middle than to the left. I'm sorry the left is so threatening to you when all they are advocating for a fairer shake, or just a leg up to get by in a system thats designed to keep people feudal. 
 

 

To me, lol? All I want is republicans to lose. What your argument is missing is the purity test on the left, especially from the younger Dems. That’s very strong also in online forums like this and many in Reddit.

we just saw an election where Rs successfully convinced voters the Dems were further left than they actually were. Lost seven of seven swing states. Solidly lost the popular vote. And the Dems response? 

But you say this as if there weren’t 10 other reasons why people didn’t vote blue. I know it’s your sticking point. But Dems lost for a confluence of reasons.

Lerxst1992

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

I think this discourse (Coates and Klein) proves that maybe the party, the ideology, or whatever is bigger than Reddit or AMT. And maybe taking a small sampling and applying it to the whole is not the best approach when arguing positions. 

Politics is about power, and winning is about being able to control the law, especially the senate. As I’ve recently taken a pause from saying, three red state dem senate seats need to be replaced, and four swing state seats need to be held, and another seat needs to be won for the Dems to have a say in who is next on the Supreme Court.

These senate races will not be in mamdaniville. The will be in states like NC IA OH GA etc. Places where the trans narrative is about Dems supporting biological boys playing against girls in sports. Places where voters believe Dems want free healthcare for illegal immigrants. And a big reason for this is Dems speak in theories, above the heads of voters while Rs get in the pit and fight a basic argument.

You see it everyday in places like this. Pearl clutching and implying voters are deplorable.

The Dems will not be able to turn this around in places that decide  the senate until they realize these are the voters that exist, not the voters they wish existed.

I mean, politics is about representing the will of the people in governance. I understand the challenges Dems face. But also, they don't exist in a vacuum either. There are consequences for Republican governance too and that affects the electorate. You are looking at Liberal positions as a binary, its either Far left or center left and its not. Ive never advocated that Mamdani's proposals for NYC will work in MO. I've said a charismatic liberal who offers the people of MO what they are interested in, will. 

Again, you are taking an extreme left positions and applying it to the whole democratic party where in reality, thats NOT where the Democratic party is. The party as a whole exists closer to the middle than to the left. I'm sorry the left is so threatening to you when all they are advocating for a fairer shake, or just a leg up to get by in a system thats designed to keep people feudal. 
 

 

To me, lol? All I want is republicans to lose. What your argument is missing is the purity test on the left, especially from the younger Dems. That’s very strong also in online forums like this and many in Reddit.

we just saw an election where Rs successfully convinced voters the Dems were further left than they actually were. Lost seven of seven swing states. Solidly lost the popular vote. And the Dems response? 

But you say this as if there weren’t 10 other reasons why people didn’t vote blue. I know it’s your sticking point. But Dems lost for a confluence of reasons.

So we agree somewhat. Let’s turn the “how democrats are miserable at politics” to today.


Schumer is on morning joe this am, regarding the shutdown, and the context is DJT is lying about “democrats are shutting down because they want illegal aliens to get free healthcare.”

all the analysts on the show call this an outright lie. What does Schumer do? Call trump a liar and a bully.

talk about an idiotic reply. Yet again, Dems are becoming like trump. Instead of strategically using your opponents lie as a strategic advantage, he reverts to useless name calling . it doesnt matter that dem leaders don’t want to appear on fox, Rogan etc, they don’t know what to say.

how about coming up with an amendment and immediately introduce it on the senate floor that proclaims zero CR funding is eligible for illegal immigrants medicare, Medicaid and ACA?  And then go tell America they gave trump exactly what he asked for, then go on fox and Rogan?

Tim Simmons

Schumer is feckless and a terrible messenger, but also he telling the truth. I don’t get what else they can do than to state reality. 

Gern Blansten

Tim Simmons said:

Schumer is feckless and a terrible messenger, but also he telling the truth. I don’t get what else they can do than to state reality. 

I like Schumer but I wish he would step aside and let someone else take over. We need a new face.